An NFL ‘QB salary cap’ is the owners’ dumbest idea yet

NFL owners are growing increasingly concerned about mammoth quarterback salaries, and reports indicate there have been some exploratory discussions on how to manage the spending.

Tom Pelissero of the NFL Network said on The Rich Eisen Show Wednesday that some owners have met about the possibility of installing a QB salary cap, which would limit the percentage of the cap which would be spent on a signal caller. Pelissero went on to say that the conversation right now is a non-starter, because so many teams have already paid their passers and don’t want to be hemmed in, but the fact this topic is being broached shows there could be some discussion on it in the future.

It’s a tricky subject to really address properly. On the one hand every player should be allowed to get whatever the free market allows them to, but there is a football reality to this as well. With such a mammoth chunk of a team’s cap being allocated to the QB position, it’s resulted in salaries plummeting at a variety of other positions, most notably at running back and safety, where players haven’t seen remotely the same raises in their compensation as other positions.

As it stands there are 11 quarterbacks in the NFL who account for over 20 percent of their respective team’s cap space this season. Meanwhile the highest-paid defensive player (T.J. Watt) accounts for 15 percent of the Steelers cap, with the vast majority of top-tier players falling in the 8-12 percent range. The owners would hold that if quarterback salaries were capped, let’s say for argument at 17.5 percent of the cap — that every other position would see more pay as a result. In addition, it would incentivize teams to pay better money for backup quarterbacks, which would ensure a more competitive team, should the starter be injured.

There is one huge problem with trying to initiate this kind of position-specific cap: It’s not in the CBA.

The NFL and NFLPA signed their most recent CBA in 2020, and it runs through the 2030 season. If owners wanted to change QB compensation to be a percentage of the total cap it would require an amendment to the collective bargaining agreement, which is something the NFLPA simply wouldn’t allow. Traditionally the union has pushed back on any and all cap-based compensation. The concern is that this would become a slippery slope for the league to implement cap-based spending for every position.

This is something nobody should want, because it would lead to league-wide homogenization. To keep football interesting we have to have some teams willing to overspend on offense vs. defense, and vice versa. If every team spent the same way then it would simply become a battle of the best markets and who drafted better, with little strategic wiggle room.

However, there exists a wrinkle to all this which Pro Football Talk is reporting on. Their sources say that NFL owners wouldn’t seek to codify percentage-based QB spending in the CBA, but rather make it an “unwritten rule” among teams.

“As we’ve heard it, it wouldn’t be an official, separate cap. It would be an unofficial, off-the-books (and, more importantly, off the CBA) arrangement pursuant to which teams would refuse to go above a certain level. All teams. Which would make it pointless for, say, Dak Prescott to force his way to the open market. The best deal he’d get from the Cowboys would be the same as the best deal he’d get from someone else. (It would be like a max contract in the NBA.)”

There’s one problem with this idea ...

I’d refuse to believe NFL owners were this dumb, except that time and time again they’ve shown us that they are this dumb. If any conversations have taken place about how to pay quarterbacks amongst owners, and there’s a tacit agreement to keep pay down — then they are colluding against players, and the NFLPA by extension.

This isn’t some cute little idea to fool around with. It’s a blatant breach of the 2020-2030 CBA that could have profound implications. Not only would it be a breach of contract, but if there’s collusion on player compensation the NFLPA has the right to terminate the agreement immediately, which could lead to a prolonged lockout.

Section 2. Termination Due To Collusion:
(a) If at any time the conditions of Article 17, Section 16(a), (b), or (c) are satisfied, the NFLPA shall have the right to terminate this Agreement. To execute such termination, the NFLPA shall serve upon the NFL written notice of termination within thirty days after the System Arbitrator’s decision finding the requisite conditions becomes final. The parties agree, however, that such termination shall be stayed if any party appeals such finding to the Appeals Panel, and to seek expedited review from the Appeals Panel.

If conversations took place about circumventing the CBA to install a “QB cap,” then it’s created a mammoth problem for the NFL. Especially with Dak Prescott’s extension on the horizon, with a team that is in salary cap hell, it will warrant a massive investigation into the negotiations process by the NFLPA if it drags out. There were already rumors of collusion taking place in 2023 with Lamar Jackson, but if sources are telling Pro Football Talk that there could be work to suppress salaries then it opens up an entirely new can of worms.

Keep an eye on this story as it evolves, because there are some mammoth implications that take this well beyond simple talks of putting in a QB pay scale.