OK, I hate Bad-ell but I like this...

[BelichickFan]

http://www.azcardinals.com/news/detail.php?PRKey=1998

"Setting a rookie salary cap is “high on our list” of things to do. “I believe players should be well compensated but they should have to earn it,” Goodell said"

"The draft, in order to make it more fan- (and TV-) friendly, will be changed. Teams will have 10 minutes instead of 15 minutes in the first round to make a choice (later rounds will also be shaved) in a move that could be announced as early as next week’s league meetings"

There's the other bad (foreign games) stuff in there but I like these two a lot.

 

[patsox23]

Re: OK, I hate Bad-ell but I like this . . .

http://www.azcardinals.com/news/detail.php?PRKey=1998

"Setting a rookie salary cap is “high on our list” of things to do. “I believe players should be well compensated but they should have to earn it,” Goodell said"

"The draft, in order to make it more fan- (and TV-) friendly, will be changed. Teams will have 10 minutes instead of 15 minutes in the first round to make a choice (later rounds will also be shaved) in a move that could be announced as early as next week’s league meetings"

There's the other bad (foreign games) stuff in there but I like these two a lot.

I LOVE BOTH OF THOSE IDEAS. Hope they institute it ASAP - especially if the Pats have a top 5 draft pick!

 

[LoganMankinsPancakeBlocks]

Re: OK, I hate Bad-ell but I like this . . .

Those are 2 very good things. The salary for top picks is absolutely ridiculous. It really doesn't help the bad teams all that much because if they get it (the draft) right, they have a player who is being paid fairly compared to what is out there on the free agent market. If they get it wrong and pick a bust, it can destroy their cap situation(s).

The draft can be painful to watch with how long the picks take. Personally, I'd prefer the 5 minutes that the NBA goes with and feel like these teams really shouldn't need to take up anywhere near as much time as they do...but 10 is fine, I guess.

Oh yeah and as patsox23 stated, hopefully they'll get on these 2 things very quickly with the way it looks like the Pats may have a pretty high pick.

 

[PATSNUTme]

Re: OK, I hate Bad-ell but I like this . . .

http://www.azcardinals.com/news/detail.php?PRKey=1998

"Setting a rookie salary cap is “high on our list” of things to do. “I believe players should be well compensated but they should have to earn it,” Goodell said"

"The draft, in order to make it more fan- (and TV-) friendly, will be changed. Teams will have 10 minutes instead of 15 minutes in the first round to make a choice (later rounds will also be shaved) in a move that could be announced as early as next week’s league meetings"

There's the other bad (foreign games) stuff in there but I like these two a lot.

How do you shave mins fron the 5 mins that they have to pick in rounds 3-7?

I think that 10 mins in round one and 7 min in round 2 would be OK. But it does limit the time to trade or talk to a players agent.

 

[BelichickFan]

Re: OK, I hate Bad-ell but I like this . . .

I LOVE BOTH OF THOSE IDEAS. Hope they institute it ASAP

It reads as if the draft thing will happen for the 2008 draft. Thank God, I love the draft but the 15 minute thing is ridiculous.

 

[FreeTedWilliams]

Re: OK, I hate Bad-ell but I like this . . .

Both of those are great ideas.

Watch for Agents to absolutely howl over the Rookie Salary Cap (see how all the NBA guys dumped thier agents when they instituted thier salary cap). It will mean no more holdouts, they will be slotted into their salaries, by their draft position.

The first round of the draft is great, however I could really do without the 15 minutes between picks (and more if Minnesota is on the clock). 10 minutes would be great the first round would take less than five hours!

I have no idea why they are playing games outside the US, I can't believe that the home teams are OK with this. and the Superbolw in London is maybe the worst idea I've ever heard of.

 

[NYCPatsFan]

Re: OK, I hate Bad-ell but I like this . . .

Great proposals!!

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

Re: OK, I hate Bad-ell but I like this . . .

So is Goodell just assuming the nflpa is going to agree to number 1?

That's pretty funny. Unless the owners are prepared to give something major, I'm not seeing how number 1 could be accomplished before 2013.

 

[BelichickFan]

Re: OK, I hate Bad-ell but I like this . . .

So is Goodell just assuming the nflpa is going to agree to number 1?

That's pretty funny. Unless the owners are prepared to give something major, I'm not seeing how number 1 could be accomplished before 2013.

The draft proposal is that one that sounds like it could be implemented immediately.

The other one would probably require a raising of the salary cap floor to ensure that salaries don't go down overall - but if there were a mechanism so that the same money was spent but on veterans instead of rookies I imagine both sides would favor it.

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

Re: OK, I hate Bad-ell but I like this . . .

The draft proposal is that one that sounds like it could be implemented immediately.

The other one would probably require a raising of the salary cap floor to ensure that salaries don't go down overall - but if there were a mechanism so that the same money was spent but on veterans instead of rookies I imagine both sides would favor it.

I guess vets would not oppose. But the nflpa would never agree without getting something. They really can't. They have duties to their entire constituency and can't favor one segment over the other. They'd have to take a hardline position and wouldn't agree without giving something up, even though with the overall salary cap it doesn't matter.

The funny part, though, is the article is written in a way to suggest that Goodel assumes he could do it unilaterally. There's no way. It would require amendment of the CBA, and while I guess possible it's not exactly easy.

 

[primetime]

Re: OK, I hate Bad-ell but I like this . . .

Oh thank God. A change that should've been made years ago.

 

[TomBrady'sGoat]

Re: OK, I hate Bad-ell but I like this . . .

I don't like changing the draft to make it more watchable. Of course, I don't watch it (and I can't understand how those of you who watch it enjoy it).

The purpose of the draft should be for team-building, not entertainment. The first should not be sacrificed for the latter.

I love the rookie scale idea and hope it gets done. That'll probably have to wait for the next CBA. Isn't the current one going to be terminated after 2008?

 

[primetime]

Re: OK, I hate Bad-ell but I like this . . .

I don't like changing the draft to make it more watchable. Of course, I don't watch it (and I can't understand how those of you who watch it enjoy it).

The purpose of the draft should be for team-building, not entertainment. The first should not be sacrificed for the latter.

The purpose of the NFL is to provide entertainment.

 

[Seymour93]

Re: OK, I hate Bad-ell but I like this . . .

I want the draft to be as long as possible. I hope they go back to the old format of 12 rounds.

As for the rookie cap, about time. It's ridiculous that someone who's never played a down in the league can have a contract worth over $30 million guarenteed + signing bonus.

 

[patchick]

The rookie salary cap is something most sane people have been calling for for years. But...

"The draft, in order to make it more fan- (and TV-) friendly, will be changed.

More fan and tv-friendly? How about more "player drafting" friendly? I'd much rather sit through some boring television than reduce teams' flexibility to make deals. This strikes me as a particular disadvantage to a team like the Patriots that typically does a lot of draft-day wheeling and dealing.

 

[TomBrady'sGoat]

Re: OK, I hate Bad-ell but I like this . . .

The purpose of the NFL is to provide entertainment.

No, it really isn't. The purpose of the NFL is to make money. They do this by entertaining. Of course, they entertain by building teams.

Should entertainment always come before team building? If one compromises the other, does the whole thing fall apart?

How far should the quest for entertainment go? Should the NFL start fixing games with the most entertaining result as the outcome? Should they condone steroid use because bigger and faster is more entertaining? Should there be strippers on the sidelines (YES!)? Entertainment still needs to be weighed against the negatives.

The draft, being a basic aspect of team building, should not have to answer to entertainment concerns. Likewise the NFL's marketing department shouldn't have to answer to coaches and GMs. They should be allowed to do their own things.

Of course, looming over all of this is money. Money does, in fact, always win. That is why the draft changes are being made.

 

[Ring 6]

Re: OK, I hate Bad-ell but I like this . . .

No, it really isn't. The purpose of the NFL is to make money. They do this by entertaining. Of course, they entertain by building teams.

Should entertainment always come before team building? If one compromises the other, does the whole thing fall apart?

How far should the quest for entertainment go? Should the NFL start fixing games with the most entertaining result as the outcome? Should they condone steroid use because bigger and faster is more entertaining? Should there be strippers on the sidelines (YES!)? Entertainment still needs to be weighed against the negatives.

The draft, being a basic aspect of team building, should not have to answer to entertainment concerns. Likewise the NFL's marketing department shouldn't have to answer to coaches and GMs. They should be allowed to do their own things.

Of course, looming over all of this is money. Money does, in fact, always win. That is why the draft changes are being made.

Changes in the draft process could possibly affect some teams, but won't affect the sum of the teams. In other words if sone are helped and some are hurt, it doesn't harm the NFL product, its a wash.
If they make the draft more fan and viewer friendly, it becomes more watched, and they make more money for the TV rights.
Of course its in their best interest.

Example: If MNF was moved from 830 to 7PM, it would increase viewership in the East and decrease it on the West Coast. The net effect, I would assume would be even. If TV advertisers would pay more to advertise on a 7PM start, then the game would be at 7, some fans would be plssed others would be happier, it would net out, and they would earn more advertising $$. The opposite id true, thats why they start at 830.

 

[BelichickFan]

More fan and tv-friendly? How about more "player drafting" friendly? I'd much rather sit through some boring television than reduce teams' flexibility to make deals. This strikes me as a particular disadvantage to a team like the Patriots that typically does a lot of draft-day wheeling and dealing.

I'm confident we could still get deals done and I'll enjoy my draft day a lot more with 10 minutes per pick.

 

[primetime]

Re: OK, I hate Bad-ell but I like this . . .

No, it really isn't. The purpose of the NFL is to make money. They do this by entertaining. Of course, they entertain by building teams.

The draft makes them a whole lot of money in advertisements. As AJ said, they can increase the draft's viewership by decreasing time per round, which will in turn increase the investment advertisers are willing to make, especially as the premium that an advertiser needs to pay for, say, 1st round spots (where the viewership is obviously highest) increases exponentially as the supply of those spots decreases. In this way, they are providing more entertainment and therefore making more money.

Most of the 15 minutes is spent sitting there hoping a call will come in with a blockbuster at the last minute. Teams already know who they want in the first round, most of the time, anyways.

 

[patsox23]

For those of you who don't like this - who seem to be guys who don't watch it anyway - this change shouldn't do much of anything to affect the quality of the drafting.

From what we ALWAYS hear, the phones don't really start to ring until a lot of time has elapsed on each pick. Cutting from 15 to 10 minutes is a no-brainer and, I'll bet, will have minimal impact.