ET80 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 9 minutes 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. Bert Bell promoted the draft process as the only way he'd be able to compete with the Giants and Redskins back in the 1930s - he was losing bidding wars to more established cities: https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2019/09/20/bert-bell-was-more-than-the-father-of-the-nfl-draft/40177901/ In 1935, after being burned by losing college players to other teams in bidding wars, Bell proposed a draft that took effect the next year — and has been copied by pretty much every other sport 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 1 minute ago, ET80 said: Bert Bell promoted the draft process as the only way he'd be able to compete with the Giants and Redskins back in the 1930s - he was losing bidding wars to more established cities: https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2019/09/20/bert-bell-was-more-than-the-father-of-the-nfl-draft/40177901/ In 1935, after being burned by losing college players to other teams in bidding wars, Bell proposed a draft that took effect the next year — and has been copied by pretty much every other sport He specifically started this because he couldn't sign Stan Kostka, a RB from Minnesota, who was wanted by every NFL team and held out in 1934. Eventually he signed and was the highest paid player in the league on his first deal. Immediately after that the draft was formed. Do the math man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 5 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: 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. This might be the case, but all you need is 4-5 Chase Young-types to make that exact same decision to encounter an issue. Talented players are a finite resource, and you're threatening competetive balance by giving them free reign in that respect. If that's what you want, that's fine - it might be interesting, but that's the eventual outcome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animaltested Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 (edited) 15 minutes ago, JoshstraDaymus said: Worlds of difference when you turn 21 my friend. True. I understand campus life is a part of it. But if it was solely campus life, why are Cali kids choosing Columbus and Tuscaloosa over USC, UCLA, or heck even Tempe / Tuscon. Right, those programs are dumpster fires, while OSU and Alabama are consistently great programs. Athletes like success, and gravitate to situations that can help them succeed. Places like Green Bay, Cleveland, Detroit and Buffalo are still signing FA and extending current players contracts with those teams. Draft picks having more freedom with where they end up would not shift the balance too much. I mean, people said the same thing when Free Agency 1st became a thing. Edited February 19, 2020 by animaltested Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soko Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 1 minute ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: 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. That isn’t a response to my statement. Nor does it make sense. The draft improves parity. Getting rid of it, would thus hurt parity. It’s quite simple. Saying - well maybe some guys would still go to small markets/bad franchises, we can’t really predict it - is not nearly a good enough reason to flip the box upside down. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 Just now, Yin-Yang said: That isn’t a response to my statement. Nor does it make sense. The draft improves parity. Getting rid of it, would thus hurt parity. It’s quite simple. Saying - well maybe some guys would still go to small markets/bad franchises, we can’t really predict it - is not nearly a good enough reason to flip the box upside down. Sorry - I edited in the response. See below: Quote 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? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 3 minutes ago, ET80 said: This might be the case, but all you need is 4-5 Chase Young-types to make that exact same decision to encounter an issue. Talented players are a finite resource, and you're threatening competetive balance by giving them free reign in that respect. If that's what you want, that's fine - it might be interesting, but that's the eventual outcome. Why are you not using this exact argument to argue against free agency? Do we look at that as something which threatens competitive balance? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 7 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: He specifically started this because he couldn't sign Stan Kostka, a RB from Minnesota, who was wanted by every NFL team and held out in 1934. Eventually he signed and was the highest paid player in the league on his first deal. Immediately after that the draft was formed. Do the math man. The Eagles weren't trying to sign Kostka, from what I've seen (admittedly, very limited view). He ended up with Brooklyn, which was a team that was in competetion. The Eagles were losing, and that made them lose out on ticket sales. Is Kostka a part of their logic? Yes, probably. Is parity part of their logic? Yes, probably. Saying it's either might be ignoring the other side of the discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animaltested Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 7 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: Why are you not using this exact argument to argue against free agency? Do we look at that as something which threatens competitive balance? Looking at last years top free agents. They went to NY, Baltimore, Detroit, Jacksonville, Washington, Indianapolis and Cleveland. Seems like desirable cities is a little.... overvalued by this board. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 1 minute ago, ET80 said: The Eagles weren't trying to sign Kostka, from what I've seen (admittedly, very limited view). He ended up with Brooklyn, which was a team that was in competetion. The Eagles were losing, and that made them lose out on ticket sales. Is Kostka a part of their logic? Yes, probably. Is parity part of their logic? Yes, probably. Saying it's either might be ignoring the other side of the discussion. I also wasn't alive in 1934 (@vike daddy we need your assistance), but Kosta ended up with Brooklyn because they beat the Eagles in a bidding war. The Eagles came in 2nd. When you lose a bidding war, and immediately call for a process that would get rid of bidding wars, it's probably because you lost a bidding war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 10 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: Why are you not using this exact argument to argue against free agency? Because the talent shift in FA is significantly lower than the talent shift from College to Pro. Any given FA period, you might have 3-4 guys who will be highly sought after - if you have 7-10 guys, you're considering it a bumper crop of FA talent. In the draft, you'll have 30+ rated as top tier talent, if you have 7-10 guys in the draft that are worth it, you have a very weak draft. There's not enough talent in FA to move a needle. You do with the NFL draft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 Just now, animaltested said: Looking at last years top free agents. They went to NY, Baltimore, Detroit, Jacksonville, Washington, Indianapolis and Cleveland. Seems like desirable cities is a little.... overvalued by this board. Yep. And when you think NFL free agency, who do you think? Cleveland, Jacksonville, and Washington are the cities that jump out to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramssuperbowl99 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 2 minutes ago, ET80 said: Because the talent shift in FA is significantly lower than the talent shift from College to Pro. Any given FA period, you might have 3-4 guys who will be highly sought after - if you have 7-10 guys, you're considering it a bumper crop of FA talent. In the draft, you'll have 30+ rated as top tier talent, if you have 7-10 guys in the draft that are worth it, you have a very weak draft. There's not enough talent in FA to move a needle. You do with the NFL draft. Then why does the NFL have virtually identical parity to baseball and hockey, where the draft doesn't have nearly the same impact? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 4 minutes ago, animaltested said: Looking at last years top free agents. They went to NY, Baltimore, Detroit, Jacksonville, Washington, Indianapolis and Cleveland. Seems like desirable cities is a little.... overvalued by this board. 2 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: Yep. And when you think NFL free agency, who do you think? Cleveland, Jacksonville, and Washington are the cities that jump out to me. This is a function that is less of where a player wants to go and more of what a franchise is wanting to spend. Some teams spend in FA, some don't - when was the last time Belly made a splash signing? Did LA have cap room after Gurley/Goff/Cooks? Miami was stockpiling future draft picks, so they're not spending big money, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted February 19, 2020 Share Posted February 19, 2020 9 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said: Then why does the NFL have virtually identical parity to baseball and hockey, where the draft doesn't have nearly the same impact? I couldn't tell you about the parity in baseball or hockey - I know that teams that spend a lot win a lot (Yankees/Dodgers) and teams that don't spend a lot don't win a lot (San Diego, I think)? I don't call that parity. The NFLs "lack of parity" (edit - parity that is in line with baseball/hockey) is due to one person, only one person - Tom Brady. Let's not try to paint that as a function of some system and call it as it is, an anomaly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.