No matter what side you take, ultimately we the consumer pay the price. I understand supply and demand, free will, etc. But my opinion - the cost of entertainment has/is become(ing) excessive.
1 Like
hey if they played 4 or 5 YEARS in the NFL and are underpaid OR grossly underpaid , they deserve to get a bit of a hike in pay…but those that are getting paid like regular, should not be due for A raise of any kind.
If St. Brown has a monster year, he is going to want to get paid as well.
Players have very little leverage on rookie deals. The only thing they can do is refuse to play.
Just waiting on those % of the cap based salaries. I think it’s just inevitable at this point.
1 Like
The 5th year option is not a cheap 5 years of play. What it does is give the team the option of having the player under their control for 5 years instead of 4, without having to use the franchise tag. Just because a player asks for money after year 3 doesn’t mean you have to give it to him. The player’s leverage is to pull a Kenny Golladay and sit out (oh I’m injured again!). The difference is Kenny only had to fake it for 1 year and he was out. If we had a 5th year option he would have been looking at the prospects of having to fake injury for 2 straight seasons and entering free agency for the first time at 29 years old.
I think the easiest way to look at it is its a free franchise tag. So unless you are suggesting teams don’t see the value of using a franchise tag, I think you can imagine the advantages a team see’s in negotiating with a player when they have a 5th year option vs not having one and losing the player 1 year sooner.
3 Likes
It’s the final year of their contract for the WR’s mentioned. They are great players, of course they are looking for an extension.
No effect.
1 Like
I think it is the rookie cap that none of these guys got to vote on
So it protects the owners from
Giving guys they draft who are busts big contracts but it’s totally unfair to the rookies who produce.
The teams should recognize this and rip those desks up early once they know they got a player and not a bust.
Instead
They pay the QBs are larger percentage of the cap.
They will just adjust the contract rules They could increase value for picks an could add year on rd one an make rd 2 4th year option .
Or how about player gets the big increase he wants but if he doesn’t produce a fair amount he loses money .
The owners /GMs are at fault when they hand out the huge contracts like they did this past FA someone anyone explain how kirk got his contract I say good for him but no way he should get that deal . Those deals are what push as good an some cases better players wanting new deals
Thanks
That makes more sense now. It seems this year more than any there are players requesting to have new contracts. As someone mentioned, the owners/GM’s are probably more responsible than anyone with some of these large contracts that have been handed out during FA and some with fully guaranteed money.
There’s plenty of $ to throw around as long as your dipshit GM doesnt do things like pay a non rush edge $18m a year long term FA contracts
1 Like
Sounds like arbitration might be on the docket
My thought is that this is just another factor to take into consideration. Its all about leverage. The higher profile the position, i.e. QB, WR, CB, OT, the more leverage a player has towards renegotiating.
Its moneyball with a pigskin.
So, if your grades are even with a couple guys at the bottom of the first, maybe you take the Linebacker, Safety, or Tight End.
It’s just another factor, some teams will emphasize it more than others, it just depends on the business model.
This topic was automatically closed 240 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.