OT: NFL Careers Are Getting Shorter

[RobertWeathers]

FWIW.

The Wall Street Journal published a story on Monday with evidence that the average length of an NFL player's career has gone down sharply in recent years, and since 2008 players have been exiting the league earlier than they were over the previous 17 years.

Using data from Pro-Football-Reference.com, writer Rob Arthur found that from 2008-2014 and across all positions, the average career length fropped from 4.99 years to just 2.66.

The decline is even greater at quarterback: where once players at the position averaged over six years, the longest careers in the game, they're now in and out of the league in three years, one month. The shortest careers belong to wide receivers, at just two years, 2.5 months.

The question is, why? There always have been and always will be players who wash out of the league quickly because they aren't talented enough or don't want to put in the time and effort required to improve.

Health concerns on teams' side could be part of the issue, as could economics: under the 2011 collective bargaining agreement, the minimum salary in 2015 for players with 4-6 years NFL experience was $745,000, and for players with 7-9 years' experience, it is $870,000; the minimum for players in their second year is $585,000 and $660,000 for those in their third.

Once a rookie pay scale for drafted players was instituted in that CBA, a myth was floated that the money once spent - and sometimes wasted - on big-money contracts for players who had yet to play a snap in the league would now go to veterans who have proven themselves, but that hasn't seemed to happen.

And keep in mind: players don't get a pension until they become a vested veteran, once they have accured four seasons. WIth the average career now under three years, that means even fewer men getting that benefit. The NFL stays winning.

WSJ article has a paywall

Study finds NFL careers are getting shorter, but why?

 

[everlong]

And keep in mind: players don't get a pension until they become a vested veteran, once they have accured four seasons. WIth the average career now under three years, that means even fewer men getting that benefit. The NFL stays winning.

Would anybody put it past this group of owners to collude and try to only keep marginal players from going past three years to save money long term? It's not an easy thing to do since a team is going to do what it needs to do to win but throw in the minimum for a rookie and a 4th year guy and it's a win-win.

 

[Schmo]

If a team doesn't integrate these stats into their drafting/FA decisions, they're morons. I've always been opposed to 1st round running backs for this reason. Add WRs and QBs to that list.

History tells us BB agrees on all 3 positions (except for that one time with maroney, but Bill learned his lesson.)

 

[SlowGettingUp]

FWIW.

Study finds NFL careers are getting shorter, but why?

The biggest drop by far was at QB - that's very little to do with injuries and more to do with many young QB's not being able to hack it the last few years.

The rise in minimum veteran salaries (particularly 7-9 year) has served to price the bottom-end of these players out of the market. Their skills are on the decline while their salaries are rising.

I have no idea why WRs have the shortest playing life - even less than RBs. Any ideas?

 

[RobertWeathers]

Would anybody put it past this group of owners to collude and try to only keep marginal players from going past three years to save money long term? It's not an easy thing to do since a team is going to do what it needs to do to win but throw in the minimum for a rookie and a 4th year guy and it's a win-win.

Its certainly is in the back of my mind as a possibility.

The biggest drop by far was at QB - that's very little to do with injuries and more to do with many young QB's not being able to hack it the last few years.

The rise in minimum veteran salaries (particularly 7-9 year) has served to price the bottom-end of these players out of the market. Their skills are on the decline while their salaries are rising.

I have no idea why WRs have the shortest playing life - even less than RBs. Any ideas?

I'll take a stab.

QB's are throwing the ball more than ever to WRs so WRs get hit more. All the tackles and hits are cumulative even for the players who can deal with the hits.

 

[SlowGettingUp]

QB's are throwing the ball more than ever to WRs so WRs get hit more. All the tackles and hits are cumulative even for the players who can deal with the hits.

These statistics mix up three factors - it's hard to disentangle them:
1. Players getting career-ending or career-shortening injuries
2. Young players washing out early
3. Veteran players in decline getting priced out of the market

WR's have always had the shortest careers (2.25 yrs vs 2.5 yrs for RBs) - their decline looks about the same as those of other positions.

Note these statistics max out at 6 years - this is the number of years (max 6) played before retirement.

 

[XLIX]

Would anybody put it past this group of owners to collude and try to only keep marginal players from going past three years to save money long term? It's not an easy thing to do since a team is going to do what it needs to do to win but throw in the minimum for a rookie and a 4th year guy and it's a win-win.

While I know the owners are a bunch of greedy sleazeballs who would gladly steal what they can when they can, the above just isn't realistic to pull off logistically.

There's no way you could get 32 owners to consistently collude to blacklist NFL caliber talent in favor of a weaker solution. You might be able to find an isolated example or two of suspected collision, but it isn't realistic to think it could be done regularly over an extended period of time.

 

[A man named Brady]

Can't get mad at players getting as much money as they can. There careers are insanely short on average

 

[james87654]

i just think its a more competitive league

which means smaller margins and more turnover