TheMathNinja
Footballguy
Hey Sharks,
I'm considering some bylaw amendments to a dynasty league I participate in, and I'm wondering about a common NFL practice. It seems like when a journeyman-type signs with a new team, they almost always sign one- or two-year contracts for the veteran minimum. I'm thinking about Domenik Hixon's 1-year $930k deal w/ the Bears and Andre Brown's 1-year $645k deal w/ the Texans.
My question is: why are these contracts never longer? With no guaranteed money, and thus total freedom to cut the player without ramifications, why don't NFL teams negotiate for longer contracts, say 4 years? That way, if the guy makes a significant comeback or develops skills, you have him rostered really cheaply for a long time, with no drawback if you cut him. Why doesn't this happen? Is it because the player's agent would never go for something like this, knowing they could get a shorter contract and negotiate up for a new one after it expires if they outperform expectations?
I'm considering some bylaw amendments to a dynasty league I participate in, and I'm wondering about a common NFL practice. It seems like when a journeyman-type signs with a new team, they almost always sign one- or two-year contracts for the veteran minimum. I'm thinking about Domenik Hixon's 1-year $930k deal w/ the Bears and Andre Brown's 1-year $645k deal w/ the Texans.
My question is: why are these contracts never longer? With no guaranteed money, and thus total freedom to cut the player without ramifications, why don't NFL teams negotiate for longer contracts, say 4 years? That way, if the guy makes a significant comeback or develops skills, you have him rostered really cheaply for a long time, with no drawback if you cut him. Why doesn't this happen? Is it because the player's agent would never go for something like this, knowing they could get a shorter contract and negotiate up for a new one after it expires if they outperform expectations?