Draft: 4 Yr. Max Contracts RDS 2-7

[groundgame]

Commisioner Tagliabue, in his press conference (NFL Network) noted that the draft picks taken in rounds 2-7 will have maximum contracts shortened to 4 years. The previous year limits for first round pick contracts will remain in effect.

A win for the agents and a negative effect on the Patriots who like to push the envelope on the life of rookie contracts.

 

[patsox23]

That's an unfortunate and kind of ridiculous change, particularly extending it to 2nd rounders. Crap.

 

[Hok]

Pats usually got their 2nd rounders to sign five year deals. A shame.

 

[Miguel]

Ask Deion Branch if he would like to be an UFA this year, rather than 2007. It is a good deal for the players. For an extra $200, 000 in 2002, he is passing up millions in 2006. Not exactly a good tradeoff.

Soapbox speech
Since the players are the ones who are putting their healths of the lines for my benefit, I like to see them make as much as possible since the life expectancy for NFL players is shorter than for the average male.

 

[Pats726]

Ask Deion Branch if he would like to be an UFA this year, rather than 2007. It is a good deal for the players. For an extra $200, 000 in 2002, he is passing up millions in 2006. Not exactly a good tradeoff.

Soapbox speech
Since the players are the ones who are putting their healths of the lines for my benefit, I like to see them make as much as possible since the life expectancy for NFL players is shorter than for the average male.

I think it is a really BIG part of the deal...and not a footnote...and I agree that players are the ones with their health on the line and should be paid a great deal of money.
I do wonder what effect this will have on teams like the Patriots?? They do like the 5 year deals...which are off the table now. Certainly this churning is good for agents..more contracts more money.

 

[Miguel]

I do wonder what effect this will have on teams like the Patriots?? They do like the 5 year deals...which are off the table now.

They will have to change their modus operandi when offering their draft picks deals. I do not see how this will hurt the Pats.

Certainly this churning is good for agents..more contracts more money.

Anything that is good for the players has to be good for the agents since they get a small cut (at max 3%) of the player's take.

 

[Pats726]

I agree.it may not hurt them, but I wonder also how in general this will have an effect on the league with rookies who "outplay" their contracts...it almost seems like they will be gone quicker...Is the max an agent gets 3%?? How has that changed...many say that Upshaw has tried to get the agents out altogether..lowering the pct etc..but if that were so. when wouldn't they push for slotted rookie salaries??

 

[jczxohn1]

This aspect of the deal will have a dampening effect on a team that drafts with developing a player in mind, certainly.

 

[mgteich]

Miguel,

You presume that poster here care about the players. Most here are happy about the pats blackmailing players into the extra year for $200K. We had an extensive fight over this last year, here and at kffl. You and I were in the distinct minority. We will be now. This clause is an important part of the deal for the players. They now actually get free agency in four years as anticipated in the last agreement. Now the only ones hurt will be the late first rounders.

Anyone picked after 20 would likely be better off being a 2nd round pick. Players will not be happy to picked by the patriots who will force them into a six year contract.

Ask Deion Branch if he would like to be an UFA this year, rather than 2007. It is a good deal for the players. For an extra $200, 000 in 2002, he is passing up millions in 2006. Not exactly a good tradeoff.

Soapbox speech
Since the players are the ones who are putting their healths of the lines for my benefit, I like to see them make as much as possible since the life expectancy for NFL players is shorter than for the average male.

 

[rookBoston]

Anyone picked after 20 would likely be better off being a 2nd round pick. Players will not be happy to picked by the patriots who will force them into a six year contract.

The solution to that for the player is simple. Put escalator clauses into the contract for years 5 and 6, so if the player makes the Pro-Bowl, or starts x% of the games, they play for legitimate veteran money. The Pats have been known to sign those deals, and really it's a win-win. The player has the incentive to be great. The team has a no-risk contract with a lot of upside.

What I object to is when the player and agent choose to not put those escalator clauses in, and instead trade that off for a bigger upfront signing bonus... and then, come Year 5, b!tch and whine that they're undercompensated. Well, hell... you signed that contract and took the money up front. You knew the implications when you signed: live up to your commitments.

What I respect is Guss Scott and agent. They were unwilling to concede to a contract they didn't believe in, and so (IIRC) Guss is playing under 1 year ERFA contracts. He's leaving up-front money on the table, and gambling on a big payday based on his skills, value to the team and early UFA. Right now, it's not looking too good for him based on injuries and lack of playing time. But at least he's acting on the strength of his convictions, instead of eagerly taking what he can get up front and then moaning to the media about what he actually deserves.

 

[mgteich]

The escalators don't come close to making up for what is available in free agency for those same starters and pro-bowlers.

Obviously, it is difficult to divide the first round contractually. The CBA (new and old) allows for teams to almost force 5 and 6 year contracts on late first rounders. The difference in pay between a future probowler who is picked 32 and 33 will be huge for teams that insist on 5 or 6 year contracts for first rounders.

The CBA hurts these few players, but the number isn't large. It is the number of successful players drafted in the last half of the first round who sign 5 or 6 year contracts.

 

[Warhorse]

I think they should have all rookie contracts slotted by what pick they are. That way the money they would get for the contract is set and the league would decide how much it would go up. In order to do that I believe that the contracts would have to be 3 year contracts so the players that teams know are going to be good, can get their money AFTER they have proven it on the field.

This would weed out the injuryprone players and the ones who have no drive to do any better. Thus making the NFL a better product for fans.

 

[patsfan13]

The teams use the rules to their advantage and so do the players. The Pats will adapt how they do their contracts. Since the cap is still in effect, the Pats will be fine. Our guys are smarter than their guys.

I am glad to see the players get more money. Footbal is the toughest sport on the players of the sport. I hope they addressed the issue of helping retired players with their health costs.

 

[arrellbee]

Just to reflect on what a 5 year deal means to a lower 3rd round draft pick - ie Ellis Hobbs.

825K signing, 5 years salaries: 230K, 310K, 385K, 460K, 545K
Figuring taxes take away in the neighborhood of 50%, if he spends 40K to 50K AFTER tax during those years (a pretty good lifestyle) and invests the rest at a minimum yield of 5%, he would end up with somewhere in the mid to high 50K range in yearly income for the rest of his life. Miscellaneous extra income from incentives earned, workout bonuses, any playoff money, etc. would add to that.

 

[Welker83]

its better for the players, and will avoid more hold outs over this issue....

 

[tailgater]

Teams that draft well will be affected less than those teams / coaches that bring rookies along slowly.

There will be more pressure than ever in selecting smart players that are right for the system the team runs, rather than the best player available.

 

[aabtec]

They will have to change their modus operandi when offering their draft picks deals. I do not see how this will hurt the Pats.



Anything that is good for the players has to be good for the agents since they get a small cut (at max 3%) of the player's take.

It also means smaller initial signing bonuses..this is going to be interesting..

 

[Pats726]

Teams that draft well will be affected less than those teams / coaches that bring rookies along slowly.

There will be more pressure than ever in selecting smart players that are right for the system the team runs, rather than the best player available.

Why do you think that those teams that draft well will be less affected?? Less so than bringing rookies along slower?? Just curious as to the thinking on this. Thinking of examples of long term players with a team..if a player comes along slower..will said player have a better chance of staying than one that comes in with a bang?? The same with the latter..best with the system vs BPA?? I'm really not sure which if either is better..with the new system..searching for examples answers as well...

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Why do you think that those teams that draft well will be less affected?? Less so than bringing rookies along slower?? Just curious as to the thinking on this. Thinking of examples of long term players with a team..if a player comes along slower..will said player have a better chance of staying than one that comes in with a bang?? The same with the latter..best with the system vs BPA?? I'm really not sure which if either is better..with the new system..searching for examples answers as well...

While your wrinkling your brow over those questions, ponder this: reserve players who have been learning the game for four years will be dumped on the market in greater numbers, not to mention players cut early because they aren't developing fast enough to have an impact before their commitment is up - whom do we know who makes a living out of sifting through other teams castoffs? :singing:

Good for the players, good for the Belichick/Kraft administration. I wonder if there will be some GMs who will bundle more picks together to draft impact players, rather then "waste" mid-round picks on developmental prospects.....

 

[DaBruinz]

Just to reflect on what a 5 year deal means to a lower 3rd round draft pick - ie Ellis Hobbs.

825K signing, 5 years salaries: 230K, 310K, 385K, 460K, 545K
Figuring taxes take away in the neighborhood of 50%, if he spends 40K to 50K AFTER tax during those years (a pretty good lifestyle) and invests the rest at a minimum yield of 5%, he would end up with somewhere in the mid to high 50K range in yearly income for the rest of his life. Miscellaneous extra income from incentives earned, workout bonuses, any playoff money, etc. would add to that.

Ok. A few things. 1st is that those salary numbers are no longer in effect since there are new minimums. 2nd, If he's paying more than 35% in taxes, he needs a new accountant. 3rd, if Hobbs is smart, he will be putting the MAX into his 401K and having it matched 2 to 1 by the league.

That throws your whole example out of whack.