New Orleans Saints QB and member of the NFLPA's executive committee, Drew Brees, wrote an email to his teammates on Saturday regarding the latest NFL lockout news and updates. Pro Football Talk obtained that email, which happens to mention the 2009 Kansas City Chiefs as an example of low-spending teams.
"We cannot have teams like KC spend only 67% of the cap like they did in 2009. It doesn't matter how high the cap is if they are only going to spend that much. So with a minimum in place, it requires all teams to be at or above that minimum. More money in players pockets."
From the players' perspective, this is a good battle to take on because ultimately it means more money for the players, as Brees notes. And, as the organization representing the players, the NFLPA should try to get as much money for them as possible.
But here's the thing though. The Chiefs reported salary cap numbers (as opposed to actual cash spent) were similar in 2009 and 2010. In 2009, they won four games and in 2010 they won 10 games.
It goes to show you that money isn't the end-all, be-all in the NFL, as it is in other sports. Sure, it definitely matters, but money doesn't buy you championships and the money spent by the Chiefs in 2009 and 2010, relative to the number of wins in 2009 and 2010, helps demonstrate that.
I'm not saying the Chiefs shouldn't spend. They should, and they will. But the more money you spend doesn't necessarily equate to more victories.