Gene Upshaw

[WhistlingMtn]

I keep hearing talk that this owners unanimously opting out thing is proof that he has done a great job negotiating. Am I the only one that thinks this is a negative mark? That the only way he could get the deal done was by leaving a giant opportunity for the owners to opt out?

Why is he getting praise for setting up a deal which was temporary and doomed from the start?

[MR. WEBBER]

the guy is junk.hope the players get him out like they want

[BrentJones84]

I keep hearing talk that this owners unanimously opting out thing is proof that he has done a great job negotiating. Am I the only one that thinks this is a negative mark? That the only way he could get the deal done was by leaving a giant opportunity for the owners to opt out?

Why is he getting praise for setting up a deal which was temporary and doomed from the start?

I agree with you.

[greenblood25]

I keep hearing talk that this owners unanimously opting out thing is proof that he has done a great job negotiating. Am I the only one that thinks this is a negative mark? That the only way he could get the deal done was by leaving a giant opportunity for the owners to opt out?

Why is he getting praise for setting up a deal which was temporary and doomed from the start?


I agree, and the fact that he will not even consider a rookie payscale just pisses me off. I understand there is more risk in football than in the NBA, so why not make the rookie payscale with for the first two years, then the player still has a lot of good playing time ahead of him to sign "big deal" for 5 or 6 years?

I thought the niners got screwed with the 1st pick when we had to invest that kind of money in Smith, but just 3 years later, look at the Ryan signing, which is much, much worse.

[SoggyNinerFan]

I agree, and the fact that he will not even consider a rookie payscale just pisses me off. I understand there is more risk in football than in the NBA, so why not make the rookie payscale with for the first two years, then the player still has a lot of good playing time ahead of him to sign "big deal" for 5 or 6 years?

I thought the niners got screwed with the 1st pick when we had to invest that kind of money in Smith, but just 3 years later, look at the Ryan signing, which is much, much worse.

There is also an issue that teams have with shorter rookie contracts. If the player plays for only two years on the initial deal, the team needs to protect itself from losing the player so soon. An added dimension of difficulty is with player development. Many players take 3-4 years to hit their stride, much less to see much playing time. If the rookie deals are too short, teams are forced to play more younger guys to test them out; veterans lose playing time and the product on the field is diminished.

Maybe they can structure a tiered deal with an option for rookies. The first phase is for 2 years at a capped amount and the team will have an option to keep the player at a predetermined extension for the remainder of the contract. That would protect the team from the risk of signing early first rounders. If there is a problem with risk in the NFL, the player can then insure himself against the remaining contract value in case of injury.

I don't understand why Upshaw has a problem with limiting rookie salaries anyway. The money saved from rookie pay will get distributed to the veterans anyway. Since the only guys with a vot in the NFLPA are current players (not future rookies), why is he so adamant about restricting pay to current players to protect the inflated salaries of future players. It just doesn't make any sense.

[greenblood25]

There is also an issue that teams have with shorter rookie contracts. If the player plays for only two years on the initial deal, the team needs to protect itself from losing the player so soon. An added dimension of difficulty is with player development. Many players take 3-4 years to hit their stride, much less to see much playing time. If the rookie deals are too short, teams are forced to play more younger guys to test them out; veterans lose playing time and the product on the field is diminished.

Maybe they can structure a tiered deal with an option for rookies. The first phase is for 2 years at a capped amount and the team will have an option to keep the player at a predetermined extension for the remainder of the contract. That would protect the team from the risk of signing early first rounders. If there is a problem with risk in the NFL, the player can then insure himself against the remaining contract value in case of injury.


Excellent points! I just don't think we will see any kind of rookie payscale even with caveats like what you described as long as Upshaw holds his position.

[TheWiz]

I just had a very nice, responsive post eaten by an internet error so I'll be more brief in my summary of it...

- You can't have a CBA over a long term. If the league grows too fast it screws over the NFLPA and if the NFLPA gets a good deal, it really screws over the owners if the economy is very slow and the league don't keep growing at record rates. You'd get an NHL type situation that way. Also, the CBA has been redone and extended 5 times since its 1993 inception, about once every 3-4 years and the fact that this CBA covered 6 seasons ('06-'11) meant it more or less had to include 'out' clauses after the first 3-4 seasons. As such, '06-'09 will all be capped and the deal actually will have at least covered 5 years, '06-'10 befire it expires before the '11 season. Saying Upshaw signed a deal that was too short is not an argument, it was standard.

- You can't slot rookie deals. Period. The more control you place over them the more money you sap away from agents. Those agents in turn will take bigger cuts of veteran deals. Also, by slotting rookies veteran deals sky rocket because of more cash available and moreso because agents want a bigger take so players want bigger deals to compensate what the agent takes from them. But it creates bigger problems for older veterans, allows teams to abuse rookies at no risk, and creates new conundrums. Imagine SEA a few years ago if rookies were slotted. Now, do you pay RB Alexander, soon to be 30, an 8M/year salary or do you take a chance on a rookie who could cost only 2M per season? By slotting and guaranteeing rookie costs combined with sky rocketing veteran costs, teams will be more likely to opt for the cheaper options, even it's a production risk! The result? Those amazingly young and talented players who have high value suddenly will never get signed ot that huge value because it's cheaper to gamble on a slotted rookie, which drives their pay day down until teams find the reward more palatable. I actually played this 'game' with people not mentioning thre NFL or players but rather, soldiers and govt' spending. In short, exactly the enigma that Upshaw lays out occurs every time.