Archer: Should Cowboys look at Orlando Scandrick's contract?

[Cowboysrock55]

Sure, but what is it? An extra $200k for a Pro Bowl? When you already have a $6M base plus signing bonus, that incentive doesn't really mean too much.

That could be correct and that's why it all depends how you structure a performance base system. Every NFL player would still have a base salary. You can always adjust the level of base salary and level of incentives to get it correct.

Fact is though, if a guy isn't being a team player in a performance based system, he probably would find himself without a team far more quickly then we see in today's NFL.

 

[Cotton]

Sure, but what is it? An extra $200k for a Pro Bowl? When you already have a $6M base plus signing bonus, that incentive doesn't really mean too much.

This is my point. As it stands right now the incentives are a very small part of the contract. You make it the majority of the contract and it changes how they play the game. They would take more chances on jumping routes to get that INT, and get burned more would be one example of how it would change the dynamics.

 

[Cotton]

That could be correct and that's why it all depends how you structure a performance base system. Every NFL player would still have a base salary. You can always adjust the level of base salary and level of incentives to get it correct.

Fact is though, if a guy isn't being a team player in a performance based system, he probably would find himself without a team far more quickly then we see in today's NFL.

Base salary with incentives built in... that sounds familiar.

 

[Jiggyfly]

So how do you fit these performance-based contracts under a salary cap?

How do you project future salary outlays when you have a guy get a fluke 10 int or 12 sack season?

This does not work for the majority of the real world how many people work jobs that's majority performance based.

And to the people who complain about players dogging it what happens when they reach an incentive and then get a minor injury, whats the incentive then?

 

[Jiggyfly]

This is my point. As it stands right now the incentives are a very small part of the contract. You make it the majority of the contract and it changes how they play the game. They would take more chances on jumping routes to get that INT, and get burned more would be one example of how it would change the dynamics.

Exactly what was the major thing this defense preached last year.

Do your job.

Performance incentives creates chaos on a D.

 

[Cowboysrock55]

So how do you fit these performance-based contracts under a salary cap?

I think the suggestion is that you don't. You eliminate free agency all together again. You would then do a revenue sharing with the players where the amount players make would be directly related to the amount of money the league is making.

Players would never go for it though. Which has always been the point.

 

[Smitty]

I think the suggestion is that you don't. You eliminate free agency all together again. You would then do a revenue sharing with the players where the amount players make would be directly related to the amount of money the league is making.

Players would never go for it though. Which has always been the point.

Yeah, I wasn't making an entirely serious suggestion, but you answered it.

The real negotiation is then between the players association and the owners as to how much percent of revenue must go to the players every year. Then there are no more teams spending less than the salary cap either.

The PA then can divide the amounts between players based on performance. Teams acquire players due to the draft almost exclusively, otherwise via a trade or waiver wire/street FA claim system. If players are traded or released, there are no cap implications because the PA is the body in charge of allocating compensation.

I obviously haven't thought it all out, but it's interesting.

 

[Jiggyfly]

I think the suggestion is that you don't. You eliminate free agency all together again. You would then do a revenue sharing with the players where the amount players make would be directly related to the amount of money the league is making.

Players would never go for it though. Which has always been the point.

Eliminate free agency?

Why should players want to be stuck on a shit team the entire time or did you mean salary cap?

I like a salary cap but a flexible one that rewards teams who can keep their own do not want it to be like Soccer where there are only the super teams.

 

[L.T. Fan]

Eliminate free agency?

Why should players want to be stuck on a shit team the entire time or did you mean salary cap?

I like a salary cap but a flexible one that rewards teams who can keep their own do not want it to be like Soccer where there are only the super teams.

That puzzled me also. I'm sure he meant the cap.

 

[ravidubey]

Yeah, I wasn't making an entirely serious suggestion, but you answered it.

The real negotiation is then between the players association and the owners as to how much percent of revenue must go to the players every year. Then there are no more teams spending less than the salary cap either.

The PA then can divide the amounts between players based on performance. Teams acquire players due to the draft almost exclusively, otherwise via a trade or waiver wire/street FA claim system. If players are traded or released, there are no cap implications because the PA is the body in charge of allocating compensation.

I obviously haven't thought it all out, but it's interesting.

Read my post above, dude. There'd be a pro draft.