The Compensatory Pick System Is BROKEN.

[Rigotz]

The Compensatory Pick system was designed to allow the bad teams to keep their good players.

 

Instead, it rewards the good teams because they can afford to let good players walk and get huge contracts, while back-filling with cheap players who want to "win now."

 

This year is another perfect example.

 

The Bottom 10 Teams this year were:

32) Jaguars: Zero Comp Picks

31) Jets: Zero Comp Picks

30)Texans: Zero Comp Picks

29) Falcons: 3 Comp Picks, but none in Round 3 or 4.

28) Eagles: 2 Comp Picks, but none in Round 3, 4, or 5.

27) Bengals: Zero Comp Picks

26) Lions: Zero Comp Picks

25) Broncos: Zero Comp Picks

24) Panthers: 2 Comp Picks, but none in rounds 3, 4, or 5.

23) Giants: Zero Comp Picks

 

So, none of the bottom 10 teams got any Round 3 or Round 4 compensatory picks.

Meanwhile, perennial playoff teams like the Patriots, Saints, Steelers, Packers, Chiefs, Rams, Titans and Ravens all received round 3 and/or round 4 picks.

 

This is a disgrace.

 

[FireChans]

4 minutes ago, Rigotz said:

The Compensatory Pick system was designed to allow the bad teams to keep their good players.

 

Instead, it rewards the good teams because they can afford to let good players walk and get huge contracts, while back-filling with cheap players who want to "win now."

 

This year is another perfect example.

 

The Bottom 10 Teams this year were:

32) Jaguars: Zero Comp Picks

31) Jets: Zero Comp Picks

30)Texans: Zero Comp Picks

29) Falcons: 3 Comp Picks, but none in Round 3 or 4.

28) Eagles: 2 Comp Picks, but none in Round 3, 4, or 5.

27) Bengals: Zero Comp Picks

26) Lions: Zero Comp Picks

25) Broncos: Zero Comp Picks

24) Panthers: 2 Comp Picks, but none in rounds 3, 4, or 5.

23) Giants: Zero Comp Picks

 

So, none of the bottom 10 teams got any Round 3 or Round 4 compensatory picks.

Meanwhile, perennial playoff teams like the Patriots, Saints, Steelers, Packers, Chiefs, Rams, Titans and Ravens all received round 3 and/or round 4 picks.

 

This is a disgrace.

 

Huh?

 

The Comp pick system is not designed to help bad or good teams. It’s designed to help teams who lose good players to FAs. And it’s working as intended.

[Mcdermott]

4 minutes ago, Rigotz said:

The Compensatory Pick system was designed to allow the bad teams to keep their good players.

 

Instead, it rewards the good teams because they can afford to let good players walk and get huge contracts, while back-filling with cheap players who want to "win now."

 

This year is another perfect example.

 

The Bottom 10 Teams this year were:

32) Jaguars: Zero Comp Picks

31) Jets: Zero Comp Picks

30)Texans: Zero Comp Picks

29) Falcons: 3 Comp Picks, but none in Round 3 or 4.

28) Eagles: 2 Comp Picks, but none in Round 3, 4, or 5.

27) Bengals: Zero Comp Picks

26) Lions: Zero Comp Picks

25) Broncos: Zero Comp Picks

24) Panthers: 2 Comp Picks, but none in rounds 3, 4, or 5.

23) Giants: Zero Comp Picks

 

So, none of the bottom 10 teams got any Round 3 or Round 4 compensatory picks.

Meanwhile, perennial playoff teams like the Patriots, Saints, Steelers, Packers, Chiefs, Rams, Titans and Ravens all received round 3 and/or round 4 picks.

 

This is a disgrace.

 

I’m not sure where you got the idea that that was the intent of the compensatory pick system but its working exactly as it was intended.

[mushypeaches]

Fortunately, we have an annual player draft that rightly or wrongly, DOES reward the worst teams

 

The Compensatory pick system is working EXACTLY as intended.  There was no intent around good or bad teams.  

 

Bad teams should draft better

Bad teams should retain their talent where appropriate

Good teams should make the right decisions on what talent to retain and at what cost.  If bad teams choose to sign those free agents and have less of a chance of getting compensatory picks, then the system is working

 

This isn't welfare, it's warfare.  There's plenty of room in the league for owners like Mike Brown, but they aren't going to be winning titles

 

[Don Otreply]

What? Did the pats get more comp picks already...? 

[Aussie Joe]

18 minutes ago, Rigotz said:

 

 

Instead, it rewards the good teams because they can afford to let good players walk and get huge contracts, while back-filling with cheap players who want to "win now."

 

 

 

 

Why should all the systems benefit the poorly managed teams (like draft & schedule)?

 

You develop a good player that you have to let go to another team ... I dont see the issue in getting a mid round pick in return

 

 

[Rigotz]

31 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Huh?

 

The Comp pick system is not designed to help bad or good teams. It’s designed to help teams who lose good players to FAs. And it’s working as intended.

 

And who do you think are the teams that consistently lose good players to FAs?

Is it the team everyone wants to play for or the team nobody wants to play for?

 

14 minutes ago, Aussie Joe said:

 

Why should all the systems benefit the poorly managed teams (like draft & schedule)?

 

 

Parity. It's good for the league and good for fans when the bad teams actually have a shot at winning. The compensatory system stacks the system against them.

Edited March 11, 2021 by Rigotz

[Doc]

Yeah comp picks weren't mean to help bad teams: the draft is supposed to do that.  And by virtue of being bad teams, they're less likely to lose good players and thus get (good) comp picks.

[Mr. WEO]

This thread doesn't seem to be working as intended...

[billsfan89]

It is very broken always has been. The stupid in and out formula is very backwards and accomplishes nothing. 

[DJB]

Well the creator of the compensatory rule Bill Belichek disagrees. 

[Buffalo_Stampede]

It is what it is. Everyone knows the rules. 

[whatdrought]

That's not at all what the comp pick system is for... If anything, it does help garbage teams by encouraging good teams, with good players to allow those players to leave, thus giving bad teams the chance to sign them.

 

The reason it always looks broken is the idea among decision makers that a player from a good team is a good player. People have been overpaying Patriot cast offs for years only to have them go back to the pats for pennies on the dollar after they flame out because teams overpaid them and didn't know how to use them. 

[Aussie Joe]

9 minutes ago, Rigotz said:

 

 

Parity. It's good for the league and good for fans when the bad teams actually have a shot at winning. The compensatory system stacks the system against them.

You think it’s bad... I don’t mind it ...I think the bad teams get enough leg ups...

[Dkollidas]

I disagree with the OP. It’s meant to help teams that lose good players. Develop good players, lose them, and don’t replace them with other highly paid players, and then you’ll get comp picks 

[FireChans]

48 minutes ago, Rigotz said:

 

And who do you think are the teams that consistently lose good players to FAs?

Is it the team everyone wants to play for or the team nobody wants to play for?

 

 

Parity. It's good for the league and good for fans when the bad teams actually have a shot at winning. The compensatory system stacks the system against them.

Teams that lose good players to FA might be teams that were good but are losing good players. They might be teams that are bad and losing good players.

 

Both teams get comp picks for losing good FAs. Because that’s how it’s supposed to work. 
 

In the salary cap era, theoretically, a good team would lose more good players than a bad team. Because they can’t afford them. 

Edited March 11, 2021 by FireChans

[djp14150]

1 hour ago, Mcdermott said:

I’m not sure where you got the idea that that was the intent of the compensatory pick system but its working exactly as it was intended.

 

Q told him....

[Rigotz]

15 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Teams that lose good players to FA might be teams that were good but are losing good players. They might be teams that are bad and losing good players.

 

Both teams get comp picks for losing good FAs. Because that’s how it’s supposed to work. 
 

In the salary cap era, theoretically, a good team would lose more good players than a bad team. Because they can’t afford them. 

 

That was how the system was built, but that's not how it functions.

I'm not sure why a lot of you can't see this. I just laid it out for you.

 

Imagine you're a free agent.

Would you rather play for the team that always wins?

Or, would you rather play for the team that always loses?

Of course, you would pick the team that always wins.

The comp pick system was created to counter-balance this by rewarding bad teams who can't hold on to their players.

But the opposite happened.

 

Now, not only are free agents overpaid by the loser teams (because it's the only way they can get these players), the winner teams get EXTRA picks in return and can replace those players that they just lost because, of course, they are overpaid by loser teams.

 

That seems like a pretty bad concept if the NFL is trying to encourage small market teams, who typically lose, to actually have a chance.

 

[Buffalo Junction]

On the flipside.... It’s kind of interesting how many times the Pats, Chiefs, 49ers and Saints have lost draft picks for violating NFL rules and policies. 
 

To the OP..... It certainly awards good teams with good management and good players. That said, one big issue with poorly run franchises is that they often fail to identify and/ develop drafted talent. Compensatory picks often keep those better teams from negotiating with high priced FAs. This brings down the cost of FAs in the market and provides the worst teams a better opportunity to sign top FAs if those players want top dollar. If all the offered contracts are equal how many FAs would sign with the Lions or Texans instead of a a super bowl contender? Artificially removing the better run franchises from the market allows talent to spread to worse teams. It also provides compensation to poorly run teams who have a FA bolt for greener pastures. 
 

Compensatory picks are not perfect. However, without them there would likely be a return to more salary cap violations, tampering, etc where the better run franchises exploit every conceivable loophole until it’s closed or they get caught. It also allows for player movement before the mid-season trade deadline. Contenders have no problem trading a 2nd round pick for a player in the final year of his deal when they know they’re likely to recoup a substantial chunk of draft capital with a comp pick. 

[Thurman#1]

1 hour ago, Rigotz said:

The Compensatory Pick system was designed to allow the bad teams to keep their good players.

 

Instead, it rewards the good teams because they can afford to let good players walk and get huge contracts, while back-filling with cheap players who want to "win now."

 

This year is another perfect example.

 

The Bottom 10 Teams this year were:

32) Jaguars: Zero Comp Picks

31) Jets: Zero Comp Picks

30)Texans: Zero Comp Picks

29) Falcons: 3 Comp Picks, but none in Round 3 or 4.

28) Eagles: 2 Comp Picks, but none in Round 3, 4, or 5.

27) Bengals: Zero Comp Picks

26) Lions: Zero Comp Picks

25) Broncos: Zero Comp Picks

24) Panthers: 2 Comp Picks, but none in rounds 3, 4, or 5.

23) Giants: Zero Comp Picks

 

So, none of the bottom 10 teams got any Round 3 or Round 4 compensatory picks.

Meanwhile, perennial playoff teams like the Patriots, Saints, Steelers, Packers, Chiefs, Rams, Titans and Ravens all received round 3 and/or round 4 picks.

 

This is a disgrace.

 

 

 

What a surprise that there is an NFL rule or situation that good organizations handle better than bad ones.

 

You say it's the comp pick system that stacks the system against the bad teams. That's nonsense. It's how the bad teams react to it. To it and to every other thing that comes up. They react badly, because they're bad teams. That's not the fault of any rule.

[FireChans]

11 minutes ago, Rigotz said:

 

That was how the system was built, but that's not how it functions.

I'm not sure why a lot of you can't see this. I just laid it out for you.

 

Imagine you're a free agent.

Would you rather play for the team that always wins?

Or, would you rather play for the team that always loses?

Of course, you would pick the team that always wins.

The comp pick system was created to counter-balance this by rewarding bad teams who can't hold on to their players.

But the opposite happened.

 

Now, not only are free agents overpaid by the loser teams (because it's the only way they can get these players), the winner teams get EXTRA picks in return and can replace those players that they just lost because, of course, they are overpaid by loser teams.

 

That seems like a pretty bad concept if the NFL is trying to encourage small market teams, who typically lose, to actually have a chance.

 

So many bad bad bad assumptions in this post.

 

First, FAs go all over. Who was the last big name FA the Steelers got? Or even the Pats? 
 

Second, it’s a salary cap era. Not only can these teams actually not afford all the good players, there is also no difference in small or big markets.

 

Third, the Jags traded away players like  Jalen Ramsey, Dante Fowler, AJ Bouye, Yannick Ngakoue for picks. So yeah, they didn’t get comp picks for those dudes. They shouldn’t.

[Tuco]

It works just like it's supposed to. It's not a reward for being good. It's a replacement tool for teams that lose good players. And the teams that are usually good tend to draft well, be coached well and so they have more good players year in and year out, which naturally loads their rosters with more players than they're able to keep.

 

Bad teams tend to draft poorly, fail to develop and have inferior coaching with regular turnovers, which naturally leaves them trying to improve by competing for the best players that can't be kept by the good teams that developed them.

 

I'd say it's more an indicator of the cause and effect of drafting, developing and coaching better than the competition.

Edited March 11, 2021 by Tuco

[DabillsDaBillsDaBills]

It's almost embarrassing how bad Buffalo has been at taking advantage of the comp pick system. We have 0 comp picks with Beane as GM. That's a disturbing lack of planning. 

[Just Joshin']

I personally get rid of the comp system.  One change that should be made is a team should make an offer in order to get the comp pick.  If you get a comp pick for losing a player you don't want you should not get a comp pick.

[Big Turk]

1 hour ago, Rigotz said:

 

That was how the system was built, but that's not how it functions.

I'm not sure why a lot of you can't see this. I just laid it out for you.

 

Imagine you're a free agent.

Would you rather play for the team that always wins?

Or, would you rather play for the team that always loses?

Of course, you would pick the team that always wins.

The comp pick system was created to counter-balance this by rewarding bad teams who can't hold on to their players.

But the opposite happened.

 

Now, not only are free agents overpaid by the loser teams (because it's the only way they can get these players), the winner teams get EXTRA picks in return and can replace those players that they just lost because, of course, they are overpaid by loser teams.

 

That seems like a pretty bad concept if the NFL is trying to encourage small market teams, who typically lose, to actually have a chance.

 

 

Most of the time they pick the team that offers the most money.

 

You are trying to wave a magic wand and do some hocus pocus to get to your conclusion but it just doesn't get there. Sorry.

 

Good teams don't let players walk because they can get an extra 3rd or 4th round pick usually, they do it because they have a lot of good players and usually a very expensive QB which means they can't pay everyone under the salary cap system. Eventually they have to make decisions on how important a player is and if they can afford to pay him. When they decide he is going to want more than the value they place on him they let him walk.

 

It is the player's right to test the market and the clubs right to put a certain value on a player and not overpay. Because 90% of the time a player on the open market is getting overpaid by someone.

Edited March 11, 2021 by Big Turk

[JoPoy88]

2 hours ago, Rigotz said:

 

That was how the system was built, but that's not how it functions.

I'm not sure why a lot of you can't see this. I just laid it out for you.

 

Imagine you're a free agent.

Would you rather play for the team that always wins?

Or, would you rather play for the team that always loses?

Of course, you would pick the team that always wins.

The comp pick system was created to counter-balance this by rewarding bad teams who can't hold on to their players.

But the opposite happened.

 

Now, not only are free agents overpaid by the loser teams (because it's the only way they can get these players), the winner teams get EXTRA picks in return and can replace those players that they just lost because, of course, they are overpaid by loser teams.

 

That seems like a pretty bad concept if the NFL is trying to encourage small market teams, who typically lose, to actually have a chance.

 

So one second you say free agents of consequence ALWAYS go to good teams. Next second you say free agents DO go to bad teams but only if they overpay. 
 

sounds like you’re a little confused and getting worked up.

[FireChans]

2 hours ago, Rigotz said:

 

That was how the system was built, but that's not how it functions.

I'm not sure why a lot of you can't see this. I just laid it out for you.

 

 

 

[MJS]

I've been against the comp pick system, regardless of the intent. I just don't think teams should be rewarded for letting talent walk.

 

And I'd feel the same way even if the Bills had been receiving lots of comp picks over the years. I just think it's a dumb system.

[machine gun kelly]

6 hours ago, Aussie Joe said:

 

Why should all the systems benefit the poorly managed teams (like draft & schedule)?

 

You develop a good player that you have to let go to another team ... I dont see the issue in getting a mid round pick in return

 

 

Exactly.  This argument has been made so many times, and people keep demonstrating a lack of understanding of comp picks.  When you lose good players to free agency like possibly Milano of happens, you get a comp pick the next year.  The design was never ever to help bad teams.  Those teams like ours for 17 years was mismanaged and drafted poorly, hired mediocre coaches and management so they perennially did not perform.  The Bills did it to themselves in the drought.  We constantly received higher draft picks, played for 2 of the 16 games opposing teams that were bad, and we still couldn’t get out of 3rd or 4th in the division.

 

When teams are outbid in FA, they are given some compensation to develop draftees.  It’s that simple.

 

Dont take my word for it.  Call into Movin the Chains tomorrow on NFLR and ask this exact question to Pat Kirwan and Jim Miller.  Seriously ask that question.  It’s one of their main points in the business season is to explain to the audience these points.  They do it every year.  Even if you don’t have Sirius, you can call in to their number and I’ll warn you most days you have to wait on hold for an hour or so, but it’s worth it.

 

For those that didn’t play or coach, they also explain depth various aspects of the game.  I’ve been meaning to call before one of their guest spots to get an answer.  They have an o line coach for 35 years, name Paul Alexander.  He’s very in  depth in his o line answers to various questions.  My question for the guys is to ask Alexander to make an assessment of the Bills o line, and why it seems they were excellent in pass pro, but lacking in run blocking.  Was it as Polian mentioned not calling holding often in 2020, or is the Bills line that good in pass pro?  The next point is what is it in their scheme that didn’t seem conducive to run blocking when they were better the two years prior.

 

Im going to try and carve out time tomorrow afternoon if anyone is interested.  I’m not sure the day of the week Alexander is in, but I’m going to ask them if they would table for his weekly spot and see what happens.

[GunnerBill]

7 hours ago, Rigotz said:

 

That was how the system was built, but that's not how it functions.

I'm not sure why a lot of you can't see this. I just laid it out for you.

 

Imagine you're a free agent.

Would you rather play for the team that always wins?

Or, would you rather play for the team that always loses?

Of course, you would pick the team that always wins.

The comp pick system was created to counter-balance this by rewarding bad teams who can't hold on to their players.

But the opposite happened.

 

 

You set it out... it just isn't true. The comp pick system was designed to reward a team for developing a player who is as a result desirable enough that he leaves them in free agency. Bad teams don't draft well, don't develop well, and therefore don't have players desirable in free agency. It isn't rocket science. 

 

The only, and I mean only, change I'd make to the comp pick formula is doing away with 3rd round comps. I think all comp picks should be day 3. The highest I'd award is a 4th rounder. I know that is a tweak to the formula but I am fine with giving out 30 odd comp picks a year spread over the final four rounds. 

[GunnerBill]

7 hours ago, DabillsDaBillsDaBills said:

It's almost embarrassing how bad Buffalo has been at taking advantage of the comp pick system. We have 0 comp picks with Beane as GM. That's a disturbing lack of planning. 

 

He had his own little comp pick hack going for a while with his trading away cut candidates in pre-season rouse. That wasn't as easy last year because there were no pre season games. I think the Bill may well end up with comp picks in 2022 and if they don't because they sign too many middle of the road free agents he will deserve criticism. 

[Ridgewaycynic2013]

Any more talk of scrapping the comp pick system, and Gregg Williams will be waiting outside the back door for the naysayers with a bludgeon. 🤨

[Big Turk]

8 hours ago, FireChans said:

So many bad bad bad assumptions in this post.

 

First, FAs go all over. Who was the last big name FA the Steelers got? Or even the Pats? 
 

Second, it’s a salary cap era. Not only can these teams actually not afford all the good players, there is also no difference in small or big markets.

 

Third, the Jags traded away players like  Jalen Ramsey, Dante Fowler, AJ Bouye, Yannick Ngakoue for picks. So yeah, they didn’t get comp picks for those dudes. They shouldn’t.

 

Well...there is a difference in big and small markets with signing bonuses since that is upfront money. Bigger market and wealthier teams can afford to hand out huge signing bonuses while smaller market poorer teams can't or choose not to.

4 hours ago, MJS said:

I've been against the comp pick system, regardless of the intent. I just don't think teams should be rewarded for letting talent walk.

 

And I'd feel the same way even if the Bills had been receiving lots of comp picks over the years. I just think it's a dumb system.

 

Not as dumb as teams getting 3rd round picks every time a minority coach/GM is promoted.

[QCity]

10 hours ago, Rigotz said:

The Compensatory Pick system was designed to allow the bad teams to keep their good players.

 

 

 

Wrong.

 

You've wasted a lot of keystrokes here, but it is that time of year.

[JMF2006]

The better the FA's you lose are the better the comp picks.

 

NE lost TB12 I think getting a 3rd for him is fair.

 

The Rams lost several FA's ....besides they need the picks they traded all theirs away

 

If your net gain in FA's is higher than your loss you don't get picks.

 

It works for me

[machine gun kelly]

Listen to MTC on demand from yesterday, Wed. on Sirius, in the beginning Pat and Jim review exactly the comp. pick system.  You don’t get a comp. pick for cuts like Brown and Jefferson.  They go through in detail the formula.  I hope that helps for those who don’t understand this formula.

[Don Otreply]

There should not be any comp picks period, losing players in FA should be a normal part of doing business, there is in actuality no valid reason for it to exist, being that it happens to all teams, it makes a level playing field, to bad for teams that are not able to control their cap issues, cry me a river...

Edited March 11, 2021 by Don Otreply

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

He had his own little comp pick hack going for a while with his trading away cut candidates in pre-season rouse. That wasn't as easy last year because there were no pre season games. I think the Bill may well end up with comp picks in 2022 and if they don't because they sign too many middle of the road free agents he will deserve criticism. 

 

Pandemic and limited salary cap this year. Brown and Jefferson don't factor in, if any rfas are non tendered I don't think they count either. So it's basically just Milano, Feliciano, and Williams. If they only target players who were cut they'd probably get some, but I doubt it.

27 minutes ago, Don Otreply said:

There should not be any comp picks period, losing players in FA should be a normal part of doing business, there is in actuality no valid reason for it to exist, being that it happens to all teams, it makes a level playing field, to bad for teams that are not able to control their cap issues, cry me a river...

 

Basketball forces sign and trades. Hockey and baseball will see players dealt on expiring deals. The short non guaranteed nature of the contracts, frequency of injury, and lack of deadline activity tend to lead to lots of players changing teams. I think if u did away with them there would probably be more trades, but its so difficult to make an impact as a mid season addition.

[machine gun kelly]

49 minutes ago, Don Otreply said:

There should not be any comp picks period, losing players in FA should be a normal part of doing business, there is in actuality no valid reason for it to exist, being that it happens to all teams, it makes a level playing field, to bad for teams that are not able to control their cap issues, cry me a river...

Don, I don’t disagree at all, but it’s been around since FA started with Reggie White.  I don’t see it ever changing.  I’m happy they added recently the comp pics for promotions in management and coaching for diversity persons.  It was a solid decision with the Rooney rule stuff.

 

One of the things the MTC guys mentioned that I thought was interesting was it’s really an 8 round draft, not a 7, and what about the teams that did everything right, but their 4th round pick, picking 2nd is now several spots lower due to the 3rd round comp. picks. Don, if you have Sirius, I think you’d like it.  Anyway, good to hear from you brother.

Edited March 11, 2021 by machine gun kelly

[4thandGoal]

22 hours ago, Rigotz said:

 

That was how the system was built, but that's not how it functions.

I'm not sure why a lot of you can't see this. I just laid it out for you.

 

Imagine you're a free agent.

Would you rather play for the team that always wins?

Or, would you rather play for the team that always loses?

Of course, you would pick the team that always wins.

The comp pick system was created to counter-balance this by rewarding bad teams who can't hold on to their players.

But the opposite happened.

 

Now, not only are free agents overpaid by the loser teams (because it's the only way they can get these players), the winner teams get EXTRA picks in return and can replace those players that they just lost because, of course, they are overpaid by loser teams.

 

That seems like a pretty bad concept if the NFL is trying to encourage small market teams, who typically lose, to actually have a chance.

 

I think your logic is broken unless you can share a link where it says that the comp picks are to help teams who are bad..