PDA

View Full Version : Football Interesting stuff from Goddell on CBA


Buehler445
06-28-2008, 11:27 AM
Goodell: Rookie pay is 'ridiculous'


CHAUTAUQUA, N.Y. (AP) -- NFL commissioner Roger Goodell said it's "ridiculous" to reward untested rookies with lucrative contracts, and wants the issue addressed in contract talks.

"There's something wrong about the system," Goodell said Friday. "The money should go to people who perform."

Goodell referred to Michigan tackle Jake Long's five-year, $57.75 million contract -- with $30 million guaranteed. Long was the first overall draft pick by the Miami Dolphins in April.

"He doesn't have to play a down in the NFL and he already has his money," Goodell said during a question-and-answer period at the end of a weeklong sports symposium at the Chautauqua Institution. "Now, with the economics where they are, the consequences if you don't evaluate that player, you can lose a significant amount of money.

"And that money is not going to players that are performing. It's going to a player that never makes it in the NFL. And I think that's ridiculous."

Goodell said he favors lowering salaries offered to rookies, but allowing a provision for those players to renegotiate their deals after proving themselves on the field.

His statement was greeted by a long round of applause from the estimated crowd of 2,000 inside the amphitheater.

Speaking to reporters before his appearance, Goodell said he plans to open negotiations with the players union on a revamped labor deal this fall. He's listened to concerns from all 32 owners in meetings over the past month.

"We just finished a series of one-on-one meetings with all 32 teams, where I have a better understanding and people have a better understanding of the economics each team is facing," Goodell said. "I think we can identify what it is we need in a negotiation to continue to make the agreement work for the NFL and for the players."

Goodell said the key need is to have the NFL Players' Association appreciate the financial challenges owners face with rising stadium construction costs and a faltering economy. Those issues were not anticipated in the previous collective bargaining agreement, which provided players a 60 percent share of the league's gross revenues.

"As our costs increase outside of player costs, that other 40 percent ... squeezes the margins and just makes it financially unworkable," Goodell said. "There has to be some more recognition of the costs."

League owners, last month, voted unanimously to opt out of the CBA that was signed in spring 2006. The decision to opt out maintains labor peace through 2011, but will result in changes regarding the NFL's salary cap and contract signings if a new deal is not signed by March 2010.

Goodell referred to next March as a deadline, but "not the end deadline," but hoped a deal could be reached by then. If not, teams will enter the following season without a salary cap. While there are concerns some of the NFL's richer teams would use their vast resources to buy up star players, there's also a drawback for players.

Under the new rules, the time for free agency in an uncapped year would rise from four years to six and allow teams to protect one extra player with franchise or transition tags. In addition, the two-year lag would allow many teams to extend the contracts of their most important players, maintaining the continuity that is important to winning teams.

Goodell acknowledged the NFL and its owners failed to foresee the economic issues that would face the league when the last CBA was approved.

"There have been some things that none of us could've envisioned," Goodell said. "You have an economy that's weakening. You have aspects of the deal that we didn't realize that we were going to be building billion-dollar stadiums. ... Things happen. I don't look back at it as a mistake. I look back at it as what do we need to do going forward?"


http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/football/nfl/06/27/goodell.rookies.ap/index.html - Apologies if this is a repost.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is some kind of interesting stuff there. Hopefully something gets worked out for the draft picks. It sounds like he is for real about it and hopefully it is not just lip service.

I didn't know about the 60% of league's GROSS Revenue going to the players union. That could put a lot of teams in a bad way quickly.

A lot of people have said on here that parity is what separates the NFL from other sports. I think it needs repeating.

EDIT - I really want some football to talk about!

Adept Havelock
06-28-2008, 11:41 AM
He's right, IMO. Absurd sums to players that have never proven a thing is ridiculous.

We can call it the "Ryan (Leaf/Sims)" Clause of the CBA.

Buehler445
06-28-2008, 12:42 PM
He's right, IMO. Absurd sums to players that have never proven a thing is ridiculous.

We can call it the "Ryan (Leaf/Sims)" Clause of the CBA.

Yeah, I like the idea of renegotiating early on. That seems like a good compromise. We'll see if the union goes for it.

Mecca
06-28-2008, 01:24 PM
It's great in theory but I see some of the players and the union acting like this is taking money out of the league.

Rausch
06-28-2008, 01:26 PM
It's great in theory but I see some of the players and the union acting like this is taking money out of the league.

Money given to rookies is money you can't give to a vet.

When it comes right down to it the PA would prefer to piss off a wet behind the ears rook before the true earners that are vets...

Spicy McHaggis
06-28-2008, 01:30 PM
Goodell said he favors lowering salaries offered to rookies, but allowing a provision for those players to renegotiate their deals after proving themselves on the field.

I'm interested in how they'll define when a player has "proven himself on the field" especially at various positions.

Could Patrick Willis say he's proven himself? Could Adrian Peterson? I would say they certainly have a case. Or do they have to perform more than one year at that level?

It sounds like a great idea in theory. I'll wait and see how they actually work it out.

jjchieffan
06-28-2008, 01:46 PM
I think the rookies should simply have a slotted one year pay scale set based on position and draft order. Every rookie would be in camp on time, the players would have the opportunity to prove themeselves first, and teams could start negotiating say after the trade deadline. Maybe a 2 year pay would be better since many position players don't get the opportunityto play much as rookies. Brady Quinn would suffer because he was on the bench all last year. Under this scenario, Jared Allen would have made more in KC than Ryan Simms.

doomy3
06-28-2008, 02:11 PM
Would the NFL ever go for an arbitration type system kind of like MLB?

Valiant
06-28-2008, 02:41 PM
I think the rookies should simply have a slotted one year pay scale set based on position and draft order. Every rookie would be in camp on time, the players would have the opportunity to prove themeselves first, and teams could start negotiating say after the trade deadline. Maybe a 2 year pay would be better since many position players don't get the opportunityto play much as rookies. Brady Quinn would suffer because he was on the bench all last year. Under this scenario, Jared Allen would have made more in KC than Ryan Simms.

First 3 rounds a tiered pay scale.. Those players get guaranteed 5 year contracts.. The first 3years, are draft pay scale.. Years 4 and 5 can be negotiated like baseball if the player performed well or became a starter..

Rounds 4-7 are tiered also.. But their contracts are not guaranteed for 5 years..

You can adjust or add ideas..

Also would force a salary cap minimum into the league.. Say if the salary cap is 115million per team you have to spend at least 85million on players..

And I would force the owners to get rid of these exorbitant signing bonuses or if they choose to have that much signing bonus on players that they have to match that amount to the league pool which goes to the other teams that are not Dallas, New YOrks or Washington.. Kind of like what is in baseball, when certain owners overpay the rest of the league because they have really deep pockets..

Buehler445
06-28-2008, 02:42 PM
Money given to rookies is money you can't give to a vet.

When it comes right down to it the PA would prefer to piss off a wet behind the ears rook before the true earners that are vets...

I don't think that will be much of a problem. What the PU will get upset about is the owners wanting to change the part where the PU gets 60% of gross revenue for the league.

They will view that as the PU getting less and less money, but it is necessary or someone is going broke, and it could damn well be us.

FAX
06-28-2008, 02:50 PM
I couldn't agree more.

FAX

jjchieffan
06-29-2008, 07:37 PM
I think the big hang up for the union is that the huge rookie contractors serve as a basis for the vets to use when negotiating their own new contracts. i.e. Rookie Smith just got X million and has never played a snap. I just made the pro bowl. I deserve X+ money. If the rookies can't get the big contracts, then they lose some negotiating leverage.

Buehler445
06-29-2008, 07:46 PM
I think the big hang up for the union is that the huge rookie contractors serve as a basis for the vets to use when negotiating their own new contracts. i.e. Rookie Smith just got X million and has never played a snap. I just made the pro bowl. I deserve X+ money. If the rookies can't get the big contracts, then they lose some negotiating leverage.

That's a good thought, but I think it is more based on other big name contracts that are signed. For example this board was full of "Is Allen worth Freeney money?" or "Is LJ worth LT money?"

If the system was slotted, I think they could find some other comparitive function for negotiations.

007
06-29-2008, 08:52 PM
Not that I think vets are underpaid, but rookies never playing a down should not get paid more than vets period.

DaFace
06-29-2008, 09:00 PM
Not that I think vets are underpaid, but rookies never playing a down should not get paid more than vets period.

Definitely agree.

I think the rookies should simply have a slotted one year pay scale set based on position and draft order. Every rookie would be in camp on time, the players would have the opportunity to prove themeselves first, and teams could start negotiating say after the trade deadline. Maybe a 2 year pay would be better since many position players don't get the opportunityto play much as rookies. Brady Quinn would suffer because he was on the bench all last year. Under this scenario, Jared Allen would have made more in KC than Ryan Simms.

That's basically how I feel. I doubt they could get a slotted pay scale through the players union, but you'd think that it would solve a lot of problems. Vets would get higher paydays, rookies would get to camp on time, and (I'd bet) rookies would play better since they have to earn their future pay. As it is, it's too easy for some of them to be Ryan Sims and just be happy with their big paychecks.

StcChief
06-29-2008, 09:02 PM
well I think performance based contracts are all that is necessary.

Mecca
06-29-2008, 09:11 PM
Not that I think vets are underpaid, but rookies never playing a down should not get paid more than vets period.

Depends what vet it is......I'm pretty sure a top 5 pick should probably get more money than say Ron Edwards.

Buehler445
06-29-2008, 09:21 PM
I'd take Edwards over Sims (top 6 pick) any day dollar for dollar.

007
06-29-2008, 09:35 PM
Depends what vet it is......I'm pretty sure a top 5 pick should probably get more money than say Ron Edwards.

Yeah, I should have defined that better. I was referring more to the Starters and probowlers.

Mojo Rising
06-29-2008, 09:58 PM
This is all posturing for the renogiation of the CBA. There is no way they could have a rookie scale without guaranteed contracts.

Rookie scales work in the NBA because the rookies only play 1 year in college for the most part and because the contracts are guaranteed. The NFL has 4 (sometimes 3) years to study these guys. They earn their signing bonus while in College.