Record number of underclassmen, cheaper talent, part of the Bills plan?

[X-Era]

An interesting article that talks about the possibility of a record number of underclassmen declaring this year. The thought is that due to the rookie wage scale, college players see less benefit from trying to improve their draft stock. Instead they want to get right into the NFL and get past the rookie contract and to their first big pay day as soon as possible.

The interesting implication is that veterans may suffer as teams go after younger, cheaper players. And more bodies may also mean deeper talent.

So, is it possible that the Bills are going after this? Taking advantage of this trend? To save money on younger and cheaper talent?

My problem with it is that it's a crap shoot and you may never get a player who's worth much of anything. The veteran route gives you a proven commodity. Of course we always need an influx of fresh young talent but we also need players that can play solid now.

If the Bills are looking for evidence that they should spend big rather than sign cheap vets and draft more players, last year didn't help that cause... They got 3 starters out of their first 3 picks, one may be the defensive rookie of the year. They drafted another player that looks pretty good in Goodwin. And in free agency signed a cheaper guy like Alan Branch who out played his salary and earned an extension.

Unfortunately for guys like me who want to see us spend more in free agency, in their minds last year worked so we may see more of the same.

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

[Skooby]

If we keep hitting on 3 guys a draft, look where we could be in year 2020.

[X-Era]

If we keep hitting on 3 guys a draft, look where we could be in year 2020.
Not really. Every 4th year we'll lose two that were drafted out of the 1st round and 1 that was drafted in the first round.

So really we can only ever have 3*4... 12 of these "hits" on the team. It takes 53.

[stuckincincy]

An interesting article that talks about the possibility of a record number of underclassmen declaring this year. The thought is that due to the rookie wage scale, college players see less benefit from trying to improve their draft stock. Instead they want to get right into the NFL and get past the rookie contract and to their first big pay day as soon as possible.

The interesting implication is that veterans may suffer as teams go after younger, cheaper players. And more bodies may also mean deeper talent.
So, is it possible that the Bills are going after this? Taking advantage of this trend? To save money on younger and cheaper talent?
My problem with it is that it's a crap shoot and you may never get a player who's worth much of anything. The veteran route gives you a proven commodity. Of course we always need an influx of fresh young talent but we also need players that can play solid now.
If the Bills are looking for evidence that they should spend big rather than sign cheap vets and draft more players, last year didn't help that cause... They got 3 starters out of their first 3 picks, one may be the defensive rookie of the year. They drafted another player that looks pretty good in Goodwin. And in free agency signed a cheaper guy like Alan Branch who out played his salary and earned an extension.

Unfortunately for guys like me who want to see us spend more in free agency, in their minds last year worked so we may see more of the same.

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

The author, Florio, is rehashing old ground...

The vets crabbed about rookie salaries - so they got what they wanted. A rookie cap. During last year's FA period, there was carping by some about just this.

[trapezeus]

the only way it works is if you do provide a payday to the top talents that you get. you don't hem and haw over whether a guy is top 3 or top 5. you make them content and keep them, and guys who don't break top ten at their position are replaced quickly with new talent.

if you just keep hoping you'll pick all new kids and they'll be NFL ready for a season or two, then you better have a coach who knows how to coach up. and that probably means not punting on 4th and short in the oppositions end, challenging plays that you clearly won't win, etc.

either way, the bills aren't set up to do anything positive if they do go the cheaper route.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

The author, Florio, is rehashing old ground...

The vets crabbed about rookie salaries - so they got what they wanted. A rookie cap. During last year's FA period, there was carping by some about just this.

You're kidding yourself if you think it was the players demanding the rookie scale. The owners wanted it because they didn't want to shell out $50 million guaranteed to guys who'd never played a snap. Those rookie salaries also pushed the highest salaries up, because how could you pay Tom Brady less than Sam Bradford? yadda yadda

And the veterans were carping in last year's free agency because of suspected collusion between the owners. Considering the cap penalties on the Redskins and Cowboys are basically textbook collusion, I think they were right to be suspicious, but we'll see how year 2 shakes out.


As for the OP, rookies coming out early to rush through the capped years is exactly what happened in the NBA when they instituted slotted rookie deals. Anyone who didn't expect this wasn't paying attention.

[DraftBoy]

You're kidding yourself if you think it was the players demanding the rookie scale. The owners wanted it because they didn't want to shell out $50 million guaranteed to guys who'd never played a snap. Those rookie salaries also pushed the highest salaries up, because how could you pay Tom Brady less than Sam Bradford? yadda yadda

And the veterans were carping in last year's free agency because of suspected collusion between the owners. Considering the cap penalties on the Redskins and Cowboys are basically textbook collusion, I think they were right to be suspicious, but we'll see how year 2 shakes out.


As for the OP, rookies coming out early to rush through the capped years is exactly what happened in the NBA when they instituted slotted rookie deals. Anyone who didn't expect this wasn't paying attention.

True it was an owner demand but the NFLPA gave in on that item quickly because the vets didn't like it either.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

True it was an owner demand but the NFLPA gave in on that item quickly because the vets didn't like it either.

No they didn't, it was one of their main points of contention throughout the process. They only agreed to a rookie scale in July (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6768521/nfl-lockout-owners-players-agree-rookie-wage-system-sources-say), only 10 days before the final deal was agreed upon (http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22475988/29591570)

Players hate artificial restrictions on what they make and with good reason. Now, the players were willing to negotiate on it provided some of the benefits returned to the older guys (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_corner/post/The-real-story-behind-the-rookie-wage-scale?urn=nfl-260642)

[DraftBoy]

No they didn't, it was one of their main points of contention throughout the process. They only agreed to a rookie scale in July (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6768521/nfl-lockout-owners-players-agree-rookie-wage-system-sources-say), only 10 days before the final deal was agreed upon (http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22475988/29591570)

Players hate artificial restrictions on what they make and with good reason. Now, the players were willing to negotiate on it provided some of the benefits returned to the older guys (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_corner/post/The-real-story-behind-the-rookie-wage-scale?urn=nfl-260642)

I can't argue with any source I can cite but it was known during the negotiations that the NFLPA was always going to give the rookie cap to the owners. Also keep in mind agreeing to the full scale, is a bit different from agreeing to the institution of a cap.

[X-Era]

I can't argue with any source I can cite but it was known during the negotiations that the NFLPA was always going to give the rookie cap to the owners. Also keep in mind agreeing to the full scale, is a bit different from agreeing to the institution of a cap.That's how I remember it too. It was well known that that would be a part of it before the old CBA even expired.

[Mace]

I think it's the only survivable plan. We all love big splash FA's, but you get one when it's the finishing touch or you're doomed nowadays. There aren't really that many useful ones anyway, so you use FA to stopgap or gather worker bees from deficient drafts.

Cheap good picks (assuming you make them) are your building blocks, they have to be or you outspend yourself fast. Success is blessing and curse for both players and teams. A team can tie up too much cash in a big contract and cap cripple themselves instantly, a player, unless he is naive will know he will never see his back end money and play out his career for what he considered peanuts if anyone wants him and didn't draft well.

You have to figure now, the real contract despite the numbers is the signing bonus and first 2 years unless foolish guarantees come into play, and for every relatively successful Mario you can get a Haynesworth, like you can draft a Gabbert instead of a Kaepernick.

These thoughts always come back to the same thing, who would you have spent big on to propel this not good team into instant Super Bowl contention, like what draft pick immediately promotes you to glory ? A Peyton Manning moves into a situation that suits him, a Welker follows, after they drafted a Von Miller and re signed a Ryan Clady. Indy wasn't so terrible when they crumpled and got a Luck, a Cliff Avril added something to a solid Seahawks team. Kruger and Ellerbe hardly vaulted Cleveland and Miami into the playoffs but Baltimore lost something in them when it paid so much to Flacco who came up short in his money moment this year.

Building through the draft needs astute eyes, but you don't build through FA, you add pieces. Nature of the beast, and common sense that you need build and create through younger players, which happen to be cheaper by labor agreement, in the draft.

[stuckincincy]

You're kidding yourself if you think it was the players demanding the rookie scale. The owners wanted it because they didn't want to shell out $50 million guaranteed to guys who'd never played a snap. Those rookie salaries also pushed the highest salaries up, because how could you pay Tom Brady less than Sam Bradford? yadda yadda

And the veterans were carping in last year's free agency because of suspected collusion between the owners. Considering the cap penalties on the Redskins and Cowboys are basically textbook collusion, I think they were right to be suspicious, but we'll see how year 2 shakes out.

As for the OP, rookies coming out early to rush through the capped years is exactly what happened in the NBA when they instituted slotted rookie deals. Anyone who didn't expect this wasn't paying attention.

Do you have a lecture series? It would save us all a lot of time... :kid:

[DesertFox24]

Doug Whaley said last year that he is not one to make big splashes in FA.

Expect much of the same this year, probably get 1 to 3 guys after the first signing period for decent deals.

Hopefully we can get two guys that play as well as Lawson and Branch did.

I honestly expect a LB, OL, DL, and boundary corner.

DL might be removed if Carrington resigns, or they might not sign any and draft Tuitt.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

I can't argue with any source I can cite but it was known during the negotiations that the NFLPA was always going to give the rookie cap to the owners. Also keep in mind agreeing to the full scale, is a bit different from agreeing to the institution of a cap.


That's how I remember it too. It was well known that that would be a part of it before the old CBA even expired.

The owners made it very clear that it was a deal breaker from day one. That's a far cry from saying the NFLPA gave into it quickly, 18 weeks into a 19.5 week lockout, or that they players were the ones asking for it.


Do you have a lecture series? It would save us all a lot of time... :kid:

Yes, but then I wouldn't be giving it away for free. :D