Booster4324 Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 A friend of mine is a big proponent of 1 year contracts as in, that's the duration of all contracts league wide. IOW's every year is a contract year and you will only be rewarded for "what have you done for us lately". Of course the NFLPA would never go for it and it would have to be a hard salary cap IMO. There would have to be some sort of provision for replacing injured players. I have my own feelings on the subject but I was curious as to how you folks felt. (btw before people start going off about how he's a complete moron, it's just a random idea of his and he's extremely knowledgable about almost every sport) Edited for clarity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanM.D. Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 Unfortunately in a competitive market, someone is always going to offer more. Players get po'd when they are franchised and that one year deal is always a big salary. Players want that big bonus that you can't get with a one year deal. It would work great if you were the only show in town. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted March 14, 2007 Author Share Posted March 14, 2007 Unfortunately in a competitive market, someone is always going to offer more. Players get po'd when they are franchised and that one year deal is always a big salary. Players want that big bonus that you can't get with a one year deal. It would work great if you were the only show in town. Sorry I should clarify, as in that's the league standard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanM.D. Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 That makes your premise more plausible but the problem is it would never happen. The NFLPA would never agree to that standard in collective bargaining. It would take massive collusion by the owners. I agree that it would certainly keep athletes on edge. It really would be an unfair work environment though. Can you imagine if every workplace was held to a one year standard? It's great unless you're the guy that gets fired/cut/injured.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted March 14, 2007 Author Share Posted March 14, 2007 That makes your premise more plausible but the problem is it would never happen. The NFLPA would never agree to that standard in collective bargaining. It would take massive collusion by the owners. I agree that it would certainly keep athletes on edge. It really would be an unfair work environment though. Can you imagine if every workplace was held to a one year standard? It's great unless you're the guy that gets fired/cut/injured.... Yeah it's more for idle chit chat I threw it out there. I can see how they might be able to swing it with certain provisions though. Say some sort of disability pension for the injured guys and lets be fair, most have a 4 year career or so. Permanent pension and a few million dollars sounds pretty dang good unless you are the CEO of a major company and then it's just your lunch expense account. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 Yeah it's more for idle chit chat I threw it out there. I can see how they might be able to swing it with certain provisions though. Say some sort of disability pension for the injured guys and lets be fair, most have a 4 year career or so. Permanent pension and a few million dollars sounds pretty dang good unless you are the CEO of a major company and then it's just your lunch expense account. Free agency for everyone every year! BRILLIANT! You think players jump around too much now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted March 14, 2007 Author Share Posted March 14, 2007 Free agency for everyone every year! BRILLIANT! You think players jump around too much now? I will put you in the no category. Honestly, I am simply curious as to the opinions of others. My friend mentioned it briefly again at lunch and I was reminded of it by something said in another thread. Besides my putrid average post's per day needs all the help it can get. Personally, I would have said, "Umm do you think we might have to spend a lot more on coaching staff/scouts as the free agency market will be extremely hard to evaluate". That's just me though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 I will put you in the no category. Excellent Honestly, I am simply curious as to the opinions of others. My friend mentioned it briefly again at lunch and I was reminded of it by something said in another thread. Besides my putrid average post's per day needs all the help it can get.[/quote] Personally, I would have said, "Umm do you think we might have to spend a lot more on coaching staff/scouts as the free agency market will be extremely hard to evaluate". That's just me though. And now you have Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 Thats a horrid idea, that would leave teams with no continuity Players would be switching teams left and right, and merchandise sales (i.e. Jersey sales) would drop drastically cause no one would pay what they are worth to own a jersey of a player only guaranteed to play for a team for one year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartshan-83 Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 If I was in charge, I'd make one serious change to NFL contracts: Create a multi-tiered salary limit based on experience (as done in the NBA). No more of this 6 year/50 million dollar rookie bullsht. If Lebron James can make half of what Marcus Camby makes, then I'm sure every top 10 draft pick can stomach a less exorbitant, and far more appropriate salary. It is getting out of control to the point where it is ruining the quality of football because teams are forced to purge superior veterans for the sake of paying out "potential." Rod Woodson once said that in his day you had to be a very good rookie to make a team, but now you have to be a very good veteran to make it. Rookie contracts must be capped, or salaries will spin out of control. As far as more drastic, experimental changes...I'd consider another: Incentive based-guaranteed contracts. I hate guaranteed contracts because of what they have done to baseball and basketball players. But OTOH, I feel it is very unfair that the athletes partaking in our country's most violent (and shortest-lived career-wise) sport are the only ones who do not have this luxury. I'm not sure if it would work, but I've always played with the idea of creating a system of relatively low (amount) base salaries with an array of very high incentive bonuses. I would still allow signing bonuses (they would however also be subject the the experience-tier) so that players wouldn't get screwed by injuries. I just think that maybe experimenting with a guarantee/incentive hybrid might keep the players from mailing it in like MLBers, but still afford them some security which might avoid potential hold-outs and early re-negotiations. I don't know...just some stuff I think about from time to time when the wonderful world of easements and defeasible fees isn't filling my life with excitement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted March 14, 2007 Author Share Posted March 14, 2007 Thats a horrid idea, that would leave teams with no continuity Players would be switching teams left and right, and merchandise sales (i.e. Jersey sales) would drop drastically cause no one would pay what they are worth to own a jersey of a player only guaranteed to play for a team for one year Well I think there would also have to be certain things added to it. Like say, you arent eligible till your 5th year to enter free agency. You could franchise a certain number of players like say 3. One player would have say a Larry Bird exemption type of contract. Is no one willing to play devil's advocate or do I have to? There are upsides to the idea. A) Players play harder in contract years. B) Elimination of dead cap money. C) You get what you pay for as a fan and an owner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanM.D. Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 No more of this 6 year/50 million dollar rookie bullsht. Couldn't agree more. Rookie salaries are a joke in the NFL. Unproven players get huge cash while solid vets get squeezed by the cap. It is hard to put limits on some employees and not others but I think it is reasonable here. At least make it very incentive based. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 Incentive based-guaranteed contracts. I hate guaranteed contracts because of what they have done to baseball and basketball players. But OTOH, I feel it is very unfair that the athletes partaking in our country's most violent (and shortest-lived career-wise) sport are the only ones who do not have this luxury. I'm not sure if it would work, but I've always played with the idea of creating a system of relatively low (amount) base salaries with an array of very high incentive bonuses. I would still allow signing bonuses (they would however also be subject the the experience-tier) so that players wouldn't get screwed by injuries. I just think that maybe experimenting with a guarantee/incentive hybrid might keep the players from mailing it in like MLBers, but still afford them some security which might avoid potential hold-outs and early re-negotiations. This is what I think all sports team should be doing. You get a base salary that could be dependent on your position, and then the team sets incentives that a player can reach during the season (get more if your on a playoff team, make the Pro Bowl, etc.) Doing that would almost eliminate the need for a salary cap, and it would eliminate the idea that players only play their best in a contract year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IndyJay1234 Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 Sorry I should clarify, as in that's the league standard. I believe the XFL tried it... Yeah ahhh... How did that work out?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 I believe the XFL tried it... Yeah ahhh... How did that work out?? Well to be fair, the XFL didn't fail because of the salary structure, it failed because it was VInce McMahons league and it got no support (probably because most thought it was rigged like his wrestling, and because the product sucked) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimBob2232 Posted March 15, 2007 Share Posted March 15, 2007 no way...players are risking their career every single play. There are one concussion or achillies away from bagging groceries to feed their families (and im not kidding). They need to have the financial security of a long-term contract. In fact, I take the opposite approach, make all contracts guaranteed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts