Colts president Polian says NFL draft needs updating
 

Good read, I thought:

http://www.nfl.com/combine/story?id=...o&confirm=true

INDIANAPOLIS -- Indianapolis Colts president Bill Polian isn't sure if having a top 10 draft pick would be worth it.
His Colts don't have a selection until late in the second round. He explained Sunday at the NFL Scouting Combine why his team might be better off that way.
Polian said good teams like the Colts are less likely than in the past to trade up for an early pick because of the required financial commitment. Last year's top pick, JaMarcus Russell, missed all of training camp in a contract dispute before getting $29 million in guarantees.
"Trades are a unique thing in the first round anymore because of the cost of the top 10 picks financially," he said. "To take on that cost ... is almost counterintuitive."
Polian said agents have driven up the cost of the early picks, making it more difficult than ever for struggling franchises to improve. He said that cost can hamper teams for years, especially if they make a mistake on a pick or the player gets injured.
"The draft was designed to either allow the weakest teams, based on record, to choose the best players, or if they chose not to take a particular player, to gather a bunch of picks to further accelerate their growth and competitiveness," he said. "That's now been skewed by the cost of the picks in the first round.
"When that's skewed and changed because of the agents, that isn't a good thing for the game."
Polian said the system also makes it difficult for a team drafting early to acquire pieces to put around the high pick. He said making the right pick is possible, but difficult.
"What it can do, if you're fortunate enough to get a Peyton Manning, is it can change your franchise," he said. "It gives you a guy who can lead you to the promised land, can help you be a good team for a long time. If you miss on that pick, economics aside, you still set yourself back."
Polian said he expects the system to change eventually. He said the league could change the pay scale or create a slotting system like the NBA has, creating a fixed rate for draft positions.
But the current system, he feels, needs to be updated so the league can remain balanced.
"Our game is based on competitive balance and the fact that every year, every franchise believes they can win, unlike other sports. You can go from worst to first in a year.
"It's not about money, it's about the integrity of the game on the field."

"It's not about the money" ROFL

I kindof agree with him on this. I cant believe how much the top picks are "Guaranteed" without yet playing a single snap, having a single practice...

Its gambling.

OK, back to the Texas Hold'em table for me...

Well, it is about the money, but he's actually arguing *for* parity and the crappy teams. Limiting the money paid out to 1st rounders, particularly top 10 guys, would be AWESOME.

Slotting is the one thing that the NBA does that is superior to the NFL's draft. I would love to see that approach but don't think the player's union will go for it.

The NFLPA will never agree to that. Why should they?

Polian probably is just trying to rig things his way. So much for integrity.

The agents would definitely oppose it. The Player's Association shouldn't oppose it (though they probably will) if the slotting system is "salary neutral" -- raising the minimum salary and the spending floors to ensure that the same amount of $$ is going to players, just spread out a little more evenly.

uh ... maybe because if they slot the draft picks then the salaries of the veteran players will go up dramatically.


it's not about the players getting less, it's about the money that the players get being distributed differently.

"Bill Polian isn't sure if having a top 10 draft pick would be worth it."

What? Where does he think Peyton Manning came from? Where did Marshall Faulk come from? Where did Edgerin James come from? How many games have those three players won for the Colts?

Agree with Colts President Polian.

focus man ..... focus


he's talking about the price of the high picks going up so far that it hurts the team almost as much as helps. A "miss" on a high pick just kills a team.


he's right

I agree 150%. Isn't J. Russel one of the top 10 paid QB's in the league, and at the time, he had never even set foot on the field. That is bullshit in my opinion. what if he turns out to be a pile of crap, that means the Raiders paid 29 Million for Ryan Leaf part II. There should be a set amount that is awarder per draft selection. Draft Pick 1 gets X amount of dollars, and it slowly declines from there. This money shoudl not just go back to the owners though, it should be used to invest in the veterans, the proven commodities in the industry. Not some dumb punk who hasn't contributed shit to the team or the league yet.

The number one picks shouldn't be making more than the superstars already in the NFL.

This decision wouldn't affect existing NFL players negatively though, would it? In fact, limiting the $$ doled out to unproven rookies would create more available for players already on the team.

Whitlock makes a suggestion in his article up on Fox Sports about limiting rookie salaries to 2 years and maximum of $10 million or some such thing.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/7850370?MSNHPHMA

I understand the point of the article. It is a legitimate point which is why it is not necessary to exaggerate or say things like, "top ten picks- who needs those?" What would his team be without top ten pick, Peyton Manning?

This is something that has bothered me for a long time, but as usual I don't see anything changing. There's way too much money involved.

Name 10 superstar qbs. I can't believe I actually agree with Shitlock that rookies shouldn't get paid as much until they actually play, then pay them as such.

The high pay to a high draft pick just gives established superstars more justification for more money. None of the players are going to support owners keeping even more money.

NBA style slotting would be a very welcome change to the NFL. Not only would there be more trades in the draft (making the better players even more valuable) but even more "superstar" players would stay with their respective teams throughout their career due a higher allocation of money to veterans.

I hope the next CBA includes slotting. I think it would make the game even more competitive.

but that's just it ..... the owners wouldn't be keeping ANY more money.

the salary cap would stay the same

veteran players get more money
rookies get less money

Who says the owner would spend that money? The veterans wouldn't make any more money, IMO.

now your just grabbing at straws

if the owners aren't gonna spend then they aren't gonna spend. Having Draft slotting isn't gonna change that.

Besides the NFL already has a salary FLOOR to go with their salary CAP.

Every team must spend a minimum of 75% of the current salary cap.

I'm not grabbing at anything. I'm just pointing out that no union anywhere is going to "trust management" and approve singling out members and limiting their income, not to the extent that this article is talking about. The union is paid because its members are paid.

probably right .... but that just shows how short-sighted many of these so-called unions are these days.

they shouldn't even be called unions imo


during the last CBA the NFL players union wanted a higher % of the total income. So they negotiated and extra 2% of the pie in exchange for taking over the retirement and disability funds for it's own members. Then it promptly starting blaming the Owners for the condition of retirement and disability that IT was in charge of.

right now the veteran are made because rookies are making too much money and getting many veterans CUT. But they don't have the brains to go to slotting so that veterans would get paid more. They will still blame the owners for their own stupidity.


stop blaming the owners and start using their brains

Glad he said it.


I WANT A ROOKIE CAP !!!

I agree with what he is saying, BUT the best COSTS MORE money. It's the old law of supply and demand. I'd like to see it brought in to more realistic numbers for rookies, but...

fine .... then the veteran players can just STFU because they have chosen to differ to the rookies.

It's a double-edged sword. They ALL want to be paid. I'm sure they'll get it sorted out.

There is nothing guaranteed except these guys getting their big bonuses for doing nothing.

Half of these players will never live up to their slotting.

And why do these guys think that they should get any big bonus from where their picked? It's still all a guessing game until they prove themselves.

We need a proving time period to test these guys. Answer = rookie cap with NO F%$# Bonuses. You get no damn bonus rookie until you help the team.

At face value one would think that, but think about it this way:

The NFL has a salary cap that nearly every team fills every year. What difference should it make to an agent if he is getting a $2 million commission from a rookie or five $400,000 commissions from veterans? It's the same money pool either way. So in a way, Polian is right. It's not about the money.

Look at how fast the NBA players are signed. Its great. The NFL should want that.

This 4 month holdout crap is reeruniculous.

There are only 2 teams that are within 5 million dollars of the salary cap, according to the numbers I've seen. Jacksonville is 46 million under the cap for crying out loud. Of course it's about the money.

The only problem with going 2 years and a maximum of $10 million dollars is that the players drafted in the 1st round will more than likely leave the team that drafted them because they suck.

Yeah I brought that up the first time this story was posted.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=4602971

I like the idea of set amounts for rookies a few reasons, but the number one reason is NO MORE ROOKIE HOLDOUTS! It hurts the player and the team for the rookies to not be in camp. Russell lost most of the season last year due to his holdout, we have had several first round picks that missed part of camp and it hurt their careers. It also is not right to pay someone who has never played a snap in the NFL more than a seasoned vet. The amount of money Ryan Sims got was highway robbery. He sure did not deserve it.

Gosh, that would force teams to actually play their draft picks instead of sit on them for years to see if they got any talent for their team or not..

Not all GM's and owners are Clark and Carl, some teams want to win championships so they will spend all their money acquiring talent to do it.. Not like Carl who will leave extra millions in their pool out of spite for profit..

I think this would be a great idea, make all first day selections this way for the first 3rounds.. 2-4 year contracts at a certain pay for each position.. Make it so these rookies are not making more then the veterans..

Opens up a bigger pool of money to use elsewhere..

Also up the salary cap floor to 90% to stop teams like the Chiefs from making a profit off of it..

An excellent idea. One that the NFLPA would never sign off on.

25 teams are 10 million dollars or more under the salary cap.

You are looking at cap numbers right now at the beginning of the season.. I am talking during the season.. The Chiefs and a few other teams carried 6+ million that could have been spent on players..

yes I'm looking at numbers before the season. There's no way these teams are going to be filling up 10-40 million in cap space. Nor would they ever want to.

Too bad the NFLPA is a bunch of bugs beneath the shoes of ownership. If the league wanted to slot rookie contracts, they could do it. This isn't the NBA or MLB, the NFL Union is a joke.

That hasn't really been put to the test anytime recently.

Then why did the owners sign a crappy CBA a few years ago?

The fact is, everybody is too busy printing money to want any kind of boat rocking. Nobody wants to see crappy replacement players, not even in Mall of America type stadiums.

Less money to unproven rooks is more money to proven vets...

That isn't true.

If they're fighting a cap it isn't. And lately it looks like moronic owners might veto the current deal.

Honestly though, if the rookie cap can shrink because of what's slotted that means the first 3 weeks of free agency can be a bigger splurge. Even marginal players would get more because you have some basis in the NFL to judge them by.

And the high spenders (Skins, Cowboys, Faiders, Cheating Donx) will still set the price...