First Pick in the Draft

Completely wrong. There is a player between 10-32 that will take the money. I guarantee it like stink on shit and Deion on Irvin.

 

STFU douche. I am not arguing with your bullshit. Anyone can read what is written.

One person's stupid is another person goldmine. You don't understand human relations. Somehow you think an agent is so powerful. I am not sure if you are doing that to bolster your argument or because you are really that deluded. But either way, it is wrong. An agent will get his client the best deal available. And if his client is projected at #15, then you give #8 money, then that is a win for everyone. If not, then look at #16 for #9 money. Whatever it takes to get a 1st round caliber player for less than the obscene #1 money. It isn't that difficult to understand, you are just being you typical douchie self.

 

OK

apparently, there's a lot I don't understand so that this is plausible. I'm sure that's the case for most people here, then.

They're the ones advocating for the player. Most times the player has no idea what he's signing, just that the agent says it's not enough. If you are a player, and an agent says "last year's #1 got $54 million. #1 contracts and contracts in general always go up. This set of idiots are offering $22 million. Don't sign."

Do you think that player's going to sign? Maybe I'm not good at human relations, fiscal responsibility, football, hockey, cribbage, Monopoly, I don't know my ass from a hole in the ground, I'm not as hirsuite as bigfoot, my tiramisu isn't as creamy as the next gal, and I don't have the sense to ignore your tired arguments, but I know that fucking player isn't going to sign. Maybe I should start deciding what you're not good at or don't know, since that's apparently what we're talking about.

No agent is willfully going to devalue the entire draft or help get his client screwed and end up losing all possible future business. You don't have to believe any of us saying this, but we're not saying it because it's fun to argue.

I guess the way you're most errant is the idea that somehow I don't grasp this idea. At what point did I ever show I didn't understand the concept? I stated it was dumb, risky, bad for the player, bad for the agent, bad for the team in the long run, and places unnecessary pressure on an already stressful situation. And it's unlikely to ever happen. And the most you seem to have in return is that you'll just keep going down the list until you find someone dumb enough to do this.

But if you think overpaying a player is fiscally smart, go for it. If you think overpaying for the sake of supposed fiscal responsibility is smart, please buy the Cowboys. All I know is if my team did this, I'd be fucking furious. If the Lions do this, it'll be funny. If I could somehow find a way to make sure someone in our division did it, I'd be ecstatic.

 

Here's where your argument falls apart -- projections lose all relevant meaning when the actual pick is made. The contracts are based on the actual pick, not where the draftee should have been taken. In other words, Detroit could draft TE Brandon Pettigrew overall, and the fact he's projected by the media as a late 1st to early 2nd won't mean much. At the end of the day, he's still the first player taken overall.

Now Detroit could lowball him, and definitely should if they made a move like that. At that point, Pettigrew and his agent would have a choice to make -- either accept the contract, or hold out. He could even choose to hold out the entire year and re-enter the draft in 2010.

If he did that, there's a good chance he'd hurt his draft stock and would get selected much lower than he normally would have. However, he would also have the satisfaction of totally screwing Detroit out of their 1st round draft pick, because they wouldn't get another one in '10 to compensate.

 

Hasbeen,

This is the last I am going to post on this. if you don't get it then you don't get it. I have stated multiple times in this thread, YOU CHOSE THAT PLAYER THAT YOU HAVE WORKED OUT A CONTRACT WITH (AND HIS AGENT) BEFORE THE DRAFT OCCURS. Him holding out after the fact is not relevant if you have a legally enforceable agreement. In that sense, there is no such thing as a "lowball" in this situation.

The only flaw in this arrangement is if there is specific language in the NFL rules that stop agreements before the draft occurs. If so, then he can break the verbal agreement and holdout. I would not risk that if it were the case.

*edit*
"Detroit has the benefit of being the only team that can talk to any player in the draft about a contract, because the Lions are on the clock; it's their pick, anytime between now and 4:10 p.m. on the opening day of the draft. " -Peter King

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/04/12/mmqb/index.html?bcnn=yes

 

he can break any 'verbal' agreement until he actually signs a contract according to the NFL.

 

I am not seeing anything in the rules that would stop the Lions from signing a college player at any time. If that is the case, then it would not be verbal, it would be a legally binding contract.

 

none of that was ever in dispute. It was whether it would actually happen.

 

I get it completely - it is very very simple. If Detroit can find someone to play that game, they should. I don't think they will.

Particularly this year, when apperently everyone is aching to get out of the top 10.

 

College kid missing out on $$Millions <> the satisfaction of screwing a franchise out of their first round pick.

Tharan's plan is completely viable....agents and players are not fools, and they have a general idea about where their clients stack up in the draft and what the pay would look like. The only real problem with the idea is the backlash from the fanbase if that player is a total bust. Todays fans are wise enough to realize the #1 pick is a gamble and, I believe, blame the player more if they don't produce as a #1 pick. In this case, the organization looks foolish if it doesn't work out, but genius if it does.

If you bolster the front of the contract with a huge signing bonus, guaranteed money, then a player who might otherwise get #20-#40 money would jump at the chance to earn #8-10 type money with guaranteed cash, so money is not an issue and they can focus on playing.



Holding out is not a good option for most NFL rookies, and typically represents a net loss of $$ if they get paid at all. A 20-40 pick holdout is not getting much interest the following year.