PDA

View Full Version : Rookie Pay Scale Coming in Time for 2010 Draft?


BeerBaron
01-14-2010, 12:51 PM
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/01/14/league-proposes-immediate-changes-to-rookie-pay/

It seems like a long shot with the looming labor crisis, but both the league and the union have submitted proposals for how it could work, and it could be in place for the 2010 draft.

So much for any underclassmen who declared trying to avoid future rookie pay scales....still a long shot like I said though.

Thoughts?

D-Unit
01-14-2010, 12:53 PM
Sooner the better, imo.

BGB
01-14-2010, 12:53 PM
No way in hell they would get that in place in time.

killxswitch
01-14-2010, 12:56 PM
Let's hope it happens, rookie salaries are out of control. I also like the idea of savings going to former players who need it.

HeavyLeggedWaistBender
01-14-2010, 02:09 PM
Great news, but not for Sam Bradford.

J-Mike88
01-14-2010, 02:27 PM
Let's hope it happens, rookie salaries are out of control. I also like the idea of savings going to former players who need it.
^^^ this.
Isn't it a shame that the NBA is actually way ahead of the NFL on this one!

swngtrdr
01-14-2010, 03:18 PM
I don't understand why everyone seems to be in favor of a rookie salary cap. You need to read the fine print in this article. It says rookies will only have a 3 year contract. As a Vikings fan I would be pissed as hell if Adrian Peterson could go to the highest bidder after this year. How about Chris Johnson after next year? What if one of this years QB's turns out to be the next Tom Brady? As a fan I find it hard to believe that all of you are going to be fine with you're stud QB becoming a free agent after 3 years.

stephenson86
01-14-2010, 03:32 PM
if i were the top team id draft suh then try and trade his rights

not because i dont love him i have a man crush but dont fancy investing that many millions

J-Mike88
01-14-2010, 04:09 PM
I don't understand why everyone seems to be in favor of a rookie salary cap. You need to read the fine print in this article. It says rookies will only have a 3 year contract. As a Vikings fan I would be pissed as hell if Adrian Peterson could go to the highest bidder after this year. How about Chris Johnson after next year? What if one of this years QB's turns out to be the next Tom Brady? As a fan I find it hard to believe that all of you are going to be fine with you're stud QB becoming a free agent after 3 years.
Agreed, it should be 5 years. Maybe 4. For sure 3 is not enough. Rodgers sat for 3 years.

stephenson86
01-14-2010, 04:13 PM
tbh i think 3 years is good, it means you dont financially tie yourself down for too long and christ if your future QB of the team shows up after 2 seasons, sign him to an extension before his 3rd year is out wow, like you would leave CJ to sign in after next season id re sign him now too lock him up

stephenson86
01-14-2010, 04:18 PM
a great example for this is j russell, raiders let him walk after season 3 having not spent so much effing money on him instead of having to release him taking a cap hit, now in example of flacco, hes proven hes going to be the ravens QB for the next decade, pay the man now and lock him up for the future, why wait until next year it works well in my opinion, it makes the finances much more comforting and extensions will just come in the second year not the third

Forenci
01-14-2010, 04:22 PM
In terms of length they should just do what the NBA does. Most of the contracts are two/three years (can't recall which off the top of my head) and then I think all first round picks have a team option for 2 more years.

Essentially it would allow a team who messes up to be rid of a player in three years, or if they are really good keep them around for two more years at a reasonable salary (compared to what they'd make as FA's, if they're good).

I imagine players who slip big on draft day will be pissed though, but there's not much you can do about it.

yourfavestoner
01-14-2010, 04:48 PM
No way in hell they would get that in place in time.

Pretty much this. Something this big doesn't get passed without months and months of deliberation.

hockey619
01-14-2010, 04:57 PM
In terms of length they should just do what the NBA does. Most of the contracts are two/three years (can't recall which off the top of my head) and then I think all first round picks have a team option for 2 more years.

Essentially it would allow a team who messes up to be rid of a player in three years, or if they are really good keep them around for two more years at a reasonable salary (compared to what they'd make as FA's, if they're good).

I imagine players who slip big on draft day will be pissed though, but there's not much you can do about it.



The NFLPA will never agree to this, it gives all the options and power to the teams and offers little security to the players.

If your good, your team keeps you for two more years at a lower salary than you deserve and you risk injury and losing that big contract and financial stability. If you suck, well that just sucks that your terrible but means the team can get rid of you faster and hurt your finances all the same.

obvs players could renegotiate to be kept if theyre good but i feel like more anquan boldin like situations would occur where a player would want a raise, couldnt get it, and couldnt get out either.

Forenci
01-14-2010, 05:08 PM
The NFLPA will never agree to this, it gives all the options and power to the teams and offers little security to the players.

If your good, your team keeps you for two more years at a lower salary than you deserve and you risk injury and losing that big contract and financial stability. If you suck, well that just sucks that your terrible but means the team can get rid of you faster and hurt your finances all the same.

obvs players could renegotiate to be kept if theyre good but i feel like more anquan boldin like situations would occur where a player would want a raise, couldnt get it, and couldnt get out either.

True, but it can be doesn't have to be just team options. It could be a team option the fourth year, and a player option the fifth year. Or it could be a vesting option, or even a mutual option.

Not to mention they could also make the option for the first year be a significant pay increase and the fifth year option even more so.

It can work, it would just need to be structured properly.

Iamcanadian
01-14-2010, 10:47 PM
Well, I don't think a settlement is even close at this point on a rookie pay scale. The NFL owners will never give in to a 3 year contract, in fact I doubt they move 1 inch off a 6 year contract. If you think they are going to allow players to reach FA after 3 seasons, your in a dreamworld.

Let's look at the facts, 10 rookies get way overpaid with their contract but in return 50 or 60 get way underpaid because they are stuck with a pitiful contract for 6 years no matter how successful they become. If the top 10 pick is a flop, his contract can be dumped after 3 or 4 seasons but if a later pick becomes a star, he is stuck at his pay for 6 years before the team will have to pay him more. Sure, he can hold out but we all know how successfully that works.

The current pay system hasn't cost the NFL a penny, in fact, they are likely making millions because lessor drafted players are stuck in their contracts for 6 years which more than makes up for any loses they take on the few top 10 picks who flop.

The idea of giving the money to retired players by the owners from the rookie money saved is just a cheap advertisement for their side and a way to get out from the bad criticism they are getting for not taking care of their older retired players in the 1st place.

Sure, the union will accept FA after 2 or 3 years for all rookies, of course it would likely cost the owners a fortune to implement and they would end up having to pay the other 50 or 60 players way above what they are paying them now.

The rich owners would love it after they soak up most of the young stars for their teams while the poorer franchises are left with the junk.

It is clear that the owners want to separate the rookie pay scale from the CBA negotiations because they know it is dynamite and could lead to a huge lockout lasting a year or more.
The owners already believe that they have the upper hand in the new CBA negotiations because of the players short careers in football but they also realize that if the 2 negotiations are tied together, it could well turn into an outright war.

Fans are being sold a bill of goods on a rookie salary cap with fans actually believing that the owners would reduce the # of years players would need to reach FA. The owners won't budge on the 6 year term for FA, the # of years most contracts cover in modern times.
What the fans are far more likely to get is a lost season probably with scab players including a SB played with scabs and in the end, the rookie salary will remain the same..

BGB
01-15-2010, 12:35 AM
tbh i think 3 years is good, it means you dont financially tie yourself down for too long and christ if your future QB of the team shows up after 2 seasons, sign him to an extension before his 3rd year is out wow, like you would leave CJ to sign in after next season id re sign him now too lock him up

3 year rewards the teams that cant draft and hurts the ones that can. If you dont want to pay a guy who sucks huge money for 5 years then do a better job of drafting. The way the Vikings have been drafting in the last 3 years I'm extremly happy to have these guys tied up for as long as possible.

BGB
01-15-2010, 12:37 AM
a great example for this is j russell, raiders let him walk after season 3 having not spent so much effing money on him instead of having to release him taking a cap hit, now in example of flacco, hes proven hes going to be the ravens QB for the next decade, pay the man now and lock him up for the future, why wait until next year it works well in my opinion, it makes the finances much more comforting and extensions will just come in the second year not the third

The Raiders shouldn't have drafted the bum. And dont kid yourself according to Al "Jamarcus is a GREAT PLAYER". Hell he'll probably give that pile of crap an extension and just keep firing coaches when they cant win with the loser.

swngtrdr
01-15-2010, 11:25 AM
The 3 year rookie contract isn't being pulled out of a hat. In the NBA the average career length is 5 years and even with extensions you are a free agent after 5 years. In the NFL the average career length is 3 years. This is why there will not be any 5 or 6 year rookie contracts. The reason the players union is in favor of rookie contracts is they realize the better players will be signing 3 contracts over their career instead of 2.

Iamcanadian
01-15-2010, 12:45 PM
The 3 year rookie contract isn't being pulled out of a hat. In the NBA the average career length is 5 years and even with extensions you are a free agent after 5 years. In the NFL the average career length is 3 years. This is why there will not be any 5 or 6 year rookie contracts. The reason the players union is in favor of rookie contracts is they realize the better players will be signing 3 contracts over their career instead of 2.

The NFL already signs its rookies for 5 or 6 years although the money isn't all guaranteed. They have an option after the 4th year to retain the player for a substabtial amount of money or let him walk. There is zero chance the NFL will lower it to 3 years and allow its player 2 FA years over their careers. It would cause complete chaos for teams finacially. We aren't talking about 12 man NBA rosters, we are talking about having to control 53 players and maybe a lot more with an 18 game schedule coming.
In the NBA changing teams is actually controlled by salaries and it is extremely difficult for a team to add a super star to their team without cutting a good portion of their roster to remain under the cap. In the NFL it would be quite easy for the richer teams tp pick up super stars and it would be much closer to MLB than the NBA where the richer cities would be able to add a substantial # of star players from other teams and it wouldn't be long before the 10 richest franchises dominated the game completely.

PS The average career of an NFL player is around 4 and a half seasons. I don't know what it is for a NBA player but I'm guessing it's longer than 5 seasons.

swngtrdr
01-15-2010, 06:56 PM
The numbers I gave for average career length are the numbers supplied by the NBA and NFL players association.

Mr.KnowItAll
01-15-2010, 07:08 PM
Who wants to see star players change their team every 3 or 4 years like the NBA