First Pick in the Draft

It's not just the agents.

I might be pissed if I was a team sitting at 8-15, had a pretty good idea what it would take to sign the kid I like and get him into camp on time and then some douchebag ahead of me decides they feel like fucking around with the slotting system (traditional and not etched in stone, I know) because the first pick looks a lot more like Kwame Brown than Patrick Ewing this year (apologies for the hoops ref). I might have to pull Mr. Ford into a room at the next owner's meeting and say "what the fuck is wrong with you?"

So, if you are Detroit and the player they picked you are happy....
... at the expense of every other team, agent and player in between 1 and the place where the Detroit playe "should" have been picked. No one has any idea for a basic starting opint for the salary: the agent uses last year's slotting (see Meat) and the owner says "No fucking way" (see Mags)...and you end up with 10 clusterfucks.

Then, we could do it ALL again the next time someone decides there's no one "really good enough" to get the No.1 money.

If I'm an owner, I'd probably rather just go on ahead and go for the GIANT clusterfuck of a lockout and solve the "value" issue by making a rookie cap part of the deal.

 

I think we're arguing from two sides of the same issue. Tharan's proposal is technically possible. My argument is that practically, it has almost zero chance of happening.

 

I just think if you are the agent of a guy who is slated to get picked 12-25 or somewhere and you can get him 135% of what he is expecting.....you've done well by your client. That is what he is proposing, so it's not that far-fetched. IMHO.

 

Except that history will record that individual as the #1 pick as show that his agent of record got him money comparable to a #8 pick. Is that really doing well by the client? I don't think that agent gets many top prospects as clients in the future.


PS. Several of you seem to have overlooked 1 key point. Agents are certified by the UNION. This is to ensure that, not only are they acting in the best interests of their individual clients, they also are working in the interest of all union members. While tharan's little scenario would benefit 1 player, the intended reduction of salaries ould not be considered to be in the collective good. In other words, an agent would be putting his certification at risk to even think about htis. IT IS VERY FAR-FETCHED.

 

What a bunch of bullshit. As an agent, I would get my mid-round client PAID, which is my job. Fuck your tradition. And I would own every freakin college player from the 15th projected pick on down to Mr Irrelevant for years to come.

 

Youu wouldn't get your guy PAID because, even IF it got to the point where the contract got signed, it would be invalidated and your certification pulled by the NFLPA. Then you wouldn't be able to represent anyone.

 

you just made that up. Name a single instance where the NFL or NFLPA has ever invalidated a contract because a draft pick got taken outside of where he was projected. And the 1st pick is not always the highest paid. Jamarcus Russel got more than Smith who got less than Mario Wiliams.

I sit in front of 22 guys, projected 10-32, and write the number 8 on one 3X5 card, and the number he is projected on another 3X5 card and place both in front of him. I say "you pick how you want to get paid."

One of those guys takes the money and signs the contract. once that contract is signed, all your piss-ass conservatism takes a flying leap out the fucking window. None of this would be an issue if the NFLPA had instituted a rookie cap. And owners would freakin love it if it happened.

 

There is a rookie salary cap.

 

I didn't make up a thing. The contract would not be invalidated because a player was selected outside of a "projected range". It would be tossed because it was not negotiated in keeping with the NFLPA Regulations Governing Contract Advisors (That's the fancy title for agents). Look it up. Your whole scenario

"But with no clear consensus #1, why couldn't the Lions just cut a deal with some player projected 10-15, sign him for some percentage more than he would have gotten otherwise, and yet still some significant percentage less than what a #1 should be getting this year? That would make the agents shit their pants. The Lions would get a solid rookie for significantly less and still have the 1st pick in the 2nd round, right?"

is based on a player and his agent working with a team to avoid high salaries. The players and their union obviously want high salaries. In other words, you wouldbe acting on behalf of the teams and the league, NOT the player and the union. The union would pull your certification and you would not be allowed to represent any NFL player. You're being crazy if you don't see that.

 

I guess I am crazy because I don't see it. And if I was the Lions, I would do it just to force the issue before the uncapped year.