This article by ESPN writer Kevin Siefert looks at the possibility and explore why it might, but likely wont, happen. http://myespn.go.com/blogs/nfcnorth/0-10-37/The-merits-and-perils-of-passing-in-the-draft.html I know many of us heard the same arguments last year when we had the first overall. At this point, the NFL NEEDS to step up and have a rookie cap in place by 2011 at the latest. Its getting rediculous that kids who havent played a down, who might ultimately never positively impact a team, are being paid such obscene amounts that teams are thinking of passing out of the #1, that this is being discussed as a legit option among draft enthusiasts and reporters. Or, as the Denver/Chicago trade showed, teams are completely unwilling to trade UP to the #1 because of the financial obligations. The draft is meant to give teams a chance to restock talent, not create such insane pressure on young kids and the worst teams in the league to pick a winner or face years of devastating economic issues and cap tie ups. Quite frankly, it almost takes some of the fun out of the process for me. Teams should all want the #1 pick overall (if not by record then by a decent trade, or just an overall desire to have the ability to pick the best player), not be desperate to give it up, or feel stuck in staying there and be unhappy about it. The whole thing is just getting out of hand. Please NFL, deal with it!
They are talking about implementing a rookie cap. I don't know if you know or not (it sounds like you do and want it now) so I figured I would mention it.
Well if the talk is true that the NFL are thinking of moving the draft to Febuary and thus before free agency (which I cant see happening myself), then some form of salary cap must be enforced or they will really get out of hand then.
Every year we hear about how a team might be well served to pass on #1, and it never happens. This year will be no exception.
no team can do it, it sends such a message that the team is disorganized and doesn't know what it's doing (even though it may be the opposite, if their intentions are to save money). It makes the guy they actually do pick look like an also-ran, and probably turns off the guys on the team as well.
If they ever get a handle on the rookie cap, I think we will see it happen more, but until that happens, no way.
If a rookie cap/pay scale was in place, the #1 team would never pass on picking #1, and this would be a non-story. Having a cap wouldn't make it more likely for the #1 team to pull a Vikings. If there was a pay scale, trading the #1 pick might become a lot easier though.
they would trade the #1 down to get more picks. if a team is in dire need (hello, 2008 detroit lions) having the #1 pick makes no sense except for the BPA when you can trade that pick down for multiple picks and fill more holes still with decent players.
The rookie wage scale is universally agreed upon as a good idea by both the players and the management. I don't understand why this was not implemented years ago. As good as Jake Long is, it is ABSURD that he became the highest paid offensive lineman in NFL history before he played a snap. Come to think of it, they agreed to terms before he was even drafted!
i like the fact that teams holding the #1 overall pick and the player getting picked at that spot agree to terms before they're drafted. It is true professionalism on both parties. The player and organization show a commitment to each other and the rookie comes into OTAs and mini camps, etc and shows a work ethic that the #1 overall pick should have. I agree with you that the prices are absurd but felt like throwing this in there.
Yeah its just silly to think that teams do not want the first overall pick these days because of the financial aspect. How does that help a team? The entire point of the draft is to restock a team with youth and talent. If you were one of the worst teams of the season, you get first dibs. Instead, the worst teams are feeling stuck in place because they will "have" to offer a huge contract to a player who hasnt played a down, may end up killing their cap for years, and who isnt demonstrably different in talent from the next 2-3 picks coming down the line. Having a better draft pick should never feel like a burden to a team. I know they are working on a cap, but as Gardenhead says, why the hell isnt it in place already?
The writer of the original article I posted answered some more questions on it, and heres the points I found best illustrates my meaning.
I agree with all the pro-rookie cap posts. Essentially the first pick is supposed to be a reward for the team that was the worst the year before to help them improve. Now the worst teams end up putting a lot of cap into a single guy who may very well be a bust and this limits what they can spend in FA to help them get better. I also agree that rookies who have never played a snap getting huge money is foolish not simply because they haven't earned it or a veteran deserves it more but because what does it leave for them to play for? I mean they are already rich so they don't have a huge incentive to play at their best level for their next contract on down the line. Also by having these huge contracts teams are less likely to take QBs, RBs, and WRs with the higher picks since they cost so much more and that is seemingly a reason why teams like the Fins pick O-Lineman (also because they're safe and the money spent is less of risk). There definitely needs to be a rookie cap or like texan posted the draft will become a mockery of what it should be until after the first 10 picks. Its sad the worst teams are hurt by this and undeserving players are getting so richly rewarded. Something should be done.
