This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
I think Chase is trying point out that just because a player makes alot of money doesn't necessarily mean he is overpaid. If Crabtree (or any other rookie) was allowed to have 32 teams compete for his services rather than only 1, he would make significantly more money. Chase could explain his point much better than I can, though.
His initial point was that rookies are widely underpaid, in which a slew of FBGers including myself immediately chimed in to disagree.
Yep. and he will have been out of football for one full year. Also if the economy continues to get worse rather than better, it may come to pass that rookie salaries may well be in decline by that time.He is dumb not to sign. It's not like the value he would get at #10 is chump change.as for whether rookies are overpaid or not.... in the open market these guys get paid for what they are capable of doing. not what they actually do.I agree crabtree may have the potential of a Moss or an Owens, but hasnt done it yet. but, in theory, if you reward someone early in their career like this, you would hope there would be some loyalty later in his career too....like when his contract expires or when he gets old and wants to play one more year. (although it rarely works out that way)If he sits out a year and enters next year's draft, there may be 2 or 3 WRs that are better than him in the 2010 draft. What does he think that will do for his $$$$ situation?Dez BryantArrelious BennMichael CrabtreeDamian WilliamsBrandon LaFellGolden TateEdited to correct Dez Bryant. I can't believe I said Dez White initially. I hope that wasn't a jinx to him. At least I had it right in an earlier post
You're probably right. I would say there's about an 80% chance of that happening.
Not a chance in hell he's anywhere close to those two. Not only isn't he close in talent, he's not close in makeup either.Yep. and he will have been out of football for one full year. Also if the economy continues to get worse rather than better, it may come to pass that rookie salaries may well be in decline by that time.He is dumb not to sign. It's not like the value he would get at #10 is chump change.If he sits out a year and enters next year's draft, there may be 2 or 3 WRs that are better than him in the 2010 draft. What does he think that will do for his $$$$ situation?
Dez Bryant
Arrelious Benn
Michael Crabtree
Damian Williams
Brandon LaFell
Golden Tate
Edited to correct Dez Bryant. I can't believe I said Dez White initially. I hope that wasn't a jinx to him. At least I had it right in an earlier post
as for whether rookies are overpaid or not.... in the open market these guys get paid for what they are capable of doing. not what they actually do.
I agree crabtree may have the potential of a Moss or an Owens, but hasnt done it yet. but, in theory, if you reward someone early in their career like this, you would hope there would be some loyalty later in his career too....like when his contract expires or when he gets old and wants to play one more year. (although it rarely works out that way)
I find it interesting that 9 out of the first 16 picks are still unsigned and none of #17-32 are unsigned.
There's also a very good chance that he is worthless in redrafts this year. Frank Gore + Singletary - top QB - Crabtree tc reps = crappy season for Craptree.
When you have lots of leverage, you can demand lots of money for your services. When you don't have any leverage, you can't demand much. Michael Vick isn't about to sign some big contract, because his services aren't in demand. Peyton Manning would demand lots of money on the open market, because his services would be in huge demand. When there are 32 teams bidding on you, you can choose to end up on the team that would pay you the most money. When you have 1 team bidding on you, you're in some ways at their whim -- because as this thread has made clear several times, Crabtree has no leverage. If the 49ers signed Crabtree to a 1 year, league minimum contract today and then cut him immediately, I have no doubt that Crabtree would sign elsewhere for more than what he'll end up actually signing for with the 49ers. That's the way the open market works. When you don't have an open market for your services, you can not sell yourself to the highest bidder.
There's a 71% chance of that happening.
So... you're saying 1st round rookie picks are underpaid? You're the first person I've heard argue this other than rookies. Even vets think first round picks are woefully overpaid.
Drafting a rookie WR in a redraft is rarely a good idea. Calvin Johnson had a great rookie year, but only managed WR 35. The few rookie WR's that do explode are generally out of nowhere and very difficult to predict.
Why wouldn't vets think that? If there was a cap on what rookies made, vets would make lots more money.I think a lot of people that have studied economics think that rookies are underpaid. I agree that all talking heads say rookies are overpaid.
It seems like you are comparing the money a rookie earns as a first round pick versus the potential of signing with any team as a free agent. While most in this thread seem to be basing the pay structure on the reality of comparing the rookie first round salaries to that productive NFL veterans.
But unless you're a Redskins or Raiders fan, you don't realize or remember all the big name, veteran free agents that prove to be a product of their former system and completely bust on their new teams after getting big $. Vets are not alway more "proven" than their rookie "prospect" couterparts. How one person will fit in with a new team is always a question mark. The only issue I have with the current system is that there is not even ground between teams and rookies, and that QBs, who take so much time to develop are paid loads of cash to sit the bench and learn.
Nice perspective.
1. He thinks he's top 5 talent. 2. He had a broken foot that kept him out of mini-camps and OTA's. 3. Their first practice was last Saturday. 4. He's not the first rookie to hold out. 5. Mike Singletary held out his rookie year. Who'd he play for again?
1. Doesn't matter what he THINKS. Whether the thinks he's top 5 talent or not is completely irrelevant.2. Reality is that he was drafted at #10, not #5.Nice perspective.
So you believe his feelings on what he should get paid supersede the pay/pick structure in the NFL?Going after as much money as you can makes you an idiot?We are in America here.
His cousin is his advisor. I'm excited to have him join the team but yes, he's an idiot in this regard. I agree he should get what he can, but if he's going to have his staffers threaten to hold out for the season, he deserves any and all ridicule he gets.Going after as much money as you can makes you an idiot?
Is there a pay/pick structure in the NFL? I know the NBA has slotted rookie contract; I don't think the NFL has this. It will be a major part of the next CBA.So you believe his feelings on what he should get paid supersede the pay/pick structure in the NFL?Going after as much money as you can makes you an idiot?
Sure it doesn't matter what he THINKS and I also agree reality is he was drafted #10.I was just disappointed to see people calling him a "money whore" and "idiot".Here's the big picture: The Niners are a once proud franchise and they have needed a #1 WR since TO left. The Niners are trying to get a stadium built in San Jose and having a winning team in 2009 would most definately help the Niners chances in the 2010 Spring Ballot Initiative in which the voters will approve or disapprove the stadium being built.Also, the Niner's brass sure had a big huge party and stated MANY, MANY times how happy they were that Crabtree "fell" to them. THEY THEMSELVES said he was Top 5 talent.Crabtree's talent/potential + stadium efforts+ SF Front Office buffoons= LEVERAGE for Crabtree.I can't stand rookies holding out, but in this case; the Niners NEED Crabtree AND treated him like a "savior" in April. Crabtree's just asking to get paid like the savior they are saying he is.As a fan, I obviously want him in camp, however, this ownership/front office have a HORRIBLE track record. Save face and overpay a little. Sheesh.1. Doesn't matter what he THINKS. Whether the thinks he's top 5 talent or not is completely irrelevant.2. Reality is that he was drafted at #10, not #5.Nice perspective.
As a fan of the 9ers you really want them to overpay for a WR who was already overrated even at #10?
Uh...the impression the front office gave everyone including fans is that they had him rated in the top 5 on their board. Maybe you think he is overrated "even at #10"; but the Niner's didn't.As far as me wanting them to "overpay", I'm not sure. They painted a picture of the offense being HUGELY improved with Crabtree....get him into camp.
If the 49ers do that, it would open a massive can of worms. Right now, there is no slotting system, not one written down anyway. But there is an unwritten one, that all teams follow. You get less guaranteed money than the guy in front of you. If the 49ers do that, every single agent recruiting a 1st round talent would have to promise that player more than a 10-15% bump in pay from the same slot the previous year.You would have massive holdouts. In fact, you are already seeing that the players drafted around Crabtree are waiting to see what he gets. If Crabtree's agents get San Fran to pay top 5 money, the agents for Raji and Andre Smith would look pretty stupid. And that would cripple them when it came time to recruit players next year. Because every other agent would mention to those same recruits that Agent So-and-So got his player a lesser deal. The NFL knows this, they can't just overpay one guy, everything would change. it'd be the Wild West.JMO, but I think by saying this, Crabtree and his advisor/cousin (
) seem willing to wait, but to actually sit out the year, and lose a year of earnings and a year towards free agency, takes some balls. Especially because they have to know there's a risk of getting drafted even lower next year. Crabtree will eventually cave, and he will be slotted. It is a tough situation for the 49ers, and I feel for the fans, but you cannot cave in to some agent who wants to break the rules, just to get a guy in camp. The repercussions would be huge, just huge.Umm, and it sure is sweet to have the only guy in that area that has signed be DHB. 
Well I'm certainly no expert on the 9ers but I think the offense will only improve as much as their QBs do. With or with out Crabtree.
Haha, for sure. Smith will be starting by November for better or worse. I hope it's for the better.
At least the Raiders are upfront about who they like, why they like him and get him into camp.Umm, and it sure is sweet to have the only guy in that area that has signed be DHB.
Per this same thread, lolBoth the 49ers and the player rep for Michael Crabtree are denying that the No. 10 overall pick has threatened to sit out the season and re-enter the draft in 2010.Despite confirmation from Crabtree's cousins and adviser, David Wells, agent Eugene Parker denies saying a word to anyone about a potential re-entry. According to AOL FanHouse, the 49ers "have no idea" what Wells is talking about. The ill-advised negotiating ploy has blown up in the Crabtree team's face. It's back to the drawing board. Aug. 6 - 3:23 pm etSource: nfl.fanhouse.comCousins and adviser? There's the problem. This guy is a few sandwiches short of a picnic. This post has been edited by Hoss_Cartwright: Today, 03:27 PM
This very well could be true. However the transition for NFL RBs and NFL WRs (particularly ones who came from a TT offense that is nothing like that of the NFLs) are vastly different. Who knows, maybe Crabtree can hold out for a while and still come in guns blazing. I wouldn't bet on it though. The longer he is out, the longer it will take him to make an impact (this year anyways).
Pick a position. There's plenty of players that held out a long time, and had fine careers.You may be right about this year, but frankly, I don't care about a WRs rookie year. I ain't expecting much. But like I said, the preseason games haven't even started yet. It's kind of early.
Well maybe you don't care about this year but I think the majority of people were expecting Crabtree to have a big impact even as a rookie. If all this drama clears itself up he has as easy a path to a starting position as any rookie in the NFL.
I am not even talking about this year. My only point was that holdouts are not the end of the world.If you are wondering how this affects him in redraft, well, I don't think it's good. But I wasn't speaking to that.
Well I was speaking for this year only. Thought I included that in my original post?
Come on Chase, that is all in theory and hte premise it right, but does not apply here. He is a draft pick and his leverage is that he was taken in the 10th slot. He will automatically get paid more than most of the players that have been working at his postion without having played one down in the NFL. He's getting paid millions on pure potential. His leverage is that he wa taken in the slot and that is why the 49ers and every other team in the NFL pay their draft picks accordingly to their draft spot. If this was not the case, then a team could easily offer the #1 overall pick a vets minimum. Of course, that doesn't happen. Again, it's leverage in that a team has used a draft pick, especially if high one, on a player. That franchise is attaching themselves to that person to help them now and later down the road. Not the same leverage as a FA in demand, but they have leverage. It is what it is, but vets should be making more than rookies and everyone knows this is a flawed system, but the union doesn't want pull back on anyone getting money because they are afraid that the team's will not re-distribute that money to the other (Vet) players. To say they are underpaid is just plain silly...in standards for normal working people, but even for NFL players.
Well, OK then.
You need to change this to 'top rookie picks.'Because if you are a 2nd rounder, or late 1st, and play well, it isn't long before you are dramatically underpaid.There's really only about 10 players every year getting crazy money. This 'redistributed to the vets' thing sounds good, but it isn't going to make much of a difference.
What is "should?"I think beer at an NFL game should cost $4. Do you think we should have a rule requiring teams to charge no more than $4 for beer?
Are you serious? I'll entertain this silliness a bit further since you want take into something else other than the topic. Let's say you have been working for FBG for 5 years now. You've helped create the site and content, basically made the name/site known. Actually helped do your part in getting the site accolades by being team member and contributing to help it become what it is now. Not only that, you don't need to be led to water and you are more self sufficient, so that means less hand holding by Joe & David having to tell you what to do all the time. Now comes along some snot nose young buck like Bloom (just using an example, not for real here) and Joe & David pay him more than you. No, not 6 or 12 pack more, since you want $4 beers....he's making more than you and every other contributer on the site/company by a far margin is clearly the highest paid on staff. He's not pulling in more people to the site (at least not yet), hey...everyone was here already loving FBG. You "should" be making more than the snot nosed Bloom or anyone else that comes in that is in the similar role as you. Now, once the snot nosed guy out perfoms you or shows that he's better or deserving, then he can get paid more than you. Why, you've been doing it for 5 years already. You put time in and have been doing your job.This is the same set up that the rest of Corporate America has in place. That is why a receptionist doesn't come in and make more than the lawyer, doctor and other professions. Matter of fact, that is why the NEW receptionist doesn't come in and make more than the existing receptionists. Now, when unions are involved...that receptionist comes in and makes closer to what the other receptionists make and that is the advantage of a union. We're still in corp America here, the union does NOT allow the NEW receptionist to come in and make more. So, the existing receptionist "should" make more.Chase Stuart said:
Best posting on the topic of draftees I've seen on this or any other thread in months.Are you serious? I'll entertain this silliness a bit further since you want take into something else other than the topic. Let's say you have been working for FBG for 5 years now. You've helped create the site and content, basically made the name/site known. Actually helped do your part in getting the site accolades by being team member and contributing to help it become what it is now. Not only that, you don't need to be led to water and you are more self sufficient, so that means less hand holding by Joe & David having to tell you what to do all the time. Now comes along some snot nose young buck like Bloom (just using an example, not for real here) and Joe & David pay him more than you. No, not 6 or 12 pack more, since you want $4 beers....he's making more than you and every other contributer on the site/company by a far margin is clearly the highest paid on staff. He's not pulling in more people to the site (at least not yet), hey...everyone was here already loving FBG. You "should" be making more than the snot nosed Bloom or anyone else that comes in that is in the similar role as you. Now, once the snot nosed guy out perfoms you or shows that he's better or deserving, then he can get paid more than you. Why, you've been doing it for 5 years already. You put time in and have been doing your job.This is the same set up that the rest of Corporate America has in place. That is why a receptionist doesn't come in and make more than the lawyer, doctor and other professions. Matter of fact, that is why the NEW receptionist doesn't come in and make more than the existing receptionists. Now, when unions are involved...that receptionist comes in and makes closer to what the other receptionists make and that is the advantage of a union. We're still in corp America here, the union does NOT allow the NEW receptionist to come in and make more. So, the existing receptionist "should" make more.Chase Stuart said:
It's called time & grade, which is used in our Armed Forces. Nothing like paying a Private more than his/her Sergeant. BTW - In the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marines...every Private gets paid less than his/her Sergeant. So, what ever leverage he or she has from deciding which Armed Forces branch to enter...they are still paid like a Private.
So, please spare the cute remarks as I'm not bashing you. You made a comment, I responded to the comment and to the premise on the what you based your comment. That is all...go sell crazy elsewhere because we're all stocked up here!
None of the players need to play in the NFL. They don't choose their team at first or maybe never, but let's face it that once they get paid or sign their contract...they don't care if it's the Lions, Raiders, or whoever drafted them. In time and hard work, they will get a better payday and have more of a choice of where they want to play. That is when they have the chance to get overpaid, if someone/organization chooses to do so.
For those that say any of the draft picks are underpaid and change it to high picks only, tell that to the Arena League players. They would have loved to be underpaid like that. The new league has players playing for $50,000. Tell me there are any of the NFL rookies being underpaid when they make far more than $50,000? The point is, they haven't played a down in the NFL and they are still being paid handsomely. Another point, most of the lower drafted players usually don't play as much, so basically many get paid to practice and sit on the bench. Once any of them prove themselves, a bigger payday will come. Again, if the players union wasn't so afraid that the teams would not re-distribute that money to the other players...a deal to not only cap, but create a lower wage for rookies that falls in line with the other wages would have been struck long time ago.
Whew, bind that and stick on a shelf!
brilliant.Are you serious? I'll entertain this silliness a bit further since you want take into something else other than the topic. Let's say you have been working for FBG for 5 years now. You've helped create the site and content, basically made the name/site known. Actually helped do your part in getting the site accolades by being team member and contributing to help it become what it is now. Not only that, you don't need to be led to water and you are more self sufficient, so that means less hand holding by Joe & David having to tell you what to do all the time. Now comes along some snot nose young buck like Bloom (just using an example, not for real here) and Joe & David pay him more than you. No, not 6 or 12 pack more, since you want $4 beers....he's making more than you and every other contributer on the site/company by a far margin is clearly the highest paid on staff. He's not pulling in more people to the site (at least not yet), hey...everyone was here already loving FBG. You "should" be making more than the snot nosed Bloom or anyone else that comes in that is in the similar role as you. Now, once the snot nosed guy out perfoms you or shows that he's better or deserving, then he can get paid more than you. Why, you've been doing it for 5 years already. You put time in and have been doing your job.This is the same set up that the rest of Corporate America has in place. That is why a receptionist doesn't come in and make more than the lawyer, doctor and other professions. Matter of fact, that is why the NEW receptionist doesn't come in and make more than the existing receptionists. Now, when unions are involved...that receptionist comes in and makes closer to what the other receptionists make and that is the advantage of a union. We're still in corp America here, the union does NOT allow the NEW receptionist to come in and make more. So, the existing receptionist "should" make more.Chase Stuart said:
It's called time & grade, which is used in our Armed Forces. Nothing like paying a Private more than his/her Sergeant. BTW - In the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marines...every Private gets paid less than his/her Sergeant. So, what ever leverage he or she has from deciding which Armed Forces branch to enter...they are still paid like a Private.
So, please spare the cute remarks as I'm not bashing you. You made a comment, I responded to the comment and to the premise on the what you based your comment. That is all...go sell crazy elsewhere because we're all stocked up here!
None of the players need to play in the NFL. They don't choose their team at first or maybe never, but let's face it that once they get paid or sign their contract...they don't care if it's the Lions, Raiders, or whoever drafted them. In time and hard work, they will get a better payday and have more of a choice of where they want to play. That is when they have the chance to get overpaid, if someone/organization chooses to do so.
For those that say any of the draft picks are underpaid and change it to high picks only, tell that to the Arena League players. They would have loved to be underpaid like that. The new league has players playing for $50,000. Tell me there are any of the NFL rookies being underpaid when they make far more than $50,000? The point is, they haven't played a down in the NFL and they are still being paid handsomely. Another point, most of the lower drafted players usually don't play as much, so basically many get paid to practice and sit on the bench. Once any of them prove themselves, a bigger payday will come. Again, if the players union wasn't so afraid that the teams would not re-distribute that money to the other players...a deal to not only cap, but create a lower wage for rookies that falls in line with the other wages would have been struck long time ago.
The fact is that the NFL is not "real life". You get paid there for what you WILL do, not what you HAVE done. And virtually every good player from the 2nd-7th rounds gets royally screwed with their rookie contract.
at Chase's 
This is a really interesting take on NFL rookies.A couple of thoughts though. The team's risk of "losing" or "wasting" a 1st round draft pick gives the player some leverage for sure. The draft is a huge source of team improvement, and biffing a 1st rounder is bad news.
