_2.gif "Time.com 50 Best Websites 2008")
In May, Titans center Kevin Mawae told ESPN Radio’s Colin Cowherd that the amount of money being paid to unproven rookies is “a little disheartening.”
The comments were surprising, given that Mawae is now the President of the NFL Players Association. Indeed, the Executive Director of the NFLPA, Gene Upshaw, has made it clear that he will never agree to a rookie wage slotting system.
Apparently, Upshaw has since coerced a little sense into Mawae. Speaking to NFLN’s Adam Schefter from the rookie symposium in Atlanta, Mawae now seems to be working from Upshaw’s talking points.
“We’re talking about a very small population of the players coming into the league making that kind of money,” Mawae said, “and I said before and I’m saying now that I’m sure it’s going to be a point of contention and something we’ll be discussing during the Collective Bargaining Agreement [negotiations].”
But if the players want what the owners want on this point, it’s not a point of contention. It’s a point of agreement.
Sure, it’s a small population of rookies who are affected by this, but there’s a lot of money. And history tells us that only half of the players taken at the top of the draft ever earn it. So why not take that money and make it available to the players who have proven themselves, year in and year out?
As long as any new system allows the Larry Fitzgeralds and the Joe Thomases and the Mario Williamseses of the NFL to be rewarded once they perform, it makes perfect sense to prevent guys like Ryan Leaf and Akili Smith from pocketing millions in exchange for, in the end, nothing.
Still, it was smart for Upshaw to reel in Mawae. Because the goal of collective bargaining is to make a concession and get a concession. If the players aren’t able to persuade the NFL that they hope to keep the current system for paying rookies, the players won’t get anything in return if/when they agree to a slotting structure.
The problem, however, is that when it comes to the input of veteran players, the cat is out of the bag, and it has clawed all the furniture (and pooped in Upshaw’s bowl of Grape Nuts). The league knows that the veteran players want to contain the money paid at the top of the draft, and no matter how hard Gene pounds his fist about it, the reality is that the rank-and-file disagree with him.
July 1st, 2008 at 4:09 pm
Jeremiah and Mervin, I don’t know Jamarcus Russell’s salary cap number for 2008, but the point is that if his cap number was lower, teams like the Raiders would have more money to give to veterans. Make jokes if you want about the Raiders overspending as it is, but the principle applies to any team that has picked recently in the top 10 and now has a young, unproven player taking up a disproportionate amount of the salary cap. Owners are not going to pocket the money because, in addition to their own desire to win, there is pressure from the fans to win, not to mention a salary cap floor.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 5 / 5 with 1 rating(s)
July 1st, 2008 at 4:50 pm
The NFL does have a salary floor, and if thing goes through without changing some other dynamics of the CBA, a lot more teams will be spending closer to the floor than trying to overspend the cap with creative bonus structures and backloaded deals that increas signing bonus money.
Making the salary cap easy to operate is not the goal of the NFLPA. They want to get rid of it. The stupid rookie contracts only help the cause.
The bottom line in my opinion is just draft the right player and they will be worth it. Andre Johnson, Mario Williams, Eli and Peyton, Carson Palmer, Larry Fitzgerald, Braylon Edwards, Joe Thomas, all helped get the teams out of the top 10 and into contention as the system was intended to do.
The Raiders have no one to blame but Al Davis for wasting big money on top picks. The Clowns wasted millions on draft picks until they figured it was better to invest in a good GM than top 10 draft picks every year.
Don’t hate the player, hate the game. The injuries, the difficlut nature of a violent sport, and bad scouting all contribute to a player being a “bust” and wasting your team’s salary cap space. But that is all arbtrary, and as teams like DC and Dallas have proven over the years, the salary cap is a very pliable Hard cap number. They seem to always have enough to get who ever they seem to want.
Jerry jones is just a little better at evaluating the talent.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 2 / 5 with 1 rating(s)
July 1st, 2008 at 4:53 pm
One argument for the large rookie pay, although I would shed no tears to see it reigned in:
The top player coming out of college is forced to play for a team not of his choosing which is likely one of the worst teams in the NFL. His chances for success are not entirely under his control. Instead, he is at the mercy of what could be a terrible offensive line, poor coaching, a scheme that doesn’t fit his talents, etc that impact his development as a player. A player that failed with the team that drafted him may have succeeded wildly if he had the opportunity to choose his team.
Since complete rookie free agency is not practical, a system that rewards the top players in the draft for being thought of as the best and for playing for the worst teams isn’t totally unreasonable.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 3.5 / 5 with 2 rating(s)
July 1st, 2008 at 5:00 pm
FiveFiveNine, where does the money go when a team cuts a veteran player and takes a “cap hit”? They can still claim they are spending as much as the “cap” allows, but in fact are on the books for a lot closer to the minimum levels than the cap. They can also give players they want to keep 4 year deals instead of 7 and inflate the “cap” number, and still never actually pay the final 2 years of the deal like in Shaun Alexander’s case. He eventually got the MVP type contract, but only got to cash the checks for 2 years. He is a proven vet player, but because he is also proven to be 30+ and beatdown, not even the Bungles are willing to offer him a minimum type deal.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 1 / 5 with 1 rating(s)
July 1st, 2008 at 7:39 pm
When any negotiations take place it is common to compare salary and benefits from similar positions. Since there is no other professional football league of the NFL’s caliber it only makes sense to compare it to other professional sports. While the NBA and MLB have higher average salaries there rookie pay is much more reasonable than the NFL’s. I believe the NBA generally starts with a 2 year contract. This would work in the NFL but in order to give that up the players would definitely need to get something in return. When comparing the NFL to the NBA and MLB it is obvious that the lack of guaranteed money is puts them at a disadvantage. Decreasing rookie pay in exchange for a greater percentage of guaranteed money in the event of injury or under performance seems like a fair trade to me.
(report as inappropriate)
Rating: 3 / 5 with 1 rating(s)