Mark Sanchez, “Big Rookie Paychecks May Be Over”

[JetNation]

Courtesy Fox Business News

NY JETS QUARTERBACK MARK SANCHEZ TELLS FOX BUSINESS THE DAYS OF BIG ROOKIE PAYCHECKS “MAY BE OVER”

New York Jets Quarterback Mark Sanchez spoke with FOX Business Network’s (FBN) Connell McShane about the NFL lockout and his recent involvement with Sam’s Club to promote healthy living. When asked about the NFL lockout, Sanchez said, “I am hearing nothing but positive things” and that “hopefully things will get wrapped up by the 21^st.” He went on to discuss rookie pay scales saying “I just feel like it’s hard to justify unless you start playing really well, a big time contract like that” and “I think those days may be over.” Sanchez also discussed what might lead the Jets to the Super Bowl, saying the team needs to “play an entire game in the AFC Championship game – not just the half.”

Excerpts from the report are below.

On the NFL lockout:

“You’re asking the wrong guy, I wish I had more answers. I am hearing nothing but positive things, though, which is encouraging. So hopefully things will get wrapped up by the 21^st. Until then I am working out like crazy and staying in shape. My offseason time clock has gone off, so I’m ready to go and get back to playing.”

On whether rookie pay scales will remain high:

“It’s a serious investment and I’ve seen both sides of it now. I just feel like it’s hard to justify unless you start playing really well, a big time contract like that. I think those days may be over because there are veteran players who have proven their skills and have proven their talent on the field and they deserve those contracts.”

On how the Jets can finally make it to the Super Bowl:

“Play an entire game in the AFC Championship game – not just the half.”

On his involvement with Sam’s Club:

“I’ve gotten this chance to actually partner with Sam’s Club. I’m trying to stay healthy and promote healthy lifestyle habits that eliminate chronic disease. With their Giving Made Simple Program, Sam’s Club is helping four different charities: The Y, Oasis, Alliance for a Healthier Generation, and Sesame Street. Each vote you cast for your specific charity, Sam’s Club will donate $5 and up to $2 million to charity during the month of July. It works out great; you’re helping people from all different walks of life. It’s been a fun partnership.”

</img></img>

View the full article

[JiFtheOracle]

I like Mark Sanchez. He's a total hottie.

[slats]

On whether rookie pay scales will remain high:

“It’s a serious investment and I’ve seen both sides of it now. I just feel like it’s hard to justify unless you start playing really well, a big time contract like that. I think those days may be over because there are veteran players who have proven their skills and have proven their talent on the field and they deserve those contracts.”

Haha! Yeah, well, Mark got his, anyway. Sucks to be in the class of '11.

[T0mShane]

I think I heard that Newton's deal with total $22 million instead of the usual $50+ mil. That's steep.

[Bleedin Green]

Haha! Yeah, well, Mark got his, anyway. Sucks to be in the class of '11.

No kidding. Any of the highly drafted guys this year who passed up on coming out as juniors last year really have to be regretting that choice.

[ECURB]

I think I heard that Newton's deal with total $22 million instead of the usual $50+ mil. That's steep.

Sucks for these first few classes that were expecting it... awesome for all the vets who will get a bigger share...

[Sperm Edwards]

Haha! Yeah, well, Mark got his, anyway. Sucks to be in the class of '11.

Yes and no depending on how the CBA ends up. Clearly those at the very top of the draft will make far less on their rookie deals. But this is a small representation of the hundreds of guys drafted every year. If those guys - like players at the bottom of round 1 locked into a 5 year deal where they don't make THAT much (relatively speaking), then they get their unrestricted status earlier than before. Then they'll make more than they would have if they had to play another year or two on an unfavorable rookie deal.

The one thing lost in all the years-until-freedom, that (sadly) probably won't get addressed in the upcoming CBA, is the obvious nature of career length of different positions. It's different for a RB to be locked up "on the cheap" for 4-5 years (or more if they're franchise-tagged for a year or two like Edgerrin James) than it is for just about every other position. By the time they've earned their unconditional UFA status at age 28-29, few teams are willing to sign them on long-term deals with nearly the same big guaranteed dollars since it will likely be a bad long-term investment that costs a franchise younger core players for years to come. Going forward, those few who end up being great RB's while avoiding serious injury are probably better-served being drafted later with as few years as possible on a rookie deal. Far different for players who play at positions where there are still superstars in their late 30s; they can get multiple high-dollar contracts even if their rookie deal was 6 years long.

[Bleedin Green]

Yes and no depending on how the CBA ends up. Clearly those at the very top of the draft will make far less on their rookie deals. But this is a small representation of the hundreds of guys drafted every year. If those guys - like players at the bottom of round 1 locked into a 5 year deal where they don't make THAT much (relatively speaking), then they get their unrestricted status earlier than before. Then they'll make more than they would have if they had to play another year or two on an unfavorable rookie deal.

The one thing lost in all the years-until-freedom, that (sadly) probably won't get addressed in the upcoming CBA, is the obvious nature of career length of different positions. It's different for a RB to be locked up "on the cheap" for 4-5 years (or more if they're franchise-tagged for a year or two like Edgerrin James) than it is for just about every other position. By the time they've earned their unconditional UFA status at age 28-29, few teams are willing to sign them on long-term deals with nearly the same big guaranteed dollars since it will likely be a bad long-term investment that costs a franchise younger core players for years to come. Going forward, those few who end up being great RB's while avoiding serious injury are probably better-served being drafted later with as few years as possible on a rookie deal. Far different for players who play at positions where there are still superstars in their late 30s; they can get multiple high-dollar contracts even if their rookie deal was 6 years long.

Definitely agree with this, and while I don't think it was AS big of a deal a few years back in the era of the "primary back", as those guys were more likely to be kept around and signed to new deals, it's definitely gotten a lot worse recently. Because of the shorter career length you referred to, more and more teams got sick of their RBs breaking down in the middle of these big deals, which is why these days you see a lot of teams just making the rounds every few years on a high to mid round pick at RB, running him into the ground and then casting him aside at the end of his rookie deal and doing it all over again. Just look at how many RBs the Jets have gone through since the end of Martin's career, and they're not even close to the worst given how many veteran RBs they've had in there.

The other part of it is that a lot more often than not RBs are going to be contributing a lot more from day one than the majority of their fellow rookie counterparts. It's definitely the one position that deserve to be getting more out of their rookie deals, but that's not something that is really easily negotiable, particularly since it's also hurt by being considered probably the most easily replaceable position.

[T0mShane]

Good points on the running backs. Still, I can't imagine that the NFLPA will yield to a five-year rookie deal. They'll get four years and ensure that the fifth year is essentially a franchise tag-style option. I love the rookie cap, btw. I hate the owners, but I feel bad for teams when they get saddled with a Gholston or a Ryan Leaf for huge dollars. That's always a bad situation for everybody involved. Also love the salary floor. It essentially forces you to pay more for your veterans. My only concern will be that, instead of helping out mid-level vets like Cotchery, teams will instead just use the newly freed-up money to overpay the top 5% of their rosters.

[ECURB]

Good points on the running backs. Still, I can't imagine that the NFLPA will yield to a five-year rookie deal. They'll get four years and ensure that the fifth year is essentially a franchise tag-style option. I love the rookie cap, btw. I hate the owners, but I feel bad for teams when they get saddled with a Gholston or a Ryan Leaf for huge dollars. That's always a bad situation for everybody involved. Also love the salary floor. It essentially forces you to pay more for your veterans. My only concern will be that, instead of helping out mid-level vets like Cotchery, teams will instead just use the newly freed-up money to overpay the top 5% of their rosters.