Sure, that makes sense. I think that the conversation of fully guaranteed deals on principle quickly delves into the fairness of fully guaranteed contracts in any sport, be it football, or baseball, or euro league soccer, or basketball. It's obviously not "fair" that elite athletes command multi year 9 figure salaries, but it's also clear that NFL is the outlier in terms of not guaranteeing contracts for athletes. It's a pretty big can of worms.
Football has always managed to stay ahead of the curve in terms of its compensation system. It's also managed to avoid complete and unfettered free agency, particularly when it comes to the biggest stars.
Unlike, say, baseball, which essentially had an economic system foisted upon it by an independent arbitrator, football has always been more proactive in areas such as labor and free agency. By various models (including a hard salary cap that is nearly impossible to circumvent), they've tamped down free agency demand just enough so as to temper potential feeding frenzies that could result in a bellwether deal (with one notable exception, of course). By historically offering short-term concessions to the players in such areas as pension, benefits, etc. they've managed to maintain long-term control over compensation.
This topic is locked
