Exploding NFL QB Salaries

[andyahs]

I wonder what happens when other star players get frustrated and hold out because they feel their pay is way under than it should be, because the portion has gotten lopsided for the qb. I'm sure the players are happy for their qb, and many feel or vouch for players getting paid. But I wonder if there's jealousy or hidden resentment toward qbs especially one's that are good but not star qbs.

You mean like Daniel Jones?

I'm sure a lot of players would prefer the salaries are more even across the team but it's not the way the market works with NFL players.

 

[phinsforlife]

So many variables. One that people often overlook is how many people go to, for example, a KC game to watch Mahomes? How many will now go to a Texans game to watch Stroud? How fast have DT/WR salaries jumped?
I've said a couple of times, at at given time, there are only 27-28 NFL level players at any position (which is why I'm against expansion). Of the reminder, there are 5-7 'top' players at any position and only a handful more who are 'average.' The remainder are below average. Thus, average players get surprisingly generous contracts - because they are not average in the NFL. QB is no different. This explains why most teams with an average or above QB don't draft one in R1. The more rare anything is, the more valuable it is.
When will sanity return? For the top 3-5 QBs, not until NFL revenue starts to decline. For the overpaid average guys, I HOPE teams see an average guy eat $45mm/yr, see the team wallow at the 5-7 win level, and rethink the value of average.

agree. the notion of people going to a KC game to watch mahomes applies to the other teams as well and their fans. that was my point about it being a business decision as opposed to a football decision. teams are fine with going 10-7 and being entertaining and providing hope. i think they want to win the SB, but when push comes to shove they prefer the relative certainty of fun and entertaining and 10-7 over the fear of totally sucking and the fans not showing up. 10-7 also keeps the GM and head coach employed.

 

[phinsforlife]

I wonder what happens when other star players get frustrated and hold out because they feel their pay is way under than it should be, because the portion has gotten lopsided for the qb. I'm sure the players are happy for their qb, and many feel or vouch for players getting paid. But I wonder if there's jealousy or hidden resentment toward qbs especially one's that are good but not star qbs.

well we did see the running backs threaten to unionize last year, and they were trying to start a movement for minimum RB salaries. that didnt seem to get much legislative traction, but interestingly the RBs did end up getting paid more this offseason. then the teams turned around and took it out on the safeties. the running back thing does make me think the players are starting to think and worry about this issue to some degree

 

[AgentXof12]

What this does indicate to me is your best window is to draft the right QB and win one when he's still on a rookie contract pay scale which kind of countervails Chris Grier's 6 season re-build.

Will touch on this down below.

Do you foresee negative side affects, or non QB players attempting to correct the perceived imbalance?

I don't think they can. What this really reveals about the present league is that GMs are unable to or unwilling to gamble on their talent assessments with QBs. It's very telling when the top 15 or 20 QBs are all making bank. We all know that after about the top 8 or 10, the next dozen or so are all lottery tickets. GMs are paying a high dollar tag for a chance to win...

I don't think you can just focus on QB salaries as a percentage of salary cap. In looking through some of the contending teams, there are plenty of QB's who have gotten paid but have low cap impacts now but balloon next year or the year after. It is about putting as many weapons on the field at the same time and playing the deferred salary game to make that happen. Currently (over the cap was the source) here is where some of the contending teams stand with their top 3 salaries compared to the cap.....

Chiefs 34%
Ravens 28.2%
Bengals 27.4%
49's 30.1%
Chargers 27.8%
Eagles 15.2%
Jaguars 23.5%
Dolphins 27.0%
Bills 22.3%

The Eagles are an interesting case.....even though Hurts has a big contract, his cap him this year is going to be $13M. Now there are years ahead where he is at $41M and $47M but there are ways to structure these deals to spread them out over time and allow for more playmaker salaries at other positions.

Bottom line, we are about middle of the pack currently in terms of our top 3 salaries. If Tua gets a contract done, his cap hit this year and potentially next year would likely go down and then start going up as we start to move on from T. Hill. I don't see us in any better or worse situation than the majority of good teams.

This speaks volumes about the teams who are being so much more deliberate about when they pay and how it's negotiated.

If you have a viable starting QB, you have to pay a starting QB wage even if he's not Tom Brady or Patrick Mahomes. It's the cost of doing business.

Yes, but there's other facets to this such as when you decide you're going to pay up and how you go about acquiring the QB talent.

What it's going to come down to is the teams that draft well year after year are the only ones that can maintain a consistently competitive team.

The ones that have to go heavy FA will be rebuilding every few years.

100% and this is why I have been uncertain about the Tua contract extension. The pattern in this league has not been locking up a QB long term and winning Superbowls unless the QB's name is Tom Brady. Possibly Patrick Mahommes. It's this type of QB that has so many GMs around the league throwing big money at lottery ticket QBs who might possibly put it all together. I don't think that's the winning formula, though.

So what's going to happen is Grier is going to have to, going to need to, lock Tua up long term, and then the team will have to work with the remaining budget. They will get creative along the way and get Tua to do "team-friendly" salary deferments so that they can add a missing part here and there or provide cap space relief in order to help the team win. This is a good move when your team is very, very close.

I admit I don't know if it's more advantageous to have the right QB (like Tua) and then go about building the rest of the roster, or if it's better to focus on managing the rest of the roster and pony up on the right QB when the team is close.

I do believe firmly that a moneyball approach is possible in this league and that every dollar counts when you're talking about value. How much risk should a team take on with big dollar players? Teams should be extremely allergic to long term contracts especially with players exiting their rookie deals.

 

[Feverdream]

My first comment is that the QB situation doesn't have much to do with the 'free market", simply because the negotiated salary cap prevents an actual free market as there would be with a highly sought after corporate executive or experimental surgeon.

The NFL contract is unique in that it guarantees the NFL players a set percentage of the gross revenues. This contract, for the whole of the NFL players is BETTER than a free market system, because as the league's finances expand, the players get as much of the proceeds as the owners do, although it could be argued that it has led to a situation where too few individuals are getting too much of the pie.

I honestly believe the next contract must take a crack at minimizing this problem, and that it will likely do this by enacting a larger rookie and veteran minimum dollar minimum. This would reduce the amount that the top players receive by an equivalent amount.

 

[Mach2]

well we did see the running backs threaten to unionize last year, and they were trying to start a movement for minimum RB salaries. that didnt seem to get much legislative traction, but interestingly the RBs did end up getting paid more this offseason. then the teams turned around and took it out on the safeties. the running back thing does make me think the players are starting to think and worry about this issue to some degree

That was never going to happen.

It is set up so the players and owners share TV contract money equally, and I think both sides
continue that design. It would be up to the players themselves to kick back $ to a fund if they desired.

I really doubt the players, as a whole, are going to be on board with that.

Even then, where does it end? What if LBs feel underpaid?

 

[phinsforlife]

That was never going to happen.

It is set up so the players and owners share TV contract money equally, and I think both sides
continue that design. It would be up to the players themselves to kick back $ to a fund if they desired.

I really doubt the players, as a whole, are going to be on board with that.

Even then, where does it end? What if LBs feel underpaid?

oh agree the notion of individual position groups unionizing and demanding a certain % of the cap cannot happen. theoretically the only thing that could realistically happen is putting a cap on any one players % of the cap, and then the free market sorts out who gets what after that. obviously, this cap will mostly only affect the QBs, and then more money would be spread to the other positions. part of the reason QB salaries have exploded is the NFL changed the rules to favor them. their salaries are not going up because their skills got relatively better than the other positions. better lucky than good i guess. no claim from me this will happen and again, maybe the NFL likes it this way and they like the parity that results.

 

[Mach2]

My first comment is that the QB situation doesn't have much to do with the 'free market", simply because the negotiated salary cap prevents an actual free market as there would be with a highly sought after corporate executive or experimental surgeon.

The NFL contract is unique in that it guarantees the NFL players a set percentage of the gross revenues. This contract, for the whole of the NFL players is BETTER than a free market system, because as the league's finances expand, the players get as much of the proceeds as the owners do, although it could be argued that it has led to a situation where too few individuals are getting too much of the pie.

I honestly believe the next contract must take a crack at minimizing this problem, and that it will likely do this by enacting a larger rookie and veteran minimum dollar minimum. This would reduce the amount that the top players receive by an equivalent amount.

I have my doubts about how much player support a higher rookie scale would get.

There's absolutely nothing in it for any player because he is already a union member and past caring what rookies make. My guess is they would be overwhelmingly against it

 

[AgentXof12]

I honestly believe the next contract must take a crack at minimizing this problem, and that it will likely do this by enacting a larger rookie and veteran minimum dollar minimum. This would reduce the amount that the top players receive by an equivalent amount.

The NFLPA is not going to support this because players don't like salary ceilings or anything that can indirectly become such. The only thing I believe can correct this problem is for GMs to become far more scrupulous over how they handle big contracts, particularly long term ones. Because what team wants to be locked in with a 10th-15th ranked starting QB for most of the next decade? Really... the fans hate it, and therefore so should GMs.

 

[phinsforlife]

The NFLPA is not going to support this because players don't like salary ceilings or anything that can indirectly become such. The only thing I believe can correct this problem is for GMs to become far more scrupulous over how they handle big contracts, particularly long term ones. Because what team wants to be locked in with a 10th-15th ranked starting QB for most of the next decade? Really... the fans hate it, and therefore so should GMs.

i both agree and disagree with the last sentence. i am not sure the fans hate this, at least when the deals are signed. it is human nature to be in love with your QB when they look pretty good at the time. the fans hate these things after the fact when they don't work, but I am not sure a majority of the fans hate these deals when they are done. in denver, i bet they were psyched about not only inheriting russel wilson's salary, but giving up all the draft capital to do it. when the giants did daniel jones, i would be curious what their fans thought when that deal went down. i do not remember there being a huge uproar. that happened after the fact when he started to suck.

 

[jimthefin]

You have to get past the sticker shock of the amount and take into consideration the % of The Cap the QB is taking.

It is a QB League and the QB gets the cheese. Superstar or decent starter.

And NOBODY gets paid what they deserve, we all get paid what we can get.

 

[C l u t c H 385]

I've given @phinsforlife crap for some of his takes, but the OP is a valid topic that does not mention, nor have any specific relationship to Tua as an individual.

If you want to argue about Tua, please consider doing it in a different thread. By making the post you did, which has zero to do with the OP, you sir are the one that is stirring the pot.

JMO as a member, and does not necessarily reflect the views of site management.

So, thread is moving to NFL forum?

 

[NEPA Phin Phan]

Fine.

Move the thread to the General forum.

With your thread about the Jets winning the Super Bowl???

 

[andyahs]

With your thread about the Jets winning the Super Bowl???

Sure it can be moved but you missed the point.

It's in the Dolphin main forum and I mentioned a dolphin player.

 

[Feverdream]

The NFLPA is not going to support this because players don't like salary ceilings or anything that can indirectly become such. The only thing I believe can correct this problem is for GMs to become far more scrupulous over how they handle big contracts, particularly long term ones. Because what team wants to be locked in with a 10th-15th ranked starting QB for most of the next decade? Really... the fans hate it, and therefore so should GMs.

I disagree on the idea that players dont like salary ceilings. In general, yes, players want to make more, but this is a player vs. player issue where 90% of the players want money that is being lavished on 10% of the players.

In this PARTICULAR contract, there is a set pie. The teams are assigned a set number of dollars to be allocated among about 100 players. If 80 of the players were to see that they'd get 500k extra, and that money would come directly out of the highest paid 10 players, those 80 players would vote for that.

I've got actual experience in negotiating a contract like this. I watched a group of nurses overwhelmingly vote for a contract that gave them large increases while the maintenance guys recieved very little. The nurses didn't care... but the same Union represented both groups and there were a LOT more nurses.

So... if the NFLPA put forward a suggestion that the vet minimum went from 1m/year to 2m/year... over half the players would vote for that.