The Compensatory Pick System Is BROKEN.

[Rigotz]

The Compensatory Pick system was designed to allow the bad teams to keep their good players.

 

Instead, it rewards the good teams because they can afford to let good players walk and get huge contracts, while back-filling with cheap players who want to "win now."

 

This year is another perfect example.

 

The Bottom 10 Teams this year were:

32) Jaguars: Zero Comp Picks

31) Jets: Zero Comp Picks

30)Texans: Zero Comp Picks

29) Falcons: 3 Comp Picks, but none in Round 3 or 4.

28) Eagles: 2 Comp Picks, but none in Round 3, 4, or 5.

27) Bengals: Zero Comp Picks

26) Lions: Zero Comp Picks

25) Broncos: Zero Comp Picks

24) Panthers: 2 Comp Picks, but none in rounds 3, 4, or 5.

23) Giants: Zero Comp Picks

 

So, none of the bottom 10 teams got any Round 3 or Round 4 compensatory picks.

Meanwhile, perennial playoff teams like the Patriots, Saints, Steelers, Packers, Chiefs, Rams, Titans and Ravens all received round 3 and/or round 4 picks.

 

This is a disgrace.

 

[FireChans]

4 minutes ago, Rigotz said:

The Compensatory Pick system was designed to allow the bad teams to keep their good players.

 

Instead, it rewards the good teams because they can afford to let good players walk and get huge contracts, while back-filling with cheap players who want to "win now."

 

This year is another perfect example.

 

The Bottom 10 Teams this year were:

32) Jaguars: Zero Comp Picks

31) Jets: Zero Comp Picks

30)Texans: Zero Comp Picks

29) Falcons: 3 Comp Picks, but none in Round 3 or 4.

28) Eagles: 2 Comp Picks, but none in Round 3, 4, or 5.

27) Bengals: Zero Comp Picks

26) Lions: Zero Comp Picks

25) Broncos: Zero Comp Picks

24) Panthers: 2 Comp Picks, but none in rounds 3, 4, or 5.

23) Giants: Zero Comp Picks

 

So, none of the bottom 10 teams got any Round 3 or Round 4 compensatory picks.

Meanwhile, perennial playoff teams like the Patriots, Saints, Steelers, Packers, Chiefs, Rams, Titans and Ravens all received round 3 and/or round 4 picks.

 

This is a disgrace.

 

Huh?

 

The Comp pick system is not designed to help bad or good teams. It’s designed to help teams who lose good players to FAs. And it’s working as intended.

[Mcdermott]

4 minutes ago, Rigotz said:

The Compensatory Pick system was designed to allow the bad teams to keep their good players.

 

Instead, it rewards the good teams because they can afford to let good players walk and get huge contracts, while back-filling with cheap players who want to "win now."

 

This year is another perfect example.

 

The Bottom 10 Teams this year were:

32) Jaguars: Zero Comp Picks

31) Jets: Zero Comp Picks

30)Texans: Zero Comp Picks

29) Falcons: 3 Comp Picks, but none in Round 3 or 4.

28) Eagles: 2 Comp Picks, but none in Round 3, 4, or 5.

27) Bengals: Zero Comp Picks

26) Lions: Zero Comp Picks

25) Broncos: Zero Comp Picks

24) Panthers: 2 Comp Picks, but none in rounds 3, 4, or 5.

23) Giants: Zero Comp Picks

 

So, none of the bottom 10 teams got any Round 3 or Round 4 compensatory picks.

Meanwhile, perennial playoff teams like the Patriots, Saints, Steelers, Packers, Chiefs, Rams, Titans and Ravens all received round 3 and/or round 4 picks.

 

This is a disgrace.

 

I’m not sure where you got the idea that that was the intent of the compensatory pick system but its working exactly as it was intended.

[mushypeaches]

Fortunately, we have an annual player draft that rightly or wrongly, DOES reward the worst teams

 

The Compensatory pick system is working EXACTLY as intended.  There was no intent around good or bad teams.  

 

Bad teams should draft better

Bad teams should retain their talent where appropriate

Good teams should make the right decisions on what talent to retain and at what cost.  If bad teams choose to sign those free agents and have less of a chance of getting compensatory picks, then the system is working

 

This isn't welfare, it's warfare.  There's plenty of room in the league for owners like Mike Brown, but they aren't going to be winning titles

 

[Don Otreply]

What? Did the pats get more comp picks already...? 

[Aussie Joe]

18 minutes ago, Rigotz said:

 

 

Instead, it rewards the good teams because they can afford to let good players walk and get huge contracts, while back-filling with cheap players who want to "win now."

 

 

 

 

Why should all the systems benefit the poorly managed teams (like draft & schedule)?

 

You develop a good player that you have to let go to another team ... I dont see the issue in getting a mid round pick in return

 

 

[Rigotz]

31 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Huh?

 

The Comp pick system is not designed to help bad or good teams. It’s designed to help teams who lose good players to FAs. And it’s working as intended.

 

And who do you think are the teams that consistently lose good players to FAs?

Is it the team everyone wants to play for or the team nobody wants to play for?

 

14 minutes ago, Aussie Joe said:

 

Why should all the systems benefit the poorly managed teams (like draft & schedule)?

 

 

Parity. It's good for the league and good for fans when the bad teams actually have a shot at winning. The compensatory system stacks the system against them.

Edited March 11, 2021 by Rigotz

[Doc]

Yeah comp picks weren't mean to help bad teams: the draft is supposed to do that.  And by virtue of being bad teams, they're less likely to lose good players and thus get (good) comp picks.

[Mr. WEO]

This thread doesn't seem to be working as intended...

[billsfan89]

It is very broken always has been. The stupid in and out formula is very backwards and accomplishes nothing. 

[DJB]

Well the creator of the compensatory rule Bill Belichek disagrees. 

[Buffalo_Stampede]

It is what it is. Everyone knows the rules. 

[whatdrought]

That's not at all what the comp pick system is for... If anything, it does help garbage teams by encouraging good teams, with good players to allow those players to leave, thus giving bad teams the chance to sign them.

 

The reason it always looks broken is the idea among decision makers that a player from a good team is a good player. People have been overpaying Patriot cast offs for years only to have them go back to the pats for pennies on the dollar after they flame out because teams overpaid them and didn't know how to use them. 

[Aussie Joe]

9 minutes ago, Rigotz said:

 

 

Parity. It's good for the league and good for fans when the bad teams actually have a shot at winning. The compensatory system stacks the system against them.

You think it’s bad... I don’t mind it ...I think the bad teams get enough leg ups...

[Dkollidas]

I disagree with the OP. It’s meant to help teams that lose good players. Develop good players, lose them, and don’t replace them with other highly paid players, and then you’ll get comp picks 

[FireChans]

48 minutes ago, Rigotz said:

 

And who do you think are the teams that consistently lose good players to FAs?

Is it the team everyone wants to play for or the team nobody wants to play for?

 

 

Parity. It's good for the league and good for fans when the bad teams actually have a shot at winning. The compensatory system stacks the system against them.

Teams that lose good players to FA might be teams that were good but are losing good players. They might be teams that are bad and losing good players.

 

Both teams get comp picks for losing good FAs. Because that’s how it’s supposed to work. 
 

In the salary cap era, theoretically, a good team would lose more good players than a bad team. Because they can’t afford them. 

Edited March 11, 2021 by FireChans

[djp14150]

1 hour ago, Mcdermott said:

I’m not sure where you got the idea that that was the intent of the compensatory pick system but its working exactly as it was intended.

 

Q told him....

[Rigotz]

15 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Teams that lose good players to FA might be teams that were good but are losing good players. They might be teams that are bad and losing good players.

 

Both teams get comp picks for losing good FAs. Because that’s how it’s supposed to work. 
 

In the salary cap era, theoretically, a good team would lose more good players than a bad team. Because they can’t afford them. 

 

That was how the system was built, but that's not how it functions.

I'm not sure why a lot of you can't see this. I just laid it out for you.

 

Imagine you're a free agent.

Would you rather play for the team that always wins?

Or, would you rather play for the team that always loses?

Of course, you would pick the team that always wins.

The comp pick system was created to counter-balance this by rewarding bad teams who can't hold on to their players.

But the opposite happened.

 

Now, not only are free agents overpaid by the loser teams (because it's the only way they can get these players), the winner teams get EXTRA picks in return and can replace those players that they just lost because, of course, they are overpaid by loser teams.

 

That seems like a pretty bad concept if the NFL is trying to encourage small market teams, who typically lose, to actually have a chance.

 

[Buffalo Junction]

On the flipside.... It’s kind of interesting how many times the Pats, Chiefs, 49ers and Saints have lost draft picks for violating NFL rules and policies. 
 

To the OP..... It certainly awards good teams with good management and good players. That said, one big issue with poorly run franchises is that they often fail to identify and/ develop drafted talent. Compensatory picks often keep those better teams from negotiating with high priced FAs. This brings down the cost of FAs in the market and provides the worst teams a better opportunity to sign top FAs if those players want top dollar. If all the offered contracts are equal how many FAs would sign with the Lions or Texans instead of a a super bowl contender? Artificially removing the better run franchises from the market allows talent to spread to worse teams. It also provides compensation to poorly run teams who have a FA bolt for greener pastures. 
 

Compensatory picks are not perfect. However, without them there would likely be a return to more salary cap violations, tampering, etc where the better run franchises exploit every conceivable loophole until it’s closed or they get caught. It also allows for player movement before the mid-season trade deadline. Contenders have no problem trading a 2nd round pick for a player in the final year of his deal when they know they’re likely to recoup a substantial chunk of draft capital with a comp pick. 

[Thurman#1]

1 hour ago, Rigotz said:

The Compensatory Pick system was designed to allow the bad teams to keep their good players.

 

Instead, it rewards the good teams because they can afford to let good players walk and get huge contracts, while back-filling with cheap players who want to "win now."

 

This year is another perfect example.

 

The Bottom 10 Teams this year were:

32) Jaguars: Zero Comp Picks

31) Jets: Zero Comp Picks

30)Texans: Zero Comp Picks

29) Falcons: 3 Comp Picks, but none in Round 3 or 4.

28) Eagles: 2 Comp Picks, but none in Round 3, 4, or 5.

27) Bengals: Zero Comp Picks

26) Lions: Zero Comp Picks

25) Broncos: Zero Comp Picks

24) Panthers: 2 Comp Picks, but none in rounds 3, 4, or 5.

23) Giants: Zero Comp Picks

 

So, none of the bottom 10 teams got any Round 3 or Round 4 compensatory picks.

Meanwhile, perennial playoff teams like the Patriots, Saints, Steelers, Packers, Chiefs, Rams, Titans and Ravens all received round 3 and/or round 4 picks.

 

This is a disgrace.

 

 

 

What a surprise that there is an NFL rule or situation that good organizations handle better than bad ones.

 

You say it's the comp pick system that stacks the system against the bad teams. That's nonsense. It's how the bad teams react to it. To it and to every other thing that comes up. They react badly, because they're bad teams. That's not the fault of any rule.