Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Moreno and broncos still far apart?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    While I agree with what you are saying in part, I think that you would find the average career time in the NFL is not all that long. There are three problems. One is that some people simply do not have the talent to continue their careers in the NFL even though it appears they do. The second problem is the injury problem. The third is that teams want to be able to recover their investment over time. If you have a great player you really do want the option to keep that player more than for just 3 years. I think 3 years would add a great deal more volitility to the league.

    It really is a balancing act. Perhapes the top 10 to 15 should be treated as they are now and the rest should be on a scale. In other words some have certainly earned the right to be treated differently and some have not. Right now everyone in the 1st round is headed for a pretty big pay day, so the competition is not as intense as it might be.

    I wonder how many players would move down if people could take them for a lesser amount. It might make the top players even more valueable. I think there is a compromise somewhere in between a scale and no scale.

    I do believe there needs to be more protection for the clubs in the case of a player like Moss and others. To me the guarantteed money has to have a stipulation against a player just guitting. If the team cuts the player, then I would say a larger percentage of the money is due, if guarantteed money is all but eliminated. There needs to some protection for the player as well.

    Breaking the contract for Medical reasons obviously is a different issue and that could include mental health as well. Even some of these issues could be non-binding. For example, if a player is suddenly an addict you say they broke the contract not the team. Obviously a player who winds up in jail for a major crime is another issue.

    What I am saying is I believe we need to see more standardization of the NFL contract. As a standard there needs to be issues addressed on a league rather than an individual basis. The ability to stipulate needs to be made a very much more limited proposition and scope. That in itself would reduce a lot of haggling in the first contracts.

    I would argue veterns should have more flexibility in the contracts they sign as they have earned that right. But the newbies should be far more restricted in terms of contract language in the best interest of all concerned.

    Most teams do a lot of due dillegence, but it is impossible to know how some one will think tomorrow. That can make it very scary for an owner. At some point the current system will break the bank, particularly in-light of salary caps. The salary cap actually hurts the vetern, not the rookie.

    Comment


    • #77
      I agree that there should be a cap on rookies or a slotted system. But, Im not holding my breath. The player's union has no desire to ask for a cap, and the owners dont seem to be pushing it either. The owners choose to pay these guys this outrageous money. It seems that if they stuck together, they could change that on their own within one year.
      sigpic


      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by Pura Vida View Post
        I agree that there should be a cap on rookies or a slotted system. But, Im not holding my breath. The player's union has no desire to ask for a cap, and the owners dont seem to be pushing it either. The owners choose to pay these guys this outrageous money. It seems that if they stuck together, they could change that on their own within one year.
        Good luck getting 32 owners to agree to do something and stick to it.

        As far as the union goes, it seems to me that protecting the veterans would be higher on their list of priorities than protecting the rookies that have NEVER played a single NFL down when they are massively payed.

        You dont see this problem in the second or later rounds. And Ill bet that if you add up the 2nd through 7th rounders and the UDFAs, there are way way way more of them played than 1st rounders (sheer numbers alone make it that way). Why not protect them?
        sigpic

        I adopt andrewmlb.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by McSmashie View Post
          As far as the union goes, it seems to me that protecting the veterans would be higher on their list of priorities than protecting the rookies that have NEVER played a single NFL down when they are massively payed.
          I agree- but I saw the president of the union on tv and he said the high rookie contracts werent the union's problem. He agreed they were ridiculous, but then he said that the owners are choosing to pay that much. If they dont want to, they dont have to.
          sigpic


          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by Pura Vida View Post
            I agree- but I saw the president of the union on tv and he said the high rookie contracts werent the union's problem. He agreed they were ridiculous, but then he said that the owners are choosing to pay that much. If they dont want to, they dont have to.
            Add have every single 1st rounder hold out?

            Once a precident is set, it is nearly impossible to break without some short of rule change.
            sigpic

            I adopt andrewmlb.

            Comment


            • #81
              This is taking too long. But we can't tell who's to blame, we don't know what's being imposed by the Broncos, what's being imposed by the agent$. Ayers should be signed already, picks 17 and 20 signed, come on. Orakpo already signed, but Moreno's agent might be waiting to see what Crabtree will get. At least we have Alphonso on the field, our 2010 1st round pick.
              sigpic

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by Roddoliver View Post
                This is taking too long. But we can't tell who's to blame, we don't know what's being imposed by the Broncos, what's being imposed by the agent$. Ayers should be signed already, picks 17 and 20 signed, come on. Orakpo already signed, but Moreno's agent might be waiting to see what Crabtree will get. At least we have Alphonso on the field, our 2010 1st round pick.
                Im beginning to wonder how much of this is slowness on the FO part. It took them a while to resign Weigmann. The non-1st rounders were slow to sign. And now the 1st rounders are still unsigned.

                Maybe since this franchise is in COMPLETE OVERHAUL, maybe the FO doesnt have as much time to focus strictly on contracts as we would like?

                If this is true though, that stinks. We need these guys in camp and in camp now.
                sigpic

                I adopt andrewmlb.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Per Adam Schefter Twitter:

                  Denver has switched its emphasis from signing Robert Ayers first to Knowshon Moreno first. But you never know how these go.


                  sigpic


                  FA Targets: DT Jason Jones, DT Pat Simms, S Reggie Smith, LB Dan Connor



                  :cool:

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    You guys can be as high on Moreno at the nfl level as you like, he's unproven and will continue to be unproven until he gets to camp and gets in a nfl game.

                    Hillis, however, did just fine last year when we needed him to step up and he was the only thing that kept our hopes at playoffs going until he got hurt. Hillis will prove he can be more than a FB and he already is proving that..

                    http://www.gazette.com/sports/traini...ncos-camp.html
                    Last edited by BroncoFan1088; 08-02-2009, 02:00 PM.
                    Being a Bronco fan is more important than being a fan of any coach or player in particular.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X