Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

I'm beginning to hate free agency.

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I'm beginning to hate free agency.

    Free agency is getting out of control. As I watch average player after average player get signed to record deals and the really good ones get even more it really is out of control. This is something the NFL should look into. I dont know how they can do it but they need to figure this out. Performaced based maybe? Do you think the Whiners believe Clements is worth his contract from last year. He's a nice player sure but he's not worth more money than Bailey. It's just getting out of control every year the free agents get rediculous contracts that set the price tag for an even higher payoff the next year. Most of the time it isnt even worth what you paid. The draft is almost the same way, the number one pick get all this money and for what? Being the best college player? I like the NBA's system where there is a cap on how much you can make based on how long you've been in the league. It can be tough on older vets but it's not getting out of control anymore. I want the Rams to get some good players but I hate to see them get an average player for top tier money and that is free agency in a nutshell.
    Aim high Willis, Aim High!

  • #2
    Re: I'm beginning to hate free agency.

    Just wait till next year when the cap is gone....then it will REALLY be a free for all.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: I'm beginning to hate free agency.

      I very much understand how you feel, rammiser, but it's not just free agency's fault. It's a perfect storm if you will.

      The first problem is the immense TV deal that Tagliabue got done along with the new CBA, giving players a greater share of the revenue. That got us from the 80 some odd million dollar cap to the one above 100 million a couple years ago. This leads to tons of spending cash as teams still have a number on contracts that are from the "old days" when 6 million a year was crazy for anyone but a QB.

      The second problem is that teams are getting better and better at identifying what players to keep and which to shove off, and how to keep those players. Incentive laden contracts, poison pill contracts, backloaded to all hell contracts in addition to the franchise tag. This leads to the number of free agents dwindling and the quality plummeting.

      So, on one hand you have teams flush with cash(unfortunately, not us), and on the other, you have a crappy free agent pool. Those teams with cash suddenly feel they have to overpay to get what little they can out of free agency, which then causes super inflation for everyone else.

      Now, as for the rookies, I blame the agents, not the players themselves. For the most part anyway. The crazy increase in the cap a couple years ago, made them crazy for cash and have driven the top of the draft prices up unimaginably high in my opinion. I am very very much in favor of scaling those down to a set value set up every year by the league. Then you don't have holdouts, and you don't have super inflation with them either. The argument is that the players union won't back it. Well guess what, if the money that is used on rookies suddenly goes into the veterans' pockets, my guess is that they'll approve it unanimously.
      I believe!:ram:

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: I'm beginning to hate free agency.

        As I watch average player after average player get signed to record deals and the really good ones get even more it really is out of control.
        We have not signed anyone, so I think it's great. The real value will come later when the dust settles, the early birds will over pay big time.

        Comment

        Related Topics

        Collapse

        • eldfan
          No-cap year would hurt the Rams
          by eldfan
          No-cap year would hurt the Rams

          New York Jets running back Leon Washington, left, and San Diego Chargers wide receiver Vincent Jackson. (File photos/AP)By Jim Thomas
          ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
          01/22/2010

          Kevin Demoff, the Rams' executive vice president of football operations, said there were times during the 2009 season when he would look at the team's salary cap sheet, "and we had about $2,000 of room."

          That was with a salary cap of nearly $128 million. But with the blessing of team ownership, the Rams decided to jettison several high-priced veterans, some who were aging and some who were under-performing.

          As a result, the team led the NFL in "dead money" money that counts against the cap for players no longer on the team. The dead money soaked up much of the team's cap space. But the payoff would come this year, with the dead money cleared from the books, giving the Rams sufficient money to re-sign their own players or go out and sign other teams' free agents.

          That strategy was implemented under the premise of a salary cap in 2010. But unless there's an extension of the current collective bargaining agreement between the players and the club owners, this league year will be uncapped. The new league year beginning with the opening of the free-agency trading period starts March 5.

          The thought of no salary cap brings visions of free spending and players changing teams in record numbers. As it turns out, an uncapped year is not nearly as enticing because of accompanying provisions that kick in if there's no extension of the labor agreement by March 5.

          Namely:

          Players with expired contracts are eligible for unrestricted free agency only if they have six years (or more) of experience instead of the usual four years. Under this scenario, players with four or five years of experience would revert to restricted free agency status.

          Each team would be allowed an additional "tag" further limiting player movement. Currently, teams can use one franchise tag (or transition tag) on a player per offseason. If it's an uncapped year, teams can designate one additional player with a transition tag. ShopSTL Marketplace


          Additional restrictions apply to the eight teams that reached the conference playoff semifinals this season. Those don't apply to the 1-15 Rams.

          But the impact of the first two provisions, particularly the six-year free agency requirement, hits the Rams where it hurts.

          "It limits the player pool," Demoff said. "It's going to be a challenging dynamic for all teams on how you get better, how you compete for players, and where you find the players that make your team better. Especially if you're a team that's still rebuilding."

          Such as the Rams.

          "I think everybody...
          -01-22-2010, 01:32 PM
        • Goldenfleece
          What can an uncapped year do for you?
          by Goldenfleece
          It won't help you get younger. Assuming there is no collective bargaining agreement signed within the next three weeks, this will mean (a) most of the players who would have been unrestricted free agents will likely be retained by their current teams, (b) the free agents who do hit the open market will mostly be 28 or older because they have to have six years in the league, and (c) the youngest talent in the market will be players who were eligible for free agency several years ago and were unable to land long-term deals.

          This is bad news for the Rams. If the old CBA was intact the Rams would be sitting pretty $35 million under the salary cap. If the owners successfully negotiated the cap down, this would be even better for the Rams because it would put the squeeze on teams that had been playing it close. With no cap, the Rams are just a mid-market team in the middle of a transition in ownership.

          The free agent market will likely be smaller than usual and more expensive. Because there will be so few starters available in free agency, I would predict competition would be more fierce. This has less to do with the lack of a cap and more to do with simple supply and demand. Effectively, the 26-year-old crowd who would normally be up for their second contract will be removed from free agency, but there will still be a market for the 31-year-old third contract group and to a lesser extent the 35+ "I'm not dead yet" market.

          There will still be a few positions we might improve. The quarterback market is likely to be almost non-existent. Even guys like Tarvaris Jackson and Jason Campbell could be retained if their teams so choose, but there will be a few options at back-up runningback including Leon Washington, Willie Parker, Chester Taylor, and Chris Brown. It is unlikely that a true #1 receiver will hit the market, and only a small number of solid #2's. L.J. Smith, formerly of the Eagles, might be an option at tight end, and Ben Watson will be one of the top names in free agency if he is available. The best starter prospects are probably at defensive end: Julius Peppers, Aaron Kampman, and Kyle Vanden Bosch are all possibilities provided they are not tagged. There may be a few options at linebacker including Gary Brackett, Scott Fujita, Angelo Crowell, Cato June, and Tully Banta-Cain.
          -02-14-2010, 08:29 PM
        • Sanantonioram
          December 23, 1975
          by Sanantonioram
          A date that will live in infamy. That is the date that Andy Messersmith and Dave McNally ruined professional sports forever when they successfully challenged the reserve clause and brought about the mess we have witnessed for the last 30 years. Free agency with all the agents and money-grubbing and the inability to build and keep a team. Man, how I yearn for the good old days when you drafted a player and built a team around him...those were the days.:sad:
          -03-16-2006, 11:17 PM
        • ramsplaya16
          Smart teams spend little in free agency/Gosselin
          by ramsplaya16
          Smart NFL teams spend little in free agency

          I love what the Green Bay Packers have done thus far in free agency.

          Nothing.

          Absolutely nothing.

          The Packers haven't signed any players in free agency nor have they lost any. The Indianapolis Colts also haven't signed any players.

          Football is figuring out what baseball discovered in the 1970s you can't buy a championship. Which is contrary to public perception.

          There's a frenzy in the fan bases of 32 NFL teams each off-season. Spend. Buy free agents. The bigger the contract, the better the signing. If you're not spending, you're not trying to get better as a football team.

          Au contraire.

          The Green Bay Packers haven't panicked in free agency at the thought of Aaron Rodgers or another quarterback in charge. The Cowboys, Cleveland Browns, San Francisco ***** and Seattle Seahawks each signed a free agent to a contract in excess of $39 million last off-season. In addition, the Washington Redskins gave aging middle linebacker London Fletcher a $10 million signing bonus, and the Jacksonville Jaguars gave journeyman offensive tackle Tony Pashos another for $9 million.

          All the while, the New York Giants were sitting out the spending spree. To borrow a Jerry Jones term, the Giants were "keeping their powder dry."

          The Giants wound up signing one free agent to fill a specific hole on the depth chart, bottom feeding in late March for linebacker Kawika Mitchell. They gave him a modest one-year, $1 million deal.

          Mitchell is now wearing a Super Bowl ring and 2007 multi-millionaires Leonard Davis (Cowboys), Eric Steinbach (Browns), Nate Clements (*****), Patrick Kerney (Seahawks), Fletcher and Pashos are not.

          In 2006, the Indianapolis Colts signed only one free agent, and he wasn't even a position player kicker Adam Vinatieri. The Colts wound up winning the Super Bowl.

          In 2005, the Pittsburgh Steelers also signed only one free agent wide receiver Cedrick Wilson to a four-year deal worth less than $10 million. He didn't even start for the Steelers. But guess who won the Super Bowl that year?

          Free agency never has been and never will be the answer. Teams are realizing the game's best players no longer become free. So the smart teams invest their salary cap dollars in re-signing their own players.

          Back in the 1990s, you could sign a difference-maker like Reggie White or Deion Sanders in free agency. But with each passing year, the quality of free agents decreases, yet the quantity of the money increases.

          I had breakfast with an NFL head coach last week, and he shook his head at the fiscal craziness, saying that average players are getting superstar money.

          There were 112 players signed in free agency through the end of business last week....
          -03-21-2008, 09:22 AM
        • txramsfan
          Not much value will be had after June 1
          by txramsfan
          I really don't see much value coming out of the second round of free agency which begins June 1. Reason: the cap is so big that teams will be able to keep players at the position the Rams are in need.....D line. I really don't think any team is going to be so cap strapped that they have to let a stud on the D line go.
          -03-11-2007, 01:50 PM
        Working...
        X