HawkShack.com

100 Million guaranteed over 5 years.
I wonder what Rodgers will cost and then Russell?

All that and more....

Maybe each team should get 1 Defensive player and 1 Offensive player exempt from the cap and not count against.

Teams are going to have 100 mil QB's and the rest on minimum wage

Uppercut wrote:Maybe each team should get 1 Defensive player and 1 Offensive player exempt from the cap and not count against.

Teams are going to have 100 mil QB's and the rest on minimum wage

Yeah, I have heard that purposed. They do that in other sports and it makes a lot of sense. In the NFL it would only really need to be something like 1 QB doesn't count against your cap.

Uppercut wrote:Maybe each team should get 1 Defensive player and 1 Offensive player exempt from the cap and not count against.

Teams are going to have 100 mil QB's and the rest on minimum wage

They should do just the opposite: Make it required that no player receive more than a certain percentage of the team's payroll.

As attractive at that may sound, could it violate some type of rule, CBA, Legal, or other?

The only way to make it required would be to write it into the next CBA.

I doubt the players would go for that...

Here's how Ryan's contract breaks down according to PFT:

1. Signing bonus: $46.5 million.

2. 2018 salary: $6 million, fully guaranteed.

3. 2019 option bonus: $10 million, fully guaranteed.

4. 2019 salary: $11.5 million, fully guaranteed.

5. 2020 salary: $20.5 million, fully guaranteed.

6. 2021 salary: $23 million, $5.5 million of which is guaranteed for injury only at signing. The $5.5 million becomes fully guaranteed on the third day of the 2019 league year.

7. 2022 roster bonus: $7.5 million, due third day of 2022 league year.

8. 2022 salary: $16.25 million.

9. 2023 roster bonus: $7.5 million, due third day of 2023 league year.

10. 2023 salary: $20.5 million.

11. All guarantees have no offset language.

I understand that a proposal such as I made would have to be included in the CBA and that players may be reluctant to consent to it. They likely would have to give up something else in a negotiation, such as the franchise tag, which the players hate.

Would restricting wages in any way imperil the NFL status regarding it's special status with Anti-Trust laws?
I don't know how they figure into the picture.

NorthHawk wrote:Would restricting wages in any way imperil the NFL status regarding it's special status with Anti-Trust laws?
I don't know how they figure into the picture.

They're doing it with the rookie contracts and that hasn't caused any concerns.

Doubtful even if the NFL consented to no franchise tag * which has about the same chance as an ice cube in hell * that players would forgo an opportunity to make big money, nor should they. It's a job, never heard of a job where any employee prohibits his own earning power... it's America, home of selling your product to the highest bidder, never understand why people are 100% behind that, until it effects their football team, then all of a sudden, that players greedy. Or not living up to their obligation somehow, fine when the employer wipes their arse with that same agreement, but the "working guy " ( the one with the product. That does the actual work) somehow is just a greedy, spoiled person, that doesn't deserve it somehow ..

Always baffled me, like no one has ever changed jobs for better pay, or asked for a raise or something... guess it's alright for us, not them situation or something...

They're doing it with the rookie contracts and that hasn't caused any concerns.

Good point.

I think what might happen is the QB's will become exempt from the Cap (or maybe 1 player that is designated each year) - and we might see the Cap shrink a little because of it.
For instance, a team with a QB on his rookie year would fall under the cap, but a star WR or LT in a contract year could be designated as exempt and franchise tagged without Cap implications. That would bring a whole new
set of variables in Cap management and trade pressures.

QBs may start to be despised by their own team mates for sucking all the funds out of the bucket before the rest of the team gets a taste.

idhawkman wrote:QBs may start to be despised by their own team mates for sucking all the funds out of the bucket before the rest of the team gets a taste.

Yah, the law of unintended consequences. With all teams eventually impacted by it, something creative will probably be developed.

It really does create a class structure within teams, especially when you take into account how the rules/officials treat QB's differently than the rest of the players ("Put dresses on them" Jack Lambert once said), how they already benefit from other income like endorsements that other positions rarely benefit from, and the fact that most of the starting QB's are white while the rest of the positions are dominated by blacks.

The way that they might 'sell' my proposal of adapting a rule where no single player can receive more than a certain percentage of the team's payroll is that the team could increase what they pay the starting quarterback so long as the increase their total payroll. That way, all team members benefit from the QB's contract increase.

RD; Your "proposal" does have some merit. I would call it a starting point, and with some tweaking might bear some fruit.

To your proposal I would add a salary cap sliding scale, team's cap based upon the size of a team's market. Small market teams receiving a larger cap and larger market teams less.

Anything worked out would have to be negotiated in a new CBA but both sides new to start thin king outside the box and come up with some new ideas such as RD's.

Edit; Oh yeah, my original reason for posting today; Aaron Rodgers has sugar plums dancing in his head thinking about what he might be worth if Matty melted Ice is worth a 100 mil. GUARANTEED but I understand that this contract will put Russell Wilson and the Seahawks front office on a collision course that may lead to Franchise Tags and even, UGH player movement. These insane contracts are the BANE of pro sports.

I don't think the issue is the money in isolation.
It's the combination of a hard Cap and the money.
The NFL will probably take the most convoluted route, but I still think the best solution is to exempt a player (teams with a franchise QB would use it there, but others without one may not) from the Cap.
They could also lower the Cap by say, half of the value of the yearly contract. For instance a player designated as exempt making a Cap hit of $30 million would have their Cap reduced by $15 Million, but
a team that is young and without a single large contract could get a full Cap value for the other players. Or they could designate their highest paid player as exempt and get a smaller Cap reduction.

I just heard a comment from Pat Kirwan on NFL Radio and he said that Ryan's Cap # is about 17% per year on average over the course of the contract and it might be less later as the Cap rises.
For reference purposes, he said Eli Manning's last contract a number of years ago was at about 16% of the Cap, so we should expect something around that figure for Wilson (16 - 20%).
So we could expect to pay roughly somewhere between $30 - $38 million/year if the Cap increases another $10 million approximately.
Things can change if there is more or less guaranteed money, I would expect.