Joey Bosa...not signed, which side do you fall?

[ATL96Steeler]

I'm not against owners/people being able to protect themselves but I think it is a travesty that A. The actual contract that is negotiated hardly ever gets completed even when a player performs well. B. How the NFLPA is so horribly run now.

I love baseball and the MLBPA is way too strong but the NFLPA is too weak, especially considering the differences between football, basketball and baseball. I think the current cap is jacked up too as it should be more like the NBA's and the players deserve a 60/40 split. The sport makes more than enough for owners to take less of the pie, as opposed to the other leagues.

And yes a strike is nearly impossible unless some of the older guys actual help the younger guys. But the NFL is basically the perfect model of a business to keep a union weak and too me that's not how they should be able to skate around the Supreme courts ruling of sports league are not deemed monopolies.

On your A & B...A...I agree. I think most of the players that were not completing the contract were the rank-n-file players...these are the guys that most need the fully guaranteed contracts...

B...The NFLPA has always been the weakest sports union because they always had ex players involved, just ill suited for the job...MLBPA hired professional negotiators. The other problem is the few at the top dictate to the many at the bottom.

60/40...idk about that...50/50 seems fair. Owners do have a few other revenue streams that players don't share in, such as concessions, parking, suite rental income...but they also have non player payroll that is pretty sizeable.

I really think the bottom feeders should make a million minimum and more importantly...if you're a late round pick and even up as a starter, they should rip up the rookie contract the following year and pay that player at the avg starter rate. I look at a guy like Kelvin Beachum for PIT...earned the starting LT job as a 7th rounder or something, and he's making 600k blocking next to a guy like Pouncey who was making $10 mil...then when he finally reaches his contract year, blows out his knee.

You mentioned MLB...I think it was Charly Finnley that was a proponent of 1 yr contracts...the player was not a FA, but essentially players would be paid what they are worth on a year to year basis...it never got of the ground.

 

[Cincyfan78]

On your A & B...A...I agree. I think most of the players that were not completing the contract were the rank-n-file players...these are the guys that most need the fully guaranteed contracts...

B...The NFLPA has always been the weakest sports union because they always had ex players involved, just ill suited for the job...MLBPA hired professional negotiators. The other problem is the few at the top dictate to the many at the bottom.

60/40...idk about that...50/50 seems fair. Owners do have a few other revenue streams that players don't share in, such as concessions, parking, suite rental income...but they also have non player payroll that is pretty sizeable.

I really think the bottom feeders should make a million minimum and more importantly...if you're a late round pick and even up as a starter, they should rip up the rookie contract the following year and pay that player at the avg starter rate. I look at a guy like Kelvin Beachum for PIT...earned the starting LT job as a 7th rounder or something, and he's making 600k blocking next to a guy like Pouncey who was making $10 mil...then when he finally reaches his contract year, blows out his knee.

You mentioned MLB...I think it was Charly Finnley that was a proponent of 1 yr contracts...the player was not a FA, but essentially players would be paid what they are worth on a year to year basis...it never got of the ground.

Didn't Ricky Williams essentially have this? His contract, if I'm remembering correctly, was completely incentive laden. In an ideal world, this would always work because you will get paid for what you do, or don't do. Of course, this will never fly full-time in any sport for a number of reasons, but in the end, there's never really going to be a fair way for these things to get done. All you can do is try and negotiate the best deal at the time.

Players in the NFL get large bonuses that can be spread over many years of the cap. It keeps the base salary down for cap considerations over the life of the contract, but the player is effectively receiving most of their payment in bonus form up front. When they are getting cut in the back in of the deal, most of those players never expect to see those numbers/dollars. They know signing that in year 5-6-7 they probably will not be looking at getting that money for one reason or another. Hell, even Brady, Manning, Rodgers, etc...never see that money. It's always renegotiated and again, paid by bonuses up front to lower the annual contract for cap reasons.

I don't think the scale is as out of whack as some may think. Can it be better? Sure, but if you were to guarantee contracts, the cap would radically have to change, and players salaries would actually (at least on paper) would decline since a lot of that money is just funny numbers on a sheet that the team, and even the player, know they are never going to see.

As for guys who outplay their contract...it is what it is in any sport. Sucks when guys get hurt in contract years, and hopefully teams will still pay them relatively well, but it's always the chance you take and everyone knows this.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

Didn't Ricky Williams essentially have this? His contract, if I'm remembering correctly, was completely incentive laden. In an ideal world, this would always work because you will get paid for what you do, or don't do. Of course, this will never fly full-time in any sport for a number of reasons, but in the end, there's never really going to be a fair way for these things to get done. All you can do is try and negotiate the best deal at the time.

Players in the NFL get large bonuses that can be spread over many years of the cap. It keeps the base salary down for cap considerations over the life of the contract, but the player is effectively receiving most of their payment in bonus form up front. When they are getting cut in the back in of the deal, most of those players never expect to see those numbers/dollars. They know signing that in year 5-6-7 they probably will not be looking at getting that money for one reason or another. Hell, even Brady, Manning, Rodgers, etc...never see that money. It's always renegotiated and again, paid by bonuses up front to lower the annual contract for cap reasons.

I don't think the scale is as out of whack as some may think. Can it be better? Sure, but if you were to guarantee contracts, the cap would radically have to change, and players salaries would actually (at least on paper) would decline since a lot of that money is just funny numbers on a sheet that the team, and even the player, know they are never going to see.

As for guys who outplay their contract...it is what it is in any sport. Sucks when guys get hurt in contract years, and hopefully teams will still pay them relatively well, but it's always the chance you take and everyone knows this.

Good post.

Not sure where to start a response. At the top I guess.

R. Williams...pretty much...that was a weird contract that we'll never likely see replicated today because his base was like league minimum, and it was a multi-yr contract. Within the rookie scale framework now, I wouldn't mind seeing a setup where #1 over gets $3 mil (or X number) base and incentives thereafter, #2 gets $2.5, and so forth.

The big bonuses...that's 15-20% of the players on the 53 tops. In terms of the top QB, they typically are the only ones that cash in on most all of the contract...very seldom are the top echelon QBs cut in their 1st or 2nd contract unless they get injured or just fall off the map.

Guaranteed contracts...spot on, it's funny money...The top players have bought into it because they are getting theirs, but there are so many rank-n-file players making under a million a yr that never see that 3rd or 4th yr, cut, injured, etc....imo these are the players that need the guaranteed deal...the players still have to own this, but this is precisely why 70% of NFL player are broke after they are done playing. Not everybody is blowing it like VY

Out play their contracts...yeah they be cut if they underperform, but suck it up and wait if you outperform...I don't buy that anymore, and I understand why players hold out in that situation.

Yes, it happens in other sports...Steph Curry is outperforming his contract in the NBA, but he made $11.3mil LY, not breaking the bank, but he's not worried about paying bills...Freddie Freeman was outperforming his MLB contract...they have the arbitration rule and careers are considerably longer...my point here is the other sports are different animals on this topic.

The NFL is the greatest team sport out there imo, but the players have the short end of the stick even though collectively (on paper) they make more than any other sport.

 

[Oldschool739]

Kind of disagree in a way. While you don't want to lose your #1 draft pick because of something avoidable; I personally never felt he was worth that pick to begin with. I just don't see him being a game changer on defense, and with that pick you have to be a legit game changer. I think he's going to have a nice career and do some good things I'm not saying he'll be a bust by any means, but I just don't see him being a top tier DL/DE.

I think even Bosa was shocked that SD took him at #3..But he was projected to be a mid to late top 10 and I think many mocks had him going 5 or 6....His chances of being a star is as good as any though according to all the pros.....Nothing but good stuff on the guy that I saw...

 

[wazzu31]

60/40 was just a number not necessarily a realistic plan. It's just owners of a NFL team will still make boat loads with that figure because of television money and the fact men are willing to pay just about anything for a sport that is in our nature.

I'm not usually pro Union but I hate how they got swindled by weak leadership. How could anyone ever agree to give a guy working the owners the right to make stuff up regarding players livelihood up on the fly. Or all the shitty salary cap when teams can bribe you with giving a more team friendly contract or be cut.

With the slotted system, it just shows how messed up the CBA is as it should be in black and white what you get, there should never be an option of holding out if the CBA was done correctly and in the players best interest. The only leverage a player ever has is holding out but even then the team can make him pay financially. Nothing seems pro player at all except for a lighter practice schedule and football is the one sport where I can sympathize with the players who put so much on the line and most aren't financially set for live. Guess it's the gladiator effect where you end up sympathizing more for the gladiators than the emperor or his hired goons.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

Kind of disagree in a way. While you don't want to lose your #1 draft pick because of something avoidable; I personally never felt he was worth that pick to begin with. I just don't see him being a game changer on defense, and with that pick you have to be a legit game changer. I think he's going to have a nice career and do some good things I'm not saying he'll be a bust by any means, but I just don't see him being a top tier DL/DE.

I agree here 100%.

I've felt this way even before the draft...I'm not bold enough to say he will be a bust, but from what I've seen at the CFB level...I didn't see a NFL stud DE.

Time will tell once he figures out that SD is not going to move on their position...at best his agent might be able to get them to shorten the time span on the backend bonus pymt.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

60/40 was just a number not necessarily a realistic plan. It's just owners of a NFL team will still make boat loads with that figure because of television money and the fact men are willing to pay just about anything for a sport that is in our nature.

I'm not usually pro Union but I hate how they got swindled by weak leadership. How could anyone ever agree to give a guy working the owners the right to make stuff up regarding players livelihood up on the fly. Or all the shitty salary cap when teams can bribe you with giving a more team friendly contract or be cut.

With the slotted system, it just shows how messed up the CBA is as it should be in black and white what you get, there should never be an option of holding out if the CBA was done correctly and in the players best interest. The only leverage a player ever has is holding out but even then the team can make him pay financially. Nothing seems pro player at all except for a lighter practice schedule and football is the one sport where I can sympathize with the players who put so much on the line and most aren't financially set for live. Guess it's the gladiator effect where you end up sympathizing more for the gladiators than the emperor or his hired goons.

60/40...gotcha...the TV money is already factored in the revenue split...that's mostly why we see jumps in the cap.

The union is screwed up because not all of the union members are on equal financial footing or anything close to it...it's almost as if the lower paid guys need a legal voice within the union to push for a higher base...the cap isn't the problem imo...it's how the players 50% cut is divided.

 

[Cincyfan78]

Good post.

Not sure where to start a response. At the top I guess.

R. Williams...pretty much...that was a weird contract that we'll never likely see replicated today because his base was like league minimum, and it was a multi-yr contract. Within the rookie scale framework now, I wouldn't mind seeing a setup where #1 over gets $3 mil (or X number) base and incentives thereafter, #2 gets $2.5, and so forth.

The big bonuses...that's 15-20% of the players on the 53 tops. In terms of the top QB, they typically are the only ones that cash in on most all of the contract...very seldom are the top echelon QBs cut in their 1st or 2nd contract unless they get injured or just fall off the map.

Guaranteed contracts...spot on, it's funny money...The top players have bought into it because they are getting theirs, but there are so many rank-n-file players making under a million a yr that never see that 3rd or 4th yr, cut, injured, etc....imo these are the players that need the guaranteed deal...the players still have to own this, but this is precisely why 70% of NFL player are broke after they are done playing. Not everybody is blowing it like VY

Out play their contracts...yeah they be cut if they underperform, but suck it up and wait if you outperform...I don't buy that anymore, and I understand why players hold out in that situation.

Yes, it happens in other sports...Steph Curry is outperforming his contract in the NBA, but he made $11.3mil LY, not breaking the bank, but he's not worried about paying bills...Freddie Freeman was outperforming his MLB contract...they have the arbitration rule and careers are considerably longer...my point here is the other sports are different animals on this topic.

The NFL is the greatest team sport out there imo, but the players have the short end of the stick even though collectively (on paper) they make more than any other sport.

The biggest hurdles to any kind of radical change are going to be the cap, and inflation. You have teams that have contracts and guys working on the finance side 2-3+ years down the road so that the cap doesn't kill the team. Again, it's why even top tier players like Ben R, Mannings, Brady, etc never see the final 1-2 or even 3rd years of those contracts. I think if you tried to tear up every contract and pay a guy what he's worth you'd struggle with the current cap structure and teams would end up with a 1-2 year window to compete before having to let guys walk. Also, the bonus is a huge factor because the player gets a large chunk of money up front, which they want, and the teams get to spread that hit over the life of the contract which they also want.

The other hurdle I mentioned is inflation. How many times have we seen guys sign deals that are decent deals (mega deals or just middle of the road deals) that are good signings at the time, but less than 1 year later look completely out-dated. There's no way to really rectify this because the market will change every year based on who is a F/A and what the market is willing to pay (or over-pay) for their services.

To guarantee contracts in the NFL, and stay within the current structure, players would have to take a lot less overall money on paper, but know that they will see every dime of the contract. So instead of signing a 5 year 30MM deal where they know that by season 3 it will be restructured, and by the end of those 5 years they may have only actually received 15MM, players would have to be OK with signing a 5 year deal worth only 18-19-or 20MM, and realize that while it is less on PAPER, they will actually earn more because it's guaranteed.

 

[cdumler7]

60/40...gotcha...the TV money is already factored in the revenue split...that's mostly why we see jumps in the cap.

The union is screwed up because not all of the union members are on equal financial footing or anything close to it...it's almost as if the lower paid guys need a legal voice within the union to push for a higher base...the cap isn't the problem imo...it's how the players 50% cut is divided.

Agreed. The whole rookie wage scale was with the idea that the middle class of NFL players would get more money. Pretty much all it meant was the top guys get even more and the middle guys get cut for much cheaper options through the draft. So the rich get richer and the middle class slowly disappears. Sounds pretty familiar.

 

[Cincyfan78]

I agree here 100%.

I've felt this way even before the draft...I'm not bold enough to say he will be a bust, but from what I've seen at the CFB level...I didn't see a NFL stud DE.

Time will tell once he figures out that SD is not going to move on their position...at best his agent might be able to get them to shorten the time span on the backend bonus pymt.

I don't think he'll be a bust, either. I think he can work himself into a solid addition to the DL, but I don't see him being the explosive game changing guy at DE that many think he will be. Even in some of his best games in NCAA, he had a lot of hustle plays that will not develop for him at the NFL level. Better protection, better QB's, and faster play are going to, IMO, really hurt his pass-rush numbers, I think. I could be totally wrong, but we'll revisit in a few years to see how he's done.

 

[cdumler7]

I don't think he'll be a bust, either. I think he can work himself into a solid addition to the DL, but I don't see him being the explosive game changing guy at DE that many think he will be. Even in some of his best games in NCAA, he had a lot of hustle plays that will not develop for him at the NFL level. Better protection, better QB's, and faster play are going to, IMO, really hurt his pass-rush numbers, I think. I could be totally wrong, but we'll revisit in a few years to see how he's done.

I would also add to this that when a player is surrounded by NFL talent at the college level it is sometimes hard to really gauge their NFL ability. Bosa was one of those guys that was surrounded by NFL talent at all levels on the defense. I do think he will be a good player but when you are picking top-5 you are looking for that franchise changing type player not just another good player for the team. He is a guy with a ton of hustle and never seems to quit on any given play so that will help him out but just pure talent he just doesn't quite match up with the top guys.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

The biggest hurdles to any kind of radical change are going to be the cap, and inflation. You have teams that have contracts and guys working on the finance side 2-3+ years down the road so that the cap doesn't kill the team. Again, it's why even top tier players like Ben R, Mannings, Brady, etc never see the final 1-2 or even 3rd years of those contracts. I think if you tried to tear up every contract and pay a guy what he's worth you'd struggle with the current cap structure and teams would end up with a 1-2 year window to compete before having to let guys walk. Also, the bonus is a huge factor because the player gets a large chunk of money up front, which they want, and the teams get to spread that hit over the life of the contract which they also want.

The other hurdle I mentioned is inflation. How many times have we seen guys sign deals that are decent deals (mega deals or just middle of the road deals) that are good signings at the time, but less than 1 year later look completely out-dated. There's no way to really rectify this because the market will change every year based on who is a F/A and what the market is willing to pay (or over-pay) for their services.

To guarantee contracts in the NFL, and stay within the current structure, players would have to take a lot less overall money on paper, but know that they will see every dime of the contract. So instead of signing a 5 year 30MM deal where they know that by season 3 it will be restructured, and by the end of those 5 years they may have only actually received 15MM, players would have to be OK with signing a 5 year deal worth only 18-19-or 20MM, and realize that while it is less on PAPER, they will actually earn more because it's guaranteed.

Top QBs...more funny money but seldom do they not get all of it unless it's their last contract .

I'll use Ben since I know the details a little better...got his rookie contract in 2004...6/22.2 mil...in '08 they folded the remaining 2 yrs into a 6/102 mil contract...so he really got $95 mil in new money. In '15 they folded the remaining 2 yrs into a 4/$87mil contract...in reality $57mil in new money....so Ben has cashed all of his rookie deal and on his 2nd contract he had about $30 mil remaining...the 3rd has $31 mil in guaranteed...basically what he was owed on his 2nd contract...so if he gets cut before this last contract runs out he won't get all of the $57 mil in new money, but again...that's his 3rd contract.

On the guarantee, lower it, make it real money...simple enough, and again...spot on...but the NFL likes to market these super high contracts to make it seem as if they are paying on par with the other top sports. Plus agents like it because they get paid on the gross value of the contract.

 

[OregonDucks]

I side with the Chargers.

You're a rookie and have never played a snap of NFL ball, prove you are what you are holding out to be.

its a team sport, act like a team player.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

Agreed. The whole rookie wage scale was with the idea that the middle class of NFL players would get more money. Pretty much all it meant was the top guys get even more and the middle guys get cut for much cheaper options through the draft. So the rich get richer and the middle class slowly disappears. Sounds pretty familiar.

Exactly...I understand that we don't fill stadiums and make appointment TV to see the 43rd guy on the roster. but those guys have a role to play and without him the overall unit can suffer...that's why I think the lower echelon players that make $550k a yr on a 4 year deal should have the majority of that contract guaranteed because a high percentage of those players a 1 contract NFL players.

The middle guys are very key and because the top level contracts take up such a large portion of the cap...it forces these guys to play for vet minimum sometimes or be replaced by younger and cheaper talent. At least a lot of these guys are on 2nd contracts and have made decent money.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

I don't think he'll be a bust, either. I think he can work himself into a solid addition to the DL, but I don't see him being the explosive game changing guy at DE that many think he will be. Even in some of his best games in NCAA, he had a lot of hustle plays that will not develop for him at the NFL level. Better protection, better QB's, and faster play are going to, IMO, really hurt his pass-rush numbers, I think. I could be totally wrong, but we'll revisit in a few years to see how he's done.

My issue more than anything with Bosa as a prospect, he needs to be in the right scheme...he's not big enough to play a 3-4 DE...maybe he's athletic enough to play 3-4 OLB, but he's played with his hand in the dirt all his college career...do you take a guy 3rd overall and try to make him fit your scheme? Ideally he seems like a 4-3 DE at this level...I thought DAL was a good spot for him.

If he's a 6 to 8 sack guy two years from now...I'd say job well done. But I wouldn't be surprised if he's a <6 sack guy...3 to 4 is not bad even...not 3rd overall, but not bad.

 

[SonnyCID]

I side with the Chargers.

You're a rookie and have never played a snap of NFL ball, prove you are what you are holding out to be.

its a team sport, act like a team player.

He's holding out to be a fairly paid rookie. SD didn't have to draft him if they didn't feel he was worth what he's slotted to get.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

He's holding out to be a fairly paid rookie. SD didn't have to draft him if they didn't feel he was worth what he's slotted to get.

Slotted contract is not the hold up by most reports out there...how the $17 mil bonus is paid appears to be the main issue...player wants it all at signing, team wants a 50/50 split...signing and March '17...I don't get the March '17 part...they should have ample cash to fund that during the season...fwiw...not all teams pay it lump sum.

 

[Calm]

He's holding out to be a fairly paid rookie. SD didn't have to draft him if they didn't feel he was worth what he's slotted to get.

This.

Whatever anyone else thinks he's worth, whether you think he's not worth #3 overall or you think he'll be a bust is irrelevant. SD chose him at #3 and they should treat him accordingly.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

This.

Whatever anyone else thinks he's worth, whether you think he's not worth #3 overall or you think he'll be a bust is irrelevant. SD chose him at #3 and they should treat him accordingly.

FWIW...they're treating him the same way they treated Rivers...and he was 4th overall.

 

[wazzu31]

60/40...gotcha...the TV money is already factored in the revenue split...that's mostly why we see jumps in the cap.

The union is screwed up because not all of the union members are on equal financial footing or anything close to it...it's almost as if the lower paid guys need a legal voice within the union to push for a higher base...the cap isn't the problem imo...it's how the players 50% cut is divided.

I know it's factored in I'm just saying it's not unreasonable for the players to get a 60/40 split since the owners will continue to make money hand over fist unlike any other sport.

I don't think the financial aspect really has to do with the union being weak, to me it is just piss poor leadership. Somehow in strikes and lockouts in other sports they hold strong regardless of the money disparity. I do feel the cap is fudged up and is a problem. From my understanding the players caved on the rookie scales in order to increase the salaries of the guys we are speaking about. Not Boss or Rivers but for the guys who are actually risking something as they are an injury away from having to join the real workforce, I just thinking if the owners are allowed to discard players then every player should have a guaranteed contract.

It's simple to keep away from the Haynesworth type deals for owners, no owner is going to sign a player to a long term giant contract if that is the new standard. Sure, players get screwed with shorter deals but I think guaranteed contracts are the trade off, especially since the league will go to 18 games soon with nothing but outrage from the players since they were so weak they basically gave themselves no voice in changes within the NFL.