Patrick Mahomes: The Best QB in the NFL & for Dynasty

[Lotto4Life]

Machines should hang out less with his State Farm.buddy Aarom and more with Tom I Can't Lift My Right Hand Cuz It's Covered In Rings Brady.

Are you suggesting that Brady wasn't getting paid pretty significantly off the NFL books by a Kraft company?

[djeternal2]

Ok...so defending the cap...
Yeah, the cap is there to protect/advance the owners’ pockets. It’s also there to help the league remain as great as it is. A league where anyone and everyone has a shot to build a contender (except the Browns?). Take away the cap, and KC may not be so fun. Cowboys sure would be a powerhouse though. The league would be as unbalanced as the NBA, with your 6-8 contenders and your 20 or so cute teams to farm from. There would possibly be some contracted teams, as, coupled with a far higher overhead (player salaries), some owners wouldn’t be able to field a competitive enough team to draw the fans. Higher overhead and lower gross income isn’t as fun to own.

In short, the cap helps keep the league a league of some parity. A league of interest. Remove it and you have the horribly predictable NBA with loser franchises like the Wolves...and the Cowboys would be the Lakers. Oh yippee.

I agree with the rest of your post though.

Exactly Valhalla. Without the cap the NFL becomes the NBA or MLB and a team like Green Bay who has been around since the beginning has to fold because they have no deep pocket owner to keep the franchise afloat let alone competitive.

[AussieMate]

Tom is also in his 40's, on his like 5th or 6th contract, and married to a super model who makes even more than him. He wasn't taking discounts on his early contracts, and sounds like he's not planning on taking one on his upcoming deal. This is Mahomes' first contract that he and his agent have any say over, and he should get as much money as he can. It is also bad for all the players in the league if the best player in the league takes a lesser contract, because teams will use that as leverage and say "Well Patrick Mahomes is doing it, so if he does you should too" and keep contract prices down.

Thankyou bjd, you get it. This contract needs to set a precedent just as much for the league, as it does for Mahomes. He is the best player to build around in the sport, and he is the best *at* the sport. He deserves it. Ironically - just like every mega-block-buster deal that has come before - this contract will be looked at as "normal" in 2 years time when the Kyler Murray extension is coming around.

It's just a floating number. The hand-wringing is pointless. Pay the man.

Relative to what his value and talents in his industry are worth, yes he's vastly underpaid currently.

I never mentioned Patty, my post was in reference to mild saying these men are underpaid.

Haaaahahaha. This man does not get it. Now, I know the toilets flush backwards and you all love a comically sized can of Fosters down there in the upside-down dungeree-doo... but lets play a quick game of "free market economy" - just for fun.

Step 1: Remove the salary cap.

That's it. That's all you'd have to do, and you'd have an immediate concrete answer as to why it is correct to say that the Superstars of the biggest sports are underpaid.

What is LeBron James' given value to any franchise he is on? Is it purely his superhuman ability to carry a team to the finals every year? Or is it the fact that - even in an eventually diminished state - he will still drive ratings, ticket sales, and merchandising at a rate far exceeding 97% of all other players in the NBA? If he literally drives your business - then what is that worth, as a business proposition, and as a number?

OK, we're still in Free Market mode. Back to the NFL. The Chargers currently have a problem: nobody cares. They can't sell seats, and they desperately need some sort of draw (in a city FLUSH with draws) to get their business operations back on track. Heck, they're even considering London (even if they say they're not ). If Mahomes was on offer to the highest bidder, no strings - then how far do you think they'd go, to secure their future - both on the field, and off?

If the players were able to be paid what they are *actually* worth, it would vastly exceed these contracts under the Cap era. Never forget that the owners are always winning - that is the design of the league. Who do you want to root for - the guys actually putting their lives on the line to entertain you on the field? Or the skinbag stooges leering from the top rails?

Pay. The. Man.

You're still strawmaning this really hard, in my opinion anyone getting over 10mil a year can't be referred to as underpaid period.
On a more NFL note I also think the second you pay that quarterback your going to struggle to win a comp unless you have a great coach and a few players taking less to get a ring.
Basically check what someone's stance is before trying to correct or convince them of something.

[mild]

Ok...so defending the cap...
Yeah, the cap is there to protect/advance the owners’ pockets. It’s also there to help the league remain as great as it is. A league where anyone and everyone has a shot to build a contender (except the Browns?). Take away the cap, and KC may not be so fun. Cowboys sure would be a powerhouse though. The league would be as unbalanced as the NBA, with your 6-8 contenders and your 20 or so cute teams to farm from. There would possibly be some contracted teams, as, coupled with a far higher overhead (player salaries), some owners wouldn’t be able to field a competitive enough team to draw the fans. Higher overhead and lower gross income isn’t as fun to own.

In short, the cap helps keep the league a league of some parity. A league of interest. Remove it and you have the horribly predictable NBA with loser franchises like the Wolves...and the Cowboys would be the Lakers. Oh yippee.

I agree with the rest of your post though.

Exactly Valhalla. Without the cap the NFL becomes the NBA or MLB and a team like Green Bay who has been around since the beginning has to fold because they have no deep pocket owner to keep the franchise afloat let alone competitive.

I just want to be clear. I was playing the "abolish the cap" game merely to demonstrate that the value of players is *underpaid* to their worth, as the last page was getting rich with "Pat Mahomes should take a cut if he knows what's good for him" sort of posts.

I fully understand why the cap is in place. It protects the balance of the league and gives every fanbase the feeling of a fair shot - even though we all know that's kind of not true, because cheap and/or incompetent owners will still find ways to be Mike Brown. You cited the NFL without a cap being as unbalanced as the NBA - another sport with a cap! But we can both agree the NBA is unbalanced for a completely different reason - player empowerment, desire to play for good organisations and/or big markets, and the fact that 1 superstar player swings a 5 man team's fortunes much harder than a 53 man one.

I might have been a bit mean to the owners perhaps. Was I being dramatic calling them leering skinbags? Perhaps, but you gotta admit its funny and fits a few of them, eh Jerry? I can't argue that some of these men are good, and got their gains from hard work. No disrespect there. But that's everybody around us, right? - some good, some bad.

However - I was talking about the Owners as a Collective. And if ever there was a Collective with an *extremely* dark-hearted history in relation to its treatment of its players and its CBA negotiation tactics, it is this one. Just listen to their former players - that is, the ones that are still kicking and haven't given in to whatever demons are haunting them now. This is a league that chews men up and spits them out. They're never the same afterward, every single one. The phrase "guaranteed contract" is a dirty word. Jerry Richardson was just three years ago.

I'm just saying. The NFL is Human Pathos at every level. And if I'm going to root for the Owners or the Players, even as far as it comes to CBA's and mega-deal-contracts - man, you can give me the boys with their boots on the ground every time.

[bjd5211]

in my opinion anyone getting over 10mil a year can't be referred to as underpaid period.

And this "opinion" is just flat out envy, and just plays into the opinion that the owners love fans having to put pressure on players to take deals for less than they are worth. These players bring in BILLIONS of dollars in revenue every year, and you are worth compensation that reflects the amount of revenue you generate for your company, regardless of what the industry is or the amount of money that is. The players are the product that the NFL sells to make all the money it does, and if that money doesn't go to the players it just stays in the pockets of the owners making their wallets even fatter.

[AussieMate]

in my opinion anyone getting over 10mil a year can't be referred to as underpaid period.

And this "opinion" is just flat out envy, and just plays into the opinion that the owners love fans having to put pressure on players to take deals for less than they are worth. These players bring in BILLIONS of dollars in revenue every year, and you are worth compensation that reflects the amount of revenue you generate for your company, regardless of what the industry is or the amount of money that is. The players are the product that the NFL sells to make all the money it does, and if that money doesn't go to the players it just stays in the pockets of the owners making their wallets even fatter.

Alright mate, you do you, hope your day gets better.

[Dynasty_Analyst]

Got to have a salary cap I get your wage fairness argument that's fine but come on I'm a Kansas City fan football is the only sport that's left that has a level playing field. I'm sure you New York and California team fans love your unfair advantages in baseball and basketball but it's not enjoyable for anyone else to watch. That's why football is the most popular. Sidenote tough to argue that any of these guys are underpaid. If you told people 500 years ago that actors (people in plays for them), athletes, and other entertainers made 100x more than the average person in society they'd be laughing

[bjd5211]

Got to have a salary cap I get your wage fairness argument that's fine but come on I'm a Kansas City fan football is the only sport that's left that has a level playing field. I'm sure you New York and California team fans love your unfair advantages in baseball and basketball but it's not enjoyable for anyone else to watch. That's why football is the most popular. Sidenote tough to argue that any of these guys are underpaid. If you told people 500 years ago that actors (people in plays for them), athletes, and other entertainers made 100x more than the average person in society they'd be laughing

They would also be laughing if you told them about airplanes and televisions, times change. The fact is a lot of athletes, especially the superstars, are underpaid relative to the amount of money they generate for their teams and leagues. Obviously no one is going to have any pity for LeBron, and he makes plenty of money and has nothing to worry about financially, but he is worth significantly more to his teams bottom-line than the NBA max salary or really even the entire salary cap of the team. If they did away with the max salary in the NBA LeBron could easily command at least $75-100M a year because he has that big of an impact on both the on-court results and the business results for his team. Just look at the state of the Cleveland Cavaliers before and after he was drafted, and then again when he left for Miami and when he returned and now that he's left again.

And the reason these entertainers are paid so much is because of us, we as fans are the ones who crave the entertainment and are always wanting to see the best entertainers perform these sports/movies/music/books etc and invest our time and money into it. That demand for entertainment generates enormous amounts of money for these industries, who in turn invest that money into the greatest talents the world has to offer so they can keep our eyes and attention and most importantly money on them.

[FantasyFreak]

So anyway, as a Raiders fan, it pains me to say this, but I think we should pretty much all be on board here, now. This guy is the safest play in Dynasty, with ceiling/floor, and he's clearly the best QB in real football. Anyone arguing that doesn't have a leg to stand on at this point.

[djeternal2]

So anyway, as a Raiders fan, it pains me to say this, but I think we should pretty much all be on board here, now. This guy is the safest play in Dynasty, with ceiling/floor, and he's clearly the best QB in real football. Anyone arguing that doesn't have a leg to stand on at this point.

But Lamar Jackson is so much fun to watch play. You're just a hater.

[Cult of Dionysus]

I disagree that the players bring in the $$$. What brings in the $$$ is the game. Sure, if you'd replace ALL the players at one time, revenue would take a hit. But if you made them play two-hand touch it would take a far bigger hit.

At the end of the day, it's Big Macs and Quarter Pounders that brings in the $$$ at McDonalds, not the guys behind the counter.

[Valhalla]

I disagree that the players bring in the $$$. What brings in the $$$ is the game. Sure, if you'd replace ALL the players at one time, revenue would take a hit. But if you made them play two-hand touch it would take a far bigger hit.

At the end of the day, it's Big Macs and Quarter Pounders that brings in the $$$ at McDonalds, not the guys behind the counter.

A rarely recognized and good point, but it slices a couple ways. I don't spend dollars toward NFL products because Patrick Mahomes joined the league. If he weren't there, it would be some other guy we'd put on that pedestal. It's the game that drives the product. Yet, at the end of the day, it's still the players that elevate the quality of the game to what it is. The NFL wouldn't create the revenue they create if we were watching a bunch of Christian Ponders running around out there.

I feel like the game drives the revenue more than the players do, as a lesser quality of players (there are a LOT of talented people out there) would still drive plenty of revenue. The players still enhance the revenue substantially, and are due their share for the talent they bring. The establishment (the owners) SHOULD be bringing in significantly more than the players, IMO. That's how business works.

[WhatWouldDitkaDo]

I disagree that the players bring in the $$$. What brings in the $$$ is the game. Sure, if you'd replace ALL the players at one time, revenue would take a hit. But if you made them play two-hand touch it would take a far bigger hit.

At the end of the day, it's Big Macs and Quarter Pounders that brings in the $$$ at McDonalds, not the guys behind the counter.

Disagree 100%. Yes, the game itself is the product, but if you had to choose between watching an afternoon game with Patrick Mahomes or one with Ryan Fitzpatrick, you're likely choosing the KC game. Yes, people still watch crap teams like MIA and NYJ for fantasy and gambling purposes, but a superstar on your team greatly raises viewership, and TV deals make up the vast majority of the NFL's income.

Also, merchandise sales are a huge revenue generator as well. Why do you think LVR and other teams would jump at the opportunity to sign Brady? That's tens of millions in jersey and other merchandise revenue as soon as the pen hits the paper regardless of how well their team will do that year.

[bjd5211]

Let's see the XFL ratings this week, sure they don't have Patrick Mahomes, Saquon Barkley, Aaaron Donald, OBJ etc, but it's still football...

[WhatWouldDitkaDo]

Let's see the XFL ratings this week, sure they don't have Patrick Mahomes, Saquon Barkley, Aaaron Donald, OBJ etc, but it's still football...

The XFL ratings won't come anywhere near NFL ratings.