Hughes 1 Of 13 Unsigned #1s

[JustinTime18™]

https://www.dailynorseman.com/2018/7/14/...ta-vikings

I'm not too concerned yet...the slotting makes this a virtual slam dunk...ask me again next week at this time though...

I'm wondering if there's a legit reason for the delay other than the other picks around the #30 not being signed...like another contract or two is a higher priority...

[Guest]

Didn't Minnesota sign all of their draft picks in like 2 weeks last year and early? Now this? I don't get it, I guess. Obviously, with 13 number one picks unsigned, there's a reason for the holdup. Why it changes year to year is the head scratcher for me.

[Guest]

its stupid,  we hear its about waiting on this player or that player and thats why this guy hasnt signed,  but somebody has to set the benchmark.  its kind of dumb that the CBA sets the length and money of the contracts but stopped there still leaving shit to work out.  why didnt they just say that the rookie deals will be X amount for Y number of years with a Z% increase each year?  With X amount guaranteed annually,  with x amounts due June 1st every year and x amount due each game.

[Guest]

@JimmyinSD said:
its stupid,  we hear its about waiting on this player or that player and thats why this guy hasnt signed,  but somebody has to set the benchmark.  its kind of dumb that the CBA sets the length and money of the contracts but stopped there still leaving shit to work out.  why didnt they just say that the rookie deals will be X amount for Y number of years with a Z% increase each year?  With X amount guaranteed annually,  with x amounts due June 1st every year and x amount due each game.

It has nothing to do with pay raises YOY and likely isn't due to bonus structure either. Offset language is the big sticking point in 1st round pick negotiations. Offsets give the team some protection that if a draft pick doesn't work out they don't owe additional money if the player is claimed on waivers or the difference in salary is offset in their new deal. So for example player A gets a 3 year $3M deal and is cut after two years. If he signs for another team on a 1 year $500K contract his drafting team would only be responsible for $500K since the other $500K would be paid by his new team. The player obviously doesn't want offset language in the contract since they'd have the opportunity to double dip in the market. Say the same scenario is used above. Player A is cut and still receives his final $1M from his drafting team and would earn the $500K in addition to that on his new deal. 

So just to show the importance: 

Offset Language: Player A receives $3M over 3 years / Team A pays $2.5M / Team B pays $500K 
Without Offset Language: Player A receives $3.5M over 3 years / Team A pays $3M / Team B pays $500K 

[Guest]

Yeah Jimmy. For a game with alot of X's and O's they sure leave alot of X's uncovered.

[Guest]

@"Geoff Nichols" said:

@JimmyinSD said:
its stupid,  we hear its about waiting on this player or that player and thats why this guy hasnt signed,  but somebody has to set the benchmark.  its kind of dumb that the CBA sets the length and money of the contracts but stopped there still leaving shit to work out.  why didnt they just say that the rookie deals will be X amount for Y number of years with a Z% increase each year?  With X amount guaranteed annually,  with x amounts due June 1st every year and x amount due each game.

It has nothing to do with pay raises YOY and likely isn't due to bonus structure either. Offset language is the big sticking point in 1st round pick negotiations. Offsets give the team some protection that if a draft pick doesn't work out they don't owe additional money if the player is claimed on waivers or the difference in salary is offset in their new deal. So for example player A gets a 3 year $3M deal and is cut after two years. If he signs for another team on a 1 year $500K contract his drafting team would only be responsible for $500K since the other $500K would be paid by his new team. The player obviously doesn't want offset language in the contract since they'd have the opportunity to double dip in the market. Say the same scenario is used above. Player A is cut and still receives his final $1M from his drafting team and would earn the $500K in addition to that on his new deal. 

So just to show the importance: 

Offset Language: Player A receives $3M over 3 years / Team A pays $2.5M / Team B pays $500K 
Without Offset Language: Player A receives $3.5M over 3 years / Team A pays $3M / Team B pays $500K 

I couldn't remember the exact term but there is no reason why offsets aren't spelled out in the CBA for rookie deals...just dumb IMO.  The whole point was to level the rookie market so just iron out all the details in the CBA and be done.  Personally I would like to see more of the negotiations removed from nfl contracts and make them more similarly structured.  Or better yet,  performance based.

[Guest]

Right? Im leaving this thread feeling bad for these poor NFL teams that are forced to participate in the draft.... lol...

[Guest]

For all the hand-wringing I still prefer it to the days of month long holdouts which were the norm in the 80s. 

[Guest]

@MaroonBells said:
For all the hand-wringing I still prefer it to the days of month long holdouts which were the norm in the 80s. 

I think Big Bryant McKinnie was the last one here...Hell, that wasn't too long ago was it? Maybe it was lol! He was on the Love Boat now that I come to think of it...