Also, just spitballing here, but has anyone thought about the implications of these ridiculous Bradshaw-like contracts, if this continues, on future re-signings? If Bradshaw gets signed to some $60 million deal that's like twice as much as the next highest paid RB, that will have a decent effect on the overall average of the top 5 highest paid at his position that's used to determine the rates for resignings (which, rightfully, won't have any NTC possibilities going forward to offset this). I'm no economist, and I haven't run the numbers or anything at this point, but with too many of these deals I can see the inflative effects growing much more than forecasted ...
WaCougMBS wrote:Related question: are we still allowing it on Re-signs for this season and then doing away with it from then on?
Agreed 100% with your entire post.
I agree with your NTC point...not even close to being the same thing as the backload issue. From the other thread, we're going to continue to allow NTC on re-signs for this year, but we'll discuss that issue in the offseason for next year. As I stated in the other thread, I have no problems allowing NTC for re-signs (because the owner will have to pay the money back if they trade the player), and I don't think it's fair to SW to change the rule now (after he used the NTC on his re-sign of MJD).
WaCougMBS wrote:Also, just spitballing here, but has anyone thought about the implications of these ridiculous Bradshaw-like contracts, if this continues, on future re-signings? If Bradshaw gets signed to some $60 million deal that's like twice as much as the next highest paid RB, that will have a decent effect on the overall average of the top 5 highest paid at his position that's used to determine the rates for resignings (which, rightfully, won't have any NTC possibilities going forward to offset this). I'm no economist, and I haven't run the numbers or anything at this point, but with too many of these deals I can see the inflative effects growing much more than forecasted ...
Thoughts
Yea...I'm wondering about this too because it could definitely "skew" the numbers at some positions if this happens and make it nearly impossible to re-sign players. I mean and that's on top of the questions about how a decent team can be fielded if you have one guy taking up $25M out of $88M down the road like that especially since I think the chances are VERY high that we will eventually either do away with or heavily restrict the parameters of the Anti-Franchise Tag.
I just think we're starting down a road that will only end up with challenging the legitimacy of the league and the whole idea of the contract style and method put in place at the start. Do some players get paid more than players better than them? Sure they do, but normally that comes with a rather large signing bonus (which we don't really have) and a whole lot of guaranteed money as well rather than a super backloaded contract where 50% of it is in the last year of the deal. I just feel like it's pretty much against the spirit of the league and rules in general regardless of whether it is technically within the rules or not.
terpfan wrote:Sorry this is off topic a bit. But the final decision was you can have 35 veterans on your roster right? Plus whatever rookies you draft?
Yeah, but you have to cut down to 35 before the season starts and are subject to all applicable cap hits as far as I know
Just so I know, no one was upset that fnj was going to pay Bradshaw $12M a year, but what I am doing is wrong? Are you honestly telling me that fnj was actually going to pay him $12 million in year 5 to a 30 year old back? Come on, you guys extend a guy for 5 years when he is at the end of his career with every intention of using the AFT before year 5.So you get to spread the contract over a few years and pay less than someone that was signing that 35 year old LB for 2 years. "ButToltec, it is in the rules."
Also, doesn't matter what the Brady contract "looks" like. Did the math for you, it is over %50 backloaded, as are 90% of nfl contracts.
So I am the guy damaging the integrity of the league as Waugh suggests? Really? How about this. Get rid of the AFT and maybe we will get a fair price for all players. No more of this 5 year nonsense on old guys.
If you guys think I am so detrimental to the league, vote me out. Because this entire issue is deflection and complete BS.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Baseball
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by 
