New Salary Structure

by DaveDawg09 on Feb 5, 2010 7:54 PM EST

I've had this idea rattling around in my head for a while, but don't know how to determine the real "value" of a position in relation to a team to make it viable.

What if, lets just say, current NFL players were allowed to keep their current contracts, but as of the 2011 draft each position was designated a base salary and all other pay was based on incentives. I'm not just talking about on the field, but off as well. Incentives for attending OTA's, finishing your degree, making weight, staying clean etc.

There are so many stats freaks today (thank you Fantasy Football) that football has begun to rival baseball. There has to be a way to statistically grade every position on a football team and adjust the salary, incentives and base salary to arrive at pay. With the known averages of any positions statistics, teams could easily arrive at an average payroll for their teams, so a surprise at the end of the season is eliminated. The team also is not blindsided by a player out performing his contract and asking for renegotiation, he just gets paid what he's earned.

Just like the NBA, positions base salaries could increase with each year of play, taking into account the average span of a career at that position. Obviously, an Offensive Tackles salary would increase annually at a lower rate than a Running Back that only averages 3 to 5 years in the league.

The players argument is that the signing bonus is where the money is at, not the contract. That is fine. Base draft picks signing bonus on the base pay of the position they are selected for and round they were picked. If there are seven rounds make it a multiplier of 7, for the sake of argument. A first round OT gets the starting salary for his position x 7, a second rounder x 6, a third x 5, and so on. If the draft pick makes his way onto the field he could earn an incentive just for that along with all the others of his position.

The confusion for me begins at determining one players value against another - and having the players buy into it. Some of it is easy, a RT is less valuable to a team than a LT, the Center is more valuable than the RG. How about specialists like Punters or Long Snappers? What is their value vs. a nickel corner? A lot of position players already buy into this theory, especially O-Lineman, but it gets slippery when you draft a linebacker to play mainly special teams. How do you justify paying Blake Costanzo the same base pay as D'Quell Jackson? His position is LB right? Maybe you make base pay commensurate with draft position until the player is a starter?

The other hole in my system that I haven't really put a whole lot of thought into is Free Agency. Just base it on years? Years by position? Make the signing bonus for a free agent equal to his draft positions current rate? What does that mean for a UFA?

Holes in my system to be sure, but I think it's better than Ryan Leaf and JaMarcus Russel getting more money than tenured vets at the same positions.

Lets build this idea and send it to the NFL and the NFLPA!

This is a fan-created post. Dawgs By Nature assumes no responsibility for the content listed.

Tweet Comment 10 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

While at first glance this may seem like a good idea, its full of holes. football stats mean much less than baseball stats, because unlike baseball where every team has the same positions and is looking for the same type of player, in football an OLB in a 4-3 is drastically different from a 3-4 OLB. hell, not every type of 3-4 calls for the same type of player. because of this, any type of catch-all stat is never going to be near reliable enough to base salary off of it. Free agency is also a huge issue, as you mentioned. I assume in this scenario there is no salary cap, because there’s no way to predict yearly payroll. In this scenario there is also no way for one team to pay a player more than another team. Because of these two things some teams (cleveland likely included) would never be able to compete for the most valuable free agents, which gives certain teams a massive advantage.

the real problem for the NFL is ballooning rookie salaries, so obviously some type of rookie salary slotting is necessary, but there is no fair way to expand that to the rest of the league.

I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.

by notthatnoise on Feb 6, 2010 8:51 PM EST reply actions

Football stats aren’t even close to the advanced metrics of basketball, and as I understand it, basketball’s aren’t as good as baseball’s.

Football stats will never make it that far. And really, I’d argue that some of the things FO does are really just ways to apply grading scales when breaking down tape, not really stats.

A rookie salary structure shouldn’t be too hard to impose, though. They have no stats when they sign the contracts.

by rufio on Feb 7, 2010 4:53 PM EST up reply actions

I like the base salary with incentives. This is just like my work, if I perform ABOVE what is required, I get Bonuses. If I perform below average, I get no bonus and am lucky I still have a job. Grading the position is going to be the hardest thing to do, like what notthat already said, "not every type of 3-4 calls for the same type of player. "

As far as FA’s go, I disagree with notthat, why wouldn’t Cleveland be able to compete if the league was uncapped?

The All-America Football Conference was created in June of 1944 to compete against the NFL. Even though the league outdrew the NFL in attendance, the continuing dominance of the Cleveland Browns led to the league's downfall.

by J. W. on Feb 7, 2010 9:34 AM EST reply actions

who wants to come play for a bad team in a cold-weather city?

I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.

by notthatnoise on Feb 7, 2010 1:10 PM EST up reply actions

Actually you could still have a cap and pay a luxury tax if you go over. This would prevent owners from stocking up on players that routinely out perform the average players at each position. Somebody like Peyton Manning would eat up cap space because he’s good, instead of a rookie bust. Like I said, owners could project toward a cap by figuring on most of their players hitting the average incentives, a couple going above and a couple going below.

I do agree about the 3-4 vs. 4-3 etc. That’s something I hadn’t considered – which is why I put up the post! How about O-Lineman? If you are penalized for allowing QB sacks, hurries and holding – do you want to be in Arizona’s Offense, or one like the Browns ran in the last 5 games of the year?

Please Lord, Just one Browns Superbowl in my lifetime.......

by DaveDawg09 on Feb 7, 2010 1:05 PM EST reply actions

as far as the luxury tax idea, i think we’ve seen in the nba that it doesn’t work. some owners (like Dan Gilbert) simply don’t care. also, a winning franchise generally makes more money, so that would cover the extra cost of the luxury tax.

I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.

by notthatnoise on Feb 7, 2010 1:14 PM EST up reply actions

I don’t mean to sound so negative, its a great idea for a salary structure, but i think it makes more sense in a sport like baseball where positional value is much easier to determine.

I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.

by notthatnoise on Feb 7, 2010 1:15 PM EST up reply actions

The luxury tax itself doesn’t matter (in terms of dollars), but I think Brad will probably be able to explain how it impacts free agency.

For instance, the Cavs almost certainly would not be able to sign LeBron plus another max contract guy in FA because of the cap. I think.

by rufio on Feb 7, 2010 4:56 PM EST up reply actions

if the cap were to go up by the average amount, they would. the issue is the cap is probably going to go down. you can go over the cap to resign a player, so as long as they signed the other guy first, they could go over the cap to resign lebron.

At least i think thats how it works, i could be all wrong on this one.

I hate the steelers the way a mother loves a child.

by notthatnoise on Feb 7, 2010 11:10 PM EST up reply actions