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!
That's part of it, but I'm not sure that's the biggest problem.No team wants to give 60 million to a guy who's never played in the NFL. No one wants to give anyone 29m guaranteed, let alone a *rookie*. Russel is one of the highest paid QBs in the league. And you're forced to pay it.Russell got a record $29 million guaranteed in his six-year $61 million deal. And when the cap goes up, 1st overall rookies want that % increase. So we're easily looking at 30+ mil, 60+ mil contract. For Jake Long? Really? Even if I had 40m in cap room, no thank you. I'll go re-sign my core to longer/cap friendly deals, like the Chargers have done. Because a) I know they can play in the NFL and b) I like their character. A rookie? Who knows.
I agree with this 100%. So why do team keep dishing out this ridiculous money to unproven prospects? Is there some law that says YOU HAVE to pay them insane coin? Why don't the teams just refuse to get raped?
The NFL really needs to consider placing a cap on rookie salaries or even an automatic slot = salary. Save more money for the veteran players.
Good post. The entire point of the draft is to help the lesser teams; this is now not necessarily true and what is definite is that the lesser teams have a huge risk exposure in these picks. It is absurd the amount these rookies get who have never played a down in the NFL. The NFL must change the format because it simply does not work. I have been saying for years that I value 2nd round picks almost as much as 1st round picks and would always trade a 1st for 2 seconds. I was criticized heavily for this, but I still believe it. I would much rather build a team of younger guys who are making a little bit and then fill in with proven veterans. You can then resign the guys you know can play from your 2nd and 3rd picks you have compiled.
I totally agree with instituting a NBA type cap. The contracts are shorter, so if the rookie can actually play, he will get his money sooner than later and the teams don't have to pay tens of millions of dollars for college players that suck in the NFL. I can't believe this isn't already in place. The contract cap would really help the teams that need it that are picking early so they can actually build their team and not have one big risk/reward player and a bunch of scrubs because there isn't any money for quality players to put around this investment.
Teams with the top pick also handicap themselves by making outrageous compensation demands for the rights to that selection, just because some other team received similar compensation or due to the "value chart" used by the Cowboys over a decade ago.Add that to that the fact that the guy you want most in the draft may just very well be there with a lesser pick (or, if not him, a guy you like quite a bit), and the likelihood of a trade makes even less sense. Cap room, cap sense, the "bust" factor, compensation, and the likelihood of a worthy guy dropping to your spot all contribute to an unlikely scenario.teamroc said:
The truth of that matter is that most of the agents would welcome a change that put more money into veteran contracts. There are a select few agents that often represent guys in the top 10. Those agents essentially specialize in those guys. Those agents also happen to be good friends with Gene Upshaw. In fact, Upshaw is even represented by one of them. So those agents have all the juice. They're the reason that the current system does't change. Let's face it, the league is made up mostly be guys that weren't top 10 picks. A HUGE majority of veteran players in the league would be helped by moving money from the top 10 picks in the draft to everyone else. Superstar players would still get theirs when their first contracts were up.
