What an NFL Rookie Salary Scale might look like
Rookie hold outs tend to get blown out of proportion. Usually, it's only first round picks who can afford to be late to camp, the majority of a team's draft picks are signed before camp starts. At this time of year, when camp is closing in on us and most of our draft picks are not signed yet, we all start to get nervous. So far, only Brandon Hughes has been signed and we haven't heard one word about the others.
That being said, there are always a few first round picks who are not signed by camp, and these can have an impact on a team's season and the player's career. It's not always the case, some positions are less likely than others to make a meaningful contribution in their first year, and some positions benefit from a full camp more than others.
All Chargers fans have to be a little worried about Larry English not making it to camp on time. While he isn't slated to start, I think everyone is expecting him to contribute a lot his first year. Getting him into camp on time will help that contribution start earlier.
Every year about this time, I start to wonder why the NFL hasn't done a rookie salary scale like the NBA has. There are no NBA holdouts, and draft picks are usually signed to their rookie contracts within weeks of the draft and playing in summer league games for the team soon thereafter.
So, I thought we could take a quick look at the NBA salary scale and how it works and come up with a plan for the NFL. Since the Collective Bargaining Agreement is being renegotiated, there is actually a chance something like this will be implemented.
The NBA's rookie pay scale is outlined in their CBA here. There are two main elements to it. One is a graduate pay scale based on your draft position (#1 picks get paid more than #2 picks, etc). The other element is that the first two years are guaranteed and then following two years are at the team's option. In the fifth year, the team can submit a "qualifying" offer which makes the player a restricted free agent where the team can match any other offer the player receives (that is why LeBron is still in Cleveland...) There is some wiggle room that allows some bonuses in the yearly salary as long as the total doesn't exceed 120% of the scale for their draft position or less than 80% if the bonuses are not met. There are lots of other subtleties that address trades, foreign players and other things, but that is the essence of the system.
Currently the NFL has a rookie salary pool for each team. The pool is based on the current salary cap and how many picks the team has and where those picks are. While I know about the rookie pool and can probably find out how much a team has been allocated, I have never heard of a team not being able to work out a contract because the pool was restricting them. So, the current system doesn't seem to do anything.
Taking a step back for a moment, let's look a whether we even need an NFL rookie scale. After all, you're worth whatever you can get paid, right? The rookies are being told where to work (via the draft), shouldn't they be able to negotiate whatever salary they can get without any additional restrictions just because they are rookies? There is something to that, and I'm not 100% on board with the rookie pay scale. However, I think the owners have proven that they have trouble restraining themselves, even in the situation they have with rookies where they are not bidding against anyone but themselves. They would be smart to collectively bargain something like a rookie scale into the CBA to protect themselves from themselves. Plus, it does abnormally screw up the pay structure of a team to have a veteran All-Pro potentially making less money than someone who hasn't even figured out how to do his own laundry yet, just because the kid was the best college quarterback last year.
So, let's assume that a rookie pay scale is on the table in the new CBA, what does it look like? It has to be something that helps the Owners restrict the salary escalation. At the same time, it must be negotiated into CBA, so there has to be some give back to the players. It must get the players into camp on time and it should have the appearance of salary fairness. The players would be giving up some salary leverage by agreeing to a rookie scale. As much as players might complain about the #1 picks unfair salary, it is a rising tide and to some extent it will raise all ships. I think Philip Rivers was secretly pretty happy about Matthew Stafford's big new contract. In order to get the players to agree to a rookie pay scale, the owners must give something back. I think the only thing they could give back is a shorter time until free agency or maybe guaranteed contracts, or maybe both.
So, here is my proposal. I think the rookie pay amounts should be slotted similar to how the NBA does it. It should be a graduated scale with the #1 pick making more than the #2 pick without regard to whether the pick is a QB, LT, or whatever. Each slot should move from year to year by the same amount the salary cap increases or decreases. I don't know exactly what the amounts should be, but it should be relatively close to what the rookies are getting now, maybe with a drop for the top 10 to a reasonable level. I like how the NBA's allows for some wiggle room for bonuses, but there shouldn't be any exotic escalators or voiding or anything like that. I think every contract should be for 4 years and should be guaranteed to some extent. 1st rounders should get all 4 years guaranteed. 2nd and 3rd rounders should have 3 years guaranteed with a team option for the 4th. All other picks should have 2 years guaranteed with team options for the 3rd and 4th years. Each year of the contract could be fixed at the time of signing or could vary along with the salary cap. At the end of the 4 years, the player should be an unrestricted free agent. The contract cannot be renegotiated until the end of the 3rd year.
The Team Benefits By: getting the player in on time, less energy in negotiating a contract, all the numbers are pretty much set in stone. No holdouts in the first 4 years of a player's career. No crazy salary escalation because some owner gave their golden boy rookie nutso money. The team still controls a developing player until they know if they are going to fulfill their potential or not.
Rookies Benefit By: guaranteed contracts, unrestricted free agency at the end of 4 years (currently, 1st round picks all get either 5 or 6 year deals)
Vets Benefit By: Less money being spent on rookies, more for them.
There are still some holes in this, but I hope something like this can be put into place.
1 recs |
9 comments
|
Comments
Quick Thoughts
1. No way the owners ever agree to guaranteed contracts. It’s too violent of a sport and there’s too many players that would be getting paid to sit at home. This is what bonuses are for.
2. An arbitrator would look at top non-rookie QBs making a ton more than non-rooking offensive linemen and would immediately destroy the notion that a #1 OT should be paid more than a #2 QB. A team’s needs, which is what the first round is usually determined by, should not effect a salary.
3. Instead of a pool, which a lot of times ends up forces a team to cut a late-round project pick, their should be a cap on each pick. The cap is basically what a QB would get if he was picked at that spot, but it would be set by an arbitrator. This way the highest possible number would already be set, and not by the agent. It would make things smoother.
"I did not invent the wheel, I was the crooked spoke adjacent." - Aesop Rock
by John Gennaro on Jul 10, 2009 8:34 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
1) aren't most 1st round picks around for the length of their first contract anyways
Maybe there were a few that didn’t make it; here are the kings of bustdom:
Tony Mandarich was with the colts for 3 years
Akili Smith was with the Bengals for 4 years
Ryan Leaf was with the Chargers for 3 years.
KiJana Carter was with the Bengals for 5 years
I don’t think the 4 year guarantee is that big a deal when looked at in light of how few of these guys don’t go 4 years anyways (even injury guys like KiJana)
2) true, but one of the points of the rookie scale is that no one in the draft class has earned anything yet. Plenty of vet OGs make more than 3rd string QBs so it’s not a foregone conclusion that someone deserves more money just because they play a position that traditionally gets paid better than other positions. Of course a pro bowl QB deserves more money than a pro bowl OG, but I don’t think that same comparison holds up when talking about unproven rookies.
Besides, I’m not trying to be fair, if it were fair everyone coming out of college would be a free agent and could go whereever they wanted for whatever contract they can get. I’m just trying to figure out if there is a balance point between fair for the players (rookies and vets) and fair for the owners and fair for the good of the game (which has a long term benefit for players and owners)
by Stephen (shaynes41) on Jul 10, 2009 9:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Fair enough
As far as busts sticking with their teams….you’re right. But that only applies to 1st round picks that have been paid huge bonuses already.
"I did not invent the wheel, I was the crooked spoke adjacent." - Aesop Rock
by John Gennaro on Jul 10, 2009 9:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
looking back on past charger drafts
here
I think the only year we didn’t keep a 1st rounder for 4 years, or a 2 or 3 rounder for 3 years or any other draft pick for 2 years was 2003. 2003 was a crazy upside down draft for us, with the first 4 picks from the first three rounds washing out and the UDFAs becoming all-pro mainstays.
by Stephen (shaynes41) on Jul 10, 2009 10:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would like to see
1) Rookie pay scale range would be set using 80% of the median salaries of all players at that position (using previous year salaries). If a QB is drafted, their pay scale would be based on the median 80% of all NFL QB’s. As an outright guess that number might be 1-8 million for a QB (per year). Obviously a 1st round QB pick would get something in the 8 million range, and later rounds obviously less than that. Round 6 and beyond would likely be league minimum. The scale would be set, and known, with the wiggle room being bonuses, and again a cap on that as well.
2) No guaranteed contracts. This is why we have signing bonuses.
3) Bonuses or escalators for playing time, number of starts, pro-bowls, etc.
by SJO on Jul 10, 2009 10:26 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
why no guaranteed contracts?
other than tradition :-)
by Stephen (shaynes41) on Jul 10, 2009 10:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
There a few different guarantee options
The obvious guarantee is complete fulfillment of the contract regardless of performance by the player.
But a cleaner approach might be a non-prorated, season by season guaranteed contract. You make the team you are guaranteed the full money for that year.
This would not put the owners on the hook for 4 years if the draft choice ends up a bust. And at a minimum it would keep the player motivated to maintain his level of performance, else be visited by the turk.
I like the concept of a rookie salary scale.
I hate seeing new comers enter the league pulling more jack than guys that have paid dues for multiple seasons. Now once these rookies start performing AT the pro level, then I think they deserve to get much more compensation than the "Ham & Eggers".
Maybe we put Pro-Bowl and/or % of utilization escalators into the mix to make it fair for stellar performers.
by Trendsearcher on Jul 10, 2009 11:08 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
One more caveat to rookie scale
Because of the propensity for players getting career threatening injuries, I would add a clause that, especially for the early round guys, an insurance policy be added to the mix. If a player who may have gotten a big signing bonus gets a career altering injury, the policy is cashed in and given to the player. This way, he can get some of the cash, at least, that he would have gotten in open negotiations.
by s2C on Jul 10, 2009 11:14 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Insurance works best in instances where claims are not made
You are right, a good half of the players will probably end up washing out due to injury. The insurance company will be paying out these contracts (and covering overhead and profit margins). The problem with insurance is that the premiums in this situation have to be almost as big as the payroll. There is no free lunch. Ultimately covering the full contract with insurance could cost more than just guaranteeing the contract.
Now insurance for medical and long-term care if they are injured, maybe with a decent annuity (not too big or you’ll have guys fraging themselves) that makes a whole lot of sense.
by Trendsearcher on Jul 10, 2009 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 


















