PDA

View Full Version : New York Daily News: Lions could pass on #1 pick


montrose
04-13-2009, 06:48 AM
Now this is funny, a concept being floated around would have the Lions passing on the #1 pick when their time on the clock expires and jumping back in to take a player after a few picks when the cost would be less. The funny thing is, who is to say the Rams would run their pick up? Or the Chiefs, Seahawks or Browns? Is there a team in the league willing to pay $30 million for any player in this draft? It would be such a huge embarrassment to the NFL, as team after team let the clock run out because no one wants to pay the #1 pick. I doubt it happens, but I think it'd be hilarious to watch the league squirm because of it's ridiculous pay system for the top pick.

http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/view/99070-why-lions-could-pass-on-no-1-pick

oubronco
04-13-2009, 07:33 AM
yea that would be funny but if it went far enough someone would jump quickly to get Curry

alkemical
04-13-2009, 07:43 AM
If i had the #1 pick - i wouldn't even think of it as anything more than i get first crack at trying to get the "safest" blue chip prospect i can.

I don't care what position it would be. ****, i might even pull an al davis and draft a kicker if i can't find anyone else i want.

snowspot66
04-13-2009, 07:48 AM
Don't you just drop back one pick if the clock runs out?

I know I would do it. I've heard others mention it before too. If there's no good reason to stay at #1 then why do it? It costs too much.

baja
04-13-2009, 07:51 AM
Don't you just drop back one pick if the clock runs out?

I know I would do it. I've heard others mention it before too. If there's no good reason to stay at #1 then why do it? It costs too much.

Ya you drop to the next pick after the one that you ran out of time on. I brought this idea up a month or so ago. I would do it in a heart beat if there was a guy I wanted that I knew would not go with the pick I was passing on.

alkemical
04-13-2009, 07:53 AM
I really think that if i'm a team that's allowed the luxury - this is where i draft "up" and take that X factor for my team. What if the pats moved up to take curry or something like that - a team like that should be going after a top pick.

TheReverend
04-13-2009, 07:56 AM
The commissioner would level the entire city of Detroit if they even tried it.

Dukes
04-13-2009, 08:00 AM
The commissioner would level the entire city of Detroit if they even tried it.

It would be a good way of forcing the league to change rookie contracts

montrose
04-13-2009, 08:00 AM
My understanding is that once the time has expired, the next team can run up their card and take their player. So, for example, if the Lions let the 15 minutes pass without turning in their card - the Rams could run up their card and take the #1 player in the draft. The Lions can still turn their card in at anytime and the player they take will be slotted in the order he was picked. The issue is that I'm not so sure the Rams would run their card up either, or the Chiefs. Whoever runs that card up first would be on the hook for the $30 million guaranteed. It would be highly amusing to watch the team after team pass.

kappys
04-13-2009, 08:11 AM
It would be a good way of forcing the league to change rookie contracts

This is all going to get addressed with the next CBA - only a year away if things get done right. No need to rock the boat right now - otherwise the Commish will freak out on Detroit in all likelihood.

baja
04-13-2009, 08:18 AM
This is all going to get addressed with the next CBA - only a year away if things get done right. No need to rock the boat right now - otherwise the Commish will freak out on Detroit in all likelihood.


All the more reason to rock the boat now. Force the hand to change the rookie contracts, they are way out of whack.

Rohirrim
04-13-2009, 08:18 AM
Jason Smith is the smart pick for them. Of course, we're talking Detroit. Since when have they made the smart pick? They'll pick Stafford. He'll be a good backup someday. ;D

BABronco
04-13-2009, 08:21 AM
Has this ever happened before?

cmhargrove
04-13-2009, 08:22 AM
My understanding is that once the time has expired, the next team can run up their card and take their player. So, for example, if the Lions let the 15 minutes pass without turning in their card - the Rams could run up their card and take the #1 player in the draft. The Lions can still turn their card in at anytime and the player they take will be slotted in the order he was picked. The issue is that I'm not so sure the Rams would run their card up either, or the Chiefs. Whoever runs that card up first would be on the hook for the $30 million guaranteed. It would be highly amusing to watch the team after team pass.

IIt sounds entertaining, but then the contract bickering could put these guys on the sidelines for half a season. No doubt the agents will have their say that their clients should be given the money anyway.

No matter how the teams would try to shuffle, in the end they would probably have to work out the same type of contracts/guarantees to get the player on the field.

baja
04-13-2009, 08:23 AM
Has this ever happened before?


Minnesota let the clock run out but most people think it was bad clock management and not intentional.

400HZ
04-13-2009, 08:34 AM
I really think that if i'm a team that's allowed the luxury - this is where i draft "up" and take that X factor for my team. What if the pats moved up to take curry or something like that - a team like that should be going after a top pick.

Other than the cheapskate/poor teams like Arizona and Buffalo, New England would be the team least likely to go after the top pick. The day they pay a rookie more than they pay Tom Brady is the day when the "Patriot Way" that they are always blathering about is officially ended.

If they are really targetting Matt Stafford then they can afford to gamble since there isn't much fall off from him to Dirty Sanchez or even Culpepper next year really. Say they miss their guy and have to settle for Jason Smith or Eugene Monroe or Aaron Curry. Are you really that disappointed if you are Detroit?

Something weird about this draft is that other than Detroit you have to go all the way down to San Francisco picking 10th before you get to a team without a stable quarterback situation or at least a team not handcuffed financially to their current starter. That's one more reason why Detroit can afford to pull something like this.

Broncos123
04-13-2009, 08:36 AM
Two years in a row that happened with the Vikings


Minnesota let the clock run out but most people think it was bad clock management and not intentional.

ludo21
04-13-2009, 08:38 AM
This would be highly entertaining!!

plsease let this happen!

400HZ
04-13-2009, 08:39 AM
Minnesota let the clock run out but most people think it was bad clock management and not intentional.

The clock ran out and then Carolina or St Louis or whoever it was picked in their spot. Minnesota went after that and picked Kevin Williams. :oyvey:

alkemical
04-13-2009, 08:42 AM
Other than the cheapskate/poor teams like Arizona and Buffalo, New England would be the team least likely to go after the top pick. The day they pay a rookie more than they pay Tom Brady is the day when the "Patriot Way" that they are always blathering about is officially ended.

If they are really targetting Matt Stafford then they can afford to gamble since there isn't much fall off from him to Dirty Sanchez or even Culpepper next year really. Say they miss their guy and have to settle for Jason Smith or Eugene Monroe or Aaron Curry. Are you really that disappointed if you are Detroit?

Something weird about this draft is that other than Detroit you have to go all the way down to San Francisco picking 10th before you get to a team without a stable quarterback situation or at least a team not handcuffed financially to their current starter. That's one more reason why Detroit can afford to pull something like this.

Why would you have to take a QB #1. I have a completely different POV.

If i'm a "top" team - like pats/steelers, etc - and if i see the luxary of drafting a guy i think will pretty much be a play maker/core foundation of my team - i'd jump on it.

It's just my POV - i don't think i'd ever take a QB #1 unless i really needed a QB and the guy at the top is as close to a sure thing (manning, etc).

Kaylore
04-13-2009, 08:49 AM
Charlie Casserly brought up a good point. If you wait and then pick after the Rams just so you don't have to pay "top" money to the guy you wanted in the first place you'll just piss of the player and the agent and get a hold out in camp. He said it's not a great way to start the revival of what was already an abysmal season. Just take the pick and next time try not to suck so bad.

baja
04-13-2009, 08:49 AM
Why would you have to take a QB #1. I have a completely different POV.

If i'm a "top" team - like pats/steelers, etc - and if i see the luxary of drafting a guy i think will pretty much be a play maker/core foundation of my team - i'd jump on it.

It's just my POV - i don't think i'd ever take a QB #1 unless i really needed a QB and the guy at the top is as close to a sure thing (manning, etc).

What if you could get your guy 3 picks later and 15 million dollars cheaper just by doing nothing for 15 minutes three times.

HILife
04-13-2009, 08:52 AM
That would be interesting to watch, but damn it would be a long draft.

alkemical
04-13-2009, 08:53 AM
What if you could get your guy 3 picks later and 15 million dollars cheaper just by doing nothing for 15 minutes three times.

Because, drafting #1 is punishment for sucking. It's not a reward, it's punishment.

ludo21
04-13-2009, 08:53 AM
If the player is going to whine about this sort of thing and not understand the business side of football then he was probably not the right pick anyway.

gyldenlove
04-13-2009, 09:08 AM
Minnesota let the clock run out but most people think it was bad clock management and not intentional.

Hehe, they did it twice and at least one time it was a beautiful con job by Jacksonville.

I don't think any team has ever let the time run out intentionally and I don't think Detroit will do it this year.

Detroit badly needs a playmaker and they can't afford a team jumping ahead of them and taking the player they need, it could get ugly.

400HZ
04-13-2009, 09:18 AM
Charlie Casserly brought up a good point. If you wait and then pick after the Rams just so you don't have to pay "top" money to the guy you wanted in the first place you'll just piss of the player and the agent and get a hold out in camp. He said it's not a great way to start the revival of what was already an abysmal season. Just take the pick and next time try not to suck so bad.

Good point, but he didn't mention that most number one picks hold out anyways unless they sign their contracts before the draft. Casserly is an old school guy with respect for tradition. He's not a manipulating schemer like most of us.

I just look at Detroits cluster - Stafford, Sanchez, Raji, Smith, Monroe - Is the falloff from one to the other worth $10 million in contract guarantees? It's definitely worth thinking about.

HILife
04-13-2009, 09:19 AM
Has this ever happened before?

The Ravens did this a few years back when they picked Terrell Suggs

worm
04-13-2009, 09:33 AM
I could see Drew, Bus or the other 'agents' arguing that even though Detroit selected the player later....they still had the #1 pick and deserve to pay the player as such.

Just like the Eli\Rivers saga after the trade both players wanted to be paid as the #1 pick.

Agents. Making life better for everybody!

Pony Boy
04-13-2009, 10:36 AM
Detroit has stated they will have a contract in place with whomever they draft. That would be the smart move to avoid a Jamarcus Russell fiasco.

Popps
04-13-2009, 10:42 AM
Jason Smith is the smart pick for them. Of course, we're talking Detroit. Since when have they made the smart pick? They'll pick Stafford. He'll be a good backup someday. ;D

Dead-on.

Overpay a little and take Smith. Some say he's got more potential than Long had, coming out. Just make him your LT for life, even if you pay a bit more on the front end than you'd like. It's such a no-brainer.

But, like you said... this is Detroit!

chickennob2
04-13-2009, 10:52 AM
More likely scneario:

All owners agree the rookie payscale is ridiculous. They can agree on a new one, and just promise not to sign any first rounders for anything above that price. Collusion be damned, this is the way to unilaterally get things done.

baja
04-13-2009, 11:29 AM
More likely scneario:

All owners agree the rookie payscale is ridiculous. They can agree on a new one, and just promise not to sign any first rounders for anything above that price. Collusion be damned, this is the way to unilaterally get things done.

They will fix this because they have to fix this.

SureShot
04-13-2009, 11:32 AM
Minnesota let the clock run out but most people think it was bad clock management and not intentional.

They did it twice.

OBF1
04-13-2009, 12:27 PM
Hehe, they did it twice and at least one time it was a beautiful con job by Jacksonville.

I don't think any team has ever let the time run out intentionally and I don't think Detroit will do it this year.

Detroit badly needs a playmaker and they can't afford a team jumping ahead of them and taking the player they need, it could get ugly.

OT is not considered a playmaker and the consensus is that Stafford is not worthy of the #1 overall pick.

Punisher
04-13-2009, 12:44 PM
Loins just need to pick Curry and try to get a stud Defense.

Kaylore
04-13-2009, 12:45 PM
Loins just need to pick Curry and keep a stud off the KC Defense.
FYP

NFLBRONCO
04-13-2009, 12:50 PM
Loins just need to pick Curry and try to get a stud Defense.

I agree but, NFLN made a point about this a few weeks ago. The Lions have too much money invested at LB position to even consider Curry.

snowspot66
04-13-2009, 01:02 PM
Nonsense. Better to overinvest and have a killer LB core than to pay the same money to somebody who has a high chance of sucking. LB's are generally easier to get a grasp on who will and won't be good. QB's are a crap shoot.

400HZ
04-13-2009, 01:10 PM
Loins just need to pick Curry and try to get a stud Defense.

I'd rather have the Chiefs take Curry than Everette Brown. :oyvey:

broncosteven
04-13-2009, 01:26 PM
Charlie Casserly brought up a good point. If you wait and then pick after the Rams just so you don't have to pay "top" money to the guy you wanted in the first place you'll just piss of the player and the agent and get a hold out in camp. He said it's not a great way to start the revival of what was already an abysmal season. Just take the pick and next time try not to suck so bad.

Kinda like an owner telling the current Pro-bowl starter that he is not going to fire Bates, only to fire Bates and then tell a lie to him about listening to trade offers for him.

kappys
04-13-2009, 07:00 PM
More likely scneario:

All owners agree the rookie payscale is ridiculous. They can agree on a new one, and just promise not to sign any first rounders for anything above that price. Collusion be damned, this is the way to unilaterally get things done.

That'll raise holy hell from the player's union unless something else is conceded in the process. I think that even the union recognizes this has gotten out of hand and will make significant changes in the coming CBA probably in exchange for enchanced vet pay or post football benefits.

chickennob2
04-13-2009, 07:10 PM
That'll raise holy hell from the player's union unless something else is conceded in the process. I think that even the union recognizes this has gotten out of hand and will make significant changes in the coming CBA probably in exchange for enchanced vet pay or post football benefits.

So I'm not sure of the specifics. When exactly do draft picks become members of the players union? I would assume it isn't until the sign their first contract. So it would really be in the interest of the Union to reduce rookie salaries, thereby providing more cap room to reward the established veteran players who are the union's members.

FireFly
04-13-2009, 08:08 PM
Ya you drop to the next pick after the one that you ran out of time on. I brought this idea up a month or so ago. I would do it in a heart beat if there was a guy I wanted that I knew would not go with the pick I was passing on.

The Lions should definitely do this. Especially if they are actually planning on drafting Stafford. He won't go at 2, so he'll be there at 3 for cheaper. Makes all the sense in the world.

Otherwise, if they're going to go OT since there's no clear best choice at that position which ever one doesn't go second is going to be better than paying 1st money on him.

What a great idea! Let the clock run out. If this happened, the league would have to fix the draft.

crazyhorse
04-13-2009, 08:19 PM
Now this is funny, a concept being floated around would have the Lions passing on the #1 pick when their time on the clock expires and jumping back in to take a player after a few picks when the cost would be less. The funny thing is, who is to say the Rams would run their pick up? Or the Chiefs, Seahawks or Browns? Is there a team in the league willing to pay $30 million for any player in this draft? It would be such a huge embarrassment to the NFL, as team after team let the clock run out because no one wants to pay the #1 pick. I doubt it happens, but I think it'd be hilarious to watch the league squirm because of it's ridiculous pay system for the top pick.

http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/view/99070-why-lions-could-pass-on-no-1-pick

Sounds like a sure fire way to guarntee a hold out.

footstepsfrom#27
04-13-2009, 08:22 PM
The Lions should definitely do this. Especially if they are actually planning on drafting Stafford. He won't go at 2, so he'll be there at 3 for cheaper. Makes all the sense in the world.

Otherwise, if they're going to go OT since there's no clear best choice at that position which ever one doesn't go second is going to be better than paying 1st money on him.

What a great idea! Let the clock run out. If this happened, the league would have to fix the draft.
Naw...it's a silly idea...how do you know he doesn't go at #2? The Rams have 38 year old TrINT Green and 32 y/o Bulger...plus even if they didn't want him they could always trade the pick down to somebody who does. The Lions just got rid of the worst GM in the league...what do you think their fans would do if they had the #1 pick and simply passed? Alex Smith went #1...somebody will want Stafford and be willing to jump up to get him. Personally I don't think he's worth the top pick but teams desperate for a QB will overpay.

BroncoMan4ever
04-13-2009, 11:47 PM
wouldn't the amount of money for whoever Detroit ended up drafting with their actual number 1 be the same regardless of them picking later?

i remember reading an article a couple seasons ago about how even if a team delays their pick, they still end up paying the guy the amount equal to the actual pick number. meaning if Detroit waits til number 5 and jumps back in, the guy they draft, was acquired through the use of the team's number 1 overall pick, and he will get paid that way.

Cito Pelon
04-14-2009, 12:32 AM
Now this is funny, a concept being floated around would have the Lions passing on the #1 pick when their time on the clock expires and jumping back in to take a player after a few picks when the cost would be less. The funny thing is, who is to say the Rams would run their pick up? Or the Chiefs, Seahawks or Browns? Is there a team in the league willing to pay $30 million for any player in this draft? It would be such a huge embarrassment to the NFL, as team after team let the clock run out because no one wants to pay the #1 pick. I doubt it happens, but I think it'd be hilarious to watch the league squirm because of it's ridiculous pay system for the top pick.
http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/view/99070-why-lions-could-pass-on-no-1-pick

Agreed.

Cito Pelon
04-14-2009, 12:47 AM
Charlie Casserly brought up a good point. If you wait and then pick after the Rams just so you don't have to pay "top" money to the guy you wanted in the first place you'll just piss of the player and the agent and get a hold out in camp. He said it's not a great way to start the revival of what was already an abysmal season. Just take the pick and next time try not to suck so bad.

That was pretty good, but that's easy to say. That #1 is a curse. I bet they'd love to get rid of it for anything, and I bet nobody wants it. I bet they'd let it go for a low 1, but I bet there's no takers. Nobody wants the 1 pick these days. Nobody is gonna trade up into the top five, nobody is gonna trade into the top 10. Denver is sitting pretty at 12.

extralife
04-14-2009, 02:53 AM
The agents wouldn't let this work. Kevin Williams got #7 money after the Vikings messed up and took him at #9. Whoever the Lions end up with in this scenario would get a number 1 contract.

That One Guy
04-14-2009, 09:41 AM
The Lions have 12 days to work out a contract with someone. If, say, they want a guy that's currently slotted to go around 10-15 and they think that money to production, he'd be their best option... why not select him at #8 or 10 money with the 1st pick. Say "Hey, you're probably gonna be picked in the 10ish range but we'll give you the publicity and the guarantee by picking you #1 overall IF you agree to this contract". Play a half dozen guys against each other and you'd have a deal. If the player found out that he may be in a free fall mode because his agent doesn't want his ego checked by having a client sign a bad contract... well, the player would be wise to speak up in that situation.