- Joined
- Oct 10, 2006
- Messages
- 76,883
- Reaction score
- 66,866
This has to be some Aussie kinda code which unless I dally someone will decrypt for me
Cinderella story....
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.This has to be some Aussie kinda code which unless I dally someone will decrypt for me
You think things are complicated NOW?
This will just make everything extremely difficult. If the rookies were allowed to choose who they played for, the most attractive, lucrative teams would have a huge advantage. There would have to be some restrictions you don't mention, like the a single team can only sign a certain number of rookies in a certain class.
Assign a tier level or something. Where a team can only sign two tier one, two tier two etc.
what you think?
Interesting perspective though.
Like the Lama's words in Caddyshack, our Lama is sprouting bull****....This has to be some Aussie kinda code which unless I dally someone will decrypt for me
Since the advent of the salary cap era, the NFL draft has been at best redundant and, presently, actually counterproductive as a tool to help instill competitive balance among the teams in the NFL.
When teams had no spending limit, the league needed the draft to prevent successful teams from going out and buying all of the best players coming out of college. The salary cap was (putatively) installed to serve the same purpose for free agents, and would not only continue to function in that regard, but would actually function BETTER if you treated all players coming out of college as UFAs. I say better, because at this point, the escalation of the 1st round rookie contract structure: a) ensures that the early picks will be grossly over-payed at the expense of the middle-round guys and the veterans., and b) punishes the teams the draft is supposed to help by forcing them to wager way too much money on their picks working out.
When the conventional wisdom says nobody ever wants the #1 pick, you know the system is broken. Many suggest tinkering with the rookie pay scale, but that's going to be a non-starter with the NFLPA and the agents for a host of reasons. It also would result in dramatic increase in
general animosity between the young players and their franchises, and lead to even more nasty contract disputes, holdouts, and all the general ugliness that makes rooting for your team less fun.
No, the only solution that makes sense is to entirely abolish the draft. You can keep the combine, Mel Kiper, and all of the over-analysis if you want, only replace the actual draft days with a "rookie signing convention." Teams can talk all they want with the rookie free agents before then, but no arrangements can be binding until noon on Day 1 of the signing convention. There's no limit or floor on the contracts offered, no artificial restrictions on contract structure or length, and teams are free to sign as many or as few players for as much or as little money as they want.
Here's a list of problems this will solve:
* Teams like the Lions, who would be better suited in their rebuilding effort by acquiring a bunch of mid-priced guys instead of paying one college star a ridiculous amount of money, would be able to do so.
* You no longer have to worry about having the most promising college players' careers ruined by ending up stuck with lousy franchises.
* With players no longer being forced to negotiate with just one franchise, there's no need for the protective limits on contract structure that the agents can then turn to their advantage, at the expense of the functionality of the system.
* Consequently, rookie salaries will no longer vary independently of the overall quality of the draft pool.
* A rookies' first experience in the league isn't being jerked around, told where you're going to play, for whom, and for approximately how much, and how long before you can go somewhere else. Do not underestimate the long-term benefits of this. The draft is THE reason that so many players end up with a huge chip on their shoulders after a few years in the NFL.
* If you fell in the draft because of an injury or rumors about your character, too bad -- you're making 4th round pick money for the first 4-5 years of your career. Without a draft, if you think your value is artificially low coming out of school, find someone willing to offer you a 1 year "prove it" deal with a big roser-bonus in year $2, if the team wants to keep you.
* Employees like to be treated like valued assets, not prizes or cattle. Players will behave much, much better in bad situations that they chose themselves of their own free will than they will in situations in which they were told to pack their bags and move to Buffalo. Graduates of med, law, and business school often have to move to undesirable places to get the job they want, but they stick it out because they made that choice.
* Veteran players will be happy, as they'll likely get a bigger piece of the pie when teams aren't forced to keep a rookie pool. Meanwhile, most of the rookies will be getting a bigger piece of the pie, too -- the only ones who will be unhappy are the would-be-early-1st-rounders, whose price tags have been artificially inflated.
* Without the draft-induced chip on their players' shoulders, teams will find it easier to resign their players. This will do more to defray the losses a team suffers in free agency than the Franchise Tag, which was a huge miscalculation, and has caused way more problems than its fixed.
* If a player wants to play where he grew up or went to college, he can make it happen by offering a hometown discount. Having more players playing in places they have pre-existing fanbases and support structures can only be a good thing.
Seriously, I could go on all day. I mean, I know that at this point in history, many of us are less than convinced of the sustaining power of free-market forces, but in a controlled system like the NFL creates with its salary cap, it really should work as well in practice as it does in theory. It would be a win-win-win situation for the owners, players, and fans.
Too bad it'll never, ever happen. There's no way any commissioner would go far enough out on a limb to actually see it through.
What you are describing is an analogue to an already existing system if you know it or not. It is the the baseball system. There the baseball draft is largely insignificant. Judging by the number of work stoppages, and the unwieldy and frankly precarious distortion of the MLB. I don't think there was an improvment in employee attitude. I hardly think an actual test case by the NFL is needed to see what results. The MLB baseball commissioner was actually calling for a League contraction and killing several franchises.
Just look at mess that is MLB. Bleeach!
Your Free Enterprise Analogy is all wrong. Sports leagues are not multiple business environments, even as they may be superficially organized to appear that way. They are a single business enterprise with multiple divisions competing in a closed environment.
Think of them as Stores owned by a single business an they compete to sell the same product available nowhere else, to others. A single store "wins" or "loses" but that is at the expense of the other company Stores in the neighborhood. McDonald's sells Hamburgers. The only place you can buy a "Big Mac" is at a McDonald's store. Nowhere else. Store "A" wins if it sells 1001 Big Macs and Store "B" loses if it sells only 999. Big Deal.
If you don't like Big Macs (football), you can go buy a Whopper (basketball) from another business enterprise.
I love the draft. It needs to be fixed where the rookies don't make gazillions of dollars. That's it. Please don't bring up Curt Flood type problematic issues. If you did not have a draft it would be similar to the NHL of years ago where the Montreal Canadians would receive the first pick, even though they had just been crowned "World" Champions.
Correct the financial salaries of the rookies and it will open up a whole new way of life.
Since the advent of the salary cap era, the NFL draft has been at best redundant and, presently, actually counterproductive as a tool to help instill competitive balance among the teams in the NFL.
When teams had no spending limit, the league needed the draft to prevent successful teams from going out and buying all of the best players coming out of college. The salary cap was (putatively) installed to serve the same purpose for free agents, and would not only continue to function in that regard, but would actually function BETTER if you treated all players coming out of college as UFAs. I say better, because at this point, the escalation of the 1st round rookie contract structure: a) ensures that the early picks will be grossly over-payed at the expense of the middle-round guys and the veterans., and b) punishes the teams the draft is supposed to help by forcing them to wager way too much money on their picks working out.
When the conventional wisdom says nobody ever wants the #1 pick, you know the system is broken. Many suggest tinkering with the rookie pay scale, but that's going to be a non-starter with the NFLPA and the agents for a host of reasons. It also would result in dramatic increase in
general animosity between the young players and their franchises, and lead to even more nasty contract disputes, holdouts, and all the general ugliness that makes rooting for your team less fun.
No, the only solution that makes sense is to entirely abolish the draft. You can keep the combine, Mel Kiper, and all of the over-analysis if you want, only replace the actual draft days with a "rookie signing convention." Teams can talk all they want with the rookie free agents before then, but no arrangements can be binding until noon on Day 1 of the signing convention. There's no limit or floor on the contracts offered, no artificial restrictions on contract structure or length, and teams are free to sign as many or as few players for as much or as little money as they want.
Here's a list of problems this will solve:
* Teams like the Lions, who would be better suited in their rebuilding effort by acquiring a bunch of mid-priced guys instead of paying one college star a ridiculous amount of money, would be able to do so.
* You no longer have to worry about having the most promising college players' careers ruined by ending up stuck with lousy franchises.
* With players no longer being forced to negotiate with just one franchise, there's no need for the protective limits on contract structure that the agents can then turn to their advantage, at the expense of the functionality of the system.
* Consequently, rookie salaries will no longer vary independently of the overall quality of the draft pool.
* A rookies' first experience in the league isn't being jerked around, told where you're going to play, for whom, and for approximately how much, and how long before you can go somewhere else. Do not underestimate the long-term benefits of this. The draft is THE reason that so many players end up with a huge chip on their shoulders after a few years in the NFL.
* If you fell in the draft because of an injury or rumors about your character, too bad -- you're making 4th round pick money for the first 4-5 years of your career. Without a draft, if you think your value is artificially low coming out of school, find someone willing to offer you a 1 year "prove it" deal with a big roser-bonus in year $2, if the team wants to keep you.
* Employees like to be treated like valued assets, not prizes or cattle. Players will behave much, much better in bad situations that they chose themselves of their own free will than they will in situations in which they were told to pack their bags and move to Buffalo. Graduates of med, law, and business school often have to move to undesirable places to get the job they want, but they stick it out because they made that choice.
* Veteran players will be happy, as they'll likely get a bigger piece of the pie when teams aren't forced to keep a rookie pool. Meanwhile, most of the rookies will be getting a bigger piece of the pie, too -- the only ones who will be unhappy are the would-be-early-1st-rounders, whose price tags have been artificially inflated.
* Without the draft-induced chip on their players' shoulders, teams will find it easier to resign their players. This will do more to defray the losses a team suffers in free agency than the Franchise Tag, which was a huge miscalculation, and has caused way more problems than its fixed.
* If a player wants to play where he grew up or went to college, he can make it happen by offering a hometown discount. Having more players playing in places they have pre-existing fanbases and support structures can only be a good thing.
Seriously, I could go on all day. I mean, I know that at this point in history, many of us are less than convinced of the sustaining power of free-market forces, but in a controlled system like the NFL creates with its salary cap, it really should work as well in practice as it does in theory. It would be a win-win-win situation for the owners, players, and fans.
Too bad it'll never, ever happen. There's no way any commissioner would go far enough out on a limb to actually see it through.
I give you credit for trying to come up with a new idea, but I think it is doomed for failure. Here are a number of points I have:
1.) The draft was implemented to level the playing field. It allows bad teams first access at the best players in every round. If you let every college player be a free agent entering the NFL, many of the best players won't even consider the bad teams because they might fear that their second contract will suffer quite a bit because they will not play to their maximum potential with a bad team around them.
2.) An open system like this also favors large marketing and winning franchises since players out of college are looking to make a name for themselves to get endorsements. It will be hard to get Reebok, Gatorade, etc. interested in you if you are not showcased in nationally televised games. That would disuade a lot of free agents from wanting to go to places like Buffalo, Cleveland, Cincy, etc.
3.) As others have pointed out, contracts are too complex in the NFL to get deals negotiated in a day or even a week. This would be one big cluster f&%k.
4.) I don't buy the chip on their shoulder argument you throw out there. There are plenty of veterans with chips on their shoulder because of how their free agency turned out and it has nothing to do with the draft. I think any player who suffers because they are pulled down by the mental aspect of either not being drafted high enough or the fans upset that they don't meet expectations or whatever chip could be on their shoulder, they don't deserve to play in the NFL.
5.) The NFL draft is a money maker for the NFL. Make no bones about it. Other than the Super Bowl and the playoffs, this is the biggest event in the NFL all year. The NFL makes tons of money off of the TV rights, licensing through draft publications, etc. There is no way the NFL is giving this up.
6.) It is good entertainment for the fans. Let's face it. The draft is pretty boring process, but there are millions of Americans who watch every minute of at least the first round every year. Everyone wants to play armchair GMs on draft day.
7.) Allowing players to choose to play for the team they grew up on favors the Texas, California, and Florida teams quite a bit. A large majority of players come from those three states because those are the states where high school football is still king on Friday nights.
8.) The league can fix the system where the rookies don't get paid so much without actually having to do away with the draft. A rookie salary cap and stronger slotting of salaries can fix that without doing away with the draft all together.
The draft is never going away. It is a huge event and money maker for the NFL.
I give you credit for trying to come up with a new idea, but I think it is doomed for failure. Here are a number of points I have:
1.) The draft was implemented to level the playing field. It allows bad teams first access at the best players in every round. If you let every college player be a free agent entering the NFL, many of the best players won't even consider the bad teams because they might fear that their second contract will suffer quite a bit because they will not play to their maximum potential with a bad team around them.
2.) An open system like this also favors large marketing and winning franchises since players out of college are looking to make a name for themselves to get endorsements. It will be hard to get Reebok, Gatorade, etc. interested in you if you are not showcased in nationally televised games. That would disuade a lot of free agents from wanting to go to places like Buffalo, Cleveland, Cincy, etc.
3.) As others have pointed out, contracts are too complex in the NFL to get deals negotiated in a day or even a week. This would be one big cluster f&%k.
4.) I don't buy the chip on their shoulder argument you throw out there. There are plenty of veterans with chips on their shoulder because of how their free agency turned out and it has nothing to do with the draft. I think any player who suffers because they are pulled down by the mental aspect of either not being drafted high enough or the fans upset that they don't meet expectations or whatever chip could be on their shoulder, they don't deserve to play in the NFL.
5.) The NFL draft is a money maker for the NFL. Make no bones about it. Other than the Super Bowl and the playoffs, this is the biggest event in the NFL all year. The NFL makes tons of money off of the TV rights, licensing through draft publications, etc. There is no way the NFL is giving this up.
6.) It is good entertainment for the fans. Let's face it. The draft is pretty boring process, but there are millions of Americans who watch every minute of at least the first round every year. Everyone wants to play armchair GMs on draft day.
7.) Allowing players to choose to play for the team they grew up on favors the Texas, California, and Florida teams quite a bit. A large majority of players come from those three states because those are the states where high school football is still king on Friday nights.
8.) The league can fix the system where the rookies don't get paid so much without actually having to do away with the draft. A rookie salary cap and stronger slotting of salaries can fix that without doing away with the draft all together.
The draft is never going away. It is a huge event and money maker for the NFL.
And it will create many more problems...especially with college football. MAny things that have been overlooked.I agree the draft is never going away, but it's because it's an institution with too much inertia to change.
* Teams like the Lions, who would be better suited in their rebuilding effort by acquiring a bunch of mid-priced guys instead of paying one college star a ridiculous amount of money, would be able to do so. .
Can it really? The league can't just dictate a rookie salary cap,.
You really think? I suppose it's possible, but to me, if there's one lesson to be learned from the way Free Agency has worked so far, it's that most players are more than capable of convincing themselves that whichever team offers them the most money and/or the best chance of starting also gives them the best chance to win. I mean, it's really only when a guy's been stuck on a seriously dysfunctional team that we've seen them take less than market value to play for a winner.
And think about it this way: when the draft was created to level the playing field, players didn't make a ton of money and there was no salary cap or free agency. Not only did the bad teams not need to worry about paying for their early picks, but they also knew they had the rights to the guy for pretty much as long as they wanted. Nowadays, an early pick earns you the right to overpay a rookie, probably to lose him in FA just when he's reaching his peak.
Thus, if the draft really leveled the playing field pre-cap and FA, since then, it should actually be making it worse for the bad teams. The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that the only thing the draft has going for it is the fact that it's a system already in place. Under the present labor circumstances, I think it's actually hard to make a strong argument that the draft really helps anyone that much.
See, again, I would suggest that the way free agency has played out, all signs would suggest otherwise.
Also, unlike the other sports, there are no local TV rights to worry about, and market size tends not to be that big a factor for national exposure. I mean, Indianapolis is hardly a large market, yet they get as many primetime games as anyone. So did Green Bay.
And yet, it always seems like teams are able to sign a bunch of FA's mere hours after FA begins each season. Sans draft, teams could be allowed to do all the working-out of players they do now, as well as talk potential numbers and such for a few months before anything was allowed to be made binding. And since teams and players really only need reach an agreement in principle in order to announce anything, not only do I think you'd see most of the high-profile players signed fairly early, it also sets the stage for a lot of interesting intrigue. Did QB X have something worked out with Team Y, only to bolt for a last-minute better offer by Team Z? That type of thing.
In our country, whether you "deserve" to have a job or not is determined by your ability to get somebody to agree you to pay you to do it. Why should NFL players be any different?
You don't think the relationship between the league and its players wouldn't improve night-and-day if the league started treating its incoming employees as the skilled professionals they are, and not as a heard of cattle you can send wherever you want? Why should an NFL player be treated differently than any other exceptionally talented and highly trained entrant entrant into the workplace?
I think the entire atmosphere of the league would improve, and since I no longer see a compelling reason for a draft, given the equalizing force of the salery cap, I think the league isn't giving anything major up in return.
Whatever system the NFL uses to allocate college players to their pro teams could be a huge cash cow for the NFL. Any non-random system would allow players to play armchair GM.
And think about it: players stepping up to a podium and announcing themselves who they've chosen to sign with makes MUCH better television than what you get from the draft.
Again, this doesn't really seem to play out in FA to any major degree. Players will go where they get the best money and chance to play.
Can it really? The league can't just dictate a rookie salary cap, or alter the way salaries are structured, without reaching a new CBA with the NFLPA. And the union isn't going to let the league limit the amount of money going to rookies without strong guarantees that every cent of these savings on rookie contracts for the teams will go into other players' salaries.
And you'll never get the smaller market owners to agree to the raising of any salary expenditure minimums. Especially not in this economy.
I agree the draft is never going away, but it's because it's an institution with too much inertia to change.