Rookie Wage Scale in NFL CBA changing the game

[Carl Spackler]

In the past 3 years with the current NFL CBA, and the rookie wage scale, both the pro game, and the college game is being changed at a pace that is hard to keep up with. I'm pretty sure the NFL ownership didn't plan for this, and the league is really creating a potential problem for itself.

Some general info: Three years ago, the number of underclassmen (which basically THEN was defined as anyone that did not finish four years of NCAA eligibility) was 56. I think about 46 of those players were drafted.

When you look up lists and numbers of these things, you got to be careful, because some lists are truly underclassmen (college juniors, sophs, or even frosh), where most lists, like the one I put up here, include anyone that hasn't finished their NCAA eligibility.

THe reality is that the numbers of players that declared that had not finished NCAA eligibility has remained pretty consistent from 1990 through about 2010. Some years higher then others, but pretty consistent at about 45 players that fit the profile, with about 65% of those being drafted (45% undrafted)

But since the rookie wage scale was changed, because the NFL owners didn't like the direction that the top draft pick salary structures were going, things have changed dramatically. We will see in the neighborhood of 100 "underclassmen" declared eligible for this draft. That is different than the "underclassmen" prior to 2010. These are approx. 100 players that are voluntarily choosing to forfeit their NCAA elgibility.

In the past, the majority of those about 45 players on average a year that declared, did so, because of reasons that basically amounted to that they didn't have much a choice, the numbers of players that were voluntarily foregoing NCAA eligibility was relatively small.

What does it all mean? Lots to discuss. The NFL has a new, and younger, population of players to farm, and don't have to pay as much. Less room for veterans. Will the quality of the game change in the pros? Absolutely.

What about seniors that finish their NCAA careers? 100 players out of the entire country, is not going to dent the number of eligible seniors that get produced every year, and smart NFL people, already know that more experienced players, are better, and translate better. NFL scouts will change their patterns.

No matter what, there are still only about 250 or so picks a year, with supplementals,a nd not all of those picks are going to mean a playing career.

I wonder where all of these kids are getting their advice from. I fear that there will be a LOT of undrafted kids this year, that gave up their NCAA eligibility.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/01/08/more-than-100-underclassmen-could-enter-the-draft/

http://blogs.ourlads.com/2012/05/29/1989-2012-underclassmen-declared-drafted/

 

[J187Money]

All of these kids get "graded" by the same drafting services before they make a choice. If a kid gets graded as a possible 6th round pick and chooses to leave that is on him. Happens in hoops, too.

 

[Carl Spackler]

All of these kids get "graded" by the same drafting services before they make a choice. If a kid gets graded as a possible 6th round pick and chooses to leave that is on him. Happens in hoops, too.

True enough. Somebody is giving those grades. Somebody is interpreting what it means. It's HUGE money business, based on thin air. Speculation. Futures.

Read Gil Brandt's piece from nfl.com that's linked in there somewhere, sorry for being lazy and not putting it here, but it's right there above, so it's really only two clicks instead of one away. The hidden part of all of this is the sports agents - and in hoops, UCONN people have a good idea of what that means. Football players need to be very careful about where they are getting advice from.

The NFL draft is just like any other business adventure, it's about who you know. Paul Pasqualoni and the Toxic Avenger are essentially the same character around here, and I will not make people happy by saying this, or maybe they won't care whatever.....but a big reason why we had some lower round draft picks last year, was because simply the number of NFL contacts that Pasqualoni had. The competition for those lower draft picks, is ramping up extraordinarily so.

The number of draft picks is fixed, and the number of players competiting for those spots is increasing quite literally, exponentially.

There are thousands of players all over the country every year, that are capable of playing in the NFL. I believe you're in business JMoney, you know getting the ticket into the office, is about who you know, a lot more than what you do.

Changing the pay scale and structure of the draft the way it was done 3 years ago, is having wide reaching effects and creating dramatic change in both NFL and college football. Where it goes from here? anybody's guess.

 

[Jax Husky]

All of these kids get "graded" by the same drafting services before they make a choice. If a kid gets graded as a possible 6th round pick and chooses to leave that is on him. Happens in hoops, too.

Yes, but kids realize that the first contract isn't where the money is made. Get out of school ASAP and get working towards that second contract is the mentality. The name programs will suffer first from this, as they have the recruits that came from HS with the "get to the NFL" mentality. RBs, for instance, may as well leave as Juniors even if they are getting a 4th round grade.

As to the "grading", I think Saban has been using a stat for recruits and underclassmen that 53% of underclassmen that received a 2nd round grade did not get drafted at all. Don't know what timeframes he is using, but that is a crazy stat.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Yes, but kids realize that the first contract isn't where the money is made. Get out of school ASAP and get working towards that second contract is the mentality. The name programs will suffer first from this, as they have the recruits that came from HS with the "get to the NFL" mentality. RBs, for instance, may as well leave as Juniors even if they are getting a 4th round grade.

As to the "grading", I think Saban has been using a stat for recruits and underclassmen that 53% of underclassmen that received a 2nd round grade did not get drafted at all. Don't know what timeframes he is using, but that is a crazy stat.

I disagree, the "name" programs won't really feel a big hit from this - because they are constantly recruiting the best athletes around. What they will experience is that it will be rare to keep a top level player around more than a year or two. But this is not basketball, one player on a roster, does not make a winning or losing team (unless it's the QB).

What I think will happen, is that there will soon be a rebound effect. When 50-60 out of 110+ players aren't getting drafted this year, or next year, players will be less likely to forego eligibility in a division 1 program unless it's not really a choice otherwise. I firmly believe that players that can finish their eligibility and perform steady and reliably are better suited for the NFL, than underclassmen, but that's my opinion.

Take a guy like Mike Flacco - Joe Flacco's brother at UNH. Played 6 years of pro baseball out of high school, and retired from MLB, and went back to football - at division II New Haven - now he's 26 and ready for the NFL and will be one of the draft picks out of Connecticut this year IMNSHO. These are what the majority of "underclassmen" in the past were.

The draft is only one road to make the NFL, and it's a small one. There are 250 or so picks a year, and there are about 1,800 or so, players in the NFL every year.

 

[Jax Husky]

I disagree, the "name" programs won't really feel a big hit from this - because they are constantly recruiting the best athletes around. What they will experience is that it will be rare to keep a top level player around more than a year or two. But this is not basketball, one player on a roster, does not make a winning or losing team (unless it's the QB).

LSU lost 11 underclassmen last year (9 on defense). 2 were legitimate 1st rounders. It crushed them. The top programs have kids that expect to leave. They aren't as easy to replace as you'd think. Mid tier programs have guys that came in hoping to get to the NFL, but not judging themselves on whether they can leave in 3 years or not.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

There are thousands of players all over the country every year, that are capable of playing in the NFL. I believe you're in business JMoney, you know getting the ticket into the office, is about who you know, a lot more than what you do.

Wait, what? How are we defining "capable of playing in the NFL"? Draft-eligible? Total number of college players who possess NFL-caliber talent?

 

[Carl Spackler]

LSU lost 11 underclassmen last year (9 on defense). 2 were legitimate 1st rounders. It crushed them. The top programs have kids that expect to leave. They aren't as easy to replace as you'd think. Mid tier programs have guys that came in hoping to get to the NFL, but not judging themselves on whether they can leave in 3 years or not.

Wow, didn't know that about LSU. But my response is this - you lose that many palyers out of a roster for any reason, a program is going to have a problems. Were all 11 drafted? Did they make it on to a roster? I don't know.

I really think that there is a ton of bad advice going on out there from sports agents trying to make a buck on all of this. You look at the numbers over the past 3 years, and it's pretty clear.

What you wrote about the getting the 3 years in as soon as you can is absolutely true, but the simple math is that there are fixed number of roster spots in the NFL, and by increasing the numbers of players that are trying to get those spots, you are decreasing the chances for those players to get a spot for one year - let alone three years.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Wait, what? How are we defining "capable of playing in the NFL"? Draft-eligible? Total number of college players who possess NFL-caliber talent?

How do you want to define it?

There are about 1,800 or so, + or - a few, players a year that are on official NFL rosters. I think in any given year, there are at least that many, and probably several times over more than 1,800 men in the country that if given the opportunity, if they knew the right people, are in condition, and physically and mentally capable of stepping on to a field and competiting and doing well. I'm pretty sure it was Danny Lansanah from UCONN this year, that went back out on the field after several years off.

Getting to the NFL, is about having the required skill sets and qualities, and then making sure you get involved personally with the right people. That has been my point in this - sports agents are like vultures. Kids now, and in the foreseeable future, got to be very careful about where they are getting advice from, because the number of roster spots in the NFL is fixed, it's not changing.

I do think that after this year, and maybe next, that the numbers of underclassmen declaring will start to go down again. I the NFL will probably change things again with the rookie wage scale again for the next CBA. I suppose it really will all come down, to how much a student really values their scholarship and education and what they are doing with it in school.

Anyway - food for thought. The 2014 NFL draft will be an interesting one.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

How do you want to define it?

There are about 1,800 or so, + or - a few, players a year that are on official NFL rosters. I think in any given year, there are at least that many, and probably several times over more than 1,800 men in the country that if given the opportunity, if they knew the right people, are in condition, and physically and mentally capable of stepping on to a field and competiting and doing well. I'm pretty sure it was Danny Lansanah from UCONN this year, that went back out on the field after several years off.

That I wholeheartedly disagree with. There aren't 1,800 players in the NFL right now that are capable of doing well. A lot of NFL backups are truly atrocious.. I just don't believe that the pool of talent outside the NFL (be it college or FAs) is nearly as athletic or talented as you do. These teams invest a lot of money in scouting and someone will always take a chance on an NFL-caliber athlete.

 

[J187Money]

That I wholeheartedly disagree with. There aren't 1,800 players in the NFL right now that are capable of doing well. A lot of NFL backups are truly atrocious.. I just don't believe that the pool of talent outside the NFL (be it college or FAs) is nearly as athletic or talented as you do. These teams invest a lot of money in scouting and someone will always take a chance on an NFL-caliber athlete.

Then maybe what he is saying is that the top idk, say 500 guys are top talent and the other 1300 guys could be replaced by the next guy on the street under the right conditions? I could buy that. How on earth do guys end up on playoff rosters and perform after being practice squad guys for years?

 

[WhereistheDove?]

Then maybe what he is saying is that the top idk, say 500 guys are top talent and the other 1300 guys could be replaced by the next guy on the street under the right conditions? I could buy that. How on earth do guys end up on playoff rosters and perform after being practice squad guys for years?

Those are the exception. For every Arian Foster there are tons of guys who are on the PS or street because they just aren't talented or athletic enough to be good NFL contributors. My point is that you have that hypothetical 1300 who could be replaced by the next guy on the street, which doesn't have to do with how much talent is available from guys on the street, but how much those bottom level guys suck. I just don't believe there to be some expansive pool of untapped talent, who could be valuable NFL players if only they got a shot.

 

[Husky25]

There are 8 years left on the current CBA and the rookie wage scale was a big concession by the Union. I don't think that is changing anytime soon. Also the NFL is still like hitting the lottery to these kids. That's $1,000,000 more than what was in the bank a couple days before.

I don't see this as a league problem though as much as it is an individual problem for those "underclassmen" who declare early. Also, keep in mind that the college system has evolved as well. Some personal career risk is mitigated by prep school, redshirting (i.e. RS Jrs. being academic Srs.) and accelerated graduation (Will Donald Brown please stand up?). The real hit, as you say, is to the underclassmen. 1st rounders generally know who they are. so it mostly affects those on the fringe of draftability. Some are being advised to leave by people with their own agendas, but that has been going on for years. If the kid is listening to the wrong people, that can't be put on the NFL. Coaches and GMs will evaluate an underclassman just the same as they have since the days of Barry Sanders.

I don't think the NFL product takes a hit though. NFL contracts are not guaranteed and by the time the rookie deal expires, the player is a veteran. The teams knows what the player is and they get evaluated against other veterans accordingly.

Does the college product take a hit? Yes, sort of. As you said, it's difficult to replace 11 starting underclassmen, but those underclassmen would be Seniors the following year. You'd still lose them due to the finite nature of college. The real affect in the college game is the shortened learning curve for RS (or not) Sophs having to step up. Secondly, it may actually level the playing field a bit, so to speak. Most underclassmen who declare are from the more high profile schools. Removing mature talent from the LSU's of the world brings them down a little to the Vanderbilts who don't necessarily target the 4 or 5 star recruit as aggressively. This may make for a more competitive product.

At the end of the day, we are talking about a very small number of the college football playing population, even if the number of early entrants has doubled, 85 scholarships x 120 teams = a minimum of 10,200 total FBS players. 10,200 divided by 4 years eligibility = roughly 2,550 draft eligible seniors + 100 early entrants = 2,650. While the majority of those seniors know they are not getting drafted, the underclassmen declaring early < 4%. of that population.

 

[Husky25]

...Take a guy like Mike Flacco - Joe Flacco's brother at UNH. Played 6 years of pro baseball out of high school, and retired from MLB, and went back to football - at division II New Haven - now he's 26 and ready for the NFL and will be one of the draft picks out of Connecticut this year IMNSHO. These are what the majority of "underclassmen" in the past were.

Flacco is an isolated incident because he chose to play baseball before returning to school. He is much older than the typical future rookie. The NFL is a young man's league and few GMs or coaches will take a shot like that on a 28 year old rookie TE. Before you come back with anecdotal evidence to the contrary, the Chris Weinkes and Kurt Warners of the world are the exception that proves the rule.

 

[J187Money]

Those are the exception. For every Arian Foster there are tons of guys who are on the PS or street because they just aren't talented or athletic enough to be good NFL contributors. My point is that you have that hypothetical 1300 who could be replaced by the next guy on the street, which doesn't have to do with how much talent is available from guys on the street, but how much those bottom level guys suck. I just don't believe there to be some expansive pool of untapped talent, who could be valuable NFL players if only they got a shot.

Right. That's what I'm saying. As an example, there are only maybe 15 legit NFL QBs in the league. The rest are fungible or "system" guys to some extent. The fact that you can get a guy out of a grocery store (and granted Warner was great) shows that the bottom half of the league is not that good.

 

[Husky25]

I think we all agree that the number of early entrants forecasted in Carl's article is inflated by a factor of six. At the end of the day, the kid better have a good idea they are first round material. There will always be "advisors" that place their own interests above the players'.

Sports isn't the only place it happens by the way. I have a friend who wants to set up more of a nest egg for retirement, kids education etc. Some financial advisors won't even talk unless they are willing to put up an amount somewhere in the six figure range. I don't know about you, but I'd actively work to avoid these people.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

Right. That's what I'm saying. As an example, there are only maybe 15 legit NFL QBs in the league. The rest are fungible or "system" guys to some extent. The fact that you can get a guy out of a grocery store (and granted Warner was great) shows that the bottom half of the league is not that good.

Yes, but that's not what Carl Spackler is saying it seems like. His opinion seemed to be that there is a bunch of untapped talent, who only need the right connections to be good in the NFL. There are plenty of replaceable dregs in the NFL and plenty of the same exact type of player on the street, but the truly worthwhile talents that have been overlooked by all 32 NFL teams are few and far between. I think we're in agreement on that.

 

[gioff23]

LSU finished 10-3, played on NYD and finished in top 15. They were the only team to beat Auburn in 2013. When we say they got "crushed" are we being a bit over the top. In fact, doesn't there season record demonstrate that the big boys will be just fine as more and more underclassmen (and the trend will go that way, IMO) leave early.

 

[Carl Spackler]

That I wholeheartedly disagree with. There aren't 1,800 players in the NFL right now that are capable of doing well. A lot of NFL backups are truly atrocious.. I just don't believe that the pool of talent outside the NFL (be it college or FAs) is nearly as athletic or talented as you do. These teams invest a lot of money in scouting and someone will always take a chance on an NFL-caliber athlete.

Is the words I'm using that are bothering you or something? "capable of playing well" and "doing well" is what bothers you about what I wrote? I don't get it. I'll tell you what, if a player gets on the field in the NFL, and makes it through the game, and gets into a starting lineup, to me - that's "doing well". Perhaps we have different concepts about what playing in the NFL means. THe number of elite players in the NFL is very small. There are 280 members of the hall of fame.

Somewhere else you wrote "replaceable dregs" in the NFL. I just don't get what your point is.

My point is that there are a fixed number of NFL roster spots every year, and the competition for those spots has been opened up. Husky did a good job of breaking down numbers, in the grand scheme, the numbers of players giving up eligibility for the draft is pretty small. Whatever.....the greater point, is that with the NFL having structured things so that young players are lining up for their shots at roster spots greater than before.....the roster spots are a fixed number, and with more younger players coming in, there is more competition for veterans as well. Veteran football players, the vast majority, aren't walking away from the game if they don't have to. There is competition for roster spots from both rookies and veterans.

Perhaps you don't agree with the other stuff I wrote about there being plenty of players that can compete in the NFL. FIne - we'll have to agree to disagree. I'll just re-state that Danny Lansanah made it back to the NFL this year. UCONN"s own. He'd been out of the league for I think 4 years. Perhaps you think that a guy like Danny is unique. I don't. I think there are lots and lots of guys like Danny out there, that just need somebody to give them the chance.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

Is the words I'm using that are bothering you or something? "capable of playing well" and "doing well" is what bothers you about what I wrote? I don't get it. I'll tell you what, if a player gets on the field in the NFL, and makes it through the game, and gets into a starting lineup, to me - that's "doing well". Perhaps we have different concepts about what playing in the NFL means. THe number of elite players in the NFL is very small. There are 280 members of the hall of fame.

Somewhere else you wrote "replaceable dregs" in the NFL. I just don't get what your point is.

My point is that there are a fixed number of NFL roster spots every year, and the competition for those spots has been opened up. Husky did a good job of breaking down numbers, in the grand scheme, the numbers of players giving up eligibility for the draft is pretty small. Whatever.....the greater point, is that with the NFL having structured things so that young players are lining up for their shots at roster spots greater than before.....the roster spots are a fixed number, and with more younger players coming in, there is more competition for veterans as well. Veteran football players, the vast majority, aren't walking away from the game if they don't have to. There is competition for roster spots from both rookies and veterans.

Perhaps you don't agree with the other stuff I wrote about there being plenty of players that can compete in the NFL. FIne - we'll have to agree to disagree. I'll just re-state that Danny Lansanah made it back to the NFL this year. UCONN"s own. He'd been out of the league for I think 4 years. Perhaps you think that a guy like Danny is unique. I don't. I think there are lots and lots of guys like Danny out there, that just need somebody to give them the chance.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

You seem to be taking this a little personally. My whole point is that the amount of players who are truly valuable (not star, not starter, but valuable) players who were discovered out of nowhere is fairly small. There are certainly exceptions (Romo, Foster, Warner, etc), but for every one of them, there are tons and tons more who cycle on and off the depth chart or practice squad, but do not have the requisite talent to be valuable in the NFL. These are guys who either are inactives or maybe get on special teams. They're guys, who once they become the slightest bit more expensive or lose a step, are tossed away with no second thought. Those are needed players, but not valuable players. Guys like Danny Lansanah are a great story, but realistically he probably won't perform well in the NFL and will end up bouncing around or out of the NFL soon. It's just the nature of the game. Now the other point I just don't know, but I am interested. Certainly there are more underclassmen, but that should correlate to less NFL-talent upperclassmen on an ongoing basis. Will it just normalize on a 4-year rolling basis like the NBA, where most of the NBA talent just leaves before they're seniors? I would assume the level of NFL talent stays fairly consistent, regardless of draft trends.

 

[Carl Spackler]

You seem to be taking this a little personally. My whole point is that the amount of players who are truly valuable (not star, not starter, but valuable) players who were discovered out of nowhere is fairly small. There are certainly exceptions (Romo, Foster, Warner, etc), but for every one of them, there are tons and tons more who cycle on and off the depth chart or practice squad, but do not have the requisite talent to be valuable in the NFL. These are guys who either are inactives or maybe get on special teams. They're guys, who once they become the slightest bit more expensive or lose a step, are tossed away with no second thought. Those are needed players, but not valuable players. Guys like Danny Lansanah are a great story, but realistically he probably won't perform well in the NFL and will end up bouncing around or out of the NFL soon. It's just the nature of the game. Now the other point I just don't know, but I am interested. Certainly there are more underclassmen, but that should correlate to less NFL-talent upperclassmen on an ongoing basis. Will it just normalize on a 4-year rolling basis like the NBA, where most of the NBA talent just leaves before they're seniors? I would assume the level of NFL talent stays fairly consistent, regardless of draft trends.

Just trying to figure out what you are trying to say. It doesn't make sense to me. I agree with most of what you're saying, but "requisite talent to be valueable"? Are you talking about salary structure or contributing to winning? Does the concept of actually making a game day roster in the NFL, not have any meaning as to the quality of athlete for you? To me, if a guy, makes an NFL game day roster, he's a pretty darn good football player.

Edit: also you cannot compare basketball to football. Just can't do it. Pro football and pro basketball are entirely different. An 18 year old kid can play in the NBA at any position, anywhere and make it through the season relatively easy. There are very few places in the NFL, where an 18 year old human body is capable of playing the NFL game for a season.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

Just trying to figure out what you are trying to say. It doesn't make sense to me. I agree with most of what you're saying, but "requisite talent to be valueable"? Are you talking about salary structure or contributing to winning? Does the concept of actually making a game day roster in the NFL, not have any meaning as to the quality of athlete for you? To me, if a guy, makes an NFL game day roster, he's a pretty darn good football player.

Edit: also you cannot compare basketball to football. Just can't do it. Pro football and pro basketball are entirely different. An 18 year old kid can play in the NBA at any position, anywhere and make it through the season relatively easy. There are very few places in the NFL, where an 18 year old human body is capable of playing the NFL game for a season.

Let me put it this way. We have our walk-ons. It's pretty impressive in a wide scope that they even made it on to a D1 team at all, but when you're looking at helping the team win, they're not exactly irreplaceable. There will be some diamonds over time for sure, but the vast majority are just not good enough to make a difference at this level and if you had to give them significant playing time, that would not be a good sign. That is about how I see these end of the roster/practice squad/FA type guys. Sure, it's impressive overall that they made the NFL, but when you're looking at them in comparison to their peers, they're just not all that valuable to the team. If they lose a step, get more expensive, or their play tails off at all, they're dropped like a hot coal.

As far as the comp to the NBA, you're not understanding me. My point is that there aren't any more legitimate NBA players available in the draft just because a lot of them come out early because the guys who would potentially be the really good upperclassmen in the draft are already gone. Take Manziel in the NFL for example. He may add another top prospect this year, but the fact that he won't be there as an upperclassman takes it away from that class. There theoretically shouldn't be any more NFL prospects, they're just coming out earlier.

 

[Waquoit]

NFL owners suck. Players are underpaid acrosss the board. Especially young players that out perform their initial contract. Yet people still carried the owners water when they instituted a lock-out.

 

[whaler11]

NFL owners suck. Players are underpaid acrosss the board. Especially young players that out perform their initial contract. Yet people still carried the owners water when they instituted a lock-out.

It is amazing how many side with management in pro sport labor disputes. Can't really chalk it up to anything beyond 'jealousy' since the majority who played sports as a kid thinks they would give a ridiculous effort for the league minimum having no understanding the effort actually required.

As for the rest of the debate the NFL has a bell curve like the rest of the world. It's just when you employ a couple thousand players you have more playing at replacement level than other sports. The baseball equivilent would be a 60 team major league where players 15-25 on most rosters would be almost completely interchangable.

In modern sports the most overlooked talent is the ability to be healthy.

 

[whaler11]

Dove is right in absolute numbers. The dynamic is twofold:
a. With younger players teams make decisions with less perfect information.
B. teams are slaves to what they paid for a player. Donald Brown is a perfect example of this aspect. If he were a 7th round pick he never would have stayed in the league long enough to become productive.

Players making the decision to leave early make a trade. It gives them more years to get paid but gives them less opportunity to become an investment. NFL teams don't have the roster space for many projects.