tazinib1 Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 NFL Network's Jason La Canfora proposes that the Bengals pass on their pick at No. 4 overall, allowing their 10 minutes on the clock to expire.This is assuming the Bengals aren't sold on Blaine Gabbert, whom La Canfora insists Cincinnati should pounce on if they believe he's a franchise passer. La Canfora senses that at least one of A.J. Green and Julio Jones will be available at eighth or so overall, and by passing the Bengals could save money at a lower-slotted selection while still getting their guy. Source: NFL.com I've never heard of this strategy and quite frankly, its intriguing given the lack of a super crop of talent this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I've never heard of this strategy and quite frankly, its intriguing given the lack of a super crop of talent this year. The Vikings did this once . . . but I beleive it was due to stupidity, not strategy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted April 13, 2011 Author Share Posted April 13, 2011 The Vikings did this once . . . but I beleive it was due to stupidity, not strategy. .... and the reason it was left out of my post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 (edited) there's a reason this has never been done. it makes zero sense. not to mention the teams fanbase would go apesh!t Edited April 14, 2011 by Jackass Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted April 14, 2011 Author Share Posted April 14, 2011 (edited) there's a reason this has never been done. it makes zero sense. not to mention the teams fanbase would go apesh!t Except the fact you save millions by sliding down spots on a guy you may get a few picks later. Also, I'm sure you know as well as everybody else that this draft does not boast more than a handful of impact players...so why settle and fork over the dough to a guy you can get later if there is nobody willing to trade up? And when have the NFL owners given a SHAM WOW! about there fan base Like I said, I've never heard of this kind of strategy before and I don't even know if there is some sort of penalty in place to prevent it. Just thought it interesting. Edited April 14, 2011 by tazinib1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zooty Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 I've heard this discussed on NFL radio but I thought they would still be obligated to pay the guy for as if he went in their original slot. That is the Bengals would still have to pay him as if he was picked 4th. Maybe wrong, I was only half listening and Tim was making funny voices and Pat was sucking up to the callers. Per usual. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 Except the fact you save millions by sliding down spots on a guy you may get a few picks later. Also, I'm sure you know as well as everybody else that this draft does not boast more than a handful of impact players...so why settle and fork over the dough to a guy you can get later if there is nobody willing to trade up? And when have the NFL owners given a SHAM WOW! about there fan base Like I said, I've never heard of this kind of strategy before and I don't even know if there is some sort of penalty in place to prevent it. Just thought it interesting. It's discussed nearly every year. There's no penalty. As pointed out above, agents will figure out a way to get more money based on the premise that the team wanted to pick him sooner. Plus there's no guarantee the team will get the player they want as another team could trade and jump them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tazinib1 Posted April 14, 2011 Author Share Posted April 14, 2011 It's discussed nearly every year. There's no penalty. In all honesty, I have missed this and I'm one of the biggest draftnicks here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duchess Jack Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 I think any time I have seen a team miss a pick (Vikingsx2) that the player demanded compensation as if he were drafted where the team was 'supposed' to draft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 I don't think that the strategy would engender goodwill with your employee. Let's say you were hired by a company. The terms were that you would get paid $300k if you worked the entire 2012 year. However, if you don't work the entire year, you get $220k. On December 31st you get a call from the company asking you to report for your first day of work on January 7. I'm sure that you would admire your company's clever strategy and report on January 7th just raring to work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 there's a reason this has never been done. it makes zero sense. not to mention the teams fanbase would go apesh!t It makes perfect sense and can be brilliant, especially if the rookie cap isn't in place. It could literally save a team millions and they'd get the same guy they had targeted provided they do their research carefully and/or they are flexible on who they intend to draft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 I don't think that the strategy would engender goodwill with your employee. Let's say you were hired by a company. The terms were that you would get paid $300k if you worked the entire 2012 year. However, if you don't work the entire year, you get $220k. On December 31st you get a call from the company asking you to report for your first day of work on January 7. I'm sure that you would admire your company's clever strategy and report on January 7th just raring to work. You have options: Choose not to report. Or just holdout like the NFL players do and see how quickly the company will bow to your demands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Itals Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 If a scenario like that is important to the Bengals (or any other team) then they should package their 4th round draft pick with their 1st rounder to entice a team to move up into their position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 If a scenario like that is important to the Bengals (or any other team) then they should package their 4th round draft pick with their 1st rounder to entice a team to move up into their position. That's the problem - under the current rookie salary structure it's virtually impossible to get teams to trade into top draft slots because the salaries are so overwhelmingly excessive. Skipping your pick, on the other hand, throws the other teams following into turmoil as they try to rush to the podium to move up the draft board by one slot and get an allegedly more premium player for what they think is no cost to themselves. That's exactly what happened when MIN skipped its spot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 (edited) This is why the draft doesn't do what it is supposed to do and doesn't deserve the praise it gets for delivering parity to the league (despite the fact that every league has a draft, which should in and of itself sort of disqualify this as a reason). Teams are stuck where they are regardless of whether or not they want the guy who is there. Yes, if a team did this the agents would see right through it and the fan base would crucify them, but that doesn't mean the intent would be flawed. It's the draft that is flawed and slotting the picks with a more reasonable salary level only sort-of fixes the problem. It still assumed that, from one year to the next the overall talent level is the same or, specifically that the talent level at a position of need is. Both sides get the shaft. Players do because they're stuck with only one team to work for. Teams are hosed because they're forced to pay a specific amount based on where their pick is. As a Niner fan, for instance, I was so bummed that the they happened to pick the year they did to be the worst team in the league, because it didn't seem like there was a guy worth taking #1 overall. A fact that was very much confirmed by the fact that they tried to unload the pick and nobody would bite. Sure, it would have been nice if the economic impact of that pick was lessened by a more sane scale, but they'd still be stuck paying more than anyone else in the league for a pick they didn't really want. If it was all FAs, then, in years where there's nobody who looks all that great, nobody would have to open up their pocket books. Agents wouldn't be able to say, "You picked this guy #1 overall, so pay up." Again, that last bit is sort of fixed, but not really. The market has already slotted draft picks. The salaries always are based on last year's salaries plus some money and, once one guy signs, every pick around him is slotted accordingly. So, even if the numbers are made smaller, it won't affect the fact that you'll be forced to pay a price based on how good the #4 overall pick should be, even if the draft class is not as highly regarded. You would think that the NFL could actually help bad teams out by installing a total rookie cap and then, somehow, give bad teams weighted priority in a more open format where all teams are allowed to ultimately negotiate with (or bid for) all rookies. Maybe your total rookie cap space is higher depending on how you finished the previous year, so bad teams have a competitive advantage in the bidding/negotiation process. Mind you, at least the team is free to approach the draft how they want. If they have a ton of needs to fill, they don't have to go after the equivalent of the #1 pick. They can load up on other guys instead. Something like that. I can't see why this wouldn't work better. After all, if they're going to slot the salary levels for each pick, they've removed the player's ability to negotiate their salary, so why not just make it an auction and the player gets stuck with whatever price the winning bidder pays for him. It's ultimately the same difference. And if it's a crappy draft class, teams don't have to spend their cap in the rookie auction. However, since there's an overall salary floor for each team, that just means they have to spend it elsewhere on veterans. So this is ultimately a net zero sum for both owners and players. The only thing that changes is that bad teams don't have their hand forced by a system that is supposed to be helping them. Also, imagine how exciting a rookie auction would be? At any rate, it would be simple. Each team has a total cap and floor. Before open FA begins, you have the rookie auction where teams can spend up to a certain amount. That amount being higher for bad teams (but again, you don't have to spend all of your rookie cap if you don't want to). Then, once that is over, you can go and sign whomever you want, be it rookies who didn't go in the auction or veterans. So, the bad teams just get more flexibility in the whole process. Edited April 14, 2011 by detlef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 I can't see why this wouldn't work better. After all, if they're going to slot the salary levels for each pick, they've removed the player's ability to negotiate their salary, so why not just make it an auction and the player gets stuck with whatever price the winning bidder pays for him. It's ultimately the same difference. And if it's a crappy draft class, teams don't have to spend their cap in the rookie auction. However, since there's an overall salary floor for each team, that just means they have to spend it elsewhere on veterans. So this is ultimately a net zero sum for both owners and players. The only thing that changes is that bad teams don't have their hand forced by a system that is supposed to be helping them. I might die of complications arising from priapism if the NFL went to an auction format where all reams could bid out of a fixed rookie cap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearBroncos Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 I read (looking for it now) that there is something in the area of a 30+ million dollar difference between a top 10 pick and from 11 to 32 where the average salary of the top 10 draft pick is in the catagory of 30+ million while 11 and higher average 750,000. Thats a HUGE savings and if a player is able to drop down, then you've played the game correctly and get that player and a much greater discounted rate. Of course, you stand the chance of someone coming in and taking that player with your slot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 I absolutely love it when people come up with FF solutions to fix the NFL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearBroncos Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 I think a rookie auction would be catastrophic. It would put teams with greater revenue streams in a better position to move up and take high end players and would put teams such as Jacksonville in a position to where no matter where they finish the year, in a position of crawling from behind on a regular basis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 You have options: Choose not to report. Or just holdout like the NFL players do and see how quickly the company will bow to your demands. Just as a matter of interest, is there any level of underhanded corporate trickery you wouldn't support? Inquiring minds want to know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 (edited) I absolutely love it when people come up with FF solutions to fix the NFL. Um, the draft as it stands is also like a FF dynasty draft, so what's your point? Again, how is my approach not better? The current system does not help the bad teams like it supposed to and arbitrarily assigns a value to each player. Quite simply, the 4th best player could be vastly more coveted than the 5th best player, who in turn, is really no more coveted than any of the next 10. Yet, currently, and even with a rookie scale, the assumption is that the 5th best players is just barely less coveted than the 4th and significantly more so than the 15th. Whether or not that is remotely true. An auction or open negotiation process would better allow the buyers to establish the relative value of each and every rookie. More so, given any specific position, currently teams can be forced to vastly overpay for a guy who is marginally better (if that) than another at the same position based simply on the fact that they have a high draft pick and can't trade out of it to "settle" for the 2nd or 3rd guy at the position they want in a draft where they like all three guys the same. If it were an auction, they could join the bidding for guy #1 and bow out as soon as it got to be more then they wanted, knowing full well they could go after one of the other two. Edited April 14, 2011 by detlef Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 I think a rookie auction would be catastrophic. It would put teams with greater revenue streams in a better position to move up and take high end players and would put teams such as Jacksonville in a position to where no matter where they finish the year, in a position of crawling from behind on a regular basis. Non-issue. Rookie cap. It doesn't matter how much money your team makes, you can only spend so much of that on rookies. And, again, you give the last place team the biggest rookie cap and move down from there. Problem solved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 Non-issue. Rookie cap. It doesn't matter how much money your team makes, you can only spend so much of that on rookies. And, again, you give the last place team the biggest rookie cap and move down from there. Problem solved. I was just about to post something similar. Make the cap progressive so that the worst teams have a little more buying power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 I might die of complications arising from priapism if the NFL went to an auction format where all reams could bid out of a fixed rookie cap. Dude, it would make the "draft" the most watched NFL telecast after the SB and maybe the Playoffs. You'd be freaking glued to the set and crazy chight would be happening left and right all day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 Dude, it would make the "draft" the most watched NFL telecast after the SB and maybe the Playoffs. You'd be freaking glued to the set and crazy chight would be happening left and right all day. That's why I might die No opportunity to get medical help after 4 hours. 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.