kiingspadee Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 The pay that some of these rookies get are outrageous. Jamarcus got what - 29 Million Guranteed?? If you pick a rookie in the top 10 well your expecting to pay a load lump sum of money. However say you pick someone like Reggie Bush. What if the Saints gave him 29 Million guranteed? Didn't it take him 8 games to put up a single TD? I think a Rookie Cap would be great. Say we somehow got the 1st overall draft pick by some trade (not because the secret conspiracy Snyder has against Zorn so he fails so Cowher comes here) we would not be able to pay that kind of money as it stands now. With a Rookie Cap in this situation we could easily decide whether or not we could afford or need to spend that type of money. See a Rookie Cap would have 3 tiers. 1-5 5-15 15-32 How much each tier has a cap to well I don't know. So let's use say Jamarcus's case (29 Mill. is outrageous for a Rookie) and then here is say Malcolm Kelly and he is in tier 3 (10 mill. guranteed) *this is saying we pick him at #21 this year* Now with us having the #1 draft pick we can then say hey do we need to shell out 29 Mill. to a Rookie? So instead we trade down to another team who would need to shell out that kind of money for that QB or RB due to there star retired or sucks. By trading down we will now know the max we would be paying the guy and not overpay some player (in this case WR) who pans out to be a Brandon Llyod type player. say "Ok look we need a big time WR we trade down to x team they have 2 1st round picks in tier 2, and 3 and 3 2nd round picks. Well let's give them #1 overall and get tier 2 and the 2nd round pick." Of course this is just a complete rough draft and may not make much sense. So in short a Rookie Cap would be so 1.) Rookies would not be making X amount of money over say a 6 time Pro-Bowler, 4 time SB Champion, 4 time MVP type player. 2.) Allow teams with early picks be able to draft & sign these players 3.) Allow teams who get a bust player not be out double digit in guranteed money because this kid did not preform. The good part is say this guy actually was an Adrian Peterson, Peyton Manning, Sean Taylor, Chris Cooley type player that actually strongly contributed to the team heck even won you a Super Bowl well of course they can reconstruct the contract and do what they want. And if they bust like Reggie Bush or Brandon Llyod then it wouldn't hurt the team to extremities that effect you for X amount of years. Well I hope this made sense and if not I am sorry I tried my best to put my ideas into words. :eaglesuck :gaintsuck :dallasuck HTTR! :point2sky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[[ghost]] Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 I hope somebody in the NFL listens to you. Somebody. Anybody. Just make this a god damn rule. Its wrong how 23 year old men can cripple a franchise for years with their terrible play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CG Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 Not sure about exactly what you're saying, but in general Yes they should, and they probably will if the CBO stays in place. The reason is that both owners and vets are angry about rookies holding out from training camp for more money, and they should be. Less money for rooks = more for vets, and when this comes up in front of the player's committee, I'd be shocked if it doesn't pass. You would however need some kind of term limit on the contracts, maybe even 1 year allowing teams to keep draft picks that they like. Whatever the uniform term is, its going to delay the inflation of player salaries a few years longer, but at least the contracts will be going to established players, not combine freaks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spade Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 Luck of the draw, thats why you hire scouts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Passizle Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 AGREED!!! with emphasis!!! We severley need a rookie cap, and it should be WAY under what the #1 is getting now. It also might help the borderline attitude guys by not making millionaires out of children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvoSkins Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 It should be like the NBA with slotting. Its already out of hand with everyone wanting more than everyone is last years draft even though they have not played a down in the league. Probably never happen though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiingspadee Posted March 4, 2008 Author Share Posted March 4, 2008 Luck of the draw, thats why you hire scouts. Wasn't Reggie Bush supposed to be the hottest thing coming out of college? He was scouted and everyone was foaming at the mouth with the thought of him coming to their team. Didn't need a scout to know he was great in college NFL.....not so much. So please tell me how are scouts supposed to predict that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinC Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 There absolutley should be some kind of cap or even pre determined salaries for each draft slot whcih increase each year in line with the over all salary cap. Getting an early 1st round draft thing is almost a bad thing at the moment as it requires a bad team to potentially get even worse by putting a huge contract and cap space into one rookie who may or may not actually perform in the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aston Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 I read an article a few years back that suggested that it's actually a disadvantage to have a Top 5 because of the insane inflation of bonuses and guaranteed money, and that the best value in the first round is 16-25 because of the ratio of talent to assumed cost. At any rate, to answer the OP's question, no, there should be no cap for rookies. We're one of the richest team's in the NFL. We don't like any form of 'cap' except the kind you wear on your Jimmy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 That may be seriously addressed in the next CBA talks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiingspadee Posted March 4, 2008 Author Share Posted March 4, 2008 I read an article a few years back that suggested that it's actually a disadvantage to have a Top 5 because of the insane inflation of bonuses and guaranteed money, and that the best value in the first round is 16-25 because of the ratio of talent to assumed cost.At any rate, to answer the OP's question, no, there should be no cap for rookies. We're one of the richest team's in the NFL. We don't like any form of 'cap' except the kind you wear on your Jimmy. Your saying its fine that an unproven rookie gets that 29 Million? Who sits out of training camp and just basically is wining and crying about last years draftee got X amount of money and teams have to basically pay up and shut up. And again I will put Reggie Bush in as my example say HE got the 29 Mill guranteed and say WE picked him up and for 2 years he has been average at best. Did we just get screwed? I'd say yes to that! I mean your entitled to your opinion as I am as well but no cap because we are rich is pretty stupid. Just because you won the lottery are you going to go out and buy your own island and spend it all at once. Or would you rather invest and save that money and use it wisely? From your previous answer I think you'd go buy up everything in the mall, car lots, 10 houses, 100 things of shoes, and then in months time say "where did it all go?" Whereas someone like me would prefer to get a house built to my liking pay up to 2 years worth of bills (i.e. just have a seperate bank account where bills are automatically taken out monthly) and then take my wife on a trip and just use the money when needed. Not just spend all the money on worthless crap. Want to spend on something that has value for years to come. But hey glad you do not own the team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1972FAN Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 They absolutely should have Caps on Rookies. Hasn't even step on the field and collects a huge paycheck. EARN YOUR PAY first. Dont cripple the franshise because of your GREEDY AGENT. Crazy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinzzfan25 Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 Luck of the draw, thats why you hire scouts. Not at all, a prime example of this is the Cards right now with Fitz. Nobody honestly thought he would preform this well and earn almost every clause in his contract. By him succeeding, it brought the Cards cap into a huge bind. I do agree with the other posters though, I like the NBA's draft slot style and it should come to the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimm Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 I hope they can do something like this, would stop all the rookie hold-outs that annoy the hell out of me every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tml6157 Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 I agree with u 10000000000%!!!! This has always been a thing about the NFL that has pissed me off majorly. People my age making millions for doing nothing. I don't mind if someone who proves himself gets a nice payday but players where a majority of them never pan out!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFan48 Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 Yes they should. There are too many bust out there and getting paid way too much to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiingspadee Posted March 4, 2008 Author Share Posted March 4, 2008 Yes they should. There are too many bust out there and getting paid way too much to do it. Agreed. Namely this guy http://youtube.com/watch?v=3PULVwe73LM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busch1724 Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 If the CBA had contract amounts predetermined for rookies, it would also prevent holdouts. Think of where the Browns might be had Quinn not held out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ADF Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 This is exactly why the Skins took Landry at #6 last year. You can't take huge a risk that early in the draft. To them, Landry was the most sure thing. Shelling out less guaranteed money to draft picks would help teams out tremendously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildbill1952 Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 I know I'm in the minority here. The only reason I've seen so far that I might support a rookie cap is more money for the veterans, so for that reason, and that reason alone, I could support a rookie cap (not that it matters a Tinker's darn whether I support it or not.) Last I looked, no one held a gun to NFL management's head and said they had to pay the money any rookie is asking. Last I heard no one forces us to buy CP jerseys, Redskins souvenirs, tickets to home and away games or me and my NFL Sunday ticket. All of that money goes to the owners and, last time I looked, Coach Dan isn't driving a 12 year old minivan because the players cost him so much and the franchise is losing money. So it doesn't bother me now that some 23 year old kid is able to get lots of millions out of old DS. We call these guys athletes, but in reality they're entertainers. I don't moan and groan that somebody like the wacky Tom Cruise gets $20 million a picture. If it bothers me that bad, I won't go to the movie. And if it bothered me what a Redskin player gets paid, I wouldn't watch them every Sunday. Now what does bother me is being forced to mortgage my house to pay for my son's chemo when he was 2 years old. It bothers me that a doctor can withhold his services or take my house if I don't pay 50 grand for life-saving surgery for me or those I love. Those people ARE holding a gun to my head. But in the big scheme of things, having DS pay some kid millions of dollars doesn't bother me. I have bigger fish to fry. If I could get somebody to pay me that much for my services, you bet I'd do it. And, just as a wild, wild guess, I'll bet you would too. JMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiingspadee Posted March 4, 2008 Author Share Posted March 4, 2008 This is exactly why the Skins took Landry at #6 last year. You can't take huge a risk that early in the draft. To them, Landry was the most sure thing.Shelling out less guaranteed money to draft picks would help teams out tremendously. Agreed. And just wanted to put it out there - in NO WAY was I saying anything negative about Laron Landry. I know you were not implying it or anything. Landry deserved all the money in that contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RemoveSnyder Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 could someone clarify the way that the NBA handles rookie contracts? _ This is what I know of it: A first round draft pick gets an automatic 3 year contract with an option for a 4th year. If/On the 5th year, he is a restricted free agent, the team can match any offer given to the player by another team. And in terms of money I'm not so sure. I don't know the cap. I think the max salary right now is 7 years 90 million (for the NBA) _ Yes on the rookie cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiingspadee Posted March 4, 2008 Author Share Posted March 4, 2008 I know I'm in the minority here. The only reason I've seen so far that I might support a rookie cap is more money for the veterans, so for that reason, and that reason alone, I could support a rookie cap (not that it matters a Tinker's darn whether I support it or not.)Last I looked, no one held a gun to NFL management's head and said they had to pay the money any rookie is asking. Last I heard no one forces us to buy CP jerseys, Redskins souvenirs, tickets to home and away games or me and my NFL Sunday ticket. All of that money goes to the owners and, last time I looked, Coach Dan isn't driving a 12 year old minivan because the players cost him so much and the franchise is losing money. So it doesn't bother me now that some 23 year old kid is able to get lots of millions out of old DS. We call these guys athletes, but in reality they're entertainers. I don't moan and groan that somebody like the wacky Tom Cruise gets $20 million a picture. If it bothers me that bad, I won't go to the movie. And if it bothered me what a Redskin player gets paid, I wouldn't watch them every Sunday. Now what does bother me is being forced to mortgage my house to pay for my son's chemo when he was 2 years old. It bothers me that a doctor can withhold his services or take my house if I don't pay 50 grand for life-saving surgery for me or those I love. Those people ARE holding a gun to my head. But in the big scheme of things, having DS pay some kid millions of dollars doesn't bother me. I have bigger fish to fry. If I could get somebody to pay me that much for my services, you bet I'd do it. And, just as a wild, wild guess, I'll bet you would too. JMHO. So you would rather us shell out millions of dollars to some kid who in return gives us nothing? You would rather pay say a.......RB to take your running game to the next level and be able to control the game and you draft him and pay him millions risking the fact that he is a bust and screwing the hell out of your team for years to come. So now you have this kid who you basically was going to put them team on his back and revolve your franchise around and he is below average and never transitioned from NCAA to NFL. So now you need a QB and Peyton Manning is available and he WANTS to play for your team but guess what.....:doh: you tied all that money into that rookie that SUCKS!! Still don't care? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aREDSKIN Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 The NFL and the NFL players Union are going to implement a rookie salary cap in the very near future IMO. There's no reason whatsoever rookies are entitle to make that much money for doing NOTHING. It also takes aways from the monies available to the rank & file union members that have put in years of service. Put the additional monies garnered fro the rookie cap towards pensions etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RemoveSnyder Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 Now what does bother me is being forced to mortgage my house to pay for my son's chemo when he was 2 years old. It bothers me that a doctor can withhold his services or take my house if I don't pay 50 grand for life-saving surgery for me or those I love. Those people ARE holding a gun to my head. I'm sorry. Universal healthcare anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.