That's a question my friend John Palmer is asking this morning:
What if everyone believes the league office really, really, truly will monitor every single contract and not allow teams to exceed the $39m salary cap. How else might teams spend more without exceeding the cap?(snip)
* I might be able to sign the player to several contracts if I have some ancillary operations or arrangements.
* I could pay him a lot to model for the cover of the programmes.
* I could give him a huge endorsement contract for some firm (that I own) that may or may not advertise in the arena.
* I could induce advertisers to offer him large endorsement contracts and in return offer them lower advertising/sponsorship rates for the team's games.
I am sure there are many many other evasions that more creative minds than mine will discover.
No, the cap is NOT hard. People respond to incentives.
John has an excellent point here. Now that the salary cap and salary floor have been established, big market owners in Boston, New York, Philly, Detroit, Toronto, Colorado and Dallas will have an incentive, and the means, to circumvent the cap.
In a way, the league gets the best of both worlds: Small market teams get the "hard" cap they're looking for to control their costs, while the big market clubs who would spend far more anyway (and for the most part were ready to settle with the players before the 2004-05 season was cancelled for good) have the means and the motive to ignore it.
Of course, this is all moot if the league is committed to rigorous enforcement of the cap. Stay tuned.
