Joe Burrow may force his way out of the Cincinnati Bengals

[ET80]

12 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

Why do we think football is at all fragile?

My "why break it" comment was specific to the NFL Draft, not football as a whole. Why break the draft? It's a system that's worked since the 30s, and I don't see a line of players decrying it - you've got Bartowski, you've got Palmer (and Palmer's gripe might be more organizational in nature than an indictment against the draft process).

The only question I would ask is this - what happens to a team like Detroit if there was no draft? No offense to anyone currently there, but it's not exactly the best place to live and it's not a team with a storied history. How do the Lions compete if there is no way for them to replenish talent outside of the draft? 

How about Cleveland? How about Buffalo? For all intents and purposes, these aren't spots for people to go to post-graduation, and neither really has the draw of solid organizational leadership.

Are we content with teams flat out failing? Because this is the first step in that direction, cutting off the supply chain to new talent.

(Not that I am against a team failing out of an NFL level and moving down a spot. I'm intrigued by how soccer works overseas).

[DerbyRam]

Burrow may be overplaying his hand a little, especially if the rumours are true. 

He's coming over an incredible season, but relatively speaking he's older than Lamar Jackson, Kyler Murray, Daniel Jones & Sam Darnold amongst others. He needs to prove himself in the NFL before he starts throwing his weight around IMO. He may not even be the best out of him and Tua - the latter hasn't reached the same peak but at the same age Tua is much more accomplished. 

I guess we'll see. 

[ramssuperbowl99]

Just now, ET80 said:

My "why break it" comment was specific to the NFL Draft, not football as a whole. Why break the draft? It's a system that's worked since the 30s, and I don't see a line of players decrying it - you've got Bartowski, you've got Palmer (and Palmer's gripe might be more organizational in nature than an indictment against the draft process).

As for "why break the draft", this simplest answer is that telling someone where they have to work in a monopoly is not a perfect system.

Just now, ET80 said:

The only question I would ask is this - what happens to a team like Detroit if there was no draft? No offense to anyone currently there, but it's not exactly the best place to live and it's not a team with a storied history. How do the Lions compete if there is no way for them to replenish talent outside of the draft? 

How about Cleveland? How about Buffalo? For all intents and purposes, these aren't spots for people to go to post-graduation, and neither really has the draw of solid organizational leadership?

Are we content with teams flat out failing? Because this is the first step in that direction, cutting off the supply chain to new talent.

(Not that I am against a team failing out of an NFL level and moving down a spot. I'm intrigued by how soccer works overseas).

This is an interesting question, and everything would just be conjecture. Maybe you set up a system where each team is given a pool of dollars to be spent on signing bonuses for their total draft picks (and those dollars would be tradeable), so you could see some team in football purgatory spend their entire amount on a QB versus some other team trying to load up on other areas.

Or you could have a free for all. In that, maybe there are so few open QB spots that the Joe Burrows of the world would be forced to either take a starting job in a less than ideal city or sit on the bench in New York. Or maybe that free for all means that small team owners will be more willing to pony up than the big city owners to get the right guy. Or maybe they don't, and the teams never contend, and the fans riot like they do in Europe when their ownership tanks, and the bad families who own NFL teams end up selling them to Mark Cuban types who are going to want to win.

[ramssuperbowl99]

@ET80, to use your Detroit example, Mike Ilitch owned the Detroit Tigers in a free for all type league and paid way over the line for Rick Porcello when the MLB draft used to be a formality following a ton of negotiations.

[Dr LBC]

17 hours ago, candyman93 said:

ET, I think there’s some confusion as to what’s being discussed. I think Nostr is arguing that no team will care if player X says “it’d be swell to play for team Y.”

If a team can hold a guy lying about the $100 bill on the last page of the playbook against him or about his teammates coming to his birthday party, then damnit they can hold another lie against a player.  And it would be a lie; no one wants to play for the Bengals.

[LeotheLion]

12 minutes ago, ET80 said:

The only question I would ask is this - what happens to a team like Detroit if there was no draft? No offense to anyone currently there, but it's not exactly the best place to live and it's not a team with a storied history. How do the Lions compete if there is no way for them to replenish talent outside of the draft? 

How about Cleveland? How about Buffalo? For all intents and purposes, these aren't spots for people to go to post-graduation, and neither really has the draw of solid organizational leadership.

You'd have significantly more organizations move to more desirable cities in this example. Chicago would have a 2nd team. 

[animaltested]

Also for anyone worried about "less desirable" cities;

LA, NY and Miami area kids are CHOOSING to spend 3 years in Alabama, Ohio, SOUTH BEND, INDIANA. Heck Patrick Mahomes CHOOSE Lubbock, Texas. 

If anything, this would promote franchises to stop being perpetual dumpster fires. 

Edited February 19, 2020 by animaltested

[MWil23]

Just now, animaltested said:

Also for anyone worried about "less desirable" cities;

LA, NY and Miami area kids are CHOOSING to spend 3 years in Alabama and Ohio. Heck Patrick Mahomes CHOOSE Lubbock, Texas. 

If anything, this would promote franchising to stop being perpetual dumpster fires. 

Counter-argument:

LeBron James was the best player on the planet for over a decade, the Cavs only won 1 Title, and he couldn't convince or recruit anyone to join him in Cleveland.

College Football is different.

You think the NFL is a monopoly, let me introduce you to the NCAA.

[Soko]

33 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

Maybe, maybe not. Even if we knew the details of whatever the new system would be (free for all, teams get pools, etc. etc.) it'd be hard to predict.

Just because something hasn’t happened yet doesn’t mean it has to be ambiguous. The system is in place to inherently put teams that did poorly in a good position with draft capital. Getting rid of that system would necessarily do away with a system that is enforcing parity.

There are tons of jobs where you don’t control specifically where you work. Especially in the early years. This happens to be one of them.

[ramssuperbowl99]

Just now, Yin-Yang said:

The system is in place to inherently put teams that did poorly in a good position with draft capital.

That was not the primary purpose of the NFL draft. The purpose of the NFL draft was to limit leverage of players trying to enter the NFL.

[Soko]

1 minute ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

That was not the primary purpose of the NFL draft. The purpose of the NFL draft was to limit leverage of players trying to enter the NFL.

And that has no bearing on the fact that the draft is a key cog in parity within the league. 

[ET80]

12 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

As for "why break the draft", this simplest answer is that telling someone where they have to work in a monopoly is not a perfect system.

Nobody is saying it's perfect - you're illustrating why it's not perfect. But perfection isn't attainable in this sort of situation, is it? Even in your examples, you're still creating an atmosphere where teams would have to overspend to simply maintain, not even compete at a high level. 

12 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

Or you could have a free for all. In that, maybe there are so few open QB spots that the Joe Burrows of the world would be forced to either take a starting job in a less than ideal city or sit on the bench in New York.

QB is perhaps the only position which presents an "All or Nothing" scenario; Every other position is subjected to regular rotation, so that "sitting on the bench" scenario is only a deterrent to QB.

Joe Burrows of the world might have this decision to make, but the Chase Youngs of the world don't have this - they'll get PT anywhere they go. If they all go to 2-3 teams, you'll see competetive disadvantages crop up, which will devalue the product as a whole.

[TOUCAN]

15 minutes ago, animaltested said:

Also for anyone worried about "less desirable" cities;

LA, NY and Miami area kids are CHOOSING to spend 3 years in Alabama, Ohio, SOUTH BEND, INDIANA. Heck Patrick Mahomes CHOOSE Lubbock, Texas. 

If anything, this would promote franchises to stop being perpetual dumpster fires. 

Worlds of difference when you turn 21 my friend.

[Ty21]

I mean he probably should if he wants to avoid having to get a passport when the NFL relocates the bengals to London

[ramssuperbowl99]

6 minutes ago, Yin-Yang said:

And that has no bearing on the fact that the draft is a key cog in parity within the league. 

We don't really know what causes parity in the NFL. Historically, football has had about the same amount of parity as the MLB (where the draft doesn't matter at all and there is a soft salary cap) and the NHL (where the draft matters a little more and there is a hard salary cap).

If the draft is vitally important and causes parity, than why doesn't football have more parity?

5 minutes ago, ET80 said:

Nobody is saying it's perfect - you're illustrating why it's not perfect. But perfection isn't attainable in this sort of situation, is it? Even in your examples, you're still creating an atmosphere where teams would have to overspend to simply maintain, not even compete at a high level. 

QB is perhaps the only position which presents an "All or Nothing" scenario; Every other position is subjected to regular rotation, so that "sitting on the bench" scenario is only a deterrent to QB.

Joe Burrows of the world might have this decision to make, but the Chase Youngs of the world don't have this - they'll get PT anywhere they go. If they all go to 2-3 teams, you'll see competetive disadvantages crop up, which will devalue the product as a whole.

Or Chase Young would see potential for additional advertising because Detroit would be starved for a marketable football player, or maybe he just wants to stay near Ohio, or maybe he wants to avoid California/New York state taxes. 

There's so many different factors that play into why someone might go to one team or another I think saying there is any trend is just not respecting how little we know about what the impact would be.

Edited February 19, 2020 by ramssuperbowl99