Should the NFL do SOMETHING to combat rising rookie contracts?

[Penthos]

While it appears many of us are divided on the particular issue of whether or not Ronnie should take the money he is being offered or force the Dolphins to pay out an enormous amount that is comaprable to other rookie contracts; I would like to know if there is a general consesus that some SOMETHING needs to be done about these contracts.

 

[Penthos]

Specifically, how would you like to the problem handled?

 

[rookieholdout]

I might be wrong, but isnt there a rookie cap already?

 

[Jimmy James]

I think the league should go to NBA-style prenegotiated deals. The only way for them to work will likely be to make them 3 year deals, though.

I would like to mention that there is already a "rookie cap".

 

[ether79]

Specifically, how would you like to the problem handled?

I really don't think there is anything that can be done until they negotiate the new CBA and at that point it will still be difficult. The league and teams make so much money off of tv deals and endorsements that going to the players and telling them they will have to take a paycut even if it means in rookie contracts won't go over to well. If any kind of middle ground was going to be found I think the players would need some more guarantees if cut or waived like baseball or baksetball players get.

 

[SCall13]

There needs to be a ceiling put in place for rookies. It's ridiculous to pay multi-millions of dollars to a player who has yet to prove themselves. Regardless of how well they do in college, it doesn't always translate to NFL success. If anything, rookie contracts should be incentive laden. I can see giving a rookie a $2 million dollar signing bonus. But GUARANTEEING $20 some-odd million? That's crazy. The NFL needs to do something about it. Investing that type of money in an unproven commodity can be devastating to a team and it's future (cap-wise). I also feel it can hurt team chemistry. Say you have a 5 year veteran football player and he is playing for $3.5 mill a season. Then you have a rookie come in and he gets a $15 million signing bonus and $6 mill a year. Let's say that rookie held oyut of camp for 2 or 3 weeks, finally comes in a either plays below what his expectations were or, at worst, just plain FLOPS in the NFL. How do you think that is going to go over with the rest of the team? And a team can't just cut them because of the cap ramifications. This entire thing puts teams in a very bad position. And the only way to combat it is for the NFL to step in and put a stop to it. There has to be a rookie salary ceiling.

 

[Losman7]

I think the league should go to NBA-style prenegotiated deals. The only way for them to work will likely be to make them 3 year deals, though.

I would like to mention that there is already a "rookie cap".

It makes sense, but as you said, 3 year deals. 3 Years is hardly long enough for some Rookie QB's to see the field.

Perhaps you could set it up so they sign a rookie deal of 2 years, but then they are restricted FA's for 3 more years, in which an arbitrator could determine fair value based on production.

 

[Dol-Fan Dupree]

It makes sense, but as you said, 3 year deals. 3 Years is hardly long enough for some Rookie QB's to see the field.

Perhaps you could set it up so they sign a rookie deal of 2 years, but then they are restricted FA's for 3 more years, in which an arbitrator could determine fair value based on production.

I think there should be variable contracts. Different per position per spot taken. Also has 3 choices for the player. 3 to 5 year contract with 3 having the minimum signing bonus and 5 having the maximum signing bonus. With simple escaltors based on position as well.

However instead of escaltor I would rather see the NFL put more money in the "performed over contract pool". This will give more incentive for these rookies to perform better, also it would give teams an advantage for drafting well.

That is my opinion.

 

[SCall13]

I really don't think there is anything that can be done until they negotiate the new CBA and at that point it will still be difficult. The league and teams make so much money off of tv deals and endorsements that going to the players and telling them they will have to take a paycut even if it means in rookie contracts won't go over to well. If any kind of middle ground was going to be found I think the players would need some more guarantees if cut or waived like baseball or baksetball players get.

The bigger money should go to proven players. The rookies (or soon to be rookies) would have no choice but to accept it. A player who has never played a down in the NFL has little leverage if the NFL decides to control the amount of money they get. I'm all about making these new players have to prove themselves before they get crazy money. For all we know, Ronnie BRown could be a flop. If he is, do we want that type of money tied up in him? We'd be stuck with a bust for years and our cap would be in bad shape for a player who may never significantly contribute.
So there would be no PAY CUT. They'd just be getting less to start with than the rookies before them. They would then have incentive to go out and prove themselves instead of becoming instant primadonna millionaires.

 

[ether79]

The bigger money should go to proven players. The rookies (or soon to be rookies) would have no choice but to accept it. A player who has never played a down in the NFL has little leverage if the NFL decides to control the amount of money they get. I'm all about making these new players have to prove themselves before they get crazy money. For all we know, Ronnie BRown could be a flop. If he is, do we want that type of money tied up in him? We'd be stuck with a bust for years and our cap would be in bad shape for a player who may never significantly contribute.
So there would be no PAY CUT. They'd just be getting less to start with than the rookies before them. They would then have incentive to go out and prove themselves instead of becoming instant primadonna millionaires.

No I agree, I just think that anything that takes money out of any players pockets future or other wise will be a hard thing to negotiate with the union.

 

[SCall13]

No I agree, I just think that anything that takes money out of any players pockets future or other wise will be a hard thing to negotiate with the union.

Yeah. The players' Union is a good thing in some ways. But there will be a fight when it comes to the cash. But being that the player reps for the union are all veterans, it may give the NFL an advantage in negotiations when it comes to rookie contracts. You'd think so anyway.

 

[bigmiamifan]

There should be a cap on guaranteed money. Like a % of the entire contract amount. Like 50% of the total contract value or something.

This is only popular because these bonuses don't count against the cap right?

 

[pwn3dyo]

after next years draft something will be done.

 

[ether79]

Yeah. The players' Union is a good thing in some ways. But there will be a fight when it comes to the cash. But being that the player reps for the union are all veterans, it may give the NFL an advantage in negotiations when it comes to rookie contracts. You'd think so anyway.

THe only caviot is that unions in general don't like to give up any money unless some of it is shifted to another area. Like maybe with what I said earlier with a guarantee of some money that was left on a contact of a player who was cut/waived.

 

[PSUFinFan]

No I agree, I just think that anything that takes money out of any players pockets future or other wise will be a hard thing to negotiate with the union.

But that is where you are wrong. The only players who would be hurt by a new system would be players who will be drafted in the future. Since these players are not members of the union, the union is not going to fight for them. It is similar to the age limit in basketball, the union didn't bother fighting it since it didn't hurt its current members. Plus as has been said before, the money will be spent one way or another, the union would much rather it be spent on its current members than future ones.