PAY SHOULD BE BASED ON PERFORMANCE!!!!!!!!!!

If these players were paid based on their week to week performances instead of gauranteed Million dollar contracts to play poor from game to game i bet there would be more of a motivation factor to show up ready to perform at your highest level from game to game you think!!!!! Reading some of the comments from some of the players who feel that since its December its time to rise to the occasion and play December Football (IKE TAYLOR) so tired of this crap playing the i hope this happens or i hope they lose so we can hope to get in the race. We are the friggin STEELERS for gods sakes.

 

The history backs you up... Problem is, the players union and jovial owners have already taken that away. Them days are gone

 

The way some of them play they would be in huge financial debt.

 

Most of them are in huge financial debt anyway.

 

Man fans are getting crazy...

I guess I few 8-8 seasons will do that to ya? Could be worse, we could be Raiders fans

 

Actually, the O.P. raised a point, that I have thought of many times...

Why can`t the contracts be MORE "incentive laden"?

Oh Yeah...
CBA, and all...

But if I was a coach, and a player had a consistent problem with fumbling, dropping passes, missing blocks/tackles, etc...

What better tool, than "each mistake costs you "x" amount of dollars"???

Pretty sure performances would improve rapidly!!!

Just sayin...

Money is the ultimate motivator, esp nowadays, it seems...

GO STEELERS!!!

 

I have asked this for years. Lets look at the OLB
position from a 3-4 perspective. Lets say 13 sacks per year 2 int's /yr 2 fumble recovery's, 80 tackles /year 10 qb hurries. What would you be willing to pay for these stats? 10 million/yr ok by you? I believe these are attainable, how about you?

 

My 83 year old aunt has been saying the same thing for years. Nice dream but, not knowing the details of the CBA, I'd guarantee that the players union would never go for it!

 

I like the idea but then you have players in positions that get little fanfare like offensive guard or special teams and with the way the owners are you would see them sitting guys so or telling coaches to make sure high incentive players don't get in position to achieve the incentives, too many conspiracy theories will happen with that. I think Worilds is a victim of that now as he is looking for a big pay day so they have him in coverage most of the time, I even saw him in coverage on 3rd down, why? Incentives would not work but fines would.

 

It's all been covered: CBA, union, yadda. The reality is that if something like this were in place (I'd be for it, BTW) you'd have a few really rich players and a bunch of really desperate ones.

 

The NFL is all about entertainment economics and risk / reward. It is big business feeding off of our desire to empathize with players as members of a collective "steeler nation". Colbert and the Rooneys must ask what reward do we offer a player understanding the risks throughout his contract? The risks of poor play (Jason Worilds), injury (Brett Kiesel), or a combination (Ike Taylor) may reduce the value of that owners realize over the life of the contract. There are others...like off-field issues (Santonio Holmes), locker room issues (L. Blount), etc. but it all boils down to risk/reward.

The players, on the other hand, are risking their health and potentially a diminished quality of life for a certain level of reward. The players union is all about veteran NFL players cashing in on the greed of NFL owners. Guaranteed contracts are what the CBA revolves around. Nothing will ever change the fact that players want to guarantee a certain amount of their value as a player to hedge against all of the inherent risks. Supply and demand takes over. Sure, the owners "lose" on many of these guaranteed contracts. However, the players union is willing to sacrifice the leverage of its newest members (rookies) in order to sweeten the deal (Salary Cap) for the vets. Look at last years winning Super Bowl quarterback...Who wins from that rookie contract? I say its the greedy players association AND the NFL owners both.

My favorite player is Heath Miller. Before him it was Aaron Smith. These guys seem to provide the effort and desire beyond the economics.

 

Which is a damn shame, because I really would love some fries right now.

 

I like the idea at first but the more I think about it; your right. Way to many ways for an owner or front office to control players. A head coach would become a figure head... nothing more than a bobble head who can speak.. wait a minute... now I'm thinking about Tomlin again. Darn it. Damn ADHD!

I agree 100% fines would be the way to go. But at what point do the coaches get fined, what about refs, what about equipment managers? Thats a really tough situation to try to bring out.

 

And they probably would still get it wrong!

 

The whole league would have to change with that kind of thinking and that is not going to happen.

 

To a large extent, pay is already based on performance.

If you doubt it consider the following:

Ben Roethlisberger and JP Losman were both 1st round QBs in 2004. One is going to make $200MM over his career, the other probably a few % of that. The reason for the difference? Performance.

6th round WR Antonio Brown is going to cash many more big $ pay checks than 2nd rounder Limas Sweed. And again the reason why is performance.

Sign a big dollar multi year contract today, guess what happens if your performance stinks? You get cut and the remaining yrs on deal get you nothing.

Sure it's not perfect, and sometimes teams overpay for unrealized potential or wishful thinking. But, a salary cap punishes teams for overpaying relative to performance. And non guaranteed contracts allow teams to correct their mistakes. But, in reality, the current system strongly forces pay for performance.