Round 1 Picks 4 years and an option 5th year

[DaBruinz]

Re: Round 1 Picks 4 years not 5

Report: Overhaul of rookie pay scale in place

ESPN's Adam Schefter reports the owners and players have come to an "agreement in principle" on an overhaul of the rookie salary system.
There are still "I's to dot and T's to cross," but the issue is no longer a roadblock to a new CBA. Both sides gave ground, with the owners' concession on the fifth-year option for top 10 picks as the pivotal move. The negotiations remain ongoing Thursday night. Mark Maske of the Washington Post believes a "handshake" labor deal is now possible on Friday, though that seems unreasonably optimistic. We'll be happy with an agreement in time for Tuesday's meeting with mediator Arthur Boylan.
Source: Adam Schefter on Twitter
Jul 14, 7:30 PM

BTW, did you ever stop to think that MAYBE what Schefter was referring to is that now all 1st rounders will be 5 years instead of 6 for the Top 16???

No. you didn't. You just over-reacted.

 

[TheSolderKing]

Re: Round 1 Picks 4 years not 5

BTW, did you ever stop to think that MAYBE what Schefter was referring to is that now all 1st rounders will be 5 years instead of 6 for the Top 16???

No. you didn't. You just over-reacted.

it's all early and I did overreact. I posted the info I saw on roto. Rumors are not always false time will tell.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Round 1 Picks 4 years not 5

For anyone panicking about the number of years:

NFL lockout -- Owners, players moving toward CBA settlement, source says - ESPN

High-level sources had told ESPN.com senior NFL writer John Clayton that all first rounders will get four-year deals, plus the option year, under the current proposal. That option could be executed by the team after the third or fourth year of the contract and sources told Schefter that the option will become fully guaranteed if it is exercised after the third year.

The option cost will vary based upon the player's position and the slot he was drafted.


This, essentially, gives one year bust insurance to lousy front offices at the expense of being comparatively more costly for better managed teams, although it also lowers the overall rookie payout.

 

[Ron Sellers]

Re: Round 1 Picks 4 years not 5

A real Debbie Downer

Just imagine his reaction after the first loss by the Pats this season.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Round 1 Picks 4 years not 5

We're now getting cap numbers from the media:

A lot of heavy lifting done. Cap will be around $123M, with certain new exceptions and credits making it "feel" more like $130/team

Jason La Canfora (JasonLaCanfora) on Twitter

and some news on what's left, as well:

Still left to be resolved - right of 1st refusal on veteran free agents, if and how NFLPA reforms, worker's comp issues, injury guarantees..

Jason La Canfora (JasonLaCanfora) on Twitter

 

[Ron Sellers]

Re: Round 1 Picks 4 years not 5

The CAP better significantly grow in size to accommodate this Bull ****.

I'm pretty sure that's not going to happen. In case you hadn't noticed one of the major reasons that the owners opted to go to a lockout as part of negotiations was to reduce the growth of the cap.

Are the weak teams owners/drafter fed up w/ picking players that s uck so they want it 4 years so they can STEAL other accomplished players from other teams.

I'm fairly certain that the owners did not opt out of the old CBA and lockout the players because weak-drafting teams were fed up with strong-drafting teams.

THIS is like the PUP list but anyteam can swoop right in and scoop up FA's this is HORRIBLE

I have no idea what you're talking about, so I can't even respond. What does a player not being able to pass a physical at the start of training camp have to do with players whose contracts have expired?

 

[Ring 6]

Re: Round 1 Picks 4 years not 5

For anyone panicking about the number of years:

NFL lockout -- Owners, players moving toward CBA settlement, source says - ESPN



The option cost will vary based upon the player's position and the slot he was drafted.


This, essentially, gives one year bust insurance to lousy front offices at the expense of being comparatively more costly for better managed teams, although it also lowers the overall rookie payout.

Its almost like a tag option on every top 10 pick and a much lower tag on the rest of round 1.
There was another section in that article that piqued my interest.
The talk of the 90% cash floor has led to a lot of discussion on this board, and it has always seemed to me that it would create a conflict where many teams would not be able to hit 90% in some seasons without exceeding the cap, based on dead money, and bonus amortization. The comments in that article lead me to believe the 20 mill benefits expense will be included. If thats the case, then 90% of 120 mill is 108 mill, but if 20 mill of that is benefits, then we don't have the wildly different and constraining change to the lower payroll teams.
The article does not say this, but it makes a lot of sense.

 

[TheSolderKing]

Re: Round 1 Picks 4 years not 5

Just imagine his reaction after the first loss by the Pats this season.

CBA talks make me worry about the FUTURE. I look past 1 season. A loss is merely a loss w/e. Why do you think I am pulling for Smith? I am b/c Crump is not part of this great FUTURE:rocker: URFA

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Round 1 Picks 4 years not 5

More from La Canfora:

Few more notes on the cap - no limit on "cash over cap" spending (teams spend more real-time $ than cap $ - remember prorated deals...

And thus in this new model league-wide spending to be pegged at close to 99 percent of cap. Could be some tweaks coming with franchise...

Jason La Canfora (JasonLaCanfora) on Twitter

 

[Wolfpack]

Re: Round 1 Picks 4 years not 5

that is not even funny. This is a CATASTROPHE that will haunt the team going forward in the next four years:bricks:

This is just silly.

Everyone will be playing by the same rules. The better front offices will adapt to the new rules and build better teams than franchises with weaker front offices. It's absolutely ridiculous to act like making round 1 picks a max of 4/5/6/whatever years will completely debilitate the Patriots.

 

[Calciumee]

Re: Round 1 Picks 4 years not 5

Is there a rule against insulting other forum members? I feel like I might break that rule pretty quickly.

I know how you feel! Best thing to do is visit your ignore list

 

[Calciumee]

Re: Round 1 Picks 4 years not 5

For anyone panicking about the number of years

I think that applies to one poster then

 

[Tasco]

Re: Round 1 Picks 4 years not 5

I think this could shift our drafting strategy even more to nfl-ready rookies, rather than physically gifted projects.

 

[Calciumee]

Re: Round 1 Picks 4 years not 5

I think this could shift our drafting strategy even more to nfl-ready rookies, rather than physically gifted projects.

Projects are usually drafted in later rounds, so I can't see it making much difference regarding project players!

 

[Tasco]

Re: Round 1 Picks 4 years not 5

Projects are usually drafted in later rounds, so I can't see it making much difference regarding project players!

well I was actually thinking more about conversion projects...say a college DE to OLB, a conversion that gets usually heavily discussed around here.
I'm not really optimistic that we will draft one in the near future with the shorter contracts, but I might be wrong.
Obviously if BB finds his perfect OLB in the draft he will take him, but I don't think that's very probable.

 

[Calciumee]

Re: Round 1 Picks 4 years not 5

well I was actually thinking more about conversion projects...say a college DE to OLB, a conversion that gets usually heavily discussed around here.
I'm not really optimistic that we will draft one in the near future with the shorter contracts, but I might be wrong.
Obviously if BB finds his perfect OLB in the draft he will take him, but I don't think that's very probable.

Ok, but how many conversations has BB drafted in the first round?

I don't see it making a difference! Great teams not only draft well, they use the draft rules well!

 

[Tasco]

Re: Round 1 Picks 4 years not 5

Ok, but how many conversations has BB drafted in the first round?

I don't see it making a difference! Great teams not only draft well, they use the draft rules well!

Sure, he hasn't even once. I was always hoping for a player like Barwin, Reed, Matthews...it just seems more improbable that my hopes will be fulfilled. Can't stop grinning when I think about my mood during every single draft with no pick being a potential stud OLB. I liked Cunningham though.

 

[fair catch fryar]

Re: Round 1 Picks 4 years not 5

I understand ALL teams fall under this... I Hate the CHANGE. I don't like CHANGE of this degree :bricks:

I see your point, but IF this is the framework for a new rookie scale then it comes as a double-edge sword for every team. Besides, your not giving any credit where it belongs and the knowledge that BB will learn how to manipulate this to his advantage in time too.

 

[fair catch fryar]

Re: Round 1 Picks 4 years not 5

This is just silly.

Everyone will be playing by the same rules. The better front offices will adapt to the new rules and build better teams than franchises with weaker front offices. It's absolutely ridiculous to act like making round 1 picks a max of 4/5/6/whatever years will completely debilitate the Patriots.

'Cept the Jests....of course

 

[patriot lifer]

Re: Round 1 Picks 4 years not 5

That Sucks for all great Drafting teams. So each team has to shellout a ridduculous amount of $$$ after 4 years to all of its players. We won't be picking in top 10 so we will always be stuck w/ 4 year players. I always liked Round 1 draft picks being our anchor w/ that extra year. Now it seems we must deal w/ a Bull **** revolving door. This new CBA SUCKS already

If they decrease the number of years for first round pick contracts, that does make some sense.
The owners wanted to retain more money and adjust the rookie wages, so they got that. The trade-off is that it's hard to justify locking players into these into lower pay for close to half their careers. If they're good, then they should be rewarded. But I don't know if they really are going to lower the max contract lengths much. We'll have to see how it finally shakes out.