PDA

View Full Version : When there's a rookie pay scale?


bigbuc
10-06-2009, 02:58 AM
Will agents hold out there players from being drafted by the Raiders? Without the big bonus money in the 20's of millions, is it worth the risk to let them draft there player. Not trying to pick on the Raiders.

2004 Robert Gallery- bust, evey player in the top 8 made a pro bowl but him.
2005 Fabian Washington- Not a bust, but not playing his best ball for them.
2006 Michael Huff- Playing good ball this year, not any other year.
2007 JaMarcus Russell- looks like a bust.
2008 Darren McFadden- looks like a bust.
2009 Darrius Heyward-Bey- Rookie but looking like he can't catch. Not Good.

The only player thats become great is Nnamdi Asomugha back in the 2003 draft... But with players soon going to have to play there way to a big pay day its fair to ask.

BlindSite
10-06-2009, 03:15 AM
There is already a rookie pool which is an unofficial rookie cap as it is.

Either way, players drafted earlier have higher potential so they're going to be paid more, their talent is scarce, therefore they demand a higher pay grade.

It's not necessarily bad or good, there's not even that big of an issue with players getting more money as rookies. Most of the holdouts, other than Crabtree's in recent history have been over other stuff than the final dollar amount.

Capology is extremely convoluted and after a lot of work I've done into it, I can't see a real reason to establish a rookie pay scale or a rookie salary cap.

Bengalsrocket
10-06-2009, 09:10 AM
There is already a rookie pool which is an unofficial rookie cap as it is.

Either way, players drafted earlier have higher potential so they're going to be paid more, their talent is scarce, therefore they demand a higher pay grade.

It's not necessarily bad or good, there's not even that big of an issue with players getting more money as rookies. Most of the holdouts, other than Crabtree's in recent history have been over other stuff than the final dollar amount.

Capology is extremely convoluted and after a lot of work I've done into it, I can't see a real reason to establish a rookie pay scale or a rookie salary cap.

This is interesting, but it doesn't really answer anything the OP was asking lol.

yourfavestoner
10-06-2009, 11:34 AM
This is interesting, but it doesn't really answer anything the OP was asking lol.

What he's saying is that there isn't going to be a rookie cap. Which I agree with.

Staubach12
10-06-2009, 12:38 PM
I could see that happening. The Raiders are never going to be a legitimate team until Al Davis dies, and if I'm an elite player coming into the draft, there's no way in hell I'm playing for the Raiders if it's not going to cost me too much.

Falcon<3
10-06-2009, 01:00 PM
I totally think there should be rookie slotting pay scale, where you get picked is what you get paid, adjust for inflation etc, but when you're the #1 pick you're the #1 pick no matter what position, and besides, with the rookie slotting then you would also see shorter rookie contracts and guys trying to make their payday on their 2nd and 3rd deals, which is where it should be made, after they've paid their dues.

Iamcanadian
10-06-2009, 10:26 PM
I totally think there should be rookie slotting pay scale, where you get picked is what you get paid, adjust for inflation etc, but when you're the #1 pick you're the #1 pick no matter what position, and besides, with the rookie slotting then you would also see shorter rookie contracts and guys trying to make their payday on their 2nd and 3rd deals, which is where it should be made, after they've paid their dues.

There isn't going to be a rookie cap, the NFL really doesn't care one iota about capping rookie salaries. The NFL has no intention of lessening the length of rookie contracts from 5 or 6 years especially as the 4th and 5th year's contract is an option year where the money isn't guaranteed and where the player can be cut if the team so chooses. It is a perfect system for the NFL owners, it is only the fans who think the system isn't fair.
The NFL owners have one goal in the new CBA and that is to get an OK for expanding the schedule to 18 games and keeping as much of the increased revenue as they can from the additional 2 games.
The NFL must currently pay a certain percentage of of the total NFL revenues to the players and they will pay out that amount no matter who gets what so their interest in changing the system is very minimal as it won't put a penny more in the owner's pocket which is what the coming strike/lockout will be all about.
The rookie pay scale is just a red herring to keep the fans on the owner's side and the blame for any work stoppage on the player's union. The union has already stated that they won't accept a rookie pay scale so neither side really cares much about it and in any settlement it will be dropped by the NFL if they get what they really want.
The simple fact is that football players make far less than any other sport's players because the owners have won every strike or lockout that has ever occurred and the owner's know it. They love the current system and certainly aren't inclined to change it. The player's union understands that rookie salaries are the driving force which increases veteran's salaries. Also, only about 10 rookies a year get inflated salaries while the rest of the rookies are paid peanuts for a contract where only about 45% of the money is guaranteed and where a star player who wasn't drafted in the top 10 faces the prospect of making practically nothing for the length of his contract, some 4 or 5 years. Considering the average length of a player's career is 4 and a half seasons, the owners are miles ahead with the current rookie pay system so why in the world would they want to change it???
THERE WILL BE NO CHANGES TO THE ROOKIE PAY SYSTEM IN THE NEXT CBA!!!

aNYtitan
10-06-2009, 10:44 PM
The Raiders are never going to be a legitimate team until Al Davis dies

That's an amazing quote. Sad but true.

MetSox17
10-06-2009, 10:50 PM
That's an amazing quote. Sad but true.

It's something everyone already knows. Just look at all their first round picks. Bust after bust after bust. It's absolutely ridiculous. No other team in the NFL, (not even the Lions) have been that bad drafting.

AntoinCD
10-06-2009, 10:51 PM
That's an amazing quote. Sad but true.

The Raiders probably won't be a good team soon. However to answer the original post, people are forgetting one big thing that players have in abundance...ego. If i'm, say, hypothetically Matt Barkley and i'm the first overall selection in 2012 and the Raiders pick me, i'm not thinking "crap the Raiders picked me." I'm thinking "I get to be the guy who turns this around".

That's pretty much exactly what Matthew Stafford said when asked how he'd feel if the Lions picked him

aNYtitan
10-06-2009, 11:06 PM
The Raiders probably won't be a good team soon. However to answer the original post, people are forgetting one big thing that players have in abundance...ego. If i'm, say, hypothetically Matt Barkley and i'm the first overall selection in 2012 and the Raiders pick me, i'm not thinking "crap the Raiders picked me." I'm thinking "I get to be the guy who turns this around".

That's pretty much exactly what Matthew Stafford said when asked how he'd feel if the Lions picked him

Well they are going on that path.

And if you look back on those drafts, they took the BPA on 4 out of 6 drafts. Gallery was supposed to be the best LT to come into the draft. Huff was as good a safety as there was (a tier below Sean Taylor), JaMarcus Russell had all the potential in the world and the Radiers needed a QB, and McFadden was the best RB in that draft, and a position of need

RaiderNation
10-06-2009, 11:57 PM
Fabian Washington is a bust.

Looks like we will have to do more than look at 40 times. Maybe we negotiate contracts before we draft them, so we dont end up having a hold out like Russell did or what Crabtree is doing now.