All Encompassing Lockout Thread

[CloakNNNdagger]

Tried watching it. Couldn't believe the crap i was watching. I don't think running the ball exists in that league.

That's because there are only 3 downs, the width of the field is 15 yds greater, and the end zone is 20 yds deep. There are other reasons, but the CFL is set up as a passing league.

 

[Ryan]

That's because there are only 3 downs, the width of the field is 15 yds greater, and the end zone is 20 yds deep. There are other reasons, but the CFL is set up as a passing league.

Makes sense. Just not my cup of tea i guess. Same reason i can't get into Arena Football. I love the smashmouth style of the NFL the most.

 

[TEXANRED]

CFL game on the NFLN right now.

For what that's worth.

My question is what the hell is an alouettes?

 

[GP]

My question is what the hell is an alouettes?

Alouette is a French word for a lark (a type of bird).

Trivia Time:

Do you remember the old Looney Tunes cartoons, with Bugs Bunny and the gang?

The skunk, named Pepe Le Pew, would bounce along and sing this song:

Alouette, gentille Alouette
(Skylark, nice skylark)

Alouette, je te plumerai
(Skylark, I shall pluck you)


Damn lockout.....

 

[TEXANRED]

Alouette is a French word for a lark (a type of bird).

Trivia Time:

Do you remember the old Looney Tunes cartoons, with Bugs Bunny and the gang?

The skunk, named Pepe Le Pew, would bounce along and sing this song:

Alouette, gentille Alouette
(Skylark, nice skylark)

Alouette, je te plumerai
(Skylark, I shall pluck you)


Damn lockout.....

Knew the song, never knew what it meant. Thanks.

Damn lockout......

 

[CloakNNNdagger]

My question is what the hell is an alouettes?

It's French for a lark. GP beat me to it. I was born in Paris and I remember my mother always used to sing that song to me as a baby.

 

[TEXANRED]

It's French for a lark. GP beat me to it. I was born in Paris and I remember my mother always used to sing that song to me as a baby.

You're French? Never would have guessed.

 

[GP]

It's French for a lark. GP beat me to it. I was born in Paris and I remember my mother always used to sing that song to me as a baby.

It's a catchy tune, that's for sure.

damn lockout...

 

[CloakNNNdagger]

You're French? Never would have guessed.

I was born in Paris to French parents. We came to the US when I was only 6......didn't know a word of English.

For those who may be interested. French mothers have always sung this song to their babies, not to relate the "plucking" aspect, but as an effective way to teach them basic anatomical parts.

 

[CloakNNNdagger]

One of the main sticking points still seems to be the rookie wage scale.

Rookie salary system a major discussion point as talks roll on

By Albert Breer NFL Network
NFL Network Reporter

July 10, 2011 at 09:46 p.m.


NEW YORK -- There have been other big days over the last six weeks, as NFL players and owners have worked to resolve their differences and end a lockout that will reach its 122nd day when face-to-face talks resume Monday.

But this week, those days start to count in a whole different way.

The parties have been working against deadlines since starting this phase of negotiations in suburban Chicago on May 31. Those deadlines are no longer on the horizon, now, with July 15 -- this Friday -- long have been pegged internally as the date when a deal needed to be agreed to in order to save the preseason in full. The Bears and Rams, combatants in the Aug. 7 Hall of Fame Game, are scheduled to open their training camps at the end of next week.

Lawyers will kick this critical week of negotiations off in Manhattan on Monday. Players and owners are expected to join them on either Tuesday or Wednesday.

The biggest issue remaining on the ledger is the rookie salary system, according to sources on both sides of the table.

The current system has long awarded rookies at the higher end of the first round with the kind of payday many veterans will never see -- 2010 top pick Sam Bradford copped $50 million guaranteed in his first deal -- and the league has always targeted an overhaul to that compensation model as an area critical to these labor talks. The players, too, have been open to restructuring rookie pay.

But the money alone isn't the problem. It's the give-and-take between the cash and the length of deals, and, in particular, the fifth year of such deals.

The NFL's disagreement with the players comes, primarily, with the top eight picks in the draft, where the dollars are biggest. Conversely, the players' issue stretches across the entire first round, with a desire to get younger players to free agency quicker, if their pay is going to be slashed significantly.

One proposal from the league cut the money for the first pick from the six-year, $78 million deal Bradford received last year to a slotted five-year, $34 million contract. Also, deals for Top 8 picks could include triggers pushing the fifth year to 150 percent of an average starter’s salary at his position, with a floor of $6 million and a ceiling of $12 million. The salary would be derived from that average in his draft year, and the league would be open to making it an option year. The lag time between Year 1 and Year 5 is the players’ issue with that aspect.

Naturally, the gap between old system and new shrinks by the pick, but just as important as the overall value of the deals is the structure.

As part of its proposal, the league is asking for a system setting the limit for length on first-round deals to five years. Under the old collective bargaining agreement, the NFL allowed six-year deals to the first 16 picks.

Meanwhile, the level to which players have been willing to cut rookie money is tied directly to the years on such deals. More significant economic changes are agreeable to the players if all rookie deals are limited to four years, which was the case for players selected in Rounds 2-7 under the expired CBA.

It's the fifth year where the disagreement arises. A proposal by the players allows a fifth year, but only as a team option year that would be fully guaranteed once exercised and pay players at the top of the market. The insistence is that players be treated as veterans in Year 5.

The parties agree on four-year deals for all other draft picks, the aforementioned term in the expired CBA. There's also basic agreement on new stipulations that would keep draft picks from renegotiating until after Year 3, and undrafted free agents (on three-year deals) from renegotiating until after Year 2. The hope is that the new mechanisms would also promote renegotiation for players outperforming their contracts.

This aspect of any new deal, of course, has a slew of other complexities that involve structure and guaranteed money as well that can further cloud what raw numbers tell you.

This isn't the only area where the players and owners need a breakthrough. But last Thursday and Friday, it was one that was largely responsible for the stalemate.

As the parties try to work those differences out, several key dates loom ahead as landmarks in this critical period, outside of just the deadlines to save preseason games and training camp practices.

Relive the NFL season in HD with NFL Game Rewind. Sign up now to get full access to the season archives.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Arthur Boylan, who ran the court-ordered mediation in April and May and has overseen these talks the last six weeks, is on vacation this week, but has scheduled a meeting between the principles and their lawyers for July 19 in Minneapolis. Two days later, on July 21, the owners have a meeting scheduled in Detroit.

Less certain, time-wise, is when a ruling will come from U.S. District Judge David Doty in the networks rights fees case, with more $4 billion in television money at stake. That could be another significant event, as the 8th Circuit ruling on the injunction appeal was on Friday.

In any event, it's clear that time is running short. And once the preseason revenue starts coming off the table, everything starts to change.

 

[badboy]

I just can not understand why rookie scale is such a big thing to players as it only effects top 10 or so and they should be able to swap that for something benefitting all players.

 

[Allstar]

I second the notion of changing the thread title. Who ever breaks the news that the lockout is over should start a new thread all together.

I just can not understand why rookie scale is such a big thing to players as it only effects top 10 or so and they should be able to swap that for something benefitting all players.

I believe the issue is "if you're going to give us less money, make us free agents in shorter time"

 

[CloakNNNdagger]

The "expected" deal date now appears to be delayed yet once again to July 21 (if you believe the tea leaves that have shown signs of fungating already). Even if we get to squeeze in a "full" 2011 season, the preparation will be predictably shortened and shoddy. It has all the potential building blocks for an injury-ladened poor performance cluster ****. JMO

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=6756301

 

[HOU-TEX]

These jokers will probably screw things up now that Boylan's on vacation and not a part of this week's meetings.

 

[GP]

Are they "working hard" today?

They need a spa day, and SHOPPING! to relieve all the stress from all the hard work.

-------------------------

Let's go SHOPPING!!!

 

[CloakNNNdagger]

I'm feeling more and more that July 21 is just another Thursday.

NFL player says deal is not close, tells Roger Goodell to “drop his nuts”

Not everyone is feeling optimistic about a labor deal being approved by July 21.

One nameless NFL player that spoke to Pete Prisco of CBSSports.com believes the owners are using the media to pressure players into a deal.

“All that is hype coming from the owners side to try and put pressure on us to do a deal. They want to make us look bad. It’s simply not true. There is a lot of work to be done. They are not close,” the player said. “Consider where that information is coming from, it’s the owners. Their reason is to try and create all this false hope to put more pressure on us.”

While we’d love to know if the player has direct knowledge of daily labor developments, his point is fair to consider. It wasn’t long ago we heard the end of June as a realistic target. Then July 4, then July 15, and now July 21.

The player says he’d be “shocked” if we had a deal in 10 days.

“Do it one-on-one like their predecessors used to do. When Gene Upshaw and Paul Tagliabue went into a room, they got it done. That’s what needs to happen now,” the player said. “The players in there are smart, but they don’t know how to close a deal. As for Goodell, he needs to drop his nuts. He needs to have the power to do a deal. It needs to be two guys in a room.”

 

[Texecutioner]

The only ones winning from all of this are the lawyers. They're raping both sides and taking them to the bank. They must be loving this.

 

[gary]

Why would anyone still support the sport after this mess?

 

[Allstar]

Apparently they won't meet face to face until Wednesday.

 

[GP]

I'm feeling more and more that July 21 is just another Thursday.

NFL player says deal is not close, tells Roger Goodell to “drop his nuts”

Not everyone is feeling optimistic about a labor deal being approved by July 21.

One nameless NFL player that spoke to Pete Prisco of CBSSports.com believes the owners are using the media to pressure players into a deal.

“All that is hype coming from the owners side to try and put pressure on us to do a deal. They want to make us look bad. It’s simply not true. There is a lot of work to be done. They are not close,” the player said. “Consider where that information is coming from, it’s the owners. Their reason is to try and create all this false hope to put more pressure on us.”

While we’d love to know if the player has direct knowledge of daily labor developments, his point is fair to consider. It wasn’t long ago we heard the end of June as a realistic target. Then July 4, then July 15, and now July 21.

The player says he’d be “shocked” if we had a deal in 10 days.

“Do it one-on-one like their predecessors used to do. When Gene Upshaw and Paul Tagliabue went into a room, they got it done. That’s what needs to happen now,” the player said. “The players in there are smart, but they don’t know how to close a deal. As for Goodell, he needs to drop his nuts. He needs to have the power to do a deal. It needs to be two guys in a room.”

Just what I predicted a day or so ago: Jerry Jones filing his paperwork for Cowboys training camp was a ploy to put pressure on the players...especially if July 21st comes and goes with no deal being made.

The owners will have hyped up the fans, and the players will say "A deal isn't imminent yet," and it will look like the players dashed fans' hopes.

Jerks.

 

[Allstar]

Just what I predicted a day or so ago: Jerry Jones filing his paperwork for Cowboys training camp was a ploy to put pressure on the players...especially if July 21st comes and goes with no deal being made.

The owners will have hyped up the fans, and the players will say "A deal isn't imminent yet," and it will look like the players dashed fans' hopes.

Jerks.

For all we know it is the payers that dashed the fans' hopes. Apparently the owners were prepared to meet tomorrow but now they wont meet until Wednesday. Who knows what goes on behind closed doors.

 

[CloakNNNdagger]

For all we know it is the payers that dashed the fans' hopes. Apparently the owners were prepared to meet tomorrow but now they wont meet until Wednesday. Who knows what goes on behind closed doors.

When he's not negotiating........Goodell relaxing with a good book..........BEHIND CLOSED DOORS.

 

[Wolf]

The only ones winning from all of this are the lawyers. They're raping both sides and taking them to the bank. They must be loving this.

yep..This^^^^^

 

[badboy]

I second the notion of changing the thread title. Who ever breaks the news that the lockout is over should start a new thread all together.



I believe the issue is "if you're going to give us less money, make us free agents in shorter time"

Yes, that is the issue but the "less money" really impacts only the top 10or so and shorter time to free agency effects all incoming players even down to our most irrevelant. I think owners will give shorter time limits to get the millions on limited salaries. Each team does not have to allow the player to leave in free agency. Owners just want to have someone else tell them to stop spending.

 

[GP]

ESPN ticker rolled across the screen last night, about midnight.

It said a deal is near.

The only item left to decide upon is the ROOKIE PAY SCALE.

 

[playa465]

I just can not understand why rookie scale is such a big thing to players as it only effects top 10 or so and they should be able to swap that for something benefitting all players.

Its slightly bigger than that...so many variables without knowing the whole story...but most reports are saying that players want the rookie cap to end after 4th year while owners want it to end after year 5 for rookies. There have been offers for 5th year to be an option where the owners want a set amount fixed or 150% increase based on incentives but the increase would be rated on salaries in year 1 of the contract. In defense of the players the lower 1st round draft picks will be the ones hurting if they out perform their contracts in year 2, 3 or 4. Its kinda controlling, plus the top 8 picks are going to get big money any way (not as much in the past). All in all I wish they just get the d#mn thing DONE

 

[Dutchrudder]

ESPN ticker rolled across the screen last night, about midnight.

It said a deal is near.

The only item left to decide upon is the ROOKIE PAY SCALE.

Really? I could hammer one out in Excel in less than an hour. Slot it by the number of the pick, not by round because compensatory picks would mess that up. Start at 5 mill per year up to four years with the 1st pick overall, and let it go down by $100,000 per slot. The 33rd pick will get ~2 mill, and let it continue to go down until the 65th pick. At that point, it should be around 1 mill, then from the 98th pick on, you should be very close to the minimum. I would also suggest making the guaranteed money 3 years for the first 32 picks, 2 years for the 33-64 picks, and 1 year for everyone else.

Paying less for rookies will encourage them to focus more on the game and keeping their jobs than spoiling them right out of the gate. Force everyone, including the #1 overall pick to earn their next contract/extension that could pay them much more than they ever got as a rookie. It also reduces the harm that busts do to a team's cap. If 3 years is the worst they could do for a Vernon Gholston or Jamarcus Russell, then teams who make a mistake won't be ruined for more than 3 years.

Done. Now sign on the dotted line!

 

[drs23]

Really? I could hammer one out in Excel in less than an hour. Slot it by the number of the pick, not by round because compensatory picks would mess that up. Start at 5 mill per year up to four years with the 1st pick overall, and let it go down by $100,000 per slot. The 33rd pick will get ~2 mill, and let it continue to go down until the 65th pick. At that point, it should be around 1 mill, then from the 98th pick on, you should be very close to the minimum. I would also suggest making the guaranteed money 3 years for the first 32 picks, 2 years for the 33-64 picks, and 1 year for everyone else.

Paying less for rookies will encourage them to focus more on the game and keeping their jobs than spoiling them right out of the gate. Force everyone, including the #1 overall pick to earn their next contract/extension that could pay them much more than they ever got as a rookie. It also reduces the harm that busts do to a team's cap. If 3 years is the worst they could do for a Vernon Gholston or Jamarcus Russell, then teams who make a mistake won't be ruined for more than 3 years.

Done. Now sign on the dotted line!

Thanks DR. Have you faxed it to them yet??

 

[Dutchrudder]

Thanks DR. Have you faxed it to them yet??

No, they won't return my phone calls

 

[badboy]

Its slightly bigger than that...so many variables without knowing the whole story...but most reports are saying that players want the rookie cap to end after 4th year while owners want it to end after year 5 for rookies. There have been offers for 5th year to be an option where the owners want a set amount fixed or 150% increase based on incentives but the increase would be rated on salaries in year 1 of the contract. In defense of the players the lower 1st round draft picks will be the ones hurting if they out perform their contracts in year 2, 3 or 4. Its kinda controlling, plus the top 8 picks are going to get big money any way (not as much in the past). All in all I wish they just get the d#mn thing DONE

One of us is mistaken. The owners want the length of contract to be 5 and players 4 or less. Players thinking is the new scale will be much lower & shorter contract will allow player to enter free agency and bid up their worth.

The rookie cap is amount for entire contract. The upfront $ is killing the owners as player gets it whether they get cut or play.

 

[welsh texan]

I might be being thick here but I fail to see why they are arguing over this.

The owners obviously want the rookie wage scale for a good reasons, in fact, I'd go so far as to say its one of the few things about this whole process that is sensible.

Why are the players against it? Surely if new rookies are gonna get paid less it leaves more in the pot for them? Of all the things for this process to snag on right at the end I wouldn't have thought a selfless act in the interests of fairness to their soon-to-be team-mates would have been one of them.

Am I missing something here?

 

[HOU-TEX]

One of us is mistaken. The owners want the length of contract to be 5 and players 4 or less. Players thinking is the new scale will be much lower & shorter contract will allow player to enter free agency and bid up their worth.

The rookie cap is amount for entire contract. The upfront $ is killing the owners as player gets it whether they get cut or play.

From what I've read, the players have agreed to a team optioned 5th year. It's the money in that 5th year where they differ and they aren't far apart. The players want the 5th year of rookies drafted 1-8 to be increased to the average of the top 10 at the position. The next 8 to be increased to the top 20.

The owners, otoh, want the top 8 increase at 150% of their salary and 125% of the next 8. The owners offered something like $840 thousand max for remaining rounds. The players are asking $880 something max for remaining rounds. This is what I read this morning. It really sounds petty if it's true. It's a win win for the owners either way. I think the owners are just dickin around in attempt to squeeze the players of every little bit of $

 

[Dutchrudder]

From what I've read, the players have agreed to a team optioned 5th year. It's the money in that 5th year where they differ and they aren't far apart. The players want the 5th year of rookies drafted 1-8 to be increased to the average of the top 10 at the position. The next 8 to be increased to the top 20.

The owners, otoh, want the top 8 increase at 150% of their salary and 125% of the next 8. The owners offered something like $840 thousand max for remaining rounds. The players are asking $880 something max for remaining rounds. This is what I read this morning. It really sounds petty if it's true. It's a win win for the owners either way. I think the owners are just dickin around in attempt to squeeze the players of every little bit of $

How many players even stay with the team that drafted them for 5 years without getting cut? I'll bet it's about 10% at most. Chances are that the 5th year option won't be used much.

 

[Allstar]

How many players even stay with the team that drafted them for 5 years without getting cut? I'll bet it's about 10% at most. Chances are that the 5th year option won't be used much.

And chances are if they actually do use the 5th year option, they deserve the big pay raise anyways.

 

[Dutchrudder]

And chances are if they actually do use the 5th year option, they deserve the big pay raise anyways.

Yeah, if it is a Team Option, then the team will likely retain the player for a massive discount compared to being forced to franchise or offer an extension to the player. Sounds very short-sighted on the player's part.

 

[Texans34Life]

Lopez was close...

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...ges-as-target-for-the-announcement-of-a-deal/

July 17 emerges as target for the announcement of a deal

We’ve got no interest in breaking the news that a new labor deal has been finalized. When it happens, plenty of people will have it within minutes, and within minutes after that it will be officially announced.

But keeping with our mission of sharing with PFT Planet the things we’re hearing from our network of sources, we’re hearing that an agreement in principle, subject to league and court approval, currently is expected to be announced on July 17.

Whether a new deal is announced on July 17 is a separate question. The story for now is that July 17 has emerged as the potential target.

Like every other aspect of the lockout story (which is about to cause Drew Magary’s heart and/or head to explode and/or implode), this one is subject to change. And change it probably will.

 

[CloakNNNdagger]

Lopez was close...

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...ges-as-target-for-the-announcement-of-a-deal/

July 17 emerges as target for the announcement of a deal

We’ve got no interest in breaking the news that a new labor deal has been finalized. When it happens, plenty of people will have it within minutes, and within minutes after that it will be officially announced.

But keeping with our mission of sharing with PFT Planet the things we’re hearing from our network of sources, we’re hearing that an agreement in principle, subject to league and court approval, currently is expected to be announced on July 17.

Whether a new deal is announced on July 17 is a separate question. The story for now is that July 17 has emerged as the potential target.

Like every other aspect of the lockout story (which is about to cause Drew Magary’s heart and/or head to explode and/or implode), this one is subject to change. And change it probably will.

Even with an "agreement in principle," there will probably be another few days before all is signed sealed and delivered...........which will probably bring the date back to around July 21 again.........then another week for explaining the "rules" to the owners and players.........then about 5-7 days of FA.............and then??????????????

 

[Dutchrudder]

Even with an "agreement in principle," there will probably be another few days before all is signed sealed and delivered...........which will probably bring the date back to around July 21 again.........then another week for explaining the "rules" to the owners and players.........then about 5-7 days of FA.............and then??????????????

PROFIT!!!

 

[badboy]

From what I've read, the players have agreed to a team optioned 5th year. It's the money in that 5th year where they differ and they aren't far apart. The players want the 5th year of rookies drafted 1-8 to be increased to the average of the top 10 at the position. The next 8 to be increased to the top 20.

The owners, otoh, want the top 8 increase at 150% of their salary and 125% of the next 8. The owners offered something like $840 thousand max for remaining rounds. The players are asking $880 something max for remaining rounds. This is what I read this morning. It really sounds petty if it's true. It's a win win for the owners either way. I think the owners are just dickin around in attempt to squeeze the players of every little bit of $

I thought 5th years of any contract was seldom guaranteed so why is that a deal breaker. I still think it is the upfront money and huge deals for first round picks. Thanks for the info.

 

[TD]

Even with an "agreement in principle," there will probably be another few days before all is signed sealed and delivered...........which will probably bring the date back to around July 21 again.........then another week for explaining the "rules" to the owners and players.........then about 5-7 days of FA.............and then??????????????

If hoover can figure out a way to harness the "suck" of this year's preseason...............

 

[badboy]

"Hey, Bob, have you made that deposit we talked about? I am fixing to start dialing".

Ric Smith

 

[TEXANRED]

Even with an "agreement in principle," there will probably be another few days before all is signed sealed and delivered...........which will probably bring the date back to around July 21 again.........then another week for explaining the "rules" to the owners and players.........then about 5-7 days of FA.............and then??????????????

What happened to the angry player from yesterday that said they were no where near close and the 21st was a fairy tail? So now today we get an earlier date?

I will so be glad when this is all over.

 

[GP]

Really? I could hammer one out in Excel in less than an hour. Slot it by the number of the pick, not by round because compensatory picks would mess that up. Start at 5 mill per year up to four years with the 1st pick overall, and let it go down by $100,000 per slot. The 33rd pick will get ~2 mill, and let it continue to go down until the 65th pick. At that point, it should be around 1 mill, then from the 98th pick on, you should be very close to the minimum. I would also suggest making the guaranteed money 3 years for the first 32 picks, 2 years for the 33-64 picks, and 1 year for everyone else.

Paying less for rookies will encourage them to focus more on the game and keeping their jobs than spoiling them right out of the gate. Force everyone, including the #1 overall pick to earn their next contract/extension that could pay them much more than they ever got as a rookie. It also reduces the harm that busts do to a team's cap. If 3 years is the worst they could do for a Vernon Gholston or Jamarcus Russell, then teams who make a mistake won't be ruined for more than 3 years.

Done. Now sign on the dotted line!

I'll take it one step further, to reduce the drama every year about how a player picked #3 holds out for #1 money because he feels HE is the best pick and was passed over for various reasons.

My plan is to slot the first five guys to make practically the SAME contract amount, regardless of being picked 1st, or 2nd, or 3rd, or 4th, or 5th. This way, you get the Top 5 players and they all make verrrry similar money.

Then, guys 6-through-10 make a percentage less than the Top 5 guys. Again, you won't get the "I was drafted 10th but I should have been 6th or 7th" etc.

Guys 11-through-15 make a percentage less than guys 6-through-10.

And lastly, all guys picked 16th through the end of the 1st round, regardless of compensatory picks, make a certain amount.

2nd round makes x-amount no matter their selection position.

3rd round makes y-amount.

4th round makes z-amount.

Etc., etc.

Simplify the process.

------------------------

FOR EXAMPLE (using loose figures, not exact amounts):

Round 1, Top 5 picks is as follows: Player 1 makes $20 million, Player 2 makes $18 million, Player 3 makes $16 million, Player 4 makes $14 million, and Player 5 makes $12 million. They all make a nice cut, and there's a $8 million difference between Pick 1 and Pick 5...which means it STILL makes sense to try and be the #1 pick vs. dropping to #5. But even if you drop to #5 due to a bad combine, etc., you're still not getting blown out of the water vs. the No. 1 pick's contract (like it is now).

Round 1, Picks 6-10 is as follows: Player 6 makes $10 million, Player 7 $9 mill, Player 8 $8 mill, Player 9 $7 mill, and player 10 $6 mill. A decrease by $1 million for each step down.

Round 1, Picks 11-15 could make a range that differs by like $50k for each spot down.

----------------

These are all just random numbers, to show how the NFL could slot players and keep a "range" to make sure guys picked in the Top 5 pay out like a Top 5 guy should, and picks 6-through-10 pay out nicely, as well, but not like it would if you were a Top 5 guy. So on and so forth, as you progress down the first round.

This would make players appreciate draft RANGE and not the exact selection position they were drafted for. It could also help to reduce a lot of the media hype about "This guy is a bust at No. 1!" and "That guy should have been a No. 1 but was chosen 5th instead, what insanity!" Now you're looking at it not being a big deal if you were picked 2nd or 3rd or 4th, etc.

 

[TEXANRED]

I'll take it one step further, to reduce the drama every year about how a player picked #3 holds out for #1 money because he feels HE is the best pick and was passed over for various reasons.

My plan is to slot the first five guys to make practically the SAME contract amount, regardless of being picked 1st, or 2nd, or 3rd, or 4th, or 5th. This way, you get the Top 5 players and they all make verrrry similar money.

Then, guys 6-through-10 make a percentage less than the Top 5 guys. Again, you won't get the "I was drafted 10th but I should have been 6th or 7th" etc.

Guys 11-through-15 make a percentage less than guys 6-through-10.

And lastly, all guys picked 16th through the end of the 1st round, regardless of compensatory picks, make a certain amount.

2nd round makes x-amount no matter their selection position.

3rd round makes y-amount.

4th round makes z-amount.

Etc., etc.

Simplify the process.

------------------------

FOR EXAMPLE (using loose figures, not exact amounts):

Round 1, Top 5 picks is as follows: Player 1 makes $20 million, Player 2 makes $18 million, Player 3 makes $16 million, Player 4 makes $14 million, and Player 5 makes $12 million. They all make a nice cut, and there's a $8 million difference between Pick 1 and Pick 5...which means it STILL makes sense to try and be the #1 pick vs. dropping to #5. But even if you drop to #5 due to a bad combine, etc., you're still not getting blown out of the water vs. the No. 1 pick's contract (like it is now).

Round 1, Picks 6-10 is as follows: Player 6 makes $10 million, Player 7 $9 mill, Player 8 $8 mill, Player 9 $7 mill, and player 10 $6 mill. A decrease by $1 million for each step down.

Round 1, Picks 11-15 could make a range that differs by like $50k for each spot down.

----------------

These are all just random numbers, to show how the NFL could slot players and keep a "range" to make sure guys picked in the Top 5 pay out like a Top 5 guy should, and picks 6-through-10 pay out nicely, as well, but not like it would if you were a Top 5 guy. So on and so forth, as you progress down the first round.

This would make players appreciate draft RANGE and not the exact selection position they were drafted for. It could also help to reduce a lot of the media hype about "This guy is a bust at No. 1!" and "That guy should have been a No. 1 but was chosen 5th instead, what insanity!" Now you're looking at it not being a big deal if you were picked 2nd or 3rd or 4th, etc.

Is that how they do it in the NBA?

I like how the NBA does their rookie contracts.

 

[CloakNNNdagger]

Is that how they do it in the NBA?

I like how the NBA does their rookie contracts.

I don't know that the NBA approach would be in any way acceptable to both parties, especially the players.

NBA players drafted in the first round get a contract guaranteed for two years, and the salary is determined by the players draft position.

The number one pick is guaranteed $4.4 million for the first year, and $4.75 million for the second year. The numbers decrease the lower the player is picked, so the number 30 player only gets $877,000 his first year.

After two years, teams have options to extend the rookie contracts, paying an increasing salary each year. If a team keeps exercising its extension rights, it can keep a player signed for seven seasons before he can finally become a free agent.

Second round picks aren't guaranteed anything. Teams usually bring them into training camp, but they don't have to give the player a contract or a roster spot, nor is there any guarantee about what the player will be paid, beyond the NBA minimum salary.

 

[michaelm]

This thread has been alive since April 25th, and I've seen it dozens of times.

It was only just now that I read the thread title for the 30th time, and thought that Judd Nelson had ordered an end to the lockout.

*disclaimer*
I haven't read the entire thread. Someone else might have already posted something this stupid.


-

 

[TEXANRED]

I don't know that the NBA approach would be in any way acceptable to both parties, especially the players.

NBA players drafted in the first round get a contract guaranteed for two years, and the salary is determined by the players draft position.

The number one pick is guaranteed $4.4 million for the first year, and $4.75 million for the second year. The numbers decrease the lower the player is picked, so the number 30 player only gets $877,000 his first year.

After two years, teams have options to extend the rookie contracts, paying an increasing salary each year. If a team keeps exercising its extension rights, it can keep a player signed for seven seasons before he can finally become a free agent.

Second round picks aren't guaranteed anything. Teams usually bring them into training camp, but they don't have to give the player a contract or a roster spot, nor is there any guarantee about what the player will be paid, beyond the NBA minimum salary.

See that is pretty simple. Only the NFL version has a sliding scale to include all rounds.

A world with no hold outs would be great.

 

[Dutchrudder]

I'll take it one step further, to reduce the drama every year about how a player picked #3 holds out for #1 money because he feels HE is the best pick and was passed over for various reasons.

My plan is to slot the first five guys to make practically the SAME contract amount, regardless of being picked 1st, or 2nd, or 3rd, or 4th, or 5th. This way, you get the Top 5 players and they all make verrrry similar money.
....

Yeah, that's similar to what I was saying, but having a specific subtraction for each slot of each round. Start at 5 million with the #1 guy and go down 100,000 per slot. So 4.9 m to #2, 4.8 to #3, etc. Stop at 32 at 1.8 million. Then have it go down less from 32-64, I would think 25,000 per slot would work, which would put 65 at just under 1 million. Then let it reduce by 20,000 per slot, so you end up near the minimum rookie salary by #100 pick. So rounds 4-7 picks are all about minimum deals.

 

[GP]

Yeah, that's similar to what I was saying, but having a specific subtraction for each slot of each round. Start at 5 million with the #1 guy and go down 100,000 per slot. So 4.9 m to #2, 4.8 to #3, etc. Stop at 32 at 1.8 million. Then have it go down less from 32-64, I would think 25,000 per slot would work, which would put 65 at just under 1 million. Then let it reduce by 20,000 per slot, so you end up near the minimum rookie salary by #100 pick. So rounds 4-7 picks are all about minimum deals.

I wonder if your idea would work, though, as it relates to the higher draft picks? I don't think it works having the #2 overall pick only making $100,000 less than the #1 overall pick.

That's why I used decreasing increments of $2 million between each slot for picks 1-thourhg-5, until you reach picks 6-through-10 which then went to decreasing increments of $1 million between each slot.

This way, you're telling picks 1-through-5 that it's something special to be in the Top 5 of the whole draft class. Yet there's still some competitive fire with those guys all trying to be as high in the 1-through-5 range as they can, since it means a few million bucks better or worse based on where they land in that range.

Then, picks 6-through-10 don't get rewarded as much...but they also don't have too much of a gap between themselves in that 6-through-10 range, either. Sort of acts like a good equalizer for those guys: Knowing that you can fall anywhere in 6-through-10 range and the guys ahead of you are not gaining too much more than you have.

I like your idea about the $100,000 difference, but only for lower ranges of draft position. $100k difference, IMO, would be how you and I would treat $1 vs. 50-cents, so to speak. Not that big of a deal. I'd rather beat you in cards and win a $200 pot than to play all night and only get $50. If that makes sense.

In other words: $100k increments at the top spots doesn't seem to engender a passion for the top guys of every draft to do all they can do in order to rise to the top of the class when the draft is said and done. I'd do just enough to land in the Top 10 and rationalize that I still made out as well as #1 guy did. THAT scenario might devalue the build-up to the draft, when guys are usually trying to get to the top or as close to the top of the draft order as possible.

I like your idea of rounds 4-through-7 just being a standard contract. Although many might argue you need to make it rounds 5-through-7, leaving round 4 as its own beast..which I can see why, since you can still get good value in round 4. Lots of TEs get drafted in that round, LOL.

 

[thunderkyss]

ESPN ticker rolled across the screen last night, about midnight.

It said a deal is near.

The only item left to decide upon is the ROOKIE PAY SCALE.

I've given up already. I drew the line at the 11th & they took a siesta.

They're not worried about us....

It's going to back fire on them, we're going to find something else to captivate our interest & they'll be fighting tooth & nail to get us back.