I'm not disagreeing, I am just saying I don't think anything is set in stone. When it is resolved, we will know. Right now it's just a lot of back and forth negotiating and posturing, right?
Like I said, shouldn't teams have a right to spend as little as they want? But sure, by that logic one could argue that they should be able to spend as much as they want.
Only reason I suggest that is because some teams might lose a lot of players and their high cap hit once year and they may not want to feel obligated and forced to replace it with some arbitrary contract, knowing that in a few years they might have a star player to re-sign that would bring their team cap back up, or they might want to save it to spend on a big fish via FA.
Some might argue it is not fair that the rich teams have to pay charity to the poor teams because they cannot afford to spend to the required floor, but is it also then not fair that the teams that can afford to pay more than the cap ceiling are not allowed?
Like I said, shouldn't teams have a right to spend as little as they want? But sure, by that logic one could argue that they should be able to spend as much as they want.
Only reason I suggest that is because some teams might lose a lot of players and their high cap hit once year and they may not want to feel obligated and forced to replace it with some arbitrary contract, knowing that in a few years they might have a star player to re-sign that would bring their team cap back up, or they might want to save it to spend on a big fish via FA.
Some might argue it is not fair that the rich teams have to pay charity to the poor teams because they cannot afford to spend to the required floor, but is it also then not fair that the teams that can afford to pay more than the cap ceiling are not allowed?