NFL's rookie pitch frees $1.2B by 2016
4 replies
The NFL wants to cut almost 60 percent of guaranteed pay for first-round draft picks, lock them in for five years and divert the savings to veterans' salaries and benefits.
Guaranteed money paid to top 10 selections since 2000 reached nearly $2 billion. Guaranteed payments for all first-rounders were at $3.5 billion. The average career length of a first-round pick since 1993 is 9.3 years.
Eagles president Joe Banner said the original aim of the draft is being compromised by the expenses associated with signing top picks.
"The whole concept of the draft and ordering of the picks is to maintain competitive balance in the league," Banner said. "Now teams get top picks who have become so expensive and there's the risk you can miss, and it makes the ability to trade in and out of those spots almost impossible. It can become a disadvantage to be in one of the top spots."
During talks for a new collective bargaining agreement, the league also proposed eliminating holdouts by reducing the maximum allowable salary if a rookie isn't signed when training camp begins. The NFL also suggested eliminating holdouts for all veterans by prohibiting renegotiations of contracts if a player holds out in the preseason.
The compensation system would not include a rookie wage scale and would allow for individual contract negotiations. Contracts would have a fixed length of four years for players chosen in the second through seventh rounds and would not affect salaries for those rounds, the league said.
"From a fairness standpoint, the simple concept to drive this should be that the players who contribute the most to the league should get the most money," Banner said. "What this system does is ensures players playing well in the NFL and bringing in fans and driving TV will get the money that went to players who turned out not to be so good. And that is good for everyone."
Of course, the agents have their opinions........
Several agents said the proposals place unfair limitations on players entering the league.
"Five years and reduced pay is basically restricting players," said Ben Dogra, whose clients include Patrick Willis and Sam Bradford. "Roughly 68 percent of the NFL is comprised of players with five years or less of NFL experience.
"Even players from essentially picks 11 to 32 in the first round are good financial deals for the teams. If a player becomes a starter or an integral part of the team under the current system, the NFL teams have the player under a rookie deal that is favorable to the team."
Peter Schaffer, who represents Josh Cribbs and Hakeem Nicks, called such a system "scouting insurance" for teams making bad selections high in the draft.
"It also makes the rookies more valuable when you reduce the amount you are paying to the young guy," Schaffer said. "This will eliminate the veteran middle class because teams can have younger players who are making less and are under fixed contracts."



All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
--Edmund Burke
The agents stand to personally lose millions of dollars in commission if a rookie scale is implemented. They’ll have to trade in their Porsches and Maseratis. Of course they’re opposed.
"Not you." — Tywin Lannister
If the money saved is going to veterans how are the agents losing money?
“Come on, shake your body baby, do that conga!”
"Stringer Bell wrote:
If the money saved is going to veterans how are the agents losing money?
Because the average length of an NFL career is three years. That means most players on their rookie contracts won’t make it to free agency, and thus the agents can’t cash in on them a second time. And since rookies will be capped, that initial payment goes way, way down. 3% of $2m is a hell of a lot less than 3% of $20m.
By the way, when it’s said that the money goes to veterans, it just means there’s more cap room that can necessarily be filled by free agents or re-signed players. It doesn’t necessarily mean that free agent contracts are going to suddenly become much, much larger.
"Not you." — Tywin Lannister
The union would have to demand a much salary cap floor to ensure that the savings went to the vets. I imagine the benefits portion could be address by raising the minimum percentage allocated to that as well.

Log in to reply.