Breaking down Saints defensive end Alex Okafor's one-year contract

SaintFanInATLHELL · 05-17-2017, 08:32 AM

Originally Posted by ScottF

Not sure what this has to do with the fans. The average fan believes players are overpaid and most fans would welcome a pay-for-performance structure. On a small scale the NFL already has a program for underpaid first year players for pay-for-performance.

It has to do with the fans because only the fans think that players are overpaid as you just stated.

How would roster expansion aid all 4 shareholder groups? First, 3 more roster spots means 100 more players making $500,000 a year.

At whose expense? I'm trying to get you to see that slice of money to fund this has to come out of the existing pie. So either the owners will have to take a cut on their profits, or the players in the existing structure would have to take a pay cut, or a combination of both. What's the incentive for either group to contribute to funding this?

Expanding the roster means dressing 8 o-lineman instead of 7, or a third quarterback, or 4th running back. Roster expansion limits wear and tear on everyday players, and gives players who would not normally make a 46 man roster a chance to see the field.

Once again, this only seems to improve things from a fans perspective. None of that helps the 53/46 man squad or the owners. Players want to maximize their income. Owners want to maximize their profits. What you propose helps neither group to do that. So why would either have any incentive to restructure this way?

This whole angle seems to be driven from a feeling that players are overpaid and that guaranteed contract dollars makes players lazy and unproductive. Therefore each player should have 1 year prove it contracts with minimal dollars in order to keep them hungry. But it doesn't work because there is $5 billion a year to spend on player salaries and less that 2500 people eligible to receive those funds. Each team is required to spend 89% average of their cap. There's simply too much money to do what you propose.

The NFL isn't a charity. Everyone who's in it is there for the money to some degree. So to me the proposal makes no sense because it in no way helps those who are supposed to fund it.

SFIAH

05-17-2017, 08:32 AM	#7
SaintFanInATLHELL The Professor Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Lithonia, GA Posts: 2,783	Re: Breaking down Saints defensive end Alex Okafor's one-year contract Originally Posted by ScottF Not sure what this has to do with the fans. The average fan believes players are overpaid and most fans would welcome a pay-for-performance structure. On a small scale the NFL already has a program for underpaid first year players for pay-for-performance. It has to do with the fans because only the fans think that players are overpaid as you just stated. How would roster expansion aid all 4 shareholder groups? First, 3 more roster spots means 100 more players making $500,000 a year. At whose expense? I'm trying to get you to see that slice of money to fund this has to come out of the existing pie. So either the owners will have to take a cut on their profits, or the players in the existing structure would have to take a pay cut, or a combination of both. What's the incentive for either group to contribute to funding this? Expanding the roster means dressing 8 o-lineman instead of 7, or a third quarterback, or 4th running back. Roster expansion limits wear and tear on everyday players, and gives players who would not normally make a 46 man roster a chance to see the field. Once again, this only seems to improve things from a fans perspective. None of that helps the 53/46 man squad or the owners. Players want to maximize their income. Owners want to maximize their profits. What you propose helps neither group to do that. So why would either have any incentive to restructure this way? This whole angle seems to be driven from a feeling that players are overpaid and that guaranteed contract dollars makes players lazy and unproductive. Therefore each player should have 1 year prove it contracts with minimal dollars in order to keep them hungry. But it doesn't work because there is $5 billion a year to spend on player salaries and less that 2500 people eligible to receive those funds. Each team is required to spend 89% average of their cap. There's simply too much money to do what you propose. The NFL isn't a charity. Everyone who's in it is there for the money to some degree. So to me the proposal makes no sense because it in no way helps those who are supposed to fund it. SFIAH
	Super Bowl Championships: New Orleans Saints:1, Carolina:0, Atlanta Chokers: STILL ZERO Only Atlanta choked in an unchokable situation... Life is definitely good.

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: https://blackandgold.com/saints/81972-breaking-down-saints-defensive-end-alex-okafors-one-year-contract.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date	Hits
Breaking down Saints defensive end Alex Okafor's one-year contract	This thread	Refback	03-16-2017 07:41 PM	4
The Latest New Orleans Saints News \| SportSpyder	This thread	Refback	03-16-2017 07:24 PM	11
The Latest NFL News \| SportSpyder	This thread	Refback	03-16-2017 07:23 PM	1