Should there be a cap on salaries of rookies

[Spider-Dan]

Not really.  The idea behind a rookie cap is independent of the team cap.  Teams would still spend just as much money on total team salary.  But more of it would go to players that re-signed and acquired by FA and less would go to rookies.

Even so, that's still more money available to spend on talent that's actually proven itself in the NFL.  Given the choice between doling out a $50mil contract to a player that's never even stepped on an NFL field, vs. $50mil for a Pro Bowl free agent, I think most teams would prefer the latter.

I mean, even if you look at the best case scenario, a Peyton Manning-type first round pick... was his play over the first 4 years worth $50mil?  Far from it.

[fyo]

There is a rookie salary cap.

It might not work exactly how you want it to, but it's there. It's called the rookie salary pool and limits the amount of cap a team can spend on their rookies (draft picks AND undrafted rookies). The amount varies by team according to the number of picks and where they fall in the draft. The Dolphins have a rookie salary cap of $6,538,400 this year.

That means, the combined cap hit THIS YEAR from rookies cannot be more than $6.54 million.

So how did we manage to sign Jake Long ($57.5 million for 5 years), let alone leave room for our other rookies?

First of all, this is CAP SPACE, so it's not a question of how much money a player actually GETS in his first year. Signing bonuses are pro-rated over the length of the contract, so for a 5 year contract, you need to divide the signing bonus by 5 to get the cap hit for the rookie year (and add the base salary, but that's typically VERY small for the first year).

These facts also clearly illustrate that the "$30M signing bonus" numbers many media outlets have bandied about are pure bull. That would be $6M against the rookie cap and not leave nearly enough space to sign our other players. No, the $30M is "guaranteed money", some of which is a signing bonus and some of which is other guaranteed money like roster bonuses in future seasons.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

There is a rookie salary cap.

It might not work exactly how you want it to, but it's there. It's called the rookie salary pool and limits the amount of cap a team can spend on their rookies (draft picks AND undrafted rookies). The amount varies by team according to the number of picks and where they fall in the draft. The Dolphins have a rookie salary cap of $6,538,400 this year.

That means, the combined cap hit THIS YEAR from rookies cannot be more than $6.54 million.

So how did we manage to sign Jake Long ($57.5 million for 5 years), let alone leave room for our other rookies?

First of all, this is CAP SPACE, so it's not a question of how much money a player actually GETS in his first year. Signing bonuses are pro-rated over the length of the contract, so for a 5 year contract, you need to divide the signing bonus by 5 to get the cap hit for the rookie year (and add the base salary, but that's typically VERY small for the first year).

These facts also clearly illustrate that the "$30M signing bonus" numbers many media outlets have bandied about are pure bull. That would be $6M against the rookie cap and not leave nearly enough space to sign our other players. No, the $30M is "guaranteed money", some of which is a signing bonus and some of which is other guaranteed money like roster bonuses in future seasons.

I suggest tweaking the current system just a tad.  Instead of using the cap hit.  Take the total contract value/divide by the number of years and use that number. 

[fyo]

I suggest tweaking the current system just a tad.  Instead of using the cap hit.  Take the total contract value/divide by the number of years and use that number. 

The problem with that is that the total contract value is completely bogus. I guess you could use total guaranteed money divided by the contract length.

I think I would prefer just cutting to the chase and using the money actually paid out to the player. That's the only really hard number in there anyway.

Maybe make rookie contracts shorter and guaranteed. That gives the players outside the very top some security and it allows everyone to go for a fair market value contract a lot sooner. Keep the franchise tag if having "name" drafted players really matters that much to a team.

[JVides]

Though I support a cap, I saw an interesting point of view made by Drew Rosenhaus on TV recently.  Namely, that the NFLPA likes the rookie contracts as they are because agents can take those massive rookie contracts into negotiations for veterans and say, "well, if Matt Ryan's worth X having never played, then my guy must be worth Y as a proven commodity."  Made sense.  In essence, Rookie pay dictates veteran extensions, and every time a rookie hits a record pay day, veterans heading into FA rejoice.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Though I support a cap, I saw an interesting point of view made by Drew Rosenhaus on TV recently.  Namely, that the NFLPA likes the rookie contracts as they are because agents can take those massive rookie contracts into negotiations for veterans and say, "well, if Matt Ryan's worth X having never played, then my guy must be worth Y as a proven commodity."  Made sense.  In essence, Rookie pay dictates veteran extensions, and every time a rookie hits a record pay day, veterans heading into FA rejoice.

Yes and no.  Keep in mind their is a team cap.  Vet demand he is paid more than the rookie, team has only so much money so the vet is forced to retire early because he is not affordable.  It also means there is virtual no money for the later round picks to get signing bonuses.

[fyo]

NFL.com has an article up on their front page with good comments from NFLPA Presiden Kevin Mawae, center for the Titans:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8088a907

Rookie salaries WILL come down with the next CBA (relatively, anyway). There's just no two ways about it. In the future, the proven guys are going to get a larger piece of the pie. The big question is, what's going to happen with the pie?

The current CBA is in place for 2008 and 2009 - and actually covers 2010 as well, but uncapped. After that (2011 on) there is no CBA. From the NFLPA's perspective, that's unthinkable... and I really don't see how the owners could accept a CBA-less year. Maybe a "light" version with no cap or whatever, but rules governing workouts, settlement of disputes (through arbitration) and so on make things a lot simpler all around.