stethant Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/15/sports/f...e-scale.html?hp Cautious optimism.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 Haha, just finished posting this in the "July 21st" thread. Yeah, that was a big hurdle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 After the new deal is completed, top draft picks from the 2011 draft are likely to make about half of what those from 2010 made. Sucks to be Cam Newton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 (edited) After the new deal is completed, top draft picks from the 2011 draft are likely to make about half of what those from 2010 made. Sucks to be Cam Newton. Yeah it does. Imagine getting only $30M in guaranteed money before ever having played a down. He ought to be seeking another line of work, the poor guy. Edited July 15, 2011 by Bronco Billy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolf Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 Yeah it does. Imagine getting only $30M in guaranteed money before ever having played a down. He ought to be seeking another line of work, the poor guy. Sounds good to me...where do I sign up????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballjoe Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 Like many I alway thought the big bucks should be saved for the proven veterans. Not that top rookies should not get a nice salary but IMO they were gewtting way to much. perhaps now the #1 overall pick will have some trade value. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Egret Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 As a Lions fan, I feel that I am an expert on picking at the top of the draft. With the hugh bonuses and salary paid to the rookies at the top of the draft, the stench of failure can hang on the neck of a team when there is a high profile bust. The Millen years were bad, 50 games under .500 bad. What made it worse was having to pay a hugh amount of money to someone like Charles Rogers and have the money count against the cap after he was off the team. It puts teams at a competitive disadvantage. Picking at the top of the draft is not a guarantee of getting a great player. It is a guarantee that your team will have a lot of salary locked up in an unproven player. While the Lions seem to be finally digging themselves out of the hole that Millen made, teams shouldn't be put in that position. I sincerely hope that any part of this new collective bargaining agreement also makes sure that Matt Millen never runs another team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 Like many I alway thought the big bucks should be saved for the proven veterans. Not that top rookies should not get a nice salary but IMO they were gewtting way to much. perhaps now the #1 overall pick will have some trade value. Couldn't agree more. What other industry pays a rookie much bigger bucks than proven successes? It's a stupid system, nurtured by agents and acceded to by idiot owners. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NAUgrad Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 This was just retweeted by Peter King SI_PeterKing Peter King RT @AlbertBreer: Filed to NFL Network: Outside of some ancillary details, the economics of a deal between the players and owners are done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Dick Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 This was just retweeted by Peter King SI_PeterKing Peter King RT @AlbertBreer: Filed to NFL Network: Outside of some ancillary details, the economics of a deal between the players and owners are done. I hope ESPN covers this story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NAUgrad Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 (edited) This is the link that is being posted about the agreement. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d820c...gn=Twitter_news And the use of a bargaining chip. Interesting http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writ...3&eref=sihp Edited July 15, 2011 by NAUgrad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooby's Hubby Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 The player I kinda fell sorry for is the rookie RB like a Chris Johnson. Sure teams are going to the 2 back system, but I think that is b/c owners wnat to keep RBs cheap. RBs usually start off hot, or at least you know what you have pretty quick. After 3 hard years (not necessarily his first 3 years) a RB best years are usually behind him. I have this feeling that owners will exploit the talents of the good rookie RB by either keeping them down in a 2 back system of running the hell out them and wearing them out. Either way the RB gets paid less for their best years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 Current players, who postured about solidarity and worry for rookies and retirees, have been ony too happy to sell out both groups. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted July 17, 2011 Share Posted July 17, 2011 The player I kinda fell sorry for is the rookie RB like a Chris Johnson. Sure teams are going to the 2 back system, but I think that is b/c owners wnat to keep RBs cheap. RBs usually start off hot, or at least you know what you have pretty quick. After 3 hard years (not necessarily his first 3 years) a RB best years are usually behind him. I have this feeling that owners will exploit the talents of the good rookie RB by either keeping them down in a 2 back system of running the hell out them and wearing them out. Either way the RB gets paid less for their best years. I don't think owners had much, if anything, to do with a 2 back system. IMO, the reason is simply that the game is so punishing, it's almost impossible for one guy to take all the handoffs throughout a season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stethant Posted July 20, 2011 Author Share Posted July 20, 2011 http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/20/sports/f...lockout.html?hp I sure hope this reporter has good sources.....this report sounds very encouraging. I also enjoyed the shot at Smith towards the end of the article. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.