Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Why does NFL have non-guaranteed contracts? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter gbill2004
- Start date
dgreen
Footballguy
A) They do have guaranteed money in the form of signing bonuses. Good players don't negotiate a contract that doesn't include a nice signing bonus.B) Notice that the NFL is a much more successful league than any of the others. I think that's because the power lies with the organizations and coaches, not the players. They pay their players very well, but they don't let players run the league.
Holy Schneikes
Footballguy
Yes, the NFL CLEARLY needs to become more like the NHL. The players would DEFINITELY be better off then.
Mungo Burrows
Footballguy
Why does a dog lick his own balls?because it can.
Last edited by a moderator:
C
CrossEyed
Guest
The real question is, why do the other leagues have guaranteed contracts?
I guess I'm curious as to the background on this. Did the NFL ever have guaranteed contracts? If so, how did they become non-guaranteed? The union must have not done its job...And in terms of the signing bonuses, they can be taken back most of the time if the player is cut, so they're not really guaranteed, right?
I don't know when (if ever) the NFL had guarnteed contracts. The union did sell the players short when they agreed to no guarantees (other than bonus money), but look at the success of the NFL and how much earnings/revenues have gone up in the past 10 years. I think it ended up being a win-win deal for players and owners alike.As for your signing bonus question, the money is 100% guaranteed if the player abides by the terms of his contract. If a player were to be cut, he gets to keep his entire bonus and the team has to apply it against their cap. The only time bonus money can be returned is if a player is in violation of terms within his contract (like Winslow was when he rode the bike) and the team wins the grievance filed to recoup the money.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sopranos
Footballguy
Up untill this season the only one that had a cap is the NBA..In the NFL its a hard cap. No ways around it really. In the NBA you can be over the cap from time to time. In the NFL you Never can. If it ever goes that way they will make less than 50% of what they do now...If you play well you get payed well. There are scrubs in the NBA that make 4-6 mill a year that play less than 5 min a game IF EVER. I dont want that crap in the NFL. Its the best,lets leave it that way. One bad contract and your franchise is done for 3-4 years? No thanks.. 
Very good points - interesting discussion.The non-guaranteed contracts are definetely good for the fans and the game, but the unions seems to be doing a better job for the players in the other leagues (to teh detriment of the game and the fans).A great example (I'm a basketball fan) is Jalen Rose. He makes $17 million a year, and is terrible. He plays 15 minutes a game this year, and is probably in the bottom 20-30% of players in the league. Yet he is one of the highest paid players (probably top 5). He has no incentive to play, or to be healthy. There are many other examples of NBA players who are always injured or their performance decreases as soon as they get their fat contract. NHL doesnt seem to have quite the same though...I guess since otherleagues have guaranteed contracts, teams must really do their research and learn the characher of a player before giving them a max contract.
I believe the reason is that the risk of injury is seen as far greater in the contact sport of pro football. You've got 40 guys. Also, one player does not have as large of an impact as in other sports. Furthermore, the NFL is not really a players' league. It is chess on grass. In other words, this is a coaches league.
How is that good for the players? He's taking up cap space and is thus depriving better players of earning more.Guaranteed or not guaranteed, the players as a whole make the same amount either way. (Whatever the salary cap is.)
Non-guaranteed contracts allow the better players to make more money, while guaranteed contracts allow Jalen Rose to make more money at the better players' expense.
I don't think the NBA way is better for the players than the NFL way is.
Last edited by a moderator:
Mr. Mojo
Footballguy
I consider guaranteed contracts the worst thing that can happen to any sport.Baseball is a good example - some teams like the Rangers gave away money just to get rid of the salary for A Rod. You can argue they were stupid to sign it in the first place, but this is not the only case of this. The Dodgers had to pay Strawberry two extra years of $5 million even though he was a druggie and a degenerate. No one in life should in any field have a guaranteed contract. As someone else said, there is no longer any incentive. If the market dictates that a baseball player should be paid $20 million a year that's fine. But when he is no longer worth that money, he should not have to be paid top $ any more.
