Chris Cooley speaks out against rookie pay system

[MPNRedskins]

I agree with Cooley, but I understand everyone's argument. Good points brought up by everyone.

[rypper11]

Gene upshaw has said that the union would never agree to a rookie cap or scale. You'd think everyone already in the NFL would want it.

[MrJL]

NFL rookies ought to get a base salary, maybe not exactly the same for everyone, but perhaps the same for each round, and their agents negotiate their first real contract that season.

And to take care of the potential injury problem each NFL club should pay for an insurance policy for them.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by rypper11

Gene upshaw has said that the union would never agree to a rookie cap or scale. You'd think everyone already in the NFL would want it.

They do but Gene Upshaw is in a fight for his job now so much of what he is saying and doing is more politically motivated. Why he seems to think that any current player wouldn't support a rookie wage scale is curious since the only ones to speak out have been in support of one, any active player stand to benefit from a rookie wage scale, and the mathematics prove it. Of course this is the guy who has carried the water for the NFL for years and now that players are starting to rumble about that he has the audacity to announce he isn't going to follow one of the rules he helped initiate, to retire by 65 and infact has the stupidity to say that he wont appoint a vice president of the NFLPA because all they would do is seek to take his position. What a dolt.

[djnemo65]

Why would the NFLPA oppose this? They represent players already in the league right? And they will do nothing but benefit from a scaled rookie salary cap, as it will free up more money for veterans. Since no one is discussing a reduction in pay, just a reorganization, what can the problem possibly be?

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by djnemo65

Why would the NFLPA oppose this? They represent players already in the league right? And they will do nothing but benefit from a scaled rookie salary cap, as it will free up more money for veterans. Since no one is discussing a reduction in pay, just a reorganization, what can the problem possibly be?

Well PFT speculates, and probably astutely in this case, that since Upshaw has never shown the penchant for being a "good" union leader and holding up interests of others before his players, that he is looking out for agents like his own who benefit greatly from these contracts.

[bnasty]

If the owners are silly enough to pay it then let them take it. Personally I would never want a number one draft pick.

[over the mountain]

Originally Posted by bnasty

If the owners are silly enough to pay it then let them take it. Personally I would never want a number one draft pick.

um yeah i think that is the point, nobody wants the number 1 overall pick b/c of the huge dollar amount attached to it. my understanding of unions is to protect the lower-end "susceptible" class of veterans who end up getting cut after years of service so teams can make room for rookies who wont contribute for a few years. by limiting what is paid to 1st round rookies, teams will have more money to keep a todd wade or james thrash kind of player.

idk, just always thought the union should watch out for the aging small pay-day players in the league as the TOs and chad johnsons of the world dont need too much financial-stability protection.

go skins!

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by djnemo65

Why would the NFLPA oppose this? They represent players already in the league right? And they will do nothing but benefit from a scaled rookie salary cap, as it will free up more money for veterans. Since no one is discussing a reduction in pay, just a reorganization, what can the problem possibly be?

But NFLPA executive director Gene Upshaw believes there is an advantage in allowing owners to spend big on high draft choices.

"Those rookie contracts play a role in what a veteran gets," Upshaw said. "Because if the top guy in the draft just got paid $35 million in guarantees and he hasn't even proven himself, and if your contract is up as a veteran, I think it has an affect on what you're going to get. You think Peyton Manning isn't looking at JaMarcus Russell's contract? Of course he is."

Expert: Stiffer rookie salary cap would benefit NFL - NFL - MSNBC.com

[over the mountain]

wow, upshaw makes a really good point. the more jake long makes as the 1 overall, the more a chris samuels type tackle could command in FA. never thought of that aspect and thats why i enjoy the warpath!! woot woot!

go skins!

[GridIron26]

It's about time.. Now Goodell is thinking same thing..

Goodell: Rookie pay-scale 'ridiculous'

[SouperMeister]

The NFL should use Major League Baseball as a model for controlling rookie pay. Top baseball draft selections usually make less than $2M in signing bonus, and their salaries are much smaller than established veterans until they reach free agency. Those that have proven themselves get big money and those that haven't don't. Is there another industry, sports or otherwise, where the top ranked newcomers make more than the best of the best in their chosen field? The NFL is the only institution that I can think of that rewards potential before proven talent.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SouperMeister

The NFL should use Major League Baseball as a model for controlling rookie pay. Top baseball draft selections usually make less than $2M in signing bonus, and their salaries are much smaller than established veterans until they reach free agency. Those that have proven themselves get big money and those that haven't don't. Is there another industry, sports or otherwise, where the top ranked newcomers make more than the best of the best in their chosen field? The NFL is the only institution that I can think of that rewards potential before proven talent.

This is the crux of the problem in the NFL: top selections are EXPECTED by the team and fans to sign, and the agents know it.

This is why top rookie SBs are so ridiculous now. In free agency, the market is even, and the best offers reflect, roughly the players' reputation around the league. With the first 2-3 picks in the draft, its a two party negotiation process, in which one party clearly holds all the leverage. A deal is going to get done: both parties know this. Thus the agent holds out until the other party caves.

What football needs to do is (in the next CBA) implement a compensatory picks system for players that do not sign. This gives the owners SOME leverage when working with the player. Then the team with the first overall pick can say "we're only giving you 15 million to sign" and if the agent thinks his client is worth 30 million to sign, he's got two choices then:

1) accept less money than his client is worth.

2) risk the whole deal (and essentially the entire player's career) on the fact that the team values him as much as the agent does.

Both parties still have leverage here. Obviously, the NFL is a young man's game, and no team wants to come away empty handed in the first round in any year, but they at the very least could draft a comparable player the next year. This 'meet me in the middle' approach would still allow the players to make market value deals, without the signing bonuses getting totally out of control.

[GTripp0012]

A slotted approach would be a disaster unless they get rid of the salary cap. It would be great for the veterans, but those contracts would be so totally inflated because of all the extra money sitting around. The best, young teams in the league would have like $60 million payrolls, and other teams would be fighting the cap year in and year out.

No free agent would ever live up to the value of his deal if mid level players were getting $25 million to sign.

[backrow]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

This is the crux of the problem in the NFL: top selections are EXPECTED by the team and fans to sign, and the agents know it.

Not having a top selection this year was a big reason I appreciated the way the FO went about acquiring the extra 2nd round picks this year. More for less!