So how bad were the bad teams during the pre- salary cap era

[lastcat3]

I think we can all safely agree that the good teams now aren't nearly as good as they were pre- salary cap era. However that also would mean that the bad teams now aren't nearly as bad as the teams pre salary cap. So how god awful would you say many of those very poor pre salary cap era teams were. Would most with a 4-12 record on down have a difficult time beating anybody from todays NFL?

[Bryan]

I don't think the bad teams were worse in the pre-salary cap era. In fact, they were probably better to some extent due to there being fewer teams in the league and fewer players on the rosters. I heard something this past weekend like the Titans used 83 players this year and the Bengals used 81 players...that's the equivalent of 4 pre-salary cap rosters. The NFL hasn't been this watered-down from a talent standpoint since the 1987 replacement games.

I think the difference is that the bad teams stayed bad longer during the pre-salary cap era. The only way to improve was through the draft, and if you didn't draft well (or if you traded away your top draft choices, which some teams tended to do) you didn't get any better. Good teams held on to their players, bad teams would usually make desperation trades (think Packers John Hadl) and the status quo remained.

The NFL today is designed for bad teams to cycle to good. It's almost more remarkable to me when a team like the Bears or Lions can break the cycle and remain bad despite picking in the top5 or top10 every year and having very few elite players eating up cap space. Even the Bengals figured out how to win a postseason game.

[Brian wolf]

Today, like the past, no matter how much talent is on your roster, if you dont have a good administration and good coaching, a team will never get better. You would like an owner who is dedicated to winning and knows how to put the proper people in place. Those people in place, whether GM, HC, coaching staff or scouts have to pick THEIR right kind of players in the draft and coach them to be their best, commit to their teammates and try to win games. If teams cant find the right players or a HC cant get the best out of them, they wont succeed. People always laughed at the antics of Charley Finley or George Steinbrenner in baseball but those owners always won with the right people, though Steinbrenner had more cash.

I think bad teams are worse today than the pre-salary cap era because teams go through much more transition today with impatient owners than ever before. Despite free agency, teams may get worse than better because a coach may be able to teach young draft picks but may fail to motivate veterans and free agents who get stuck in their own ways and worse, just play for their new contract and dont stay in shape and get injured. Scouting in general is much worse today IMO because its hard to truly find self-motivated players with great work ethic who can get the most out of their talent without being blindsided by these huge salaries. Compared to say, 25 years ago, there are way more busts in the draft, especially at the QB position, which can set back teams for years.

In the past, with dominant teams, bad teams had to draft well and fight their way to prominence which was a hard chore but they could get better along the way. Nowadays, with so much parity and free agency movement, the good but not dominant teams can become bad, unless they overcome key injuries and bad teams, with good health along the way, could suddenly become good and give their fanbases some pride ...

[Jay Z]

I am reminded of playing Mario Kart with my kids.

I am better as a racer, so I give them a bit of a head start. Mario Kart has a bunch of goofy items that you can fire at the other players. You can control the power of the items that the game spits out. Even though players in the back get stronger items than players at the front, it's actually harder to work from the back to the front if the items are stronger. Because you work up from 12th to 8th, then you're hit yourself by some object. Even though the items are stacked to help the weaker players, adding more turmoil hinders more than helps straightforward efforts to get ahead.

It's clear salary cap inhibits simply stockpiling some super level of talent for years at a time. But bad teams have some good players too, and they're getting hit will all of the salary cap stuff as well. Pre salary cap and free agency, yeah you had to go and do it, but a bad team could become a champion with a few good rafts. Which the Steelers did. Even teams like the Cardinals and Colts, with owners and management that weren't so great, could at least get a core and get in the playoffs for a few years. IMO the greater turmoil of today makes it harder, not easier, for a bottom team to dig its way out. They just get started and their own players want to leave.

[Bryan]

Pre salary cap and free agency, yeah you had to go and do it, but a bad team could become a champion with a few good rafts.

IMO the greater turmoil of today makes it harder, not easier, for a bottom team to dig its way out. They just get started and their own players want to leave.

Interesting. I never thought of it that way. It would be enlightening to see a study as to how quickly/how often teams improve and make the playoffs in this era. I think another factor is that free agency just gives bad organizations another way to shoot themselves in the foot. I've seen that happen every year with the Bears...wasting draft pick after draft pick on the TE position, then "solving" the problem by throwing $30M and leadfooted Jimmy Graham.