TBO.com - TBO is Tampa Bay Online

Issue Of Rookie Salaries Really Starting To Simmer

AP Photo

The Raiders shelled out a fortune for 2007 top pick Jamarcus Russell, with no idea if he'll ultimately be worth the investment.

ADVERTISEMENT

By IRA KAUFMAN

The Tampa Tribune

Published: May 11, 2008

TAMPA - You've worked hard for the money, learning your trade and succeeding in the marketplace.

But here comes that new hire, right out of college.

He hasn't graded his first test paper or run his first mail route, yet his paycheck is bigger than yours. He hasn't been chewed out by the boss or fought traffic to make that 8 a.m. meeting, but he's already got it made.

How would that sit with you?

It sounds zany, but that's the illogical system the NFL has in place regarding rookie contracts.

The top picks in last month's draft will each be showered with millions of dollars in guaranteed money before ever proving themselves at the pro level.

"I'll take it," says Boston College quarterback Matt Ryan, selected by Atlanta with the No. 3 overall choice. "I see both sides of the argument. Maybe in 20 or 30 years and I'm a GM, I'll take the other side."

This $7 billion sports juggernaut has been reluctant to change an unfair playing field, but the issue of rookie salaries is now simmering on the front burner.

It's about time.

While the NFL Players Association appears reluctant to back down from these exorbitant rookie wages, the ridiculous money is affecting draft strategy.

"Trades are a unique thing in the first round anymore because of the cost of the top 10 picks financially," Colts president Bill Polian said. "To take on that cost ... is almost counterintuitive."

Teams owning the top overall pick usually entered the draft wielding considerable clout, but the first is now last in terms of comfort level. And finding a trade partner eager to vault to the top never has been more challenging.

In 2003, Cincinnati's Carson Palmer signed a rookie contract that included $16.4 million guaranteed. The Raiders guaranteed No. 1 choice JaMarcus Russell $29 million in 2007, a bump of 77 percent.

And lest we forget, Russell missed Oakland's training camp in a contract dispute, setting back his pro career.

By paying these youngsters lavishly, based on potential rather than performance, NFL clubs run the risk of alienating core veterans.

These are the same leaders asked to provide guidance for the new millionaires, showing them how to be a professional.

"We've come to one of the few places where you actually make a lot of money before you produce," Indianapolis coach Tony Dungy said. "I think it would be fair to pay veterans more, but this is the system we have right now. It's something we ought to take a look at."

Commissioner Roger Goodell doesn't want to take a look - he wants to take a chisel to a deeply flawed salary structure.

"I do believe this is something we should address because it's not necessarily saving dollars, but putting dollars to the players who should get them," Goodell said.

Here's the starting lineup for this looming skirmish:

On one side are NFL owners, executives and veteran players.

Those who like the status quo include agents, rookies and union head Gene Upshaw.

"Clubs want the players to pay for mistakes they make in drafting," Upshaw said. "We'll never agree to a rookie wage scale in such a short-career sport."

Not every NFL administrator is convinced the current system needs to be scrapped.

"Some of the rookies deserve their contracts, and then some," Bucs GM Bruce Allen said. "It depends on the player. If you get a great player, they will earn that contract, and then some."

Even if the league shifted to an NBA-style wage scale for rookies, there's little reason to believe first-year players would be exploited. Any player who outperforms his initial contract can expect to cash in down the line.

That's the way it works in the real world. Gene Upshaw needs to get real.

You work and you get paid.

Not the other way around.

Share this:

Loading Comments...

Email Print

ADVERTISEMENT