NFL commissioner Roger Goodell said it’s "ridiculous" to reward untested rookies with lucrative contracts and wants the issue addressed in contract talks.

"There’s something wrong about the system," Goodell said Friday. "The money should go to people who perform."

Goodell referred to Michigan tackle Jake Long’s five-year, $57.75 million contract — with $30 million guaranteed. Long was the first overall draft pick by the Miami Dolphins in April.

"He doesn’t have to play a down in the NFL, and he already has his money," Goodell said during a question-and-answer period at the end of a weeklong sports symposium at the Chautauqua (N.Y.) Institution.

Goodell said he plans to open negotiations with the players union on a revamped labor deal this fall.

Source: Fort Worth Star Telegram

__________________
Long Live Sports Outlaw!

Looks like Goodell now wants to start taking notes from the NBA. What's next, College players entering the NFL after their freshmen year?

------------>Goodell

About time they come out and state the obvious, now the question is how long till they fix it.

__________________

Banner by Mark Clapper

Putting limits is too one-sided. It is 100% good for the owners and 100% bad for the players.

All I see this is as a way to cover up a problem that is already there, the salary cap. Owners are obsessed with the young players coming out of college and fear losing them, so they cave in and sign them to an increasingly high rate, then they are forced to let go of proven veterans.

Drop the salary cap, or leave it up to the owners to decide on where they want to spend their money.

I think it is stupid to cap the players salary, and just as stupid to cap a rookie contract, when there is no cap on what an owner can make (and they are making a killing off of these teams)

If you disallow the cap, you totally destroy the even ground for each team. You then go to Baseball and have the rich get richer, and the smaller markets get worse. It isn't a good plan at all. Oh, and before you throw out look at the small market teams in baseball discussion, show me a minor league system for small market NFL teams, and then we can talk it.

Like it or not, the NFL is this popular now because of the overall balance of the league. Any given team has the chance to win it all. No dynasty of the rich as it were. Take the cap away, and let the Dallas's and NY teams do what they want, while the KC's and Pittsburghs and such can't....and you lose that leadership.

I agree you need to cap the spending on rookies. I also think that the NFL could adopt the rule the NBA has about signing your own top FA to a cap breaking deal, the larry bird rule. But I think the cap has to remain.

__________________
Expert on nothing, opinionated on everything...

The NFL hit it's popularity peak above all other sports before the salary cap came into play.

As for making the cap flexible, allowing you to keep the players you drafted, I am all for that. However, you might as well not have a salary cap in the NFL at that point, because it will be the teams that were willing to spend the money without the cap that will be spending into the luxury tax to keep their drafted players. So, you might as well not have a cap.

Since when was the salary cap a problem? The salary cap in the NFL is one of the biggest reasons for their success. If they do away with it, they will see a deterioration of the sport IMO. It's a horrible idea. And as far as capping the rookie salaries, this will allow owners to pay their vets what they deserve and not force them to let them go b/c they have to pay some unproven kid more then the proven super-stars at their position. It's good for the owners and good for the players. With a cap, they money will get spent regardless. So instead of over-paying young kids who have proven nothing, the money will go to proven producers. Now you remove the cap, and then you open a can of worms that will snow ball into catastrophe.

Why? The only reason Goodell is pushing for this because the owners don't want to spend the money on them.

This is nothing but an angle to slow down the annual rise of the salary cap, effectively putting more money in the owners pockets.

It sounds good on the surface, but lining the owners pockets is the reason this is being pushed....

You are being rediculously closed minded on this.

here is a thought, lets look big picture.

If we limit rookie salary, that then allows teams to spend more on the players that DESERVE the salary. You know, the guys who are pro-bowlers, all stars, guys who have proven their value. Rather than potential value.

lets also please notice that if you spend huge money on a draft pick, and that player busts, or does not pan out..and team is stuck with that salary and player for length of initial contract. That can be huge for a team rebuilding.

net, the salary cap isn't the issue. Huge rookie salaries are.

Yeah i think there should be a cap on the rookies as well. I dont think this will be a problem being passed because as miller stated above the vets will get their money and they will look after their interests. Owners already approve and even commish is on board.

The most a rookie can be signed to is 50% of the value of the top 5 salaries at that position.

A decent compromise? I hate to say this, but paying a guy over $50 million dollars who as yet has not done a damn thing in the NFL is kinda foolish.

__________________
2008 Black Knights Football - 12 wins isn't enough

I completely and totally 100% disagree.

Having a salary cap is "Stupid"!? What? Tell me you're just saying that because your team is owned by Jerry Jones and not because its an honest opinion...

Speaking as a fan, the salary cap is the single most important part of the NFL. If you were to remove the salary cap you would lose all sense of parity in the National Football League and the big market teams would lord over the cities that are unfortunate enough to have less rabid followings or greedier owners.

The salary cap is absolutely essential and must be maintained at all costs. Please don't turn the NFL into baseball...

Or better yet, if the OWNERS would quit caving each and every year and paying more money to the rookies, this wouldn't be an issue. But instead, we need some set rule in place.

These contracts are only this high because the owners let it get that way.

No, B/C the MARKET let them get that way! One owner does it, and the rest have to follow in order to keep up. The rookies leverage these insane demands with holdouts and the owners cave due to pressure from the fan base to get them into camp. It's a vicious cycle, one that can be stopped by a slotting system and there is no discussion. You get what you get and that is the end of it. Not sure why you don't feel this is a good thing? You actually feel the escalting rookie contracts are good for the league?

Dallas being stuck with Julius Jones. Chicago stuck for so long with Cedric "drunken bust" Benson. Tim Couch. Akili Smith. Ryan Leaf. Ki Jana Carter. Just a few names who ate a salary out of your ass as the next hope and were worth dick.

Im all for paying those guys millions of useless dollars.

I didn't say that the contracts are good for the league, I said I think it should be up to the owners to stop it.

Starting in 2009, if they want to hold out over not getting a big fat contract, the owners should unite and let them holdout. Instead, we have to have a rule put into place to do this for the owners, which I think is ridiculous.

And mark my words, as soon as this gets proposed, it is going to send the players union into a frenzy and quite possibly bring us a nice long work stoppage, which will result in many important issues getting ignored just so football can be played again.

All because people are worried about how much the owners are spending on rookies.

I think you guys look too "short term" here. What the NFL is doing here is copying what the NBA has already done. Well, to limit the rookies contract, you can bet that they are ultimately going to have to start guaranteeing contracts. Once that happens, we can enjoy watching players be shipped from team to team, not because a team wants the player, but because they are taking his salary.

Do you want a 53 man roster that has a bunch of busts sitting there with guaranteed money? Because when you open this can of worms, this is exactly what you are going to get. The players union IS NOT going to simply agree to this without getting something in their favor.

So in the end, all that money you think will be available to veterans will in fact be there for them at first, in the form of guaranteed contracts. Then, when many of them start to break down during that 6 year deal they got, they get to spend the remaining 5 on the sideline earning the money and doing nothing.

But isnt that what so many highly paid rookie busts do for two or three seasons? Sit, earn money, and do nothing?

Some do, some don't.

Would you rather have veteran players get big contracts, do nothing, and sit on the bench earning their money?

At least right now teams can cut players who aren't producing, and players can hold out if they aren't earning their fair market value.

Personally, I think the owners need to get smarter about how they hand out their money, rather than opening up this can of worms and turning the NFL into the NBA.

And personally, I am not looking forward to a work stoppage and a loss of popularity for the best league in pro sports, all because the commissioner wants to make a rule to protect some idiot owners.

Whats wrong with leaving the current system in place and just limiting the years and money a rookie can be signed for? Your not crashing the entire system that way. Hell, might help some guys who are studs and want off a horrible team.

And then the union will nail the owners with collusion, because they have unilaterally decided to do this, rather than bargain it in. Please don't be this naive, you know better.