NFL Looking To Slash Rookie Salaries -

NFL5nbacyomi · Starszy sierżant borok

NFL Looking To Slash Rookie Salaries
(Related from: [link widoczny dla zalogowanych])
[link widoczny dla zalogowanych] Anyone would take that job. The 30% pay cut shouldn’t happen, I’ll agree, but this “putting thier body on the line” stuff is nonsense. They can chose to enter the NFL draft. Either at $275k or 400k a year starting,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], they would have to be idiots not to. A busted knee would suck, but if you’re that concerned about it,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], don’t play. I put my “body on the line” every weekend when I go skiing. It’s what I do, and I wouldn’t blame anyone if I got hurt doing it [link widoczny dla zalogowanych].
[link widoczny dla zalogowanych] I get tired of this argument. No one is forcing them. Players get an enormous salary,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], near celebrity status,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], all the pussy they can handle and we’re supposed to weep for them if they get hurt. I think the owners are cheap fuckers and this is an obvious attempt to pound the crap out of the players and slant the entire board thier way, but this reasoning is a bunch of shit.
(Related from: [link widoczny dla zalogowanych])
authentic [link widoczny dla zalogowanych] The people who are really getting screwed are the older players. They weren’t aware of the serious effects of the game that are just now being uncovered. They also didn’t make dick compared to what the players today are getting. Those are the people we should actually care that they put thier bodies on the line. The compensation wasn’t nearly as high and the risk wasn’t as apparent.
Linebacker Brandon Graham, from the University of Michigan, the 13th pick overall by the Philadelphia Eagles in the 2010 NFL draft, holds up an Eagles jersey during a newss conference in Philadelphia
10 months ago: Linebacker Brandon Graham, from the University of Michigan, the 13th pick overall by the Philadelphia Eagles in the 2010 NFL draft, holds up an Eagles jersey during a newss conference in Philadelphia,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych],
[link widoczny dla zalogowanych],[link widoczny dla zalogowanych],Florio had his annual good idea with limiting all rookie contracts to four years in the first round and three years in the rest of the draft. Busts can be quickly dismissed, guys who outperformed their contracts can be quickly rewarded. The NFL won’t do that because, quiet as kept, contracts are pretty reasonable for players who aren’t drafted in the top 10.
The NFL owners are desperately looking for ways to keep more of their revenue for themselves and give less to the players. One area they're very keen on making changes is in the way they pay rookies. There's no doubt that rookies at the top of the draft,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], who have yet to prove anything in the NFL,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], are getting huge deals that often seem to end up hamstringing a franchise if the guy busts. But according to the Sports Business Journal, the owners aren't just out to change they way they pay the top rookies, they want to dramatically slash the salaries of all of them [link widoczny dla zalogowanych].
(Related from: [link widoczny dla zalogowanych])
In an NFLPA memo obtained by Mullen,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], she reveals that the NFL proposed cutting the league minimum to players in their first four years by nearly 30 percent, from $405,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych],000 to $275,000. Players whose performance exceeded those numbers would be stuck, as "re-negotiations or extensions would be banned until after three years for drafted players" under the NFL Rookie Wage Scale proposal. Also, to save the owners from paying younger players so much up front, signing bonuses would be fixed and paid over the life of the contract instead of all at the beginning.
This seems like a cheap move from the owners. The fact is that they're already getting these guys on the cheap and without guaranteed contracts they can easily cut young players that aren't up to snuff. So unlike the guys taken in the top of the first round getting huge signing bonuses, the owners can easily get rid of the contracts of these guys if they want.I find it hard to believe that later round rookie are such a drain on a teams' finances that a 2/3rds cut of salary is needed.
If the NFL is trying to level the field of competition, the worst team in a league year shouldn’t take a hit for having the first pick, it should be a blessing, not a curse
Aw,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], hell naw. They’re asking players to put their bodies on the line for two more games a year and then to take a paycut as well? Bullshit. Remember, the average NFL career is 4 years. For every Ray Lewis there’s 2 guys you’ve never heard of that play for two years and retire because of injury. This is an insult to the NFLPA if it’s true.
The ban on re-negotiations within the first three years is an interesting idea and one you'd think the Eagles wouldn't be too keen on as they like to lock up young players early... However,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], the aim would seem to be to pre-empt all the holdouts and contract complaints you hear from young players looking to force a new long term deal. If this were a rule now, no one would be concerned with DeSean Jackson getting a new contract this summer as he would be ineligible.
the big issue is how much of the entire cash pie goes to players. period. And that means ALL players from rookies, to current players, to benefits plans, to retired players.
This year, players got just over 41%…they initially agreed to keep things the same (although in the most recent meeting, the union asked for a 50-50 split which caused owners to walk away from the table). Owners opted out, they want to not only grow the pie (by adding two games) but ALSO for the players to take a lower percentage of that pie.
[link widoczny dla zalogowanych] The players Union was willing to keep the current CBA, which alotted to players about 41% of the total NFL cash pie (that includes current veterans,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], rookies, benefits, and retired players)
- The owners are asking to both grow the total pie by adding 2 games, and cut rookie wages
-It seems that 41% of more money PLUS a cut in rookie wages would immediately give more money to both current and retired players which should make the union happy, as well as giving owners more which should make them happy
-HOWEVER, the owners want to grow the pie while ALSO giving less to the players,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], while the union’s most recent request (which forced owners away from the negotiating table) was for a 50-50 split.
-I don’t see how this goes anywhere, there’s too much stubborness on both sides. When the owners say,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], “we want you to take a smaller percentage of more” and your counter-offer isn’t a compromise, but rather a HUGE raise…they really are miles apartofficial [link widoczny dla zalogowanych], [link widoczny dla zalogowanych].
(Related from: [link widoczny dla zalogowanych])
Srouce related：

[link widoczny dla zalogowanych]