Is the draft obsolete?

[st pete gogolak]

Going all the way back to Jay Berwanger, the purpose of the draft is to help bad teams improve at the expense of good teams. So how is that working out for the Bills, Lions, Raiders, Chiefs and all the other cellar dwellers for the last ten plus years? It's easy to argue that before the rookie salary cap, the draft was actually a net negative to bad teams, saddling them with horrendous contracts for mediocre players (everyone from Sam Bradford to Aaron Maybin).

 

The thing is, the veteran salary cap made the draft obsolete. Granted that teams with good management will always do bettter identifying good players than teams with bad managment, but eliminating the draft will probably lead to more parity than the current system. For example, rather than make incremental changes year by year, a team could decide to clean house of most of its veterans and sign a core of talented rookies and let that core mature over 3 - 4 years of playing together. A team in need of a quarterback (anyone know a team in need of a quarterback?) could target two or three QB's to pursue irrespective of their "draft position". There would be absolutely no excuse to find a "franchise" quaterback, or at least no excuse to try to find one.

 

Of course, I don't expect it to happen. Everyone is too vested in the present system to make any changes. The league makes too much money televising the draft, ESPN, et al. make too much money from mock drafts, draft previews, etc. etc. But if you really think about it, the draft is an anachronism that should be dumped in the wastebin of history.

[ny33]

Going all the way back to Jay Berwanger, the purpose of the draft is to help bad teams improve at the expense of good teams. So how is that working out for the Bills, Lions, Raiders, Chiefs and all the other cellar dwellers for the last ten plus years? It's easy to argue that before the rookie salary cap, the draft was actually a net negative to bad teams, saddling them with horrendous contracts for mediocre players (everyone from Sam Bradford to Aaron Maybin).

 

The thing is, the veteran salary cap made the draft obsolete. Granted that teams with good management will always do bettter identifying good players than teams with bad managment, but eliminating the draft will probably lead to more parity than the current system. For example, rather than make incremental changes year by year, a team could decide to clean house of most of its veterans and sign a core of talented rookies and let that core mature over 3 - 4 years of playing together. A team in need of a quarterback (anyone know a team in need of a quarterback?) could target two or three QB's to pursue irrespective of their "draft position". There would be absolutely no excuse to find a "franchise" quaterback, or at least no excuse to try to find one.

 

Of course, I don't expect it to happen. Everyone is too vested in the present system to make any changes. The league makes too much money televising the draft, ESPN, et al. make too much money from mock drafts, draft previews, etc. etc. But if you really think about it, the draft is an anachronism that should be dumped in the wastebin of history.

 

No. The draft gives weak teams a chance to draft a franchise QB. If you fail at that exercise, tough luck.

 

Ask the Redskins and Colts if they feel the draft hurts parity.

Edited April 24, 2013 by ny33

[Kelly the Dog]

I assume that you mean ignoring the fact that the last three Super Bowl winners, the Ravens, Giants, and Packers, were made up almost entirely of draft choices?

 

Bad teams are bad because they draft poorly, followed by the fact they are coached poorly.

[BillsPride12]

Just because the Bills suck at the draft does not make it Obsolete

[Leelee Phoenix]

It's far from obsolete. The draft remains far and away the optimal way to build your team.

[Wings and Beer]

I disagree with you also, as I think most will. However, for conversation sake, what system would you suggest for having college players join the NFL? If they were all treated as free agents, wouldn't contenders and large markets have an enormous advantage, especially with a rookie salary cap?

[st pete gogolak]

I disagree with you also, as I think most will. However, for conversation sake, what system would you suggest for having college players join the NFL? If they were all treated as free agents, wouldn't contenders and large markets have an enormous advantage, especially with a rookie salary cap?

 

Do away with the rookie salary cap but keep an overall cap for the team. You've got $90 million to spend (or whatever the number is). Yes, college players would be free agents free to join any team that they want. Contenders however, wouldn't necessarily hold a huge advantage. Presumably they would be chock full of high-priced veterans. Teams with more cap space (smart teams, bad teams?) would/should have more money available to pursue blue chip college players.

 

Look, no system will be perfect becasue Ozzie Newsome will always get better players than Buddy Nix but if you think outside the box doing away with the draft will actually help bad teams more than maintaining a college draft.

[ICanSleepWhenI'mDead]

History has a wastebin?

[Kellyto83TD]

Going all the way back to Jay Berwanger, the purpose of the draft is to help bad teams improve at the expense of good teams. So how is that working out for the Bills, Lions, Raiders, Chiefs and all the other cellar dwellers for the last ten plus years? It's easy to argue that before the rookie salary cap, the draft was actually a net negative to bad teams, saddling them with horrendous contracts for mediocre players (everyone from Sam Bradford to Aaron Maybin).

 

The thing is, the veteran salary cap made the draft obsolete. Granted that teams with good management will always do bettter identifying good players than teams with bad managment, but eliminating the draft will probably lead to more parity than the current system. For example, rather than make incremental changes year by year, a team could decide to clean house of most of its veterans and sign a core of talented rookies and let that core mature over 3 - 4 years of playing together. A team in need of a quarterback (anyone know a team in need of a quarterback?) could target two or three QB's to pursue irrespective of their "draft position". There would be absolutely no excuse to find a "franchise" quaterback, or at least no excuse to try to find one.

 

Of course, I don't expect it to happen. Everyone is too vested in the present system to make any changes. The league makes too much money televising the draft, ESPN, et al. make too much money from mock drafts, draft previews, etc. etc. But if you really think about it, the draft is an anachronism that should be dumped in the wastebin of history.

 

With no draft Dallas, Washington and NE would ensure all the top talent played on their teams every year as they can outbid everyone else for the kids right out of school. No draft = the same 5-6 teams competing for the championship every year.

[mrags]

 

 

No. The draft gives weak teams a chance to draft a franchise QB. If you fail at that exercise, tough luck.

 

Ask the Redskins and Colts if they feel the draft hurts parity.

i was just about to add the Patriots 2 times for they're last 2 starting QBs in the last 20 years and the Colts again, but quite a few years ago.

[ThurmasThoman]

i will say this op: i admire you for making this thread--usually threads that try to attribute buffalo being awful to anything other than... well.. buffalo being AWFUL, are met with derision and mocking.

 

my problem with your system would be that it puts TOO much power in the hands of rookies. you could have a guy like luck come out and say, "im not signing anywhere until i get x, y and z." the problem with that is, it seems highly unlikely that a team would be able to sign guys like that year after year, to build a nucleus. sure, as a bad team, you might get lucky/get away with it one year (like us with mario last year), but then where does that leave you the following season?

 

no, surprisingly, i think the draft is perfect just the way it is in the nfl: it rewards the worst teams with the chances at the best players, and it is 75%/25% skill to luck in terms of hitting on your draft picks.

 

let me throw this one at you:

i think that the true problem with the nfl today, and for the last decade, has been its scheduling formula. it is absolutely, 100%, without question, inexcusably RIDICULOUS that, since 2002, teams within a division play a grand total of TWO games that are different from one another. every year, for the last 10 years, we've played the same schedule as the patriots, minus 2 games.

 

the difference between first and last place in the afc east, since switching to 4 teams in the division, has been (on average,) 7 games. 7 games a year separating first and last place since realignment, and yet, our schedules differ by only 2 games.

 

if this were one of the other 3 major sports, where seasons are 80-160 games, of course schedules would be similar. but in a league where 1 game is ALWAYS the difference between playoffs or no playoffs, to have teams that are so clearly discrepant in terms of talent levels playing (essentially) the same schedule, could lead to longer playoff droughts (us) and longer playoff runs of glory (new england) that make teams worse or better than they actually are.

 

my proposal (for an afc team):

 

home and away vs. everyone in your division (6)

play the team that corresponds to your place in the standings, in every nfc division (4)

if you finish first or second, play all first and second place teams in your conference/3rd and 4th v all 3rd and 4th teams (6)

 

lets take a look at who our opponents would be this year-bills and pats:

 

bills:

pats (2)/dolphins (2)/jets (2)/steelers/browns/titans/jaguars/chiefs/raiders/cardinals/buccaneers/lions/eagles

 

pats:

bills (2)/dolphins (2)/jets (2)/ravens/bengals/colts/texans/broncos/chargers/redskins/packers/falcons/49ers

 

now, for the bills, ive bolded the games that we might actually have a shot of winning...or at least, when i sat down in front of the tv, i wouldnt think "WERE GOING TO LOSE THIS GAME, IF WE WIN, IT WILL BE A MIRACLE." there are 13 of those games. wow.

 

for the patriots, ive highlighted games that they could, theoretically lose: and there are 6 of them.

 

how ANY fan of the national football league could read this post and not agree is beyond me. im waiting for the day when goodell stumbles across one of the MANY threads ive made on this subject across the internet, and implements it immediately.

[ny33]

With no draft Dallas, Washington and NE would ensure all the top talent played on their teams every year as they can outbid everyone else for the kids right out of school. No draft = the same 5-6 teams competing for the championship every year.

 

There's a salary cap.

[st pete gogolak]

With no draft Dallas, Washington and NE would ensure all the top talent played on their teams every year as they can outbid everyone else for the kids right out of school. No draft = the same 5-6 teams competing for the championship every year.

 

Why assume that Dallas Washington and NE would outbid all other teams for college talent? If they did, they would run into salary cap issues pronto. Granted, San Francisco a year ago could have gone all out for Andrew Luck with Bay Area location, Harbaugh as coach, but if some other team offered significantly more money, maybe he follows the money. The point is, the salary cap eliminated the need for a college draft.

[Kellyto83TD]

Why assume that Dallas Washington and NE would outbid all other teams for college talent? If they did, they would run into salary cap issues pronto. Granted, San Francisco a year ago could have gone all out for Andrew Luck with Bay Area location, Harbaugh as coach, but if some other team offered significantly more money, maybe he follows the money. The point is, the salary cap eliminated the need for a college draft.

 

Those 3 and maybe a couple more would have all the top talent. Take out the draft, keeping in the current rookie cap and think about what those teams would look like cutting the 4th string on type talent on their rosters and outbidding other teams for pure 1st -3rd round talent each year.

[BillsPride12]

Do away with the rookie salary cap but keep an overall cap for the team. You've got $90 million to spend (or whatever the number is). Yes, college players would be free agents free to join any team that they want. Contenders however, wouldn't necessarily hold a huge advantage. Presumably they would be chock full of high-priced veterans. Teams with more cap space (smart teams, bad teams?) would/should have more money available to pursue blue chip college players.

 

Look, no system will be perfect becasue Ozzie Newsome will always get better players than Buddy Nix but if you think outside the box doing away with the draft will actually help bad teams more than maintaining a college draft.

 

Absolutely terrible idea!!!! Dude do you realize if this were the case we would never be able to get any top rookies to sign with Buffalo

[San Jose Bills Fan]

In striving for intellectual honesty, you knowingly hurt your own argument when you said "Granted that teams with good management will always do bettter identifying good players than teams with bad managment…"

 

Nevertheless, an interesting post.

 

I think a main reason the draft would never be abolished is because it's such a popular event that captures the imagination of NFL fans for many weeks.

 

BTW, who is Jay Berwanger?

[ny33]

Those 3 and maybe a couple more would have all the top talent. Take out the draft, keeping in the current rookie cap and think about what those teams would look like cutting the 4th string on type talent on their rosters and outbidding other teams for pure 1st -3rd round talent each year.

 

Given that a cap would still be in place, that doesn't make any sense.

[Dragonborn10]

 

 

Those 3 and maybe a couple more would have all the top talent. Take out the draft, keeping in the current rookie cap and think about what those teams would look like cutting the 4th string on type talent on their rosters and outbidding other teams for pure 1st -3rd round talent each year.

Only one QB can play at a time. Only a handful of star players would want to be on a team together. It takes 50+ guys to make a roster. There are hundreds of very good players in the NFL. And Brady still went in the 7th round. What if the Pats paid millions for Tim Couch?

Cap, human error, and reality argues against just a few teams having all the talent

[Captain Hindsight]

I assume that you mean ignoring the fact that the last three Super Bowl winners, the Ravens, Giants, and Packers, were made up almost entirely of draft choices?

 

Bad teams are bad because they draft poorly, followed by the fact they are coached poorly.

This^

[bowery4]

History has a wastebin?

It is right there in the corner, we also recycle. Ask Captain Hindsight, he empties it once a week and keeps the "good stuff".