MrJL 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. My dad's been saying that for years. He's also suggested the teams could take out an insurance policy for the rookies in case a career ending injury happens that years. That way no one can say, without the cap he could have been set for life, now because of the rookie cap he'll struggle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 Technically the NFL does have a rookie cap, the rookie pool. It has an allocation(based on the total NFL salary cap) that is the limit to be paid out to rookies. It then(based on number of picks and in what rounds) allocates each team a certain amount of money they can spend on rookie contracts. So technically it exists. Of course the problem with it is it only covers the first year of the contract. So if a player bombs he still earns 20 million of guaranteed money if hes cut. The problem with any rookie cap which would cap the WHOLE contract(and not just the first year), is you then have to control the length of the contract as well. Essentially that means teams can no longer lock up someone they think is going to be a superstar for 7 years. So all of the effort they put forth in drafting a guy 1st overall may mean hes on a different team in just 3 years. The solution? Im sure its complicated. I would suggest that one possibility is to have a league mandated price per pick, for a 3 year contract. This would be preset(based on the pick number, round and the position). However, there would be an option, that could be exercised SOLELY by the team drafting the player to try to negotiate a new contract, for any dollar amount or years the team wants. The player is not required to sign it, just the preset contract. In cases where the team wants to save some money, or isnt sure the player will pan out, the team can just use the preset contract. If the player plays well, he hits payday sooner then he would have(year 4). In cases where the team wants to lock up the player for a long time, because they are sure he will be a star, they can negotiate a long term, high money contract. The player can then chose to sign it(if he likes the team), or just take the lower money, 3 year contract if he thinks he may want out in 3 years. Will they ever change the currrent system? Maybe. But its not exactly a sure thing. In order to get a change the owners must dislike the current system(I think they do), and the NFLPA must get an alternative thats better for THEM than the current system. I think allowing players to hit FA quicker, or have the option to sign a much higher money deal(in other words, putting total freedom in the players hands) might persuade them. It wont be easy though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-Prime Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 I've said for a long time that rookie salaries should be capped.. It's counter productive for teams to pay all this big money for someone who turns out to be crap... PA will never allow it thou. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boy1Der Posted March 4, 2008 Share Posted March 4, 2008 If the had a cap you might see more rookies pan out because a bunch of them won't have that big contract to sit on they will have to go out there and prove themselves so they can make some real money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildbill1952 Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 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? Nope. Do you think if DS lowers the price on rookies, or any other player for that matter, do you think he's going to charge less for tickets to the game? Do you think the beer is going to cost less? Do you think he's going to give some money back to the TV so they can charge less for commercials to the beer companies so they can charge you less for a 6-pack?Again, no way. It just sounds like somebody wishes he made millions also and is mad because he can't. So he gets jealous of what someone else is making. That would be called coveting for the Biblically challenged. Just curious, has anyone asked for less money at work recently? So why should the entertainers we call Redskins be forced to do it? I don't expect you to agree. It's obvious you're pumped about this issue. But again, if it really bothers you, then don't pay their salaries by buying Redskins stuff. The bad draft decisions I'm afraid we'll both have to live with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpt.Chaos47 Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 There should definately be a rookie ceiling. The way the Draft is setup its supposed to benefit the worst teams the most and so on, but it doesn't. The money teams have to pay for 1st round players is ridiculous especially for picks 1-10. Teams have to spend so much money on rookies they can't afford to keep their Vets and if a high 1st rounder turns out to be a bust it could set a team back for years. The NBA has the right idea, I personally prefer the NBA's Draft Lottery to the NFL's system as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Yes. It would have to be added into the next CBA. However the Union will never go along with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REEGSKINS Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 yes............... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewCliche21 Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 I totally agree. I think that this would be WONDERFUL for the league! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard Washington Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 why would the player's association agree to this? :rotflmao: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebornempowered Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 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 collegeNFL.....not so much. So please tell me how are scouts supposed to predict that? The Texans seemed to figure this out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaz13 Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 why would the player's association agree to this? :rotflmao: Because it would mean more money allocated to veterans. The salary cap and especially the salary floor would not change, so teams would spend just as much, except more money would go to veteran players. V. Davis was drafted by the niners a few years ago and instantly became the highest paid TE in the NFL without having played a down. Getting the 1st pick in the draft is supposed to help the worst team in the league, but if the player is a bust it could set the franchise back years with that type of guaranteed money. The NBA has the best setup. There is a rookie wage scale. There are no holdouts because there is nothing to negotiate. The player gets a certain amount for the first 4 years based on draft position, then becomes a FA and gets paid based on actually playing in the NFL. This is something that the players should want. If I was a veteran and saw a rookie coming in making more than anyone else at my position I wouldn't be too happy. Something needs to be done. The inflation in these rookie deals is out of control and it will continue to get worse. At this rate in 20 years the top 10 players in every draft will become the top 10 highest paid players in the NFL every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard Washington Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 The NBA has the best setup. the nba has guaranteed contracts. i'm no capologist but i think only the first round picks have significant signing bonuses and those bonuses are usually tiered based on pick location. i wished the system was more balanced for the players and organizations. the players don't have to give up anything to do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smoke-n-mirrors Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 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. Speaking of Caps, how about that 10-2 win last night! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaz13 Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 the nba has guaranteed contracts. i'm no capologist but i think only the first round picks have significant signing bonuses and those bonuses are usually tiered based on pick location. i wished the system was more balanced for the players and organizations. the players don't have to give up anything to do that. The NBA doesn't have signing bonuses b/c their contracts are guaranteed. Only 1st round picks have guaranteed contracts. Second round picks have no guarantees at all and can be cut with no cap consequences. NFL contracts are not guaranteed therefore signing bonuses are used as the "guaranteed" money. Maybe a concession can be made that a certain number of years can be guaranteed to a rookie in the NFL if they go to a tiered system. But that would probably only be for the first round or two. Something has to be done, I'm sure the NFL can figure out a fair system that benefits both the players and teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbnva Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 I sent an email to the NFLPA union suggesting the same thing a while back, I know they won't consider it but I fell good that I made my voice heard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBarrett82 Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 i love this idea. this concept is the only thing i respect about the nba. this is the only thing they do right. its a shame that some vets can't get the contracts they deserve b/c teams need to keep cap space for the rookie pool. i hope the commish considers this next year when the cba comes back up for renewal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 I agree about 1 trillion %. This will have to be negotiated in the next CBA. You'll probably have to alter free agency. In order for players to agree to real rookie salary cap; free agency will have to start sooner. Say restricted free agency after 2 seasons and unrestricted free agency after 3 years. Also, may have to give out more comp picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaSkinsNut Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 I agree, rookie contracts can cripple a franchise if you guess wrong. It more or less hamstrings teams financially who were already bad if they get average performance or below. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewCliche21 Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 The NBA doesn't have signing bonuses b/c their contracts are guaranteed. Only 1st round picks have guaranteed contracts. Second round picks have no guarantees at all and can be cut with no cap consequences. NFL contracts are not guaranteed therefore signing bonuses are used as the "guaranteed" money. Maybe a concession can be made that a certain number of years can be guaranteed to a rookie in the NFL if they go to a tiered system. But that would probably only be for the first round or two. Something has to be done, I'm sure the NFL can figure out a fair system that benefits both the players and teams. Because it would mean more money allocated to veterans. The salary cap and especially the salary floor would not change, so teams would spend just as much, except more money would go to veteran players. V. Davis was drafted by the niners a few years ago and instantly became the highest paid TE in the NFL without having played a down. Getting the 1st pick in the draft is supposed to help the worst team in the league, but if the player is a bust it could set the franchise back years with that type of guaranteed money. The NBA has the best setup. There is a rookie wage scale. There are no holdouts because there is nothing to negotiate. The player gets a certain amount for the first 4 years based on draft position, then becomes a FA and gets paid based on actually playing in the NFL. This is something that the players should want. If I was a veteran and saw a rookie coming in making more than anyone else at my position I wouldn't be too happy. Something needs to be done. The inflation in these rookie deals is out of control and it will continue to get worse. At this rate in 20 years the top 10 players in every draft will become the top 10 highest paid players in the NFL every year. Quoted backasswards because I'm an idiot, but VERY well put!!! I wish that I were having an articulate day so that I could better agree with you, but I'm not. :mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jp redskin Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 yes! when cba is redone. how 'bout pick #1 6yr 50 ml pick #2-5 6 yr 40 ml pick #5-10 6 yr 30 ml pick #10-20 5 yr 15 ml pick #20-32 5 yr 10 ml rd 2 5 yr 4 ml rd 3 4 yr 2 ml rd 4 3 yr 1.3 ml rd 5 3 yr 900 k rd 6 2 yr 400 k rd 7 2 yr 300 k total contract not gaurenteed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deejaydana Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 I think we will see a cap for rookies shortly. The players' union and the owners will come to an impasse, just like they do every few years, and they will hammer something out. These elite athletes deserve mucho dinero as they are the cream of the cream but when a completely unproven player comes into the league, especially when he's first overall, the team shouldn't run the risk of mortgaging themselves completely for what essentially is a calculated risk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JazzboneCuit Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 I've always been a firm believer to pay a man for what he has done for you, not for what he MIGHT do for you. Rookies holding out for more money just makes me furious. Especially ones that have been injured in college. Prove to me your worth the 20 million guaranteed and I'll pay it. So yes, I do believe there should be a cap for rookies depending on position, each team would set in specific benchmarks for that rookie to meet, if they meet those goals...pay the man, if not it doesn't cripple the finances of a team for years to come. :2cents: JazzboneCuit :dallasuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scamp1 Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Its amazing to me that its never been passed. Owners want it, the Vets want it , and the only ones who dont are the Agents [see snakes in Webster}.I cant beleive the league continually want to reward the unproven, while proven veterans wait for there payday because of where they were drafted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyndorf25 Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Great point...the pay these rookies get is rediculous and in some cases puts losing teams in a perpetual game of Russian Roulette having to draft high and live with the outcomes when these guys never live up to their rookie contracts (Houston comes to mind). The whole point of having teams with the worst record picking first is to balance the talent pool, but that system does not take into consideration the finanacial aspect that can bankrupt a team that has too much money tied up in a handful of players (hmm, this sounds familiar). I understand that teams can trade their high picks, but the principle is what I am referring to--when this system was set up, the money being thrown at these rookies could not have even been anticipated...and the situation only seems to be escalating in a climate that is always trying to out-do itself. Often shrewd teams, like the Patriots for example, try to avoid taking players in the top 10 by trading out and if they do, they rarely take guys at skill positions in order to avoid hefty contracts. Think about this...this strategy has become a pretty sound one in that it sort of circumvents the point of the draft system simply because of the money aspect. Should it really be about money or helping a team obtain the best player that best fits that team? Bring on the rookie cap. My :2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.