Seahawk Addicts
I think the current system allows the good teams who draft later in the first round to stay away from rookie salary hell. Sure, the guarantees for all first round picks are rising, but Mr. Ruskell can stay out of trouble's way by drafting high character guys who will earn their money, instead of high talent guys who are unlikely to be worth their signing bonus. Its almost like this system runs against the parity of the league....
Kirwan knows his stuff and should be listened to. He is level headed and knows where Seattle is. He is as unbiased as any "expert" who has a show or a column.
So you know why Upshaw doesn't want to budge? Because these salaries and guarantees push those of the free agents. If these are lower guarantees, he fears that guarantees for veteran players will not be as high.
I think a standardized system is no good either. However, something needs to be done. Nobody benefits from players holding out until mid-camp. Players certainly don't. Teams don't. The league doesn't get to see their fresh talent on the field. I think this is one thing they can agree on.
If the Owners dont like the current situation, all they have to do is correct it through negotiations.
They can stop paying these unproven players and if they all agree to it, and players dont sign, then they dont play and dont get paid.
I think it works both ways, I dont blame the agents or the rookies for all of it, they are getting as much as they can and they should, but the GM's are ultimately agreeing to these demands, so my simple mind says, stop offering these deals.....and the market should correct itself?
I may be way off base here, but that is a simple solution in my mind.
Upshaw is nuts, and greedy as hell. The guy is every bit as crooked as Hoffa.
Something has to give with the ridiculous rookie contracts, and contracts in general. There is no way Manning is worth 11 million a year. No one is. Eventually, the NFL will hit the ceiling. They will run out of people willing and able to pay the skyrocketing costs to attend a game. And then people will stop caring.
Truehawk,
The owners can't just decide to stop paying the salaries under the current collective bargaining agreement. This would amount to collusion and would violate the Anti-Trust exemption that the NFL enjoys from the government.
The only way the league can get a rookie salary structure is with the agreement of the NFLPA. As it appears Upshaw won't give that then the only option will be a lockout in 2011.
Some points/questions:
First "those working in the business world would NEVER pay a new hire more than someone who’s a proven performer, would they?"
Yes they do. New hires coming out of law school or business school at the top of their classes make bigger salaries than many of the people already at the firm. If you show yourself way above the crowd at the college level, you'll start at the next level higher than many.
Secondly:
"The top four players of this year’s draft are costing the respective franchises that drafted them a guaranteed $124 million dollars combined."
That's out of close to 4 *billion* in total salary, right? How fast do the rookie salaries start to drop down to a low level? Isn't the pay very reasonable starting at about the fifteenth pick and down? How big is this problem, really?
Papahawk, part of the reason why I think it's a great idea is the washout rate. Fifty percent? It's unbelievable. Seattle fans can certainly discuss what happens to any franchise when they roll the dice on a player and lose, right?
I think the fact that teams are actively trading out of the first round to avoid the gigantic guaranteed salaries is an indicator that there might be a problem. When Mr. Upshaw made the comment that maybe teams should just "draft better", I realized he's not interested in addressing the problems of franchises that have bet on a player who looked just fabulous, but won't cut it in the NFL for whatever reason.
Of course, IMHO.
-S
Truehawk, I think they have to wait till the CBA expires, according to another poster here.
I just don't think it's a great idea to pay anyone thirty million dollars guaranteed if he's never done the job. Even if Jake Long is the greatest defensive tackle known to mankind. 
-S
STTB, my sweet,
>Eventually, the NFL will hit the ceiling. They will run out of people willing and able to pay the skyrocketing costs to attend a game.<
THANK YOU.
I have never been to Qwest. It's not for lack of trying. We're getting on the season ticket list this summer. Thanks to Michael's ticket availability post, there's a good chance I'll finally get to see a game in person as well. At the same time, I went to a certain ticket broker's site to check out what was available. The "cheap" tickets are going for $250 apiece. Fine. There's two of us. Parking's what, twenty-five bucks? We might want something to eat. We'd better add on another $25-30.00 for that. I have no idea how much a beer is at Qwest, but I'm betting that's not cheap, either.
The NFL is currently facing the very real fact that people under 25 aren't as enthralled with professional sports. Their fan base is aging. If those who work for a living can't afford to pack up the kids, the wife, and drag the family off to see a game once in awhile, they're embracing a sport that's a little more affordable for family fun.
Here's a radical idea that will NEVER fly with the NFL: Preseason tickets should be half-price. We don't see starters. Wouldn't it be a nice thing to encourage those who may not be able to afford either season tickets or nosebleed-level ticket prices to attend a preseason game and see the rookies make those first steps into the NFL? I think it's a win-win.
When I hear Gene Upshaw talking about "the money you deserve," I get pretty PO'd. I'm the original union girl. I support unions. At the same time, it's difficult for anyone who actually goes to a 9-5 job daily to understand the miseries of someone who makes $11 million a year. (Doesn't Mr. Upshaw make six million a year himself?)
Of course, this is IMHO.
-S
Chuck, thanks for mentioning that the current CBA prevents owners from any kind of rookie pay scale.
Let's hope a lockout that would most likely deal the league a killing blow can be avoided.
-S
There was talk a couple of months ago about the players union replacing Upshaw. He is supposed to work for them, but he seems to have an agenda that conflicts with what the player's association leaders (Kevin Mawae among others) seem to want. What are the chances that the players union replaces him?
I believe Upshaw makes in the range of 9 million dollars a year. I bet he actually "works" 20 hours a week.
No wonder he's so ruthless and savage when it comes to his job. No one else would hire him at a rate anywhere close to what he pays himself out of the Players Union coffers.
And if any lawyer pipes up and tries to tell me how hard Upshaw has it, Im gonna barf.
The Rookie contracts aren't any different then the recent housing crisis. Anytime you pay more then something is worth for a long enough time the bubble will pop. The draft isn't any different then speculation and a hope for glory for the risk taken. I wish I had a dime for every player and owner who has said this is a business. And they are right. This bubble will pop and watch out.
The NFL is like housing prices: it rose so fast, for awhile folks reacted to fear, got desperate, and were willing to pay any price they could handle to get a house (or season tickets). But then the rates got so high, everyone who could get a house (or tickets) did. The rest looked at the prices, realized they could not afford those prices if they worked several lifetimes, and gave up and went back to renting.
Problem was, some who could afford one house bought two or more, trying to flip them--and cant sell thier investment homes for even a small loss. Realtors kept desperately trying to pump air into the sagging market, but the fact is, no one is left who can afford anything close to the prevailing market rate, even though it has dropped.
Whats going to happen? Home prices will continue to drop for years untill the market drops far enough for a large chunk of the non-homeowner populace to afford. Then it will begin all over again. Growth, bubble burst, drop, level out, growth, bubble burst...
The NFL cannot afford for this to happen to them. They keep building larger and fancier stadiums, (in order to make more money) and usually try to hold the local taxpayers hostage (like they did in WA), and gouge thier ticketholders with bogus fees like the Giants are doing with PSL's. At some point, the bubble will burst--the madness must end.
The NFL keeps trying to expand, bigger, better, faster, more--they would love to become the IFL, the international football league, but it wont happen. There just arent enough people who can afford higher prices, as I said. Keep it up, NFL, you'll ruin a wonderful thing.
eyeland--great minds think alike, eh?!
Stephen,
That might be your experience, but the businesses I've worked in lose proven performers implementing this kind of stuff.
It's a huge problem if you're a team that is losing, looking for help at multiple positions, and has a high-round draft pick you've just spent a metric buttload on that's just blown up. We're lucky to have Tim Ruskell. He's made some great choices for us. I'm sure Seahawks fans, however, can remember certain first round picks that just didn't pan out for us. At all.
-S
Correct me if I'm wrong... but isn't Long now the highest paid offensive lineman in the league and he has never even played in the league? I think this lends credence to the general feeling of this post and subseqent comments that the Rookie salaries are heinous. I think the NFL will be willing to give quite a bit to get a reasonable rookie salary schedule; primarily for the reason that it protects the currently bad franchises and promotes parity to an even greater extent. We all know the NFL wants every market to feel like they have a shot so everyone remains interested.
I have no idea what the NFL will do with it's ticket prices. I suppose they will continue to charge as much as possible as long as the tickets are selling. They care more about the money than they do about which fans are able to afford tickets.
elgranderojo, I know you're right about the ticket prices. They'll charge what they think they can get. At the same time, we figured out that for us to attend a game by buying a "cheap" ticket off one of the ticket brokers, parking, food, etcetera? Six hundred and fifty dollars.
We can go to a Mariners' game (and we have,) for about a hundred bucks. They have the "family special" several times a year, too.
I understand that MLB and the NFL are two completely different animals. At the same time, if they want younger fans to bond with the league, it might be good if those younger fans could even see a game in person.
-S
Strategerie:
I'm pretty sure the practice of recruiting top college prospects with high salaries is ubiquitous in the business world. Why? Because you have to do it to get high performers at your firm. The lesser paid employees know that these recruits have a limited time to prove themselves. The lesser paid employees also know they got their asses kicked in college by these guys, so they don't resent it.
Stephen, you must work for a law firm. My husband works in the software industry. He does very, VERY well. When colleges are graduating MCSE's who've never actually worked on a system, the guy that can save your ass at 3 a.m. because he knows that system backwards and forwards is the one that's getting paid.
Of course, we can argue about this all day. Here's a question. Do you think it's a good idea to pay a young man who's never played in the league over fifty million dollars? What will happen to the Dolphins if he washes out or can't make it in the league? What's happened to other teams who've bit the bullet, ponied up a fortune for a top ten first round pick, and had them blow up?
-S
Strategerie: Of course a veteran who has proven themselves is more valuable to a team than a recruit. In sports there is one other issue that tends to bump up the recruit's value a little: Age. The younger a great player is that you have tied up in a long contract, the more valuable they are to your team.
Certainly, signing a recruit is more speculative, but signing an older player is speculative too, injury-wise. Generally, the closer they get to thirty and over, the more fragile they are.
As to your question I have one for you. Was it wise to pay Shaun Alexander his large, long contract? Looking back, most people would say 'no.' It didn't sneak up on anyone that he was about to turn thirty. It all depends on how the player turns out. If the Miami QB turns out to be the next Dan Marino, everyone will say how smart they were for getting him in camp early, how cheap they are getting him in today's dollars, blah blah blah. Right?
Supply and demand. You cannot blame Jake Long for the problem. Who wouldn't want to get as much as they could without even playing a down? We should give the kid credit for not taking as much as he could get! If he was trying to get every dollar possible he wouldn't be under contract and he would hold out into training camp.
the signing bonus is the only way for a NFL player to guarantee themselves money (just ask Shaun A.) and everything else will only be paid if they are retained at the listed salary. So you cannot blame the players, only the owners, who have paid these bonuses. Veteran players do not like these deals either...other than that it helps the overall pay scales. They'd rather have more money available to them.
You can't blame Upshaw for this problem. Its his job as Union chief, for whatever he gets paid, to represent the Union. You can blame him for the pension stuff that he hasn't made a great enough priority though...a whole other story right there. Maybe he could trade some money here for a better back end pension program for the players? Especially those who are injured. I think the fans would gladly see that happen.
Remember- in any negotiation the beginning point is always the most extreme. There is too much money to be made for these sides to come to a work stoppage. Both sides are doing quite well right now.
as for half-price preseason games...that will happen when the entire league is not selling enough season tickets. Right now its just the price you pay to get a season ticket. Trust me, paying the same ticket price for the NE Patriots game as a preseason game...a bit crazy. You don't hear these folks who are bitching about the preseason ticket prices...you don't hear them talking about how great a deal they got to get the Patriots ticket for only...whatever it is. Compare this to the Mariner ticket prices. Where you pay more for certain games and you pay more for gameday tickets! Out of principle I will not buy those tickets. Heck, if they follow that rationale they should be selling gameday tickets for $5 each on rainy days under 55 degrees against opponents who have a losing record and fewer than two all-stars.
The NFL way...heck. If you are not a season ticket holder its easy to go to preseason games for half price. Just go to the stadium and buy one outside the stadium. Nobody will get full price for those tickets. Heck, I *give away* one of my preseason game tickets every year (to a friend, family member, or charity) because I just can't stand to sit through two preseason games. that's my choice. But I'd rather buy that preseason ticket at full price than give up my season tickets.
Stephen--sounds like you are a high-priced lawyer (no offense Michael) who did well in school...but did your mommy and daddy pay for that school? Are you in debt up to your ass? Did you have to work nights 40 hours a week while going to school even more?
While I was in college doing the above, with no parental assistance, I was near the top of my small class (top 3). In my business, no one gets paid enough, because there are always idiots like me willing to earn low pay to do what I love. The only way to make any money is become upper management and that is a hateful job to me and many others. The whole point of my career is not to have to go to meetings and be inside all day.
And a funny thing: many of those who did well in school actually sucked in the real world, where they actually had to put theoretics into action. Many flat couldnt do it, and have washed out. And while the high-achieving trust-funders from large schools got the best jobs with better pay, the ones who couldnt hack it right away often ended up washing out. (not as many as should have--some got kicked upstairs where the damage they could cause with icompetence was lessened).
So the idea that rookies who were high achievers in school should make more money than seasoned vets who area allready capable just doesnt hold water.
"I’m not picking on Mr. Long. He’s free to make as much money as any team’s willing to pay him. At the same time, those working in the business world would NEVER pay a new hire more than someone who’s a proven performer, would they?"
Two responses: first, if he's free to make as much money as any team is willing to pay him, why do you then write fourteen paragraphs arguing that he should not be able to make as much money as any team is willing to pay him?
Second, people in the business world cut hefty checks to unproven workers all the time. Big law firms give freshly minted lawyers $160,000 salaries, top financial analyst shops give Wharton MBAs $100,000 signing bonuses. All are betting on potential, plus the ability to make a buck if the thing goes sour. Even if Jake Long is a bust, he will sell enough tickets and jerseys to make up for the contract.
Hey Paul,
I'm making the point that it's an unsustainable business model from several points of view. Also, he's taking dollars out of the pockets of veteran players who are a proven commodity, and put butts in the seats Sunday after Sunday.
People in the business world can "cut hefty checks to unproven workers" all the time, but there is no guaranteed money or five-year contracts involved, are there? If that employee doesn't work out, the appropriate documentation is gathered, and he's fired. Any team that tries to trade or cut a player earning this much bank takes a huge hit on their bottom line.
If Jake Long is not a success, he won't sell tickets or jerseys, because he won't be in the stadium, will he? Take a look at the 2005 first round picks article Chris wrote. Still feel the same way?
-S
STTB,
>So the idea that rookies who were high achievers in school should make more money than seasoned vets who area allready capable just doesnt hold water.<
Of course we're all already in love with LoJack, but should he get paid more money than Patrick Kerney? If the argument over "whatever the market pays" holds water, is this the right thing?
-S
p.s. I wish everyone listened to Sirius NFL. They had a GREAT discussion yesterday about what's more important to any team -- an elite DE, or an elite RB?
Papahawk,
Thank you for a thought-provoking response. (Maybe I should write about the pension program. There was a really interesting article in the Times a few weeks back about former players and the pension stuff.)
>Maybe he could trade some money here for a better back end pension program for the players? Especially those who are injured. I think the fans would gladly see that happen.<
One of the other ideas that's been floated on T-ROCK and PK's show has been trying to persuade the owners to change the split of the revenues as follows: Fifty percent to the players. Forty percent to the owners. Five percent to the pension, and another five percent put into a stadium fund. Five percent of that money would be substantial, wouldn't it?
What are your thoughts?
-S
Stategerie,
I assume that the winning argument to that discussion was the elite DE, right? I can think of a few elite DE's that have been on Superbowl championship teams...while elite RB's are often home during the superbowl. Thinking of the last five champs...a lot of elite DE's out there, a few nice RB's, but elite doesn't come to mind. Lots of ways to skin a cat or win a championship. I think the common denominator to success is teamwork and chemistry added to a very nice talent level.
I think its fair for rookies to get a lot of money. They are playing the hand they are dealt. Would I like to see that money in the pockets of the veterans? Absolutely. Why? Because I already know them and have seen them play through pain, injuries, etc.
The key is to not have to draft in the top 15. That way you can get a contributing player at a reasonable contract level.
You could also argue that this system is more fair...to the teams. If all money was free agency related, then teams in remote cities or less desireable places to live...would have an even more difficult time competing. We all know that its tougher to get a top tier FA to Seattle than it is to get a top tier FA to say...Dallas or New York.
You know what Chuck Knox said...."you've got to play the hand you are dealt"
Stephen, the Shaun Alexander contract is a conundrum, isn't it? I'm wondering to myself if half of it was making up for money he didn't get previously, half was what they were hoping he'd be able to do in the future. One thing's for sure, I don't think that Sylvia Browne could have foretold what was going to happen with SA last year. Yeah, thirty's a marker for players in the NFL, but we've got several still playing (and playing well) after that number.
I'm also wondering if the Hawks will be hesitant to hand out that kind of money for awhile.
IMHO,
-S
Wow, quick feedback on posts. You guys run a tight ship.
This time I have four points. First, businesses also pay huge amounts for elite unproven talent. The going rate for signing bonuse for lawyers finishing clerkships with the U.S. Supreme Court (a good equivalent to top-10 draft picks) is $200,000. This, in addition to the $160,000 salary with yearly bonuses in the $30,000-60,000 range. Most firms require a two-year commitment, which is around what football teams will give to even the hugest busts.
Second, if it's a bad business model, then teams with good business models will exploit the inefficiency. If signing veterans who have proved themselves is such a wise strategy, and if paying rookies huge guarantees is so foolish, then only dumb teams would do it. This may actually be happening, since several teams always seem to find themselves in the first ten picks. But that is no argument to fix their stupidity for them by forcing rigid contract rules. Which leads to:
Third, you claim in your comment that you only want to point out that the model is unsustainable. But you seem to bless a suggestion that forces a contract on both team and player. That is probably the definition of telling someone he should not be able to make as much money as any team is willing to pay him.
Finally, I can't find any quick data, but I would be willing to bet Jake Long has already sold a hefty amount of jerseys. Moreover, he will certainly start this year and next, no matter how bad he is. The team will use him to sell more tickets than they would otherwise.
TJ, I'd read that a group of players wanted to replace Mr. Upshaw as well. I'm wondering what happened with that. It's gotten pretty quiet.
-S
Paul, Pat Kirwan and Tim Ryan have forgotten more about football than I'll ever know, and PK thinks this may be a workable idea.
The rookie compensation is at the insanity level. Roger Goodell said so as well over the weekend. It may benefit us as one of the smarter teams that don't buy into it, but wouldn't it be better to actually encourage competition/parity instead of a few winning teams, and a bunch of those who just aren't? Dynasties (well, other than the Seahawks!) are boring.
Here's a question: How many people will show up to see Jake Long, and how many still show up to see Jason Taylor?
-S
Darn. When I first read your comment, I thought you were giving me a great compliment, saying "Paul, Pat and Tim have forgotten more that I'll ever know," including me in the list. After reading it again, I realize that you were saying "Hey Paul, I know two guys who know a lot about football." Well, I take fleeting pride in thinking you would say such a nice thing about me, if only for a moment.
As for my response: Of course Roger Goodell said rookie salaries are insane. He works for the owners, and they don't want to pay rookies so much. But rather than do the smart thing--trade their high picks or, what would make some sense, skip the pick altogether--they don't want to explain that to their fans. So they send the commissioner to try to whip up sentiment for an unnatural restriction on salaries.
Second, of course it would be a workable idea. So would a system dictating salaries based only on the number of letters in a players last name. The point is not that the idea is unworkable, it is simply that two contracting parties should be able to price labor however they want.
Third, I would rather encourage good football than parity. If dynasties are the evil, then the league could just tell teams which players will play for them. A large part of the fun for me (and, I am guessing, most of your readers) is that teams can do whatever they want with their salary caps, and we are free to analyze, praise, and criticize those decisions. If some teams are consistently smarter than others, that is the price I am willing to pay.
Finally, I am not sure how many people will show up to watch Jake Long. To be honest, probably not many to see him alone. Trying to watch a lineman is boring compared with a wide receiver. But lineman are the quickest way to make a bad team good. So I am guessing (along with the Dolphins FO) that Long will make the team better, which will attract more fans. And in any event, I cannot agree that they should be prevented from making that decision.
Paul, LOL! I have had fun talking with you today, and it's obvious that you also know quite a bit about football.
I'd rather watch something competitive than the same teams winning all the time. That's just me. Of course, I offer the caveat that it's wonderful when the Seahawks win all the time.
One of the posters further up said that both Goodell and Upshaw are posturing prior to negotiations, and this is probably the case. As far as inflammatory statements, though, Mr. Upshaw doesn't seem to have a problem with them. He doesn't seem to understand that the fans of his league, the folks paying the bills, have a job. Suggesting that someone with no experience and being paid a king's ransom should get what he "deserves" is a little offensive.
Of course, this is IMHO.
-S
Parts of the business world are as out of control as top 15 rookie salaries in the NFL. Corporations regularly pay huge bonuses and guaranteed contracts to CEO's. The CEO's get to keep huge money, even if they fail miserably and run thier companies into the ground.
Then, to make matters worse, even if the CEO fails, another company snaps them up, and the whole circle begins again. Like the dude who invented New Coke, he failed much more than he succeeded, but the guy always came out richer and smelling like roses. Or the top 3 at Starbucks over the last few years: they ran that company into a brick wall, and now they all have lucrative jobs elsewhere. So where is the incentive to do well?! The CEO's become Ryan Leaf's--all the talent in the world, no reason to succeed once the ink is dry.
The problem is that there is no pure system of business or government that works. Even our government is not a pure democracy--because a pure system will not work. Pure free-market capitalism doesnt work too well either. We are seeing that right now, the top 10% does great, the middle shrinks, and poverty prevails.
There has to be some checks and balances, as in government, so in business.
Instituting some kind of rookie cap really is the answer. Youre telling me those poor poor agents and players will suffer if we cap signing bonus' for rookies at a million and guaranteed salaries at 5 million?! I dont buy it.
And if that makes me a commie pinko, well paint me pink and call me Krushchev!
Union chiefs do not have the job of staying PC. That is the job of the league commissioner. Goodell would be foolish to make inflammatory comments, while it doesn't really injure the union chief very much.
the only solutions are: owners stop paying so much -or- renegotiate the deal to include some sort of control mechanism.
Which side will "do the right thing" first?
Great posts! I have to say that there are some very smart folks on this site who have as much understanding of business and economics as they do of football. I am not kidding when I say this, I'm working on my MBA, and not more than 5 days ago we were talking about exploiting inefficiencies in my finance class. The real question is at what point do rookie salaries, or salaries in general reach the level where the owners actually stop making money and start losing money? The salaries, as high as they are, are investments that must provide a positive return. Of course the commissioner, working for the owners, wants the salaries to stop skyrocketing. Most business owners try to keep their expenses down. Why did the Falcons pay Matt Ryan $70 million? because they view him as the marketable new face of the franchise who will put butts in seats and help sell merchandise. All business faces risk and the owners must feel that the risk is worth it, even if publicly they say it isn't.
Damn... the Seahawk Addicts were busy while big daddy was away!
Great discussion everyone. You make me very proud.
Michael, I hope you had a blast! I sent a link to T-ROCK and PK; maybe they'll stop by, huh?
-S
No, it's not just lawyers. Probably all Fortune 500 companies heavily recruit top college prospects. You get near the top of your class in business school (heavy competition there btw) and you can write your ticket when you graduate.
And no one has addressed what I thought was an important question: How much of a problem is this? Aren't the picks 15 and lower pretty much below all five year veteran salaries?
Stephen, those contracts are for two years or so, right? They're getting paid probably less than $200K. For a larger law firm, that's like a parking ticket. If they don't bill a staggering amount of hours that first year as well, they're shuffled off into Siberia, aren't they, so that money isn't as much of a gamble as it might be.
You should feel free to disagree with my thoughts, but I'm thinking the huge salaries paid to the top ten draft picks represent a huge financial drain for any team that participates. How can Atlanta afford to pay Matt Ryan seventy million clams, anyway? Their team's decimated. They're going to have to spend a fortune to get anywhere near competitive again. Could they have spent perhaps thirty-five million on shoring up other positions on the team? What happens if Matt Ryan turns out to be another Alex Smith? As we've all learned, quarterback is one of the riskiest first-round draft picks, anyway. (See Leaf, Ryan.)
Those in the lower draft rounds probably make league minimum or close to it, but wasn't part of the reason why we traded out of the first round this year was to avoid the huge financial hit of a first round pick?
I've enjoyed the discussion, and I hope all of you guys have as well.
-S
Just checked in for today and wow, what a great discussion. I'm sorry I missed it. Leaky tub that had to be fixed. argh... I hate work. 
Speaking of Labor issues. I just found out that plumbers in Anchorage are charging $120 hour. Law School my ass, where do I send my son to get a degree in Pipe Wenchery? Err..... I guess that should be Wrenchery huh? He's already an experienced Wenchist. Apologies to the Ladies. I just couldn't help myself. I had to start drinking after I found out the price to fix my leaky tub and that's what you get when I'm half-loaded. A male Chauvinist swine.
Back to football.......
A lot of great points brought up today but one thing jumps out at me concerning the labor situation and how the money gets split in the NFL. As long as the Owners and Players are both making big bucks, nothing is going to change other than maybe who gets the biggest share. When one or the other starts actually losing money (or jobs for the players), they will find a way to band together and work for the good of the Golden Goose again. Right now with the huge revenue sharing from television and naming rights as well as the full stadiums and just how immensly popular the game itself is, everyone wants as big a share of the Goose as he can get. Right now the Goose is fat too.
The Goose can be killed though and it will take a long time to grow one as fat as this one is again so the league better do what it can to avoid a lockout or a capless year and all that triggers and especially they need to find a way to control who gets the Lions share of the salary money paid to players. Once crapped on, the sports fan can be as fickle as fate. Lockouts and strikes will alienate the fans very quickly.
The largest share of player salary money should be in the hands of the impact players on every team who are in the prime of their careers and have proved their worth. I'm not sure anyone can argue with that premise.
From what I've seen of how the Owners want to change it, a rookie would come in and play for a set salary based on his draft position and the position he plays. Probably the Players Union will want shorter contracts for new players so those that show they deserve better money and become impact players can get up to speed salary wise quicker. Will the Owners go for lower but shorter rookie contracts which will become larger contracts for those who show promise quicker? I think as long as the money percentage split doesn't change too much, both players and Owners could get along with a plan like that. Remember they all want the Goose to be healthy. The players will want their best talent getting the biggest salaries and the resentment of the rookie coming in and making more than the Pro Bowl or All Pro player will be gone. For those who are budding impact players, they'll get to a big payday sooner as contracts become shorter. The ones who will lose out biggest are the ones who come out of college showing great promise and get drafted highly but become a big bust. The rookie contract will not be for millions of guaranteed money before he is found out to be not worth it and the team can cut him without a huge financial loss. I see that as a win/win situation.
As a lot of people have pointed out today, being a loser gets you a high draft choice and the ability to shoot yourself in the foot quicker and with a lot more pain than a team who was in the playoffs and has a lower round draft choice who won't cost nearly so much to sign and the pain of finding he's a bust is much more bearable. In some respects it's almost an easier task to keep yourself at the top of the division than at the bottom. How can the Seahawks always come up with a better team while drafting at the bottom of the rounds for the last 4 years while SF, The Rams, and The Cards have all had much better and more numerous choices in those same drafts? That's a big hit for parity as it's supposed to work in the NFL these days wouldn't you say?
Of course when you have a talent evaluator like Tim Ruskell, you always seem to find good players anywhere you look for them but we already had that discussion.
Billt, I may be committing crimes against my own gender, but I have to say that the whole "experienced Wenchist" idea made me laugh!
For the ten thousanth time or so, we're lucky to have Tim Ruskell, aren't we?
I hope things are MUCH better with the bathtub.
-S
Strat,
The tub has been stopped from leaking down into my wife's den so peace has taken hold once again in the household and it's been decided that I won't be thrown to the Lions afterall.
After reading "The Draft" by Pete Williams, I realized that Ruskell has a lot more experience that I thought he had when he was first hired by Paul Allen. I had thought initially that he was someone out of the blue sky because I had never heard of him before he became Seattle's President and GM. From Pete William's book where Ruskell was a central character, I learned a lot about his background and who he learned the trade from and where his roots are. It also took us through some of the thought processes that were involved in formulating the principles that he uses today to find and evaluate talent for the NFL. Page by page, I became more and more enamored with his value system and how he applied it to the search for NFL talent. I realized that he had been working under Rich McKay for quite some time and the job in Seattle was his first chance to step out from under McKay and spread his wings and fly solo.
Seattle is the first team Ruskell can call his and his alone. That may explain some of the remarks that surfaced about his being jealous of sharing credit for the team with Holmgren a couple of years back. I think those reports were overblown for sensationalism by our favorite sports writers and that Holmgren and Ruskell get along just fine but there may have been a grain of truth in the situation. Ruskell has been waiting a long time to be able to have a team to call his own and now he probably wants everyone to know that it carries his stamp. You know how it was with your first car.
However you slice it, Seattle's damn lucky to have Ruskell trying out his hard learned bag of tricks with the Seahawks. His principles are sound and if guys like Tatupu are the type of players that get turned up by following those tenements, I don't see how the team can go wrong.
To me the real exciting part of it all is that because Ruskell has never had a chance to Captain the ship before, we don't know how far he can sail do we? He's barely into his fourth draft and the team is just now actually becoming a Ruskell built team. After he's had a chance to start building up the depth through the draft as his philosophy dictates and we start seeing our aging veterans replaced by those drafted players who have been waiting to step up and start, we'll truly see how his system produces a winner for today and continued dominance for tomorrow and into the future. I really believe that he can produce a dynasty as far as having a team that is in the playoff's every year and therefore is always in the hunt for a Super Bowl apperance and that is all you can really ask of anyone in his position.
I do like the makeup of the Seahawks better than I've ever liked the team before from the first version in 1976. The chemistry and how they believe in themselves and expect to win is something that has made this team something special. With the type of player Ruskell insists on having playing for his team, you can expect that kind of team harmony and committment to excellance will continue while the team reaches new heights.
Commenting by HaloScan
