The nine players filing suit against the NFL

[detlef]

No, I'm not. Not really sure where you got that from.

 

I'm not even really taking sides so much as I'm thinking about what the NFL will look like without the draft. It won't be pretty. I take it you don't agree?

To be honest, I think the draft has evolved into something that stopped doing what it was supposed to do. The NFL does a good job of leveling the playing field (though data does not support that it does way better than other major sports like some may think), but I don't actually think the draft is the most important part of that. I actually think the unique blend of chemistry and the need for many players to play a role have as much to do with NFL parity as anything, and that's not even a function of anything the league does, but simply a built-in part of the game. In fact, given how much more teams have to pay for top 10 picks than the last 10 in the 1st round, I think it needlessly hinders the bad team's ability to improve their roster with more proven players (be it re-sign their own players or poach quality players from other teams).

 

If you look back, you'd find that top 10 picks really don't pan out much better than picks 20-30 and yet cost a ton more. The cash isn't the big thing because ultimately every team ends up spending money on someone, but using all that cap space on the most un-proven segment of players there is has got to suck.

 

I honestly think that being "stuck" at the back end of the 1st round year after year, like teams like Indy and NE, and Philly, and Pitt, and other teams who always manage to be in the mix and, as a result, always end up with picks in the 2nd half of the 1st round is not a bad thing at all. I actually think they're better off back there because they're still getting very, very talented players and yet devoting a fraction of the money to them.

 

I've brought this up before. How many years do you see 5 OTs with first round grades and yet, if you look at 5 different reputable draft guy's lists, you'll see them ranked 5 different ways. So, the only reasonable conclusion is that they all should be good and we simply don't know which one is going to be the best of the batch. Only, one is gonna go at pick 4, one at pick 8, one at pick 12, and so on with maybe the last at 20. So, here are 5 guys who all the experts can agree should end up being good but none can agree who will be best. Only one is going to sign for $10 million a year for 5 years and one is going to sign for $12 total for 4 years. That's a massive freaking difference! I would vastly prefer to take my chances with #5 for 1/3 the price. That gives me $7 million a year to go out and spend on other players.

 

It's one of the reasons why teams often have such a hard time trading back and out of their high 1st round picks. Nobody really wants them nearly enough to give up much of anything to move up. And for the team holding that high pick, it would be PR suicide to move back in the draft and not get a ton of picks in return because it would seem like a bad deal, even if it really isn't.

 

So, no, I don't like the draft. It's a tool that doesn't seem to work all that well in the round that should matter the most and forces guys into situations that may not be the best fit for them and could ultimately cost them a chance to make a team at all in the later rounds when the parity issue is less important. After all, by the 5th round, the draft order is way less important than in the 1st and 2nd.

 

Think about it like this. Say you're a GM who has just taken over a really crappy team that is in desperate need of rebuilding. You need guys everywhere and have the first pick in the draft. The very first thing you're going to do in this rebuilding process is spend more money than you do on any other player on the team for a kid who has never played a down in the NFL. Talk about staring off behind the 8-ball. Wouldn't you rather gather a bunch of solid guys for less money and fill some holes? For what you'd have to pay the #1 QB prospect, you could have the #2-3 QB, the #1 Safety, and maybe the best TE. Something like that. And god help you if that #1 QB is Tim Couch.

 

One could argue that doing away with the draft would be nearly as effective in lowering rookie salaries as putting a scale in place. After all, right now, both the player and the team are stuck with each other. You pick a guy and you've got to get him signed or you're screwed out of who was supposed to be one of your best new players. If it's wide open, you can target a guy and, if he wants too much, screw him and go talk to someone else. And it's not like one team can sign everyone, because there's a cap. Of, if you do go after all the studs one year, you can't the next because, again, these guys still count against the cap.

 

None the less, if the players win this suit, my guess is that the only thing it causes is to force the hand of the owners to simply re-up for the deal they had in place since 2006.

Edited April 2, 2011 by detlef