[jjchieffan]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

If there wasn't a rookie cap, rookies in the free market could negotiate a market wage. Because there's a cap, Eric Fisher gets comped at #1 the same as Andrew Luck would.

So yes, rookies are extremely underpaid. I get the reasons why they do it, but it doesn't take away from the fact that rookies get screwed.

But the heart of my response is responding to the dumb and overused idea that athletes should just find another job. Find another industry where owners collude with each other to underpay athletes. Most businesses pay a market wage. If it's too low, the jobseeker can find a job somewhere else. The NFL clearly does not do that. Overall payrolls would soar if they took away the salary cap. And if the players took another job, the NFL would tank. They are irreplaceable talent. Therefore, players are underpaid.

Back before the last CBA, when players had the right to negotiate what you call a "fair wage", first round rookies were way overpaid. Players were paid based on potential instead of what they had proven. Drafting a player in the first round that busted was devastating to teams salary caps and it would take years to recover. I think that they could be paid a bit better than they are now. But I don't believe that they are "extremely" underpaid as you put it. Why should Jared Goff come into the league as the first overall pick and get paid more money than Tom Brady or Big Ben or whoever?? That is exactly what was happening before and it had to change. Jared Goff would have probably received a $100 million rookie contract if not for the cap. Then, say he busts. The Rams would have paid out all that money for nothing. He didn't even play last year. He received an $18 million signing bonus on a 4 year $27 million deal. I don't think that's unfair at all for a guy who hasn't proven anything yet.