22 mill for ronnie?

[Merman]

I'll take your word on all the math... simply put "I ain't no mathematician".

Still, I think the point is valid. Even at a 4% increase over the cap per year... that's still adds up quickly. It's even more of an issue when you consider how the NFL market works. If the 1st rounders are getting a 10% raise every year... then I'm sure that the 2nd and 3rd rounders will want one as well. Also, as rookies being to set records for salary more and more often... you'll get the veterans who want to be the highest paid... and take issue to rookies making more than them. I'd be interested in a study of how quickly the salaries of NFL starters in general are rising in comparison to cap raises.

I understand that this is a business, and I don't fault Ronnie in the least for taking advantage of the current environment regarding rookie contracts. My issue is that I enjoy a team with several "star" players. With the current CBA set to expire in the near future, and surely the next CBA being negotiated... I just don't want them to overlook this issue, and realize it after the next CBA sets the rules for the next 10 years. I don't think a situation in which teams can only afford to pay one or maybe two big stars would be benificial to either the NFL, or the fans.

The arithmetic is not hard to do.

Most players do not get a 10% increase from the previous year. There is something call a Rookie Pool Allocation. It was implemented to a limit rookie contract increases.

Each Club is given a certain maximum amount to sign all their rookie players. I would have to look it up again but I think it's a 6% increase from last year. The Clubs can spend it on the rookies any way they want but cannot exceed the limit.

The pool is only for the first year salary cap charge, which assumes that contracts are the typical old deal with a first year signing bonus only. So if Clubs add money to the end of the contract and/or guarantee base salary the numbers still go up faster than the amount the League and Union are trying to contain the increases to but not the first year.

The minimum salaries are also an attempt to limit the yearly increases but the top round first picks also get more than the minimum base salaries that the majority of the rookies receive.

 

[grooves12]

Something to think about is... the Salary Cap is based on revenues generated by the league. Although the CBA is expiring, that is likely to continue for the forseeable future, since it seems to be working well for both side. 2006 is the beginning of the new TV contracts being included in league revenue, and since those numbers were astronomically high, there is going to be a HUGE increase in the Salary Cap, I am gussing it will likely top $100 million. Agents and players know this, and will use it as a bargaining tool in their negotiations.

The only with this is, since the CBA has yet to be extended, there is a limit on the pro-ration of signing bonuses. Early first round players typically sign contracts about Seven-years long. Like someone else already pointed out... the total contract value has only went up a small amount. The reason there is more guaranteed money is because the teams are being forced into shorter term contracts, and players/agents want to receive some kind of concessions for doing so. I haven;t seen the structure of the deal, but my guess is the reason the number is so high, is because they are using some creative numbers to get around the limited term of the pro-ration of the signing bonus... and perhaps since the 9ers have the cap space the next few years, are trying to get the big $$$ out of the way so they will have plenty of space in the future.

 

[3P]

The arithmetic is not hard to do.

Most players do not get a 10% increase from the previous year. There is something call a Rookie Pool Allocation. It was implemented to a limit rookie contract increases.

Each Club is given a certain maximum amount to sign all their rookie players. I would have to look it up again but I think it's a 6% increase from last year. The Clubs can spend it on the rookies any way they want but cannot exceed the limit.

The pool is only for the first year salary cap charge, which assumes that contracts are the typical old deal with a first year signing bonus only. So if Clubs add money to the end of the contract and/or guarantee base salary the numbers still go up faster than the amount the League and Union are trying to contain the increases to but not the first year.

The minimum salaries are also an attempt to limit the yearly increases but the top round first picks also get more than the minimum base salaries that the majority of the rookies receive.

Thanks Merman... I always enjoy getting schooled by you :)

Do you think the rookie pool is actually an effective method of limiting the skyrocketing of rookie salaries? Seems to me like the higher round players would still ask for a large amount, with the attitude that the lower round players will just have to play for what ever is left... if there is any.

 

[Merman]

Thanks Merman... I always enjoy getting schooled by you :)

Do you think the rookie pool is actually an effective method of limiting the skyrocketing of rookie salaries? Seems to me like the higher round players would still ask for a large amount, with the attitude that the lower round players will just have to play for what ever is left... if there is any.

I am not sure if its as effective as it should be but I agree with the many posters that the Top rookie picks are getting too much and some of that should be funneled to the veterans. Some effort is being made to funnel some more more money to four years and more vested vets. It's the qualifying veteran contract which was alluded to by other posters. Its does not seem like much but it is an effort.

4. Minimum Salary Benefits

I found the 05 rookie pool article by Pasquarelli and the increase is only 5%. Don't over look the link at the bottom of the post.

The '05 rookie pool totals $126.92 million, an average of about $3.966 million per team. There are 15 clubs with allocations higher than the league average. The pool represents a five-percent increase over the 2004 rookie limit of $120.76 million. That is significant, since last year's rookie total showed a bump of only two percent from the previous one. Five teams received rookie allocations of $5 million or more this year, an increase of two over 2004. Those five franchises account for $28.2 million in rookie pool funds, or roughly 22 percent of the leaguewide allocation.

Rookie Pool Allocation

 

[chub]

The NFL has a major issue with rookie contracts. In the NHL there is a rookie cap of $850,000 with a possibility of making 4.5mil if that player is in like the top ten in the league at his position.

Paying millions for unproven players is just plain dumb. Brown will get more than the headcase Ricky but to be honest he doesnt deserve it, not even close. I am all for the rookies making loads of cash if they perform. Yet we sit here and ask vets to take paycuts so we can sign unproven guys!

Thats bad business! Almost wants you to trade the first rounder for seconds and thirds every year. While your at it just sign FA's

 

[LithoMan]

Can you show me where you found this policy?
Veteran players with 4 year's experience or more that make the league MINIMUM salary only count 450K against the cap, but I was unaware of any regressive scale for cap charge for all veterans based on the number of years a player has played.

I'll try to dig it up, its just general knowledge I have. Im sure it is in the CBA. I'll look for it.

 

[Merman]

I'll try to dig it up, its just general knowledge I have. Im sure it is in the CBA. I'll look for it.

I already posted the link in my last post. 4. Minimum Salary Benefits

It's a one year contract for the vet minimum for veterans with 4 or more credited seasons. The maximum bonus is $25k plus the $455k salary is a maximum deal of $480k. .

 

[VanDolPhan]

There's some bad math in this thread. Ronnie will NOT get a $22 million signing bonus or close to it.

The difference between the #1 and #2 draft pick is huge.

Gallery only got $14 million in signing bonus and he was signed for SEVEN years.

My guess is we get Ronnie on a $15 million signing bonus over 6 years or if the team locks him down for 7 (which would be bad for Ronnie cause we'd pretty much have him for his career) even at a 20% rise would only be a $16.8 million bonus on a SEVEN year deal.

 

[Fran2fin]

Agreed, rookie contracts should be incentive based. NOT gaurenteed money.

Exactly! Think that will ever happen??????? Nah, it makes too much sense!

 

[phinphan896]

Stop being "haters" because if you were in his position you'd want as much money up front as possible

 

[Dol-Fan Dupree]

Stop being "haters" because if you were in his position you'd want as much money up front as possible

Well true, doesn't mean I think that it is right

 

[VanDolPhan]

To put it in even more perspective.

2004 Gallery: $14 million signing bonus, $60 million total. 7 year contract
2003 Rogers: $14.4 million to sign, $56 million total. 6 year contract (wow gallery got screwed)
2002 Peppers: $13.15 million to sign (over 2 years). $50 million total (62 total on hard to reach incentives). 7 year contract

As you can see there really isn't much room to jack that up.

 

[Merman]

There's some bad math in this thread. Ronnie will NOT get a $22 million signing bonus or close to it.

The difference between the #1 and #2 draft pick is huge.

Gallery only got $14 million in signing bonus and he was signed for SEVEN years.

My guess is we get Ronnie on a $15 million signing bonus over 6 years or if the team locks him down for 7 (which would be bad for Ronnie cause we'd pretty much have him for his career) even at a 20% rise would only be a $16.8 million bonus on a SEVEN year deal.

The $22 million prediction is based on two things.

1. It is not a signing bonus but total guaranteed money.

2. "Gallery' s $14.5 million total signing and option bonus was $500k more than than that of the No. 1 pick in the previous year’s draft, Bengals quarterback Carson Palmer."

A 20% increase of $14.5 million is $17.4 million paid over two years. The $22 million of guaranteed money over the life of the contract would probably be a better deal for the Dolphins.

I also know you haven't forgotten that the maximum proration for signing bonuses is 5 years this year and 6 years last year. :)

 

[VanDolPhan]

The $22 million prediction is based on two things.

1. It is not a signing bonus but total guaranteed money.

2. "Gallery' s $14.5 million total signing and option bonus was $500k more than than that of the No. 1 pick in the previous year’s draft, Bengals quarterback Carson Palmer."

A 20% increase of $14.5 million is $17.4 million paid over two years. The $22 million of guaranteed money over the life of the contract would probably be a better deal for the Dolphins.

I also know you haven't forgotten that the maximum proration for signing bonuses is 5 years this year and 6 years last year. :)

Yup makes sense. Guarentee some of his base salary every year to help deal with the 5 years instead of 6 stuff.

 

[LithoMan]

I already posted the link in my last post. 4. Minimum Salary Benefits

It's a one year contract for the vet minimum for veterans with 4 or more credited seasons. The maximum bonus is $25k plus the $455k salary is a maximum deal of $480k. .

Thanks Merman. I didnt even have to look for it, and that is a huge agreement to sift through, Thanks very much!