Would Parcells let time expire? (1 Viewer)

[streamkeeper]

I heard this discussed on the NFL network this evening. I did not see anyone posting on the subject. I am usually just a one sentance guy around here, take it easy on me.

The posed question was "Should Parcells let the first pick clock run out and essentially trade himself out of the number one pick?"

If Bill likes three guys equally, whay not let STL & ATL go on the clock? He would do this to manage the salary cap hit of the first overall selection.

Not only would the move be within the scope of league rules, it has happened before.

Solomon Wilcox went as far as to call it a mockery if Parcells went through on it.

I kinda like the move.

What do you all think?

 

[JPeso]

Dumb move unless they got value other than a smaller hit. I don't think Parcells is dumb enough to pass up on his favorite player solely because of the money.

 

[BeTheMatch]

Who says the player and his agent would accept less money if they took him at No. 2 after passing at No. 1? This will NEVER happen.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

Dolphins Beat Writer Omar Kelly's Take on This Idea

Let me go on record saying that this idea about letting the time on the No. 1 pick expire to save money is the ABSOLUTE DUMBEST idea I've ever heard of regarding the NFL draft. THE SINGLE DUMBEST, and I really question the football intelligence of those who think it's genius.

This story (CLICK HERE) points out why it's not a good idea and I'll give you five more reasons:

1. How often does a team get the opportunity to select the single best player in a draft? For the Dolphins it's happened only once, and that was in 1966. Illinois running back Jim Grabowski was the selection. The Dolphins will set the tempo for the entire draft.

If they pick Michigan offensive lineman Jake Long then there will be an immediate run on offensive linemen in the first round. If they select a hybrid linebacker like Virginia's Chris Long or Ohio State's Vernon Gholston it'll create a demand for those players. If it's LSU's Glenn Dorsey, then the trade market for picks in the Sedrick Ellis range skyrockets. Why give that power up?

2. Why lose the opportunity to negotiate a contract before selecting the pick. Only one team in the NFL can do that, and it's the team that holds the rights to Mr. No. 1. No one else can talk terms but the Dolphins. This year the Dolphins can actually buck the trend of escalating contracts for the top pick because teams generally pay less for the No. 1 pick when it's not a quarterback, and I'd bet a week's salary the Dolphins aren't picking a quarterback. I'd also bet another week's salary the selection will have agreed to a contract before the commissioner calls his name.

3. Why lose the trade value of the selection by letting time expire? It's worth something, and you won't find out what that is until around the 48 hours before the draft, if not the hour before the selection is due.

The draft is like a poker game before the turn has been made. No one is showing their cards, and everyone is bluffing. Trust me, someone is going to make the Dolphins an offer for LSU's Glenn Dorsey or Michigan's Jake Long, who I'm told those two are viewed as the best player in this draft for teams looking for offensive line help (which is everyone), and defenses that run a 4-3. The Dolphins are presently making sure they are prepared for that by making sure their draft board is TIGHT in case they end up with a selection in the teens or 20s. I also wouldn't be shocked if a trade for a veteran like Panthers defensive end Julius Peppers and Eagles Lito Sheppard is made to swap first rounders, and other chips.

Also, don't sleep on those Jeremy Shockey to the Dolphins whispers because Bill Parcells LOVES him some tight ends, but I don't see how a trade with the Giants could land New York the No. 1 pick. The Saints, which are coached by another Parcells protege, are also interested in acquiring Shockey. A good tight end will balance out the field for the quarterback and jump start his offense.

4. Team owner H. Wayne Huzienga has already told us "it's not the money" he has beef with regarding the No. 1 pick. "We're going to pay to the cap," Huizenga said, referring to the salary cap.

Huizenga's issue is he'd rather give $30 million in guaranteed money to a veteran free agent. But if he's got the pick he's going to write the check and cross his fingers that Mr. Number 1 pans out. Plus, if you are passing on the pick to save money the only way to really get a savings is the pass on the first three or so picks because the money doesn't drop that significantly until pick No. 5.

5. Let's say you do pass on making the pick, but the Rams select the Long you really liked and wanted. Then what? You just settle for your second choice. Settling is for losers!

Those who like this idea probably settled on their wife too, picking the girl you knew would say yes rather than the one you're still thinking about to this day. Imagine how badly the Dolphins will be mocked if Jake Long or Chris Long become perennial Pro Bowlers and the Dolphins passed on selecting them to save money. Passing on Dorsey because he doesn't fit your scheme is one thing, but passing on a player because of money (and not getting anything for it) is idiotic.

Bill Parcells' biggest draft mistake ever was not selecting Orlando Pace that year he had the No. 1 pick with the Jets. Parcells kept trading down and passed on two Pro Bowlers considering Walter Jones was taken with the other selection Parcells shipped away to Seattle so he could eventually select linebacker James Farrior. I think Parcells has learned from his error considering that mistake has bee rubbed in his nose every draft since.

Now that that's off my chest, I can move on. And you should too, never bringing up passing on the pick EVER AGAIN.

If you haven't checked out my Mock Draft, please do by (CLICKING HERE). It was a labor of love (check the time it was posted), and you'll get another next Saturday, preparing you for the real deal on April 26. On the next one I'll give you three different candidates for each of the later rounds.

Since my Danger Zone list (CLICK HERE IF YOU MISSED IT) went over so well I've decided to do a Dolphins centered list every week. This week I'll be doing: 10 Dolphins who need big years in 2008 to save their careers. I'm debating whether Joey Porter, David Martin or Ricky Williams should be No. 1.

I'd love to take your suggestions for future lists. Just post your ideas here and I'll take note.

I also wanted to ask you guys and gals what position do you think the Dolphins should focus on with the first pick in round 2 if Jake Long's the No. 1 pick. I'm getting a poll put up and whatever the top choice is will impact my next mock draft since so many people took issue with me selecting a quarterback (not even my favorite one) on the last mock.

Since I'm a man of the people I figured I'd put it to the people.

As usual, hit F5 to fresh, and drop me any question or comments you might have.

 

[comfortably numb]

Parcells would never do it.

He made some insensitive comments about Japaneses, referring to a play made by another team as a "*** move"

So, I figure Japanese make cars, and he would never drive a HONDA

 

[Chase Stuart]

Bill Parcells' biggest draft mistake ever was not selecting Orlando Pace that year he had the No. 1 pick with the Jets. Parcells kept trading down and passed on two Pro Bowlers considering Walter Jones was taken with the other selection Parcells shipped away to Seattle so he could eventually select linebacker James Farrior. I think Parcells has learned from his error considering that mistake has bee rubbed in his nose every draft since.

This is wrong on two levels.First, in 1988, Parcells drafted G Eric Moore in the first round; the next pick was Michael Irvin, and the next guard drafted was Randall McDaniel. So a future HOFer and a 12-time Pro Bowler were passed on for a guy who started 16 games once in his career.Second, Parcells couldn't hold on to the #1 pick. The Jets couldn't afford it; the previous year the Jets went on a huge, huge, huge spending spree, and had the #1 draft pick. Maybe, if Manning had come out, the Jets could have cut half their team and figured it out. And that would have been worth it, in retrospect. But with Pace there, the Jets had to move out of that spot, and were a 1-15 with 22 holes to fill. Parcells knew how good Pace would be, but he needed quantity. That's why the Jets could only get a 3rd, 4th and 7th from the Rams to move down to 6 -- everyone knew the Jets had to sell.Dedric Ward, Leon Johnson and Jason Ferguson were drafted with the picks the Jets added, and all became valuable Jets. Farrior was just mediocre with the Jets, but he was still valuable even if he underperformed as the eighth pick. Sure Pace was great, and maybe in hindsight it would have been worth it to do who-knows-what with the cap to get him in. But it was hardly the worst draft decision ever made by Parcells.

 

[comfortably numb]

Bill Parcells' biggest draft mistake ever was not selecting Orlando Pace that year he had the No. 1 pick with the Jets. Parcells kept trading down and passed on two Pro Bowlers considering Walter Jones was taken with the other selection Parcells shipped away to Seattle so he could eventually select linebacker James Farrior. I think Parcells has learned from his error considering that mistake has bee rubbed in his nose every draft since.

This is wrong on two levels.First, in 1988, Parcells drafted G Eric Moore in the first round; the next pick was Michael Irvin, and the next guard drafted was Randall McDaniel. So a future HOFer and a 12-time Pro Bowler were passed on for a guy who started 16 games once in his career.Second, Parcells couldn't hold on to the #1 pick. The Jets couldn't afford it; the previous year the Jets went on a huge, huge, huge spending spree, and had the #1 draft pick. Maybe, if Manning had come out, the Jets could have cut half their team and figured it out. And that would have been worth it, in retrospect. But with Pace there, the Jets had to move out of that spot, and were a 1-15 with 22 holes to fill. Parcells knew how good Pace would be, but he needed quantity. That's why the Jets could only get a 3rd, 4th and 7th from the Rams to move down to 6 -- everyone knew the Jets had to sell.Dedric Ward, Leon Johnson and Jason Ferguson were drafted with the picks the Jets added, and all became valuable Jets. Farrior was just mediocre with the Jets, but he was still valuable even if he underperformed as the eighth pick. Sure Pace was great, and maybe in hindsight it would have been worth it to do who-knows-what with the cap to get him in. But it was hardly the worst draft decision ever made by Parcells.

Jets had TONS of holes, and Parcells traded down from 1 to 6 for a 3rd, 4th, and 7thHe then traded down from 6 to 8 where he took Farrior and picked up a 4thThe Jets went from 1-15 to 9-7 and were a half back incomplete toss by Leon Johnson in DET in the last seconds to getting to the playoffs.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Bill Parcells' biggest draft mistake ever was not selecting Orlando Pace that year he had the No. 1 pick with the Jets. Parcells kept trading down and passed on two Pro Bowlers considering Walter Jones was taken with the other selection Parcells shipped away to Seattle so he could eventually select linebacker James Farrior. I think Parcells has learned from his error considering that mistake has bee rubbed in his nose every draft since.

This is wrong on two levels.First, in 1988, Parcells drafted G Eric Moore in the first round; the next pick was Michael Irvin, and the next guard drafted was Randall McDaniel. So a future HOFer and a 12-time Pro Bowler were passed on for a guy who started 16 games once in his career.Second, Parcells couldn't hold on to the #1 pick. The Jets couldn't afford it; the previous year the Jets went on a huge, huge, huge spending spree, and had the #1 draft pick. Maybe, if Manning had come out, the Jets could have cut half their team and figured it out. And that would have been worth it, in retrospect. But with Pace there, the Jets had to move out of that spot, and were a 1-15 with 22 holes to fill. Parcells knew how good Pace would be, but he needed quantity. That's why the Jets could only get a 3rd, 4th and 7th from the Rams to move down to 6 -- everyone knew the Jets had to sell.Dedric Ward, Leon Johnson and Jason Ferguson were drafted with the picks the Jets added, and all became valuable Jets. Farrior was just mediocre with the Jets, but he was still valuable even if he underperformed as the eighth pick. Sure Pace was great, and maybe in hindsight it would have been worth it to do who-knows-what with the cap to get him in. But it was hardly the worst draft decision ever made by Parcells.

Jets had TONS of holes, and Parcells traded down from 1 to 6 for a 3rd, 4th, and 7thHe then traded down from 6 to 8 where he took Farrior and picked up a 4thThe Jets went from 1-15 to 9-7 and were a half back incomplete toss by Leon Johnson in DET in the last seconds to getting to the playoffs.

It was actually an INT and it wasn't at the very end of the game, but otherwise .

 

[BigJim®]

Interesting question, but no way.

(1) I don't see Parcell's being the first to pull a move like this, which will be deemed JV by most. If he can't trade the pick, he'll use it.

(2) A move like this is begging for a prolonged contract dispute from the guy claiming he should have been the #1. If I recall, this happened to the Vikes after their screw up re: McKinnie or K. Williams... I think Williams.

Here's hoping they change the rookie pay scale before some team pulls this move. I've seen enough 1st round picks flop to conclude the existing system needs to be fixed. It isn't good for the sport to force already bad teams to pay $60 million guaranteed to a guy who could well flop and ruin them for years.

 

[Barry]

Why is it always Parcell's name being brought up for anything that has to do with the Dolphins. He hired a GM.

Does the whole organization wait for Parcell's permission to go to the bathroom? Or is that only the impression I get from reading things here.

 

[Bri]

Why is it always Parcell's name being brought up for anything that has to do with the Dolphins. He hired a GM.Does the whole organization wait for Parcell's permission to go to the bathroom? Or is that only the impression I get from reading things here.

Did you PM Parcells for permission before you posted? Really it is hard to figure out who has what role with him around. He'll be a coach in some eyes, in the fall

 

[teamroc]

Why is it always Parcell's name being brought up for anything that has to do with the Dolphins. He hired a GM.Does the whole organization wait for Parcell's permission to go to the bathroom? Or is that only the impression I get from reading things here.

Uh Parcells is running the Dolphins. The silly titles don't really mean much at this point.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

I heard this discussed on the NFL network this evening. I did not see anyone posting on the subject. I am usually just a one sentance guy around here, take it easy on me.The posed question was "Should Parcells let the first pick clock run out and essentially trade himself out of the number one pick?"If Bill likes three guys equally, whay not let STL & ATL go on the clock? He would do this to manage the salary cap hit of the first overall selection.Not only would the move be within the scope of league rules, it has happened before. Solomon Wilcox went as far as to call it a mockery if Parcells went through on it. I kinda like the move.What do you all think?

Glad you made a thread, good to have more people post intrested in football.It's just not a good idea for a lot of reasons. Not only all of the reasons mentioned, but he's also new in Miami. Is this really going to be your first move? Some crazy stunt, passing on the first pick so that someone else can take the hit of choosing the first player?They'll probably end up taking Long from Michigan, and move on. Build a team in the trenches and work yourself out from there.

 

[Tanner9919]

Heard on WFAN-NY, that Francesca ( sp?) had a conversation with Parcells recently, and Parcells basically said 'you can be assured that who ever we select at #1, WILL be signed BEFORE the draft even begins'.

Tells me if they don't have someone signed before the Draft, they might be looking at trading down instead of making a selection at 1.1

 

[Sabertooth]

What does it say about your ability to scout players if you have two or three rated exactly equal? Tells me you didn't do enough research.

 

[zadok]

I don't get why people believe they can save money by doing this. Unless they trade out of it, the Dolphins pick will be paid as the #1.

 

[renesauz]

Why has this topic come up every week or so since January, in one form or another?

I still say that "letting the clock expire" is the single dumbest draft day move I have ever heard of, ESPECIALLY for the #1 pick, who could have a contract agreed to long before they have to make a decision.

 

[KellysHeroes]

I assure you, if teams began letting the timer expire on purpose... the commish would come down on them very hard on them and a rule would be created. However, something does need to be done about these top picks getting a boat load of money when they haven't even stepped on the field... and if they don't get the $$, they hold out. These teams tie up so much money on these top picks, and if they don't workout... the team is set behind for yrs.

I would like to see sometype of Cap be placed on the money these kids make... in thier 1st 2 season or so.

 

[Sabertooth]

I assure you, if teams began letting the timer expire on purpose... the commish would come down on them very hard on them and a rule would be created. However, something does need to be done about these top picks getting a boat load of money when they haven't even stepped on the field... and if they don't get the $$, they hold out. These teams tie up so much money on these top picks, and if they don't workout... the team is set behind for yrs.I would like to see sometype of Cap be placed on the money these kids make... in thier 1st 2 season or so.

If the teams sucked less in all other aspects of football operations, presumably they wouldn't be picking in the top 5. I think these kids work their asses off for free so that their colleges can just rake in the cash. I think they risk being injured or killed in the college game for a chance at that payday. I think that if a kid rises to the top of the draft, he is worth the money. He's risked his health for the chance at that money. I don't begrudge him the money.

 

[RUSF18]

Why has this topic come up every week or so since January, in one form or another?

Thank you.

 

[Christo]

What does it say about your ability to scout players if you have two or three rated exactly equal? Tells me you didn't do enough research.

I'd agree if you were talking about three players at the same position. But I can see how a team could rank Long, Long and Dorsey equally.

 

[Doug Drinen]

What does it say about your ability to scout players if you have two or three rated exactly equal? Tells me you didn't do enough research.

Maybe. Or maybe it says you're realistic about how much you (or anyone) can actually know about the future, and that you haven't fallen into one of the many psychological traps that trick you into thinking you know more than you actually know.

 

[Sabertooth]

What does it say about your ability to scout players if you have two or three rated exactly equal? Tells me you didn't do enough research.

Maybe. Or maybe it says you're realistic about how much you (or anyone) can actually know about the future, and that you haven't fallen into one of the many psychological traps that trick you into thinking you know more than you actually know.

Parcells doesn't strike me as a guy who is anything but sure of himself. I agree with your point to an extent, but I don't think Parcells is real high on the list of most humble people in the NFL.

 

[Mr Capicollo]

In theory, if the Dolphins are indifferent between two or more players on their draft board and they can't trade out of the 1.1, then they could let the pick lapse and try to save money. The problem is that when the Vikings did this (twice! still kills me. ) the agents for the players involved still demanded money commensurate with the original pick's slot. I don't know that this solves anything.

Bill Parcells' biggest draft mistake ever was not selecting Orlando Pace that year he had the No. 1 pick with the Jets. Parcells kept trading down and passed on two Pro Bowlers considering Walter Jones was taken with the other selection Parcells shipped away to Seattle so he could eventually select linebacker James Farrior. I think Parcells has learned from his error considering that mistake has bee rubbed in his nose every draft since.

This is wrong on two levels.First, in 1988, Parcells drafted G Eric Moore in the first round; the next pick was Michael Irvin, and the next guard drafted was Randall McDaniel. So a future HOFer and a 12-time Pro Bowler were passed on for a guy who started 16 games once in his career.

Parcells wasn't drafting in 1988 with the Giants, George Young was (and only a year removed from his 1986 NFL Executive of the Year Award). I'd even doubt how much input he had on that pick given that Moore was an offensive player, and Parcells was a defensive oriented coach.

 

[ravnzfan]

What does it say about your ability to scout players if you have two or three rated exactly equal? Tells me you didn't do enough research.

I'd agree if you were talking about three players at the same position. But I can see how a team could rank Long, Long and Dorsey equally.

touche`!and to make a 2nd point, the team would, if all 3 were rated equally, sign the least expensive player--based on negotiating w/each prior to the draft....there is added market value as the #1 overall, so there is good reason for a player to do so...

there is no "set in stone" value linked to the #1 overall selection...yes, there is last years value and there is the % increase in cap space, which would lead to a range that the pick would fall in...but there is no a "set" $$$ number for the #1

and to the OP's point....no way Parcells does this---he is a big 'morals' guy, and would not allow this is happen to start his tenure as GM/VP whatever-the-hell he is

...what he is---is in charge...make no mistake about that!

 

[KellysHeroes]

I assure you, if teams began letting the timer expire on purpose... the commish would come down on them very hard on them and a rule would be created. However, something does need to be done about these top picks getting a boat load of money when they haven't even stepped on the field... and if they don't get the $$, they hold out. These teams tie up so much money on these top picks, and if they don't workout... the team is set behind for yrs.I would like to see sometype of Cap be placed on the money these kids make... in thier 1st 2 season or so.

If the teams sucked less in all other aspects of football operations, presumably they wouldn't be picking in the top 5. I think these kids work their asses off for free so that their colleges can just rake in the cash. I think they risk being injured or killed in the college game for a chance at that payday. I think that if a kid rises to the top of the draft, he is worth the money. He's risked his health for the chance at that money. I don't begrudge him the money.

The kids do work hard... but they are getting an elite education from these schools in exchange for thier talents on the field. I knew only some take advantage of thier eductaion... but atleast they have the piece paper that can get them a decent paying job else where.The day is coming very soon where 1.01 is going to make 100M in 7 years... thats crazy. All I'm saying is that there should be a cap placed on these draft positions.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I assure you, if teams began letting the timer expire on purpose... the commish would come down on them very hard on them and a rule would be created. However, something does need to be done about these top picks getting a boat load of money when they haven't even stepped on the field... and if they don't get the $$, they hold out. These teams tie up so much money on these top picks, and if they don't workout... the team is set behind for yrs.I would like to see sometype of Cap be placed on the money these kids make... in thier 1st 2 season or so.

If the teams sucked less in all other aspects of football operations, presumably they wouldn't be picking in the top 5. I think these kids work their asses off for free so that their colleges can just rake in the cash. I think they risk being injured or killed in the college game for a chance at that payday. I think that if a kid rises to the top of the draft, he is worth the money. He's risked his health for the chance at that money. I don't begrudge him the money.

The kids do work hard... but they are getting an elite education from these schools in exchange for thier talents on the field. I knew only some take advantage of thier eductaion... but atleast they have the piece paper that can get them a decent paying job else where.The day is coming very soon where 1.01 is going to make 100M in 7 years... thats crazy. All I'm saying is that there should be a cap placed on these draft positions.

No there shouldn't. Teams should not be rewarded any more for incompetence, and kids shouldn't have money stolen from them by veterans or owners. I think doing away with the draft, entirely, is a much better idea than capping the rookie picks.

 

[Doug Drinen]

there is no "set in stone" value linked to the #1 overall selection...yes, there is last years value and there is the % increase in cap space, which would lead to a range that the pick would fall in...but there is no a "set" $$$ number for the #1

That's right. If I'm Glenn Dorsey, and the Dolphins offer me (what people perceive as) #3 pick money for being the #1 pick, my first reaction is "hey, I want #1 money if I'm going to be the #1 pick!!" But then my second thought is, "if I don't take this, I may slip to #5 or #6. Maybe it's not such a bad deal after all." It seems to me that, because of their ability to negotiate with multiple players, the Dolphins should be able to get a guy they want at the price they want without having to resort to any let-the-clock-expire shenanigans.

 

[BeTheMatch]

In theory, if the Dolphins are indifferent between two or more players on their draft board and they can't trade out of the 1.1, then they could let the pick lapse and try to save money. The problem is that when the Vikings did this (twice! still kills me. ) the agents for the players involved still demanded money commensurate with the original pick's slot. I don't know that this solves anything.

The Vikings didn't do this twice.

 

[Mr Capicollo]

In theory, if the Dolphins are indifferent between two or more players on their draft board and they can't trade out of the 1.1, then they could let the pick lapse and try to save money. The problem is that when the Vikings did this (twice! still kills me. ) the agents for the players involved still demanded money commensurate with the original pick's slot. I don't know that this solves anything.

The Vikings didn't do this twice.

Meh, techinically you're right as they didn't "miss" the Sims pick in 2002.

 

[BeTheMatch]

In theory, if the Dolphins are indifferent between two or more players on their draft board and they can't trade out of the 1.1, then they could let the pick lapse and try to save money. The problem is that when the Vikings did this (twice! still kills me. ) the agents for the players involved still demanded money commensurate with the original pick's slot. I don't know that this solves anything.

The Vikings didn't do this twice.

Meh, techinically you're right as they didn't "miss" the Sims pick in 2002.

No technically about it. Some other team right in front of them actually let the clock run out and they tried to jump in front - only to be told that a trade was in on time. Therefore the Vikings picked in their original slot.

 

[FairWarning]

In theory, if the Dolphins are indifferent between two or more players on their draft board and they can't trade out of the 1.1, then they could let the pick lapse and try to save money. The problem is that when the Vikings did this (twice! still kills me. ) the agents for the players involved still demanded money commensurate with the original pick's slot. I don't know that this solves anything.

The Vikings didn't do this twice.

Technically they did. They let the time run out, Jax drafted Leftwich. Right after Jax drafted, Carolina made their selection, bypassing the Vikings. Then the Vikings took their guy.

 

[BeTheMatch]

In theory, if the Dolphins are indifferent between two or more players on their draft board and they can't trade out of the 1.1, then they could let the pick lapse and try to save money. The problem is that when the Vikings did this (twice! still kills me. ) the agents for the players involved still demanded money commensurate with the original pick's slot. I don't know that this solves anything.

The Vikings didn't do this twice.

Technically they did. They let the time run out, Jax drafted Leftwich. Right after Jax drafted, Carolina made their selection, bypassing the Vikings. Then the Vikings took their guy.

I don't think that's true. The year they did it was when they ended up getting Kevin Williams. As I said, in the other year that people think it happened, it was the team in front of them that let time run out (but then had a trade) - not the Vikings.

 

[Bri]

there is no "set in stone" value linked to the #1 overall selection...yes, there is last years value and there is the % increase in cap space, which would lead to a range that the pick would fall in...but there is no a "set" $$$ number for the #1

That's right. If I'm Glenn Dorsey, and the Dolphins offer me (what people perceive as) #3 pick money for being the #1 pick, my first reaction is "hey, I want #1 money if I'm going to be the #1 pick!!" But then my second thought is, "if I don't take this, I may slip to #5 or #6. Maybe it's not such a bad deal after all." It seems to me that, because of their ability to negotiate with multiple players, the Dolphins should be able to get a guy they want at the price they want without having to resort to any let-the-clock-expire shenanigans.

that's a good point. Once the draft takes place that "I might fall and make less" fear is gone.

 

[TheHosers]

Vikings Screw Up Straight from Pro Football Weekly:

Vikings passed in first round, leaving Minnesota fans confounded

The Vikings came under national fire Saturday for failing to turn in their card within the allotted 15 minutes and were passed by two teams — the Jaguars and Panthers — before they picked Oklahoma State DT Kevin Williams. The pass was significant because the Vikings had agreed to a trade down to No. 10 with the Ravens, who were going to take Marshall QB Byron Leftwich. But Jacksonville stymied those plans when they jumped up and took Leftwich. The deal fell through because the Ravens and Vikings could not get through to the league to verify the trade they had just agreed to. The Vikings still were able to pick Williams, the player they had targeted all along, but the incident was viewed as a black eye by team officials and observers.

 

[Sabertooth]

Vikings Screw Up Straight from Pro Football Weekly:Vikings passed in first round, leaving Minnesota fans confoundedThe Vikings came under national fire Saturday for failing to turn in their card within the allotted 15 minutes and were passed by two teams — the Jaguars and Panthers — before they picked Oklahoma State DT Kevin Williams. The pass was significant because the Vikings had agreed to a trade down to No. 10 with the Ravens, who were going to take Marshall QB Byron Leftwich. But Jacksonville stymied those plans when they jumped up and took Leftwich. The deal fell through because the Ravens and Vikings could not get through to the league to verify the trade they had just agreed to. The Vikings still were able to pick Williams, the player they had targeted all along, but the incident was viewed as a black eye by team officials and observers.

Boy the Vikings sure got by getting Williams huh?

 

[BeTheMatch]

Vikings Screw Up Straight from Pro Football Weekly:Vikings passed in first round, leaving Minnesota fans confoundedThe Vikings came under national fire Saturday for failing to turn in their card within the allotted 15 minutes and were passed by two teams — the Jaguars and Panthers — before they picked Oklahoma State DT Kevin Williams. The pass was significant because the Vikings had agreed to a trade down to No. 10 with the Ravens, who were going to take Marshall QB Byron Leftwich. But Jacksonville stymied those plans when they jumped up and took Leftwich. The deal fell through because the Ravens and Vikings could not get through to the league to verify the trade they had just agreed to. The Vikings still were able to pick Williams, the player they had targeted all along, but the incident was viewed as a black eye by team officials and observers.

Yes, that's the one year the Vikings screwed up. They didn't miss their pick in any other year, as some have claimed.

 

[BigJim®]

In theory, if the Dolphins are indifferent between two or more players on their draft board and they can't trade out of the 1.1, then they could let the pick lapse and try to save money. The problem is that when the Vikings did this (twice! still kills me. ) the agents for the players involved still demanded money commensurate with the original pick's slot. I don't know that this solves anything.

The Vikings didn't do this twice.

Technically they did. They let the time run out, Jax drafted Leftwich. Right after Jax drafted, Carolina made their selection, bypassing the Vikings. Then the Vikings took their guy.

I don't think that's true. The year they did it was when they ended up getting Kevin Williams. As I said, in the other year that people think it happened, it was the team in front of them that let time run out (but then had a trade) - not the Vikings.

This is correct. The Vikings only missed their own pick one time; the year they drafted Kevin Williams. The first situation people are referring to was the prior year when the clock expired on Dallas, who picked immediately before the Vikings, and yet Dallas was able to finalize a trade with KC before the Vikings could jump in front of them. As I recall, the Vikings claimed they tried to hand in their pick and were not allowed, as draft officials was accommodating the nearly competed trade [which officials should not have done, and which they didn't do the very next year when allowing teams to jump over the Vikes as the Vikes attempted to complete a trade with Jaxonville].

 

[BeTheMatch]

In theory, if the Dolphins are indifferent between two or more players on their draft board and they can't trade out of the 1.1, then they could let the pick lapse and try to save money. The problem is that when the Vikings did this (twice! still kills me. ) the agents for the players involved still demanded money commensurate with the original pick's slot. I don't know that this solves anything.

The Vikings didn't do this twice.

Technically they did. They let the time run out, Jax drafted Leftwich. Right after Jax drafted, Carolina made their selection, bypassing the Vikings. Then the Vikings took their guy.

I don't think that's true. The year they did it was when they ended up getting Kevin Williams. As I said, in the other year that people think it happened, it was the team in front of them that let time run out (but then had a trade) - not the Vikings.

This is correct. The Vikings only missed their own pick one time; the year they drafted Kevin Williams. The first situation people are referring to was the prior year when the clock expired on Dallas, who picked immediately before the Vikings, and yet Dallas was able to finalize a trade with KC before the Vikings could jump in front of them. As I recall, the Vikings claimed they tried to hand in their pick and were not allowed, as draft officials was accommodating the nearly competed trade [which officials should not have done, and which they didn't do the very next year when allowing teams to jump over the Vikes as the Vikes attempted to complete a trade with Jaxonville].

I think we both misunderstood the OP. I think he's saying the Vikings missed their first-round pick two times in that same year, which is true. We both thought he meant - as Berman has repeatedly incorrectly claimed - that the Vikings missed their pick two years in a row, which is not true.

 

[BigJim®]

I assure you, if teams began letting the timer expire on purpose... the commish would come down on them very hard on them and a rule would be created. However, something does need to be done about these top picks getting a boat load of money when they haven't even stepped on the field... and if they don't get the $$, they hold out. These teams tie up so much money on these top picks, and if they don't workout... the team is set behind for yrs.I would like to see sometype of Cap be placed on the money these kids make... in thier 1st 2 season or so.

If the teams sucked less in all other aspects of football operations, presumably they wouldn't be picking in the top 5. I think these kids work their asses off for free so that their colleges can just rake in the cash. I think they risk being injured or killed in the college game for a chance at that payday. I think that if a kid rises to the top of the draft, he is worth the money. He's risked his health for the chance at that money. I don't begrudge him the money.

The kids do work hard... but they are getting an elite education from these schools in exchange for thier talents on the field. I knew only some take advantage of thier eductaion... but atleast they have the piece paper that can get them a decent paying job else where.The day is coming very soon where 1.01 is going to make 100M in 7 years... thats crazy. All I'm saying is that there should be a cap placed on these draft positions.

No there shouldn't. Teams should not be rewarded any more for incompetence, and kids shouldn't have money stolen from them by veterans or owners. I think doing away with the draft, entirely, is a much better idea than capping the rookie picks.

Really? Scratching my head over this comment. Year after year unproven rookies come into the league and get better contracts than established vets, and flame out completely. I don't understand at all what you mean by a cap rewarding teams for their incompetence. We're talking about a double whammy here, where weaker teams are basically forced to commit tens of millions of dollars to some heralded rookie in hopes he pans out.

 

[Liquid Tension]

I look at the concept being floated more than actually letting time expire. The very fact that teams would even consider this (even if only for a moment) shows that something needs to be done about the money going to rookie players. There needs to be a lower and possibly set cap for rookies so that draft order means a lot to the league rather than burdening an already weak team with the possibility of another Ryan Leaf.

This "saved" money should not go into the owners pockets, but should go to the players in terms of veterans getting more and the rest going towards pensions and medical costs (H&W) for retired/injured players.

This makes too much sense not to happen and the good part about this somewhat silly hypothesis is that maybe this will shine some light on the possibility I believe makes sense.

 

[Liquid Tension]

'Chase Stuart'

No there shouldn't. Teams should not be rewarded any more for incompetence, and kids shouldn't have money stolen from them by veterans or owners. I think doing away with the draft, entirely, is a much better idea than capping the rookie picks.

Could you elaborate?

 

[renesauz]

No there shouldn't. Teams should not be rewarded any more for incompetence, and kids shouldn't have money stolen from them by veterans or owners. I think doing away with the draft, entirely, is a much better idea than capping the rookie picks.

Chase, I have nothing but respect for you, but that statement makes no sense whatsoever. In how many job fields on the planet does the unproven new guy get offered 20, 30, even 60% MORE MONEY then the established guys in his field, REGARDLESS of his college resume?Is the #1 law graduate from Harvard automaticaly in the top five money making lawyers?I have no problem with paying the top picks well, even well above the average for their positions, but they are being paid as if they were all -pros before they ever play a down, and that's just plain wrong, on many levels.Sorry for the hi-jack fellas.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I assure you, if teams began letting the timer expire on purpose... the commish would come down on them very hard on them and a rule would be created. However, something does need to be done about these top picks getting a boat load of money when they haven't even stepped on the field... and if they don't get the $$, they hold out. These teams tie up so much money on these top picks, and if they don't workout... the team is set behind for yrs.I would like to see sometype of Cap be placed on the money these kids make... in thier 1st 2 season or so.

If the teams sucked less in all other aspects of football operations, presumably they wouldn't be picking in the top 5. I think these kids work their asses off for free so that their colleges can just rake in the cash. I think they risk being injured or killed in the college game for a chance at that payday. I think that if a kid rises to the top of the draft, he is worth the money. He's risked his health for the chance at that money. I don't begrudge him the money.

The kids do work hard... but they are getting an elite education from these schools in exchange for thier talents on the field. I knew only some take advantage of thier eductaion... but atleast they have the piece paper that can get them a decent paying job else where.The day is coming very soon where 1.01 is going to make 100M in 7 years... thats crazy. All I'm saying is that there should be a cap placed on these draft positions.

No there shouldn't. Teams should not be rewarded any more for incompetence, and kids shouldn't have money stolen from them by veterans or owners. I think doing away with the draft, entirely, is a much better idea than capping the rookie picks.

Really? Scratching my head over this comment. Year after year unproven rookies come into the league and get better contracts than established vets, and flame out completely. I don't understand at all what you mean by a cap rewarding teams for their incompetence. We're talking about a double whammy here, where weaker teams are basically forced to commit tens of millions of dollars to some heralded rookie in hopes he pans out.

Teams aren't forced to do anything. The team with the #5 pick can trade for the #15 or #20 pick pretty easily.

 

[Doug Drinen]

Chase, I have nothing but respect for you, but that statement makes no sense whatsoever. In how many job fields on the planet does the unproven new guy get offered 20, 30, even 60% MORE MONEY then the established guys in his field, REGARDLESS of his college resume?

I'm not Chase, but...I'd guess that extremely-high-potential-but-unproven employees get paid similarly to or more than their experienced counterparts in all the fields where a typical employee's age 23--26 working years are likely to be more productive than their age 28--31 years.

On your dynasty cheatsheet, do you have Darren McFadden ranked higher than Jamal Lewis? If you're willing to allocate more of your resources to the unproven guy, why shouldn't NFL teams be willing to do the same?

 

[Chase Stuart]

No there shouldn't. Teams should not be rewarded any more for incompetence, and kids shouldn't have money stolen from them by veterans or owners. I think doing away with the draft, entirely, is a much better idea than capping the rookie picks.

Chase, I have nothing but respect for you, but that statement makes no sense whatsoever. In how many job fields on the planet does the unproven new guy get offered 20, 30, even 60% MORE MONEY then the established guys in his field, REGARDLESS of his college resume?Is the #1 law graduate from Harvard automaticaly in the top five money making lawyers?I have no problem with paying the top picks well, even well above the average for their positions, but they are being paid as if they were all -pros before they ever play a down, and that's just plain wrong, on many levels.Sorry for the hi-jack fellas.

Why is it wrong on any level?Most of you guys seem to lack an understanding of the value of having a top rookie and the pay structure of the NFL. Put it this way -- if there was no NFL draft, do you think a rookie would get paid more or less money? Do you think Glenn Dorsey would sign a bigger or small deal than Tommy Kelley?The free market ones. Teams need not sign the #1 pick if it's a bad investment. Teams could trade the #1 pick for just about anything if it's a bad investment. It's not.Chris Long deserves to make more money than Bernard Berrian. Why? Because Chris Long is more valuable than Bernard Berrian. That's why Berrian won't be traded for the #1 pick.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I look at the concept being floated more than actually letting time expire. The very fact that teams would even consider this (even if only for a moment) shows that something needs to be done about the money going to rookie players. There needs to be a lower and possibly set cap for rookies so that draft order means a lot to the league rather than burdening an already weak team with the possibility of another Ryan Leaf.

This "saved" money should not go into the owners pockets, but should go to the players in terms of veterans getting more and the rest going towards pensions and medical costs (H&W) for retired/injured players.

This makes too much sense not to happen and the good part about this somewhat silly hypothesis is that maybe this will shine some light on the possibility I believe makes sense.

'Chase Stuart'

No there shouldn't. Teams should not be rewarded any more for incompetence, and kids shouldn't have money stolen from them by veterans or owners. I think doing away with the draft, entirely, is a much better idea than capping the rookie picks.

Could you elaborate?

It sounds like you did, already, LT.Let me ask you this: Would you be happy if your work decided to take away 15% of your salary, and then take that "saved" money and give it to the retired workers of your company?

Most companies don't pay their employees for their perceived production. The typical employee's worth curve might be low in the beginning, rises sharply for the first 5 years, stays high for another ten, then begins to drop-off as they age. That's what your average employee is worth. No one wants to be paid that way, though. We, as employees, desire steady income. And social science has shown that the masses are happy (think bread and circus here) if you increase their pay slightly each year. So that's what we get -- a pay structure that keeps us happy, keeps us with steady income, and reduces our risk. But it doesn't match our production. We accept low pay in our early years because we know we'll be overpaid in our later years. And that's fine with us -- we think that's a good deal. And if companies tried to fire all their old, overpaid workers, then all their young, underpaid workers would see that in leave. So that's our system.

In the NFL, though, players are paid based on their perceived potential. That's why it seems so backwards to us. They're not paid steadily rising incomes, because they'll be with different employers every other year. Instead, they've got to be paid what their worth (which means expected worth, since you can't pay someone based on their future production, because you can't predict the future). NFL teams are willing to pay rookie QBs drafted #1 a ton of money, because the marginal value they add -- especially in years 3, 4, 5 and 6 of their rookie contract -- is off the charts, if they do well. And NFL teams wouldn't draft the player if they didn't think they would do well.

We have a salary cap in the NFL. What this means is that you can spend money however you want. You could spend $100M on free agents and $0 on draft picks, or $60M on free agents and $40M on draft picks, or somewhere in between. If NFL draft picks at the top were so overvalued, then teams would just give up draft picks and sign free agents. But we just saw how "overvalued" free agents are. So they're not going to do that.

If you want to compare a draft pick to a star QB in the second to last year of his contract to show an inequity, that's fine, but silly. Of course that won't look "fair". But if you compare a star rookie QB to the top FA available, they seem a lot more fair. And since the studliest of the stud QBs don't come on the market -- you literally can't acquire Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Ben Roethlisberger, Tony Romo, or Brett Favre -- you need to draft them. So teams will (wisely) pay a premium just for the chance to get them.

There's a reason no team voluntarily gives up its first round pick, and no team trades the #3 pick for the #11 pick, and it's not because GMs are stupid or because the high draft picks are overvalued. It's because they're good deals.

 

[BigJim®]

I assure you, if teams began letting the timer expire on purpose... the commish would come down on them very hard on them and a rule would be created. However, something does need to be done about these top picks getting a boat load of money when they haven't even stepped on the field... and if they don't get the $$, they hold out. These teams tie up so much money on these top picks, and if they don't workout... the team is set behind for yrs.I would like to see sometype of Cap be placed on the money these kids make... in thier 1st 2 season or so.

If the teams sucked less in all other aspects of football operations, presumably they wouldn't be picking in the top 5. I think these kids work their asses off for free so that their colleges can just rake in the cash. I think they risk being injured or killed in the college game for a chance at that payday. I think that if a kid rises to the top of the draft, he is worth the money. He's risked his health for the chance at that money. I don't begrudge him the money.

The kids do work hard... but they are getting an elite education from these schools in exchange for thier talents on the field. I knew only some take advantage of thier eductaion... but atleast they have the piece paper that can get them a decent paying job else where.The day is coming very soon where 1.01 is going to make 100M in 7 years... thats crazy. All I'm saying is that there should be a cap placed on these draft positions.

No there shouldn't. Teams should not be rewarded any more for incompetence, and kids shouldn't have money stolen from them by veterans or owners. I think doing away with the draft, entirely, is a much better idea than capping the rookie picks.

Really? Scratching my head over this comment. Year after year unproven rookies come into the league and get better contracts than established vets, and flame out completely. I don't understand at all what you mean by a cap rewarding teams for their incompetence. We're talking about a double whammy here, where weaker teams are basically forced to commit tens of millions of dollars to some heralded rookie in hopes he pans out.

Teams aren't forced to do anything. The team with the #5 pick can trade for the #15 or #20 pick pretty easily.

I'll agree to disagree. With the current draft chart it is practically impossible for a team to trade out. The only option is to take a public fleecing over the fact you traded out without getting value, and being stigmatized as a dumb franchise. That said, the part of your message I most disagree with is you implying that rookies are worthy of tens of millions of dollars before they step on an NFL field, while proven vets have limited options to get paid as they deserve to be paid, either because this team is capped out or that team. It's just not even debatable in my books, and I'd say it is a rare occurence when an early round pick is worth what he's been paid. So again, agree to disagree.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I assure you, if teams began letting the timer expire on purpose... the commish would come down on them very hard on them and a rule would be created. However, something does need to be done about these top picks getting a boat load of money when they haven't even stepped on the field... and if they don't get the $$, they hold out. These teams tie up so much money on these top picks, and if they don't workout... the team is set behind for yrs.I would like to see sometype of Cap be placed on the money these kids make... in thier 1st 2 season or so.

If the teams sucked less in all other aspects of football operations, presumably they wouldn't be picking in the top 5. I think these kids work their asses off for free so that their colleges can just rake in the cash. I think they risk being injured or killed in the college game for a chance at that payday. I think that if a kid rises to the top of the draft, he is worth the money. He's risked his health for the chance at that money. I don't begrudge him the money.

The kids do work hard... but they are getting an elite education from these schools in exchange for thier talents on the field. I knew only some take advantage of thier eductaion... but atleast they have the piece paper that can get them a decent paying job else where.The day is coming very soon where 1.01 is going to make 100M in 7 years... thats crazy. All I'm saying is that there should be a cap placed on these draft positions.

No there shouldn't. Teams should not be rewarded any more for incompetence, and kids shouldn't have money stolen from them by veterans or owners. I think doing away with the draft, entirely, is a much better idea than capping the rookie picks.

Really? Scratching my head over this comment. Year after year unproven rookies come into the league and get better contracts than established vets, and flame out completely. I don't understand at all what you mean by a cap rewarding teams for their incompetence. We're talking about a double whammy here, where weaker teams are basically forced to commit tens of millions of dollars to some heralded rookie in hopes he pans out.

Teams aren't forced to do anything. The team with the #5 pick can trade for the #15 or #20 pick pretty easily.

I'll agree to disagree. With the current draft chart it is practically impossible for a team to trade out. The only option is to take a public fleecing over the fact you traded out without getting value, and being stigmatized as a dumb franchise. That said, the part of your message I most disagree with is you implying that rookies are worthy of tens of millions of dollars before they step on an NFL field, while proven vets have limited options to get paid as they deserve to be paid, either because this team is capped out or that team. It's just not even debatable in my books, and I'd say it is a rare occurence when an early round pick is worth what he's been paid. So again, agree to disagree.

So why aren't teams dying to trade draft picks for proven veterans?

 

[BigJim®]

I assure you, if teams began letting the timer expire on purpose... the commish would come down on them very hard on them and a rule would be created. However, something does need to be done about these top picks getting a boat load of money when they haven't even stepped on the field... and if they don't get the $$, they hold out. These teams tie up so much money on these top picks, and if they don't workout... the team is set behind for yrs.I would like to see sometype of Cap be placed on the money these kids make... in thier 1st 2 season or so.

If the teams sucked less in all other aspects of football operations, presumably they wouldn't be picking in the top 5. I think these kids work their asses off for free so that their colleges can just rake in the cash. I think they risk being injured or killed in the college game for a chance at that payday. I think that if a kid rises to the top of the draft, he is worth the money. He's risked his health for the chance at that money. I don't begrudge him the money.

The kids do work hard... but they are getting an elite education from these schools in exchange for thier talents on the field. I knew only some take advantage of thier eductaion... but atleast they have the piece paper that can get them a decent paying job else where.The day is coming very soon where 1.01 is going to make 100M in 7 years... thats crazy. All I'm saying is that there should be a cap placed on these draft positions.

No there shouldn't. Teams should not be rewarded any more for incompetence, and kids shouldn't have money stolen from them by veterans or owners. I think doing away with the draft, entirely, is a much better idea than capping the rookie picks.

Really? Scratching my head over this comment. Year after year unproven rookies come into the league and get better contracts than established vets, and flame out completely. I don't understand at all what you mean by a cap rewarding teams for their incompetence. We're talking about a double whammy here, where weaker teams are basically forced to commit tens of millions of dollars to some heralded rookie in hopes he pans out.

Teams aren't forced to do anything. The team with the #5 pick can trade for the #15 or #20 pick pretty easily.

I'll agree to disagree. With the current draft chart it is practically impossible for a team to trade out. The only option is to take a public fleecing over the fact you traded out without getting value, and being stigmatized as a dumb franchise. That said, the part of your message I most disagree with is you implying that rookies are worthy of tens of millions of dollars before they step on an NFL field, while proven vets have limited options to get paid as they deserve to be paid, either because this team is capped out or that team. It's just not even debatable in my books, and I'd say it is a rare occurence when an early round pick is worth what he's been paid. So again, agree to disagree.

So why aren't teams dying to trade draft picks for proven veterans?

I'm not sure. IMHO part of the reason is most teams aren't looking to trade their proven/happy players even if a team is offering picks. The guys being dangled for picks are usually being offered up for a reason; either because they are damaged goods or demanding a new contract, or what have you. Do you have an example player you are thinking about? If I have a 1st round pick and offer it up for Chad Johnson or Tito Shepherd, I'm going to pay that money and more over the contract extension which will be part of the deal. I'm defintely not trading it for the proven vet who has 1 year remaining on his contract and is set to become a FA.