A gap remains in Raji negotiations.

[Lurker64]

Wish we had an idea on how far apart they are

Well, if Andrew Brandt is to be trusted as a resource for this, generally in contract negotiations the part of the discussion about "how much is this player to be paid" in contract negotiations takes all of half an hour.

The part about "how to structure escalators" and "which incentives are worth how much" takes 50+ hours.

So they are probably not "far apart" in the way you think they are.

[Deputy Nutz]

let him sit, send a message. the message is worth more than BJ is. Make a final offer and drop it every day as his value drops with lack of camp time. Make it a five year deal too. Once game one starts make it a 5 year deal at the league minimum so he can't decide to sign in week 7 to get his year credit. Let him re-enter the draft and see if his value jumps or drops.

Thats great, but at some point, specific date I am not positive of, you lose his rights and he goes back into the draft, it is not like having the rights to a restrictive free agent or a player under a franchise tag.

[pbmax]

Wish we had an idea on how far apart they are

Well, if Andrew Brandt is to be trusted as a resource for this, generally in contract negotiations the part of the discussion about "how much is this player to be paid" in contract negotiations takes all of half an hour.

The part about "how to structure escalators" and "which incentives are worth how much" takes 50+ hours.

So they are probably not "far apart" in the way you think they are.

Its the bonus/guarantee money that is killing this. Its not a normal slotting anymore for a total package.

DHB in Oakland brought the insanity of 20% year over year increase to the seventh pick thanks to Mr. Davis. And Crabtree and Parker are trying to pull that kind of top 5 increase down to pick 10.

The only early slot to go the Packers way was Moreno at 12. The Packers could afford to do a deal, but the two franchises in front at 6 (Bengals) and 8 (Jacksonville) are confirmed penny pinchers. Especially the Bengals, where they are almost predicting a camp long stalemate. So those won't go quick.

[pbmax]

It seems to me that a very simple solution is to establish a cutoff date of Aug. 1 for rookies to sign, or they go back into the draft next year. You wouldn't even have to deal with a salary schedule, which sets itself by default anyway. The key is to get the players into camp for everyone's benefit.

- Training camp holdouts hurt both the player and the team, no one benefits.
- Players eventually sign, they wait (more accurately the agents and teams wait) because they can.
- Very little happens the first few months after the draft, moving up the deadline will start negotiations earlier.

Even if the NFLPA agreed to that, it would seem eminently vulnerable to a court challenge.

Court challenge, for what? They already have a cutoff date, this is just moving the date. The team is under no obligation to sign the player for anything other than the minimum, which is automatically tendered by the draft. However, the team can withdraw the tender.

Doesn't MLB have a mid-August deadline for signing players from the May draft? What happens if a baseball player doesn't sign by then?

You are moving the date to a time that would make it impossible for a person to ply their trade for more than a year. Aug 1 and then sit out a year means the contract must be done before the first week of training camp. That makes it look like restraint of trade.

The current cutoffs are so late in the year that it would be hard to argue they prevent the player from working in his profession. Leagues have lost these battles before, both the NFL and the NBA. The difference now is that both have the Unions on their side. But its a higher hurdle to climb as the rookies simply must avoid joining the union and the case becomes more difficult.

And MLB has an August deadline and it may be that you go back into the draft. But August in the baseball season means the season is 2/3 over. And rookies in MLB spend time in the minors, even if there are Sept callups. There are also extended seasons and Winter Ball available for them if they sign late. At Aug.1, the professional football player would be left with only the UFL.

The fact that it exists might be the argument that would prevent owners from moving that date.

[Tarlam!]

That makes it look like restraint of trade.

By mandating the salary niveau for draftees by the position they get drafted, the league would take it out of the greedy agents' hands and there is no need for a deadline.

The league could have standards on the variable parts (i.e. garanteed money) and positions (i.e. escalator clauses etc).

But unless the salary cap remains in some form, my idea has no merit.

[Patler]

You are moving the date to a time that would make it impossible for a person to ply their trade for more than a year. Aug 1 and then sit out a year means the contract must be done before the first week of training camp. That makes it look like restraint of trade.

The current cutoffs are so late in the year that it would be hard to argue they prevent the player from working in his profession. Leagues have lost these battles before, both the NFL and the NBA. The difference now is that both have the Unions on their side. But its a higher hurdle to climb as the rookies simply must avoid joining the union and the case becomes more difficult.

And MLB has an August deadline and it may be that you go back into the draft. But August in the baseball season means the season is 2/3 over. And rookies in MLB spend time in the minors, even if there are Sept callups. There are also extended seasons and Winter Ball available for them if they sign late. At Aug.1, the professional football player would be left with only the UFL.

The fact that it exists might be the argument that would prevent owners from moving that date.

It doesn't prevent him from plying his trade, it merely puts a limit on how long he and the team can play around negotiating a contract. It doesn't eliminate his opportunity it just puts limits on it just as the roster limit, salary cap, draft and a host of other things limit how he can exercise that right.

Currently the deadline is week 10. If week 10 is OK as a deadline, why not week 5? If week 5 is OK, why not week 1?

The fact that there are very limited opportunities for a player to play outside the NFL is not the fault of the NFL unless their unfair trade practices have eliminated the competition. That's a whole different question.

One could argue that an August 1 deadline would promote competition, because it would make players available for a competitive league to use while still allowing the player to re-enter the draft the next year. Right now if a hold out decides to sign with the CFL or some other pro league, he doesn't go back into the draft pool the next year. His original drafting team retains his NFL rights for a second season. Under my scenario, his NFL rights would expire if a contract isn't signed by August 1. He could then go play in another league and re-enter the draft the following year. It enhances his freedom.

[SnakeLH2006]

Just had to break in and say "WHO FUCKING CARES?"....

I cared more when I was a teen. This contract/negotiation is meaningless as it's set amount.....he (Raji) reports soon. No body cares. Who gives a flying fuck when it happens?....As if we did NOT expect it. WHO FUCKING CARES? He's signed when it happens. It's tedious....but he gets NO MORE than what we expect....IMO there is no Drama other than the start date when he signs......NBA contracts are much more worthwhile Drama Wise. Raji's deal will be 5 years (that is a fact) for about $7 million yearly. Wow. Just stated it. Who cares? He's in camp within a week.

[Patler]

Just had to break in and say "WHO FUCKING CARES?"....

I cared more when I was a teen. This contract/negotiation is meaningless as it's set amount.....he (Raji) reports soon. No body cares. Who gives a flying fuck when it happens?....As if we did NOT expect it. WHO FUCKING CARES? He's signed when it happens. It's tedious....but he gets NO MORE than what we expect....IMO there is no Drama other than the start date when he signs......NBA contracts are much more worthwhile Drama Wise. Raji's deal will be 5 years (that is a fact) for about $7 million yearly. Wow. Just stated it. Who cares? He's in camp within a week.

Well, you could say the same thing for any and every thread here.

[Partial]

Snake was laying the smack down all over the site last night.

[pbmax]

It doesn't prevent him from plying his trade, it merely puts a limit on how long he and the team can play around negotiating a contract. It doesn't eliminate his opportunity it just puts limits on it just as the roster limit, salary cap, draft and a host of other things limit how he can exercise that right.

Currently the deadline is week 10. If week 10 is OK as a deadline, why not week 5? If week 5 is OK, why not week 1?

The fact that there are very limited opportunities for a player to play outside the NFL is not the fault of the NFL unless their unfair trade practices have eliminated the competition. That's a whole different question.

One could argue that an August 1 deadline would promote competition, because it would make players available for a competitive league to use while still allowing the player to re-enter the draft the next year. Right now if a hold out decides to sign with the CFL or some other pro league, he doesn't go back into the draft pool the next year. His original drafting team retains his NFL rights for a second season. Under my scenario, his NFL rights would expire if a contract isn't signed by August 1. He could then go play in another league and re-enter the draft the following year. It enhances his freedom.

Aug 1 would make more players available to other leagues, but I am not talking about restraint of trade in terms of competing leagues.

It eliminates more player leverage than team leverage. A team faces increasing pressure as time passes to get a drafted player signed. That continues right through the last preseason game and the end of camp. Whereupon, nearly everyone forgets about a contribution from that player. But the player can still get paid, salary for the part of the season they are available and all the bonus money they can negotiate.

An Aug 1 date means the player no longer has the threat of non-participation and eventually getting the money for that year. The player cannot hope to receive any money if they don't sign by Aug. 1. It increases the players risk and it throws most of the leverage to the team. Yes the team has a new deadline and if they hope to have the player on board they need to get him signed faster, but that changes none of their risk. Teams do not suddenly increase rookie draft contract offers in Week 2. The real negotiations take place all through August.

And players would certainly avoid joining the Union and sue when put at that disadvantage.

[sharpe1027]

Aug 1 would make more players available to other leagues, but I am not talking about restraint of trade in terms of competing leagues.

It eliminates more player leverage than team leverage. A team faces increasing pressure as time passes to get a drafted player signed. That continues right through the last preseason game and the end of camp. Whereupon, nearly everyone forgets about a contribution from that player. But the player can still get paid, salary for the part of the season they are available and all the bonus money they can negotiate.

An Aug 1 date means the player no longer has the threat of non-participation and eventually getting the money for that year. The player cannot hope to receive any money if they don't sign by Aug. 1. It increases the players risk and it throws most of the leverage to the team. Yes the team has a new deadline and if they hope to have the player on board they need to get him signed faster, but that changes none of their risk. Teams do not suddenly increase rookie draft contract offers in Week 2. The real negotiations take place all through August.

And players would certainly avoid joining the Union and sue when put at that disadvantage.

Is it restraint of trade when an employer doesn't hire a potential empolyee because they do not agree on salary?

Wouldn't moving the date just increase the pressure for both sides? You seem to suggest that rookies gain an advantage by missing training camp. Maybe, but one could argue that rookies are under more pressure to sign as the training camp progresses. They need the practice more than the team needs them...

Maybe they should move up the draft a few weeks and the deadline with it. That gives teams and players the same amount of time to dick around with the contract details.

[Patler]

It eliminates more player leverage than team leverage. A team faces increasing pressure as time passes to get a drafted player signed. That continues right through the last preseason game and the end of camp. Whereupon, nearly everyone forgets about a contribution from that player. But the player can still get paid, salary for the part of the season they are available and all the bonus money they can negotiate.

An Aug 1 date means the player no longer has the threat of non-participation and eventually getting the money for that year. The player cannot hope to receive any money if they don't sign by Aug. 1. It increases the players risk and it throws most of the leverage to the team. Yes the team has a new deadline and if they hope to have the player on board they need to get him signed faster, but that changes none of their risk. Teams do not suddenly increase rookie draft contract offers in Week 2. The real negotiations take place all through August.

And players would certainly avoid joining the Union and sue when put at that disadvantage.

It changes leverage a little for each, but I don't think it favors one over the other to any significant degree. It puts a drop dead date at a time when it has meaning. Does the player want to go a season without playing and without income? Does the team want to lose rights to the player forever? For each the answer is likely "No".

The current system allows each side to waste a year of the other side's time? Moving the deadline eliminates that for each.

Why have there been no meaning negotiations on the CBA in the last year? Because there is not a critical deadline close enough for the two side to start worrying. As soon as that happens, they will begin to meet frequently and work something out. Moving the deadline for rookie contract negotiations would do the same.