Abolish the Draft

[The Quest for Six]

In a recent article on ESPN.com, Malcolm Gladwell briefly talked about the benefits of getting rid of drafts in pro sports. Instead, he mad the argument that players and teams should choose for themselves. Basically, it would work the same way as national signing day in college football. It sounds like a crazy idea, but I think that there's some merit behind it.

First, it's better for the players, without question. They would get to decide what's important to them, whether it be money, location, loyalty, history, etc. If I were a star college player from FL and was being offered 5 million a year from Seattle or 4.5 million a year from Tampa, then there's a good chance that I will stay where my home is. As another benefit, with multiple bidders for their services, players would be ensured the best contract possible.

Second, it's better for the fans. Instead of having players who were chosen to be on your team, you root for players who wanted to be there. The drama and excitement of acquiring new players is still there, it's just in a different format.

Third, it's better for the teams. Instead of being punished for succeeding, good teams are still able to pursue the players who they really want. Dallas wanted Unger and Crabtree this year? It could have happened. With a hard salary cap in place, teams would still be on an equal playing field. Now, would it punish the bad teams? No, it just wouldn't reward them.

I think it's a really interesting idea.

dumb idea...

 

[Bob Sacamano]

while a good idea, it will never happen, the draft is a huge money maker for the NFL because of the TV deal

 

[dogunwo]

Bad teams would still be able to compete for players. For example, if you're Matt Stafford and Det. comes to you with an offer and there's a similar offer from Pitt., which team do you choose? The one where you're going to play. It's just like college football, the top prospects don't always go to the national champion, or even a major bowl game winner. They go where they are going to get to play.

USC still seems to get guys going there all the time, and the prospect knows he may not start or even get significant playing time for 2-3 seasons.

 

[dogunwo]

The same teams dominating year after year is just flat out boring and bad for the league as a whole.

Think MLB. There are teams who just never have a shot, and never will under the current MLB. Yeah, there is a Florida Marlins, but there are much more Pittsburgh Pirates.

 

[masomenos]

USC still seems to get guys going there all the time, and the prospect knows he may not start or even get significant playing time for 2-3 seasons.

Well that's a different situation. In college, all you need is one really good season in order to be considered a 1st round prospect. When a high school player signs with a college, they're going to the place that will give them the best chance of getting into the NFL. Getting significant playing time for two years at a major school like USC is more valuable than getting 4 years of starting time at Fresno. St.

There's nothing like that in the NFL. Players have already reached the highest level and there is a ton of money up for grabs. You don't get giant contracts for being a career backup, so most players want to go where they will have a chance to start from day one. If you were Matt Stafford, would you want to go to a team where you'll be the starter or would you take less money to go to San Diego, where there's a young, entrenched starter?

 

[masomenos]

Think MLB. There are teams who just never have a shot, and never will under the current MLB. Yeah, there is a Florida Marlins, but there are much more Pittsburgh Pirates.

In the MLB, since 2000, only two teams have multiple World Series appearances and only one team has multiple wins. In the past 9 years, 15 different teams have made an appearance in the World Series.

That's parity.

 

[iceberg]

Truer words have never been spoken.

i used to love to watch football cause those that dared to be great, were. those who put it on the line, won. those who cared the most and made the best moves, succeeded.

somewhere along the line it was decided that handicapping success so more people could succeed was a good idea. "even the playing field" so people with less desire can stand a chance.

in essence, to me, we brought the best down to the averages so the averages wouldn't have to work as hard.

care the most.

dare to be great.

they can just be average now and we call it success.

parity sucks.

 

[Clove]

Horrible idea. Draft is designed to get the poor back to being rich.

 

[iceberg]

Horrible idea. Draft is designed to get the poor back to being rich.

or to reward the poor for being poor and never having to do more.

 

[Clove]

or to reward the poor for being poor and never having to do more.

I don't think teams get off on being horrible, last I checked.

 

[iceberg]

I don't think teams get off on being horrible, last I checked.

i didn't say they got off on being horrible. i said they got rewarded for poor performance.

lowing standards of excellence only lowers excellence. while you may get more people to "succeed" - success becomes meaningless.

 

[DallasEast]

i used to love to watch football cause those that dared to be great, were. those who put it on the line, won. those who cared the most and made the best moves, succeeded.

somewhere along the line it was decided that handicapping success so more people could succeed was a good idea. "even the playing field" so people with less desire can stand a chance.

in essence, to me, we brought the best down to the averages so the averages wouldn't have to work as hard.

care the most.

dare to be great.

they can just be average now and we call it success.

parity sucks.

 

[masomenos]

Horrible idea. Draft is designed to get the poor back to being rich.

Who cares what the draft is "designed" to do when it doesn't work. A high draft pick in NO way means that you will be better in the following season. In fact, if you were the Chiefs last year what would help your team more?

A) Spending a ridiculous amount of money on #3 pick Tyson Jackson

or

B) Getting two or three "mid-level" players for the same cost, say Ron Brace, Lawrence Sidbury and Brandon Tate

Having to pay the salary of a top 5 pick is a real burden for a team that has a lot of holes to fill. Getting rid of the draft would allow them to cast off that burden while still giving them the option of pursuing the best player, if they wanted.

 

[masomenos]

i didn't say they got off on being horrible. i said they got rewarded for poor performance.

lowing standards of excellence only lowers excellence. while you may get more people to "succeed" - success becomes meaningless.

We've been on the same wavelength lately, get out of my head Ice!

 

[iceberg]

We've been on the same wavelength lately, get out of my head Ice!

but i just ordered drinks....

 

[amuze]

Somehow I don't think this would even be debated if we were the Lions.

 

[RainMan]

It seems like an interesting idea...the problem is lower echelon teams such as Cincy, Det, etc. wouldn't have a chance to compete against higher profile teams such as Dallas or NYG....and considering the NFL is all about Parody these days the draft will always be around...not to mention it's one of my favorite days of the year

I agree. It'd be damn interesting and fun for fans of certain franchises. The whole Signing Day comparison is really fun to contemplate.

But, as you said, I doubt leagues would ever go for this because of the rightfully perceived notion that the smaller-market teams would get screwed. Much less the smaller-market teams who are cheap and typically uncompetitive. Granted, you might say screw 'em, it's not like they spend money under the current structure. But at least through good drafting, these teams can build quality ball clubs.

If we had a national NFL signing day, you might see a team like Cincinnati sign the equivalent of 20 6th or 7th round picks. Think they'd voluntarily go after a big-money guy? Unlikely.

And how fun would it be for the majority of football fans if the vast, vast majority of talent is going to 7-12 teams?

 

[Q_the_man]

Think MLB. There are teams who just never have a shot, and never will under the current MLB. Yeah, there is a Florida Marlins, but there are much more Pittsburgh Pirates.

And the Marlins are the only example u need! LOL, 25 mil payroll two rings..... TB came close last season with a small payroll, the only problem is they can't keep the players after they win....It's a shame what happened to the Pirates, in all honesty I forgot about them been a major league team, I honestly cannot name 1 player on their team off the top of my head and baseball is my favorite sport and i have 3 fantasy league BB teams......

My bad I forgot they have the La Roache brothers, only reason why I remembered them is that Andy played for the Dodgers....

 

[Q_the_man]

I love the draft. Always have. I used to stay home from school to watch on espn way back when it used to be held Monday.

However, I do like change.

Here's an interesting compromise that I think is a completely original idea.

How about each team is given ONE rookie FA pre-draft signing.
Every team can sign just one player to whatever deal they want.
You could call it Rookie FA week. Start it on Monday morning and have it end that Saturday before the now 6 round college draft starts.

What I like about this is you reward lousy teams less. They don't get to monopolize the very best players.
You also keep the glamor franchises from getting all the great players.

The only bad thing about your idea is, who would watch the draft, it would be like the 2nd day on draft day, all the top talent gone.....All the NFL needs to do is put a rookie cap on these rookies and you would see alot of trading again................

 

[Sarge]

As a certified Draft Nut, I would hate it.

You're definitely certified.