Oddly, the NFL draft is one of its most significant events. It shows a man rising to the podium, being booed, and reading names at its core. Throughout the season, the NFL continues to dominate playoff Saturdays, Sundays, Mondays, and Thursdays. The league can also take advantage of the offseason thanks to the draft. But as interest continues to grow, there has been relatively little pushback from those who make the draft work: the prospects, particularly those slated to go at the top of the first round.
Pay attention to it. Your reward for being one of the best college athletes in the country is to end up on one of the worst NFL rosters, typically one plagued by poor leadership, questionable coaching, or a roster of third-rate players. Peyton Manning and Troy Aikman are two examples of quarterbacks who have won with teams that select them first overall. However, most of the time, the best quarterbacks end up in situations where they are most likely to fail. After being let go by the teams that selected them in the top three, Sam Darnold and Baker Mayfield went on to succeed. The best prospects are left to the whims of errant franchises because they have no say over where they begin their careers. Is there a system that can maintain the interest and parity of the league while providing players with some autonomy throughout their careers or, at the very least, not rewarding struggling franchises? There are flaws in each of the ideas below, so no system is perfect. However, at least it’s something to think about. Flip-flop the draft order.
Because teams would be ranked 1-32 based on their previous record, teams at the bottom of the league standings would not be rewarded with the earliest picks. The playoff-closest teams, on the other hand, would “earn” the top draft picks. The 14 teams that make the playoffs would still have the picks 18 through 32, but the teams that didn’t make the playoffs would be rewarded for how close they came to making it. If that happened this year, Seattle would be selected with the first overall pick and be the team with the best record that would not make the playoffs in 2024. The Titans, who had the worst record in 2024, would select at 18. Changing the order would hurt the league’s sense of parity and make it harder for failing franchises to quickly relaunch. But it would make the end of the league’s regular season spicier, as teams fight to get closer to the playoff race. Instead of giving the top prize to the league’s weakest teams, it would encourage rebuilding teams that are trying to get to the postseason. There would be obvious consequences down the road. Would a team drop out of the playoffs to win the first-round pick? Without a top-five pick, would terrible teams continue to fail? However, there is no perfect system, and this one would encourage teams to pursue in-season moves more aggressively and place more top prospects on teams with solid foundations. A draft lottery
A lottery system for all non-playoff teams is a more palatable option. The NBA, NHL, and MLB use weighted draft lottery systems that give teams with the worst records the best chance of getting a top pick. The NBA started its lottery in 1985 to stop teams from tanking for top picks. In 2019, the NBA flattened its weighting to stop franchises from losing their way into a player who could change the franchise. Although some have attempted, the NFL has not been the target of significant tanking, in contrast to the NBA or NHL. The season is insufficient. Careers are in jeopardy. Every rep is an audition for fringe and rotational players looking for a new deal because there are no guaranteed contracts. Even a talented quarterback prospect cannot influence an NFL team in the same way Victor Wembanyama did in the NBA. Numerous teams have attempted to trade away a season in exchange for a top quarterback prospect since Andrew Luck. However, as teams vie for position late in the season, there is still some duplicity. Additionally, if a team is out of the playoff picture by Thanksgiving, they will likely begin preparations to select the Texas quarterback in the first round of the upcoming season. A lottery would make it more likely that some well-run franchises would move up the draft board, giving the league yet another showcase event during the draft cycle. Imagine the chaos that would ensue if Travis Hunter awaited the 49ers or Seahawks to win the championship this season. Favorable to league parity? Possibly. Giving the players some say over where they go? No. Is there a possibility that Mel Kiper will drown on set? Absolutely. The drama alone is reason enough for the league to investigate. Waiving the eligibility rule
NFL rules state that a player must be three years removed from high school to be eligible for the draft. The league asserts that an 18-year-old cannot handle the physical and mental demands of the sport. However, the unspoken aspect of the NFL’s criteria is that it provides teams with additional time to evaluate players by utilizing college football as an efficient minor league. In the pre-NIL era, when student-athletes were working for free, it was a grim spectacle. With players now able to earn money in college, the system is less grotesque.
However, it is still possible to alter the eligibility requirements, making college football a more effective entry point into professional sports. Tinkering can be done in several different ways. One is to make all players eligible for the draft but not play until they have completed three years of college. In that scenario, teams would choose between selecting a prospect they know can play as a rookie and drafting, stashing, and developing a player until they can see the field. In a recent all-eligible mock draft conducted by Pro Football Focus, five players who were not eligible for this year’s class were among the top ten picks. By the time they are eligible to be selected in real life, some of those players will undoubtedly vanish. Injuries could sap some potential, or weaknesses could be exposed. But why should those players not be able to cash in on their draft stock today?
Players ought to be able to choose when to experiment with the NFL as college football becomes increasingly professionalized. Franchises should decide whether to select a talented player a year or two before they are eligible to play on Sundays.
The league could either allow teams to select players and make them a part of their practice squad until they can play, or have teams retain the draft rights of a player while they’re still in college. There is no disadvantage to the players being on the NFL’s books if they are receiving compensation in college. The player would decide when they want to leave school and enter the pros, rather than merely following the league’s schedule. And it would be up to teams to decide if they would rather take Arch Manning’s No. 1 overall this season and sit him for a year or wade into this year’s eligible crop of quarterbacks.
Players would have more control over their careers if the requirements were changed, and they would also have a chance to capitalize on their talent before an injury prevents them from signing a professional contract. It would also end the non-stop moaning from the league’s executives that college football is not adequately developing players.
Pool of salaries If you were starting from scratch, a salary pool makes more sense than a traditional draft. You might wonder why players don’t get to choose where they work when you step away from the big boards and mock drafts. After all, Starbucks does not accept top applicants and then sends them to its worst outlet.
A salary pool would be added to the traditional draft. The Super Bowl champions, who would receive the least amount, would be followed by the team with the lowest performance. This year, let’s say the Eagles get $30 million and the Titans get $60 million for rookies. From there, teams and prospects are free to negotiate as they see fit. A team could splurge all its money on a generational prospect, or spread the wealth across 15 intriguing rookies.
At best, the concept of an “auction” draft is unsavory. There is no need to go into greater detail about the sinister undercurrents. If, on the other hand, a negotiated system was used in place of a highest bidder scheme, players would have the opportunity to strike a balance between the best contract they could sign and the right environment. Travis Hunter may want to make a lot of money from the Giants or Browns or he may be willing to give up some money to team up with Josh Allen or Patrick Mahomes. He would make the decision. The teams at the bottom of the standings would still have an advantage in negotiations if the pool that is available to each franchise was tiered, allowing them to spend more money on the best prospects or split it among several second-tier prospects to rebuild. Young overseas rookies in baseball now have access to a pool with comparable salaries. The league probably will not approve of the idea. It would remove the tension of draft night, robbing viewers of televisual drama, and the league of attention. However, it could result in a frantic process lasting several weeks, similar to free agency, in which teams wait for the top dominoes to fall. Additionally, each fan base would be aware that they stand a chance of getting the best players. If the process were negotiated rather than selected, players would have some control over where they play. Additionally, basing the salary pool on a team’s previous year’s record would help maintain a sense of parity.
