Tweet
Re: Rookie pool discussion
I don't think it's ever a good idea to front-load a rookie's contract. First, if they don't work out then the team will have invested a large portion of the contract prior to getting any return. It's not wise to front-load payments for services yet rendered in most anything in life, especially when you're talking about young men with various maturity levels. Since you don't know what you're getting from a rookie, why push more money into their hands early in the deal?
Second, if the player is any good, most rookie contracts will get redone before they expire. You save nothing if you end up having to redo the final years of the deal which is where the real cap value would come into play from front-loading the deal.
Third, from a risk standpoint, in the NFL contracts aren't guaranteed so a large cap number later in the deal is a safe bet for a team because they don't necessarily have to pay it. It's the ultimate flexibility. If the player stinks, (see J.Reynolds) then you just cut him and the cap number doesn't matter. If the player is good, then you extend the deal and end up reworking the cap number for the final year or two. Giving the money up front to a guy like Reynolds only makes a mistake worse because now you've screwed up on the evaluation of talent AND given him a chunk of money that you can't get back.
Originally posted by Rastak
Okay guys, how does the NFL's rookie pool work for frontloading contracts?
I think it's relevent this year because both Green Bay and even more so Minnesota have loads of cap space right now. Front loading the #1 picks contract would make sense for both teams given the free cap space and injury history concerns.
Is this really feasibile with the rookie pool or would frontloading eat up the pool RIGHT NOW and prevent a team from signing all it's picks? Perhaps a second year high base might also work somewhat if enough cap could be pushed back to next year via LTBE bonuses.
Thoughts? (Ecspecially Patler
)
I think it's relevent this year because both Green Bay and even more so Minnesota have loads of cap space right now. Front loading the #1 picks contract would make sense for both teams given the free cap space and injury history concerns.
Is this really feasibile with the rookie pool or would frontloading eat up the pool RIGHT NOW and prevent a team from signing all it's picks? Perhaps a second year high base might also work somewhat if enough cap could be pushed back to next year via LTBE bonuses.
Thoughts? (Ecspecially Patler
)Second, if the player is any good, most rookie contracts will get redone before they expire. You save nothing if you end up having to redo the final years of the deal which is where the real cap value would come into play from front-loading the deal.
Third, from a risk standpoint, in the NFL contracts aren't guaranteed so a large cap number later in the deal is a safe bet for a team because they don't necessarily have to pay it. It's the ultimate flexibility. If the player stinks, (see J.Reynolds) then you just cut him and the cap number doesn't matter. If the player is good, then you extend the deal and end up reworking the cap number for the final year or two. Giving the money up front to a guy like Reynolds only makes a mistake worse because now you've screwed up on the evaluation of talent AND given him a chunk of money that you can't get back.
Comment