Falcons sign Ryan to $72M contract

[The Rick]

Falcons sign Ryan to $72M contract

By Peter King, SI.com

In a stunning contract sure to have ramifications up and down the first round of the NFL draft, the Atlanta Falcons have signed QB Matt Ryan, the third pick in April's draft, to a six-year, $72 million contract with a hefty $34.75 million bonus.

The Falcons obviously wanted to get Ryan in camp without a holdout. The franchise is eager to lift black cloud that has hung over the franchise since Michael Vick was jailed in a shocking dogfighting case and coach Bobby Petrino jilted the team with three games left in the season, leaving for Arkansas.

Ryan is expected to compete for the starting job with Falcon roster holdovers Joey Harrington and Chris Redman. Obviously, it's only a matter of time before he wins the job as Atlanta's quarterback of the future.

NFL teams had been trying to hold down rookie salaries this year, and Miami's signing of No. 1 pick Jake Long to a reported five-year, $57.75 million contract with $30 million guaranteed was a step in the right direction because it contained approximately the same guaranteed money as last year's top pick, JaMarcus Russell, received from the Oakland Raiders. But $34 million guaranteed for the third pick will surely draw the ire of other teams and general managers trying to hold the line.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...act/index.html

[Hydrae]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

I don't think this will have much impact on Dorsey. Long signed for $57 million with $30 million guaranteed. QB's will always make more money than anyone else.

I agree though that the NFL does need to do what the NBA does as far as rookie slotting.

That is my thinking as well. You should not expect a DT to be earning as much as a QB so I am not sure how much affect this will really have for us. Of course this is where Carl's tough guy stance comes in to play and leaves us without at least one of the first rounders most of the way through camp.

[StcChief]

Originally Posted by Molitoth

Matt Ryan Leaf

we can hope, need a good bust at QB has been a while an over-rated QB fell to earth fast.

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

This, of course, is part of why teams want to renegotiate the CBA. Slotted rookie salaries makes a helluva lot of sense, and I have no idea why the union would oppose them. It makes no sense for a rookie to get more than anybody except a multiple pro bowl veteran.

The NFL is so much tougher than the NBA or MLB because most players only get ONE contract, maybe two...

So for some of these top rookies it is important to get the money while they can...especially since contracts in the NFL aren't guaranteed like the NBA and mostly in the MLB.

I don't know what they can do...other than maybe guaranteeing two year contracts or giving the players SOME leverage...or giving the team that drafted you your rights for 4 or 5 years like the NBA...it's just more difficult in the NFL.

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Molitoth

Matt Ryan Leaf

Leaf was a miserable failure in part because he had the emotional maturity of a 3 year old.

Ryan is the exact opposite. He is the definition of mature, calm, cool and collected. He has tremendous leadership skills.

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by Basileus777

This is why the old CBA had to go. The NFL needs to get their act together and implement and NBA style rookie pay scale.

He has a larger contract than the new one Romo just signed...the system is broken.

The only way to fix it, in my opinion, is for said scale and TWO year deals with an option year...the average NFL career makes these rookies try and get as much as humanly possible because most of them only have one contract to make their money...whether it be the massive rookie one they sign or the second contract they sign like LJ...

Lets say LJ played out his rookie contract and the foot injury happened his final season...he only signed for what, like 7 million total for the first 5 years he was in the NFL? Yeah, 7 million is a lot to you or me but when guys like Brian Cardinal are making 50 million dollars for 6 years of NBA service...I can see why the NFL guys ask for so much money when they are top picks...or holdout after breakout seasons...the organizations always have all of the leverage.

[dirk digler]

Originally Posted by Hootie

The NFL is so much tougher than the NBA or MLB because most players only get ONE contract, maybe two...

So for some of these top rookies it is important to get the money while they can...especially since contracts in the NFL aren't guaranteed like the NBA and mostly in the MLB.

I don't know what they can do...other than maybe guaranteeing two year contracts or giving the players SOME leverage...or giving the team that drafted you your rights for 4 or 5 years like the NBA...it's just more difficult in the NFL.

There is no reason why rookies should be making more than the majority of the veterans.

Like most jobs they need to start at the low end and maybe only do 3 yr contracts.

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Hootie

The NFL is so much tougher than the NBA or MLB because most players only get ONE contract, maybe two...

So for some of these top rookies it is important to get the money while they can...especially since contracts in the NFL aren't guaranteed like the NBA and mostly in the MLB.

I don't know what they can do...other than maybe guaranteeing two year contracts or giving the players SOME leverage...or giving the team that drafted you your rights for 4 or 5 years like the NBA...it's just more difficult in the NFL.

NFL will resist guaranteed contracts to the death, and rightly so. Guaranteed contracts have destroyed baseball and basketball, IMHO.

I'm not saying rookies should be paid peanuts, but the draft is ridiculously topheavy -- 1st round picks make 100x 3rd rounders, who generally get little/no guaranteed money, and top of hte 1st round get paid like they're proven vets.

I'm not arguign to reduce the cap, I'm just saying the $$ should be redistribution as between vets and rookies.

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

NFL will resist guaranteed contracts to the death, and rightly so. Guaranteed contracts have destroyed baseball and basketball, IMHO.

I'm not saying rookies should be paid peanuts, but the draft is ridiculously topheavy -- 1st round picks make 100x 3rd rounders, who generally get little/no guaranteed money, and top of hte 1st round get paid like they're proven vets.

I'm not arguign to reduce the cap, I'm just saying the $$ should be redistribution as between vets and rookies.

I don't disagree...I'm just saying the NFL is in a tough predicament with these contracts...not only for rookies, but for veterans...or for guys like Ryan Grant, who makes NOTHING, has the running style that will see him out of the league in two-three seasons...he'll be the featured back for a playoff/super bowl caliber team...and make less than a million dollars (that's just me guessing because he runs so hard he will be out of the league in no time)...

In a perfect world, they would pay based off of performance in all pro sports...but then it would turn into a TO circus of everyone becoming me, me, me, me...

Either way, the NFL is HUGE...and the players get treated far worse (money wise) than any other major American sport.

And in all reality, football does the most long term damage to these players as well...

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Hootie

The only way to fix it, in my opinion, is for said scale and TWO year deals with an option year...the average NFL career makes these rookies try and get as much as humanly possible because most of them only have one contract to make their money...whether it be the massive rookie one they sign or the second contract they sign like LJ...

No, usually the real money is when they hit free agency the first time. Keep in mind that only 1st round picks get decent money -- even 2nd rounder's money isn't great, especially on the guaranteed side. Rookies who actually turn out to be decent hit big twice, at least.

Lets say LJ played out his rookie contract and the foot injury happened his final season...he only signed for what, like 7 million total for the first 5 years he was in the NFL? Yeah, 7 million is a lot to you or me but when guys like Brian Cardinal are making 50 million dollars for 6 years of NBA service...I can see why the NFL guys ask for so much money when they are top picks...or holdout after breakout seasons...the organizations always have all of the leverage.

The economics of the other sports are VERY different. 82 or 162 games versus 16. 12 players or 25 players versus 53. Tom Brady makes less than JD Drew or something silly like that. Garnett/Pierce/Allen ALL make more than ANY NFL player. And the reason is 100% because NFL economics are very different.

In baseball you have a 25 man roster, but only about 13 matter ALL that much, and with about 4 superstars you are a dominant team.

Basketball -- 5 guys on the court at any point in time, and 12 people total on the team.

Football -- 22 starts, plus special teamers. Your great QB doesn't matter worth a damn without an OLine and some decent WRs.

It goes on and on. The economics just aren't the same.

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Hootie

I don't disagree...I'm just saying the NFL is in a tough predicament with these contracts...not only for rookies, but for veterans...or for guys like Ryan Grant, who makes NOTHING, has the running style that will see him out of the league in two-three seasons...he'll be the featured back for a playoff/super bowl caliber team...and make less than a million dollars (that's just me guessing because he runs so hard he will be out of the league in no time)...

In a perfect world, they would pay based off of performance in all pro sports...but then it would turn into a TO circus of everyone becoming me, me, me, me...

Either way, the NFL is HUGE...and the players get treated far worse (money wise) than any other major American sport.

And in all reality, football does the most long term damage to these players as well...

The NFL does have an NFL-wide perofrmance based bonus, but it's relatively small dollars, and only applicable to younger players -- like first 3 years.

And yes, football does do more bodily damage than any toher sport. That's obvious.

[Basileus777]

Originally Posted by Hootie

The only way to fix it, in my opinion, is for said scale and TWO year deals with an option year...the average NFL career makes these rookies try and get as much as humanly possible because most of them only have one contract to make their money...whether it be the massive rookie one they sign or the second contract they sign like LJ...

Lets say LJ played out his rookie contract and the foot injury happened his final season...he only signed for what, like 7 million total for the first 5 years he was in the NFL? Yeah, 7 million is a lot to you or me but when guys like Brian Cardinal are making 50 million dollars for 6 years of NBA service...I can see why the NFL guys ask for so much money when they are top picks...or holdout after breakout seasons...the organizations always have all of the leverage.

I agree that you would have to have short contracts with a pay scale. But I think 2 years is too short, I would give them a 3 year deal and then they become RFAs. You'd have to get rid of poison pills too. The players would benefit by becoming free agents sooner, and while first round picks might earn less, other players who've earned the money would benefit. I would rather have this system than the current one if I was a player. Good players would earn a lot more by getting to their 2nd and 3rd contracts much sooner.

NBA players earn a lot more because they have 15 men on their rosters instead of 53. Even with NFL revenue being much higher, NFL players are never going to earn as much as an NBA player. But yeah, you can't blame the player for wanting as much money as they can get, thats why the system needs to be fixed.

[dirk digler]

Originally Posted by Basileus777

I agree that you would have to have short contracts with a pay scale. But I think 2 years is too short, I would give them a 3 year deal and then they become RFAs. You'd have to get rid of poison pills too. The players would benefit by becoming free agents sooner, and while first round picks might earn less, other players who've earned the money would benefit. I would rather have this system than the current one if I was a player. Good players would earn a lot more by getting to their 2nd and 3rd contracts much sooner.

NBA players earn a lot more because they have 15 men on their rosters instead of 53. Even with NFL revenue being much higher, NFL players are never going to earn as much as an NBA player. But yeah, you can't blame the player for wanting as much money as they can get, thats why the system needs to be fixed.

I agree with most of that except RFA isn't really free agency. Most restricted free agents get like $1-$2 million per year at the most. They need the ability to pay those guys more money but allow the team to get the right of first refusal or match.

[Basileus777]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

NFL will resist guaranteed contracts to the death, and rightly so. Guaranteed contracts have destroyed baseball and basketball, IMHO.

I'm not saying rookies should be paid peanuts, but the draft is ridiculously topheavy -- 1st round picks make 100x 3rd rounders, who generally get little/no guaranteed money, and top of hte 1st round get paid like they're proven vets.

I'm not arguign to reduce the cap, I'm just saying the $$ should be redistribution as between vets and rookies.

I don't think the NFL should implement guaranteed contracts, it wouldn't work for football, but they haven't destroyed basketball. The NBA salary structure/system works rather well, I'd argue that it works better than the current NFL system.

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

No, usually the real money is when they hit free agency the first time. Keep in mind that only 1st round picks get decent money -- even 2nd rounder's money isn't great, especially on the guaranteed side. Rookies who actually turn out to be decent hit big twice, at least.




The economics of the other sports are VERY different. 82 or 162 games versus 16. 12 players or 25 players versus 53. Tom Brady makes less than JD Drew or something silly like that. Garnett/Pierce/Allen ALL make more than ANY NFL player. And the reason is 100% because NFL economics are very different.

In baseball you have a 25 man roster, but only about 13 matter ALL that much, and with about 4 superstars you are a dominant team.

Basketball -- 5 guys on the court at any point in time, and 12 people total on the team.

Football -- 22 starts, plus special teamers. Your great QB doesn't matter worth a damn without an OLine and some decent WRs.

It goes on and on. The economics just aren't the same.

I understand the economics...and the roster size and the amount of games played etc. etc. etc.

But a guy like Michael Strahan who was only worth like $20M last year during his divorce case...

Yikes. You'd think the star players would have more than the $100M+ Tim Salmon made during his MLB playing days

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by Basileus777

I don't think the NFL should implement guaranteed contracts, it wouldn't work for football, but they haven't destroyed basketball. The NBA salary structure/system works rather well, I'd argue that it works better than the current NFL system.

They only destroyed the dumb teams...I think the NBA has the best system in sports...and it's not even that good.

Teams are starting to be smarter with the money they spend...this was the best year for the NBA since Jordan's last year, by far.