Skip to content

Minimum salaries shoot up under new deal

gty_executives_handshake_with_money_jt_110703_wg Getty Images

The bad news for undrafted players is that they won’t be able to tell who’s interested in them as something more than camp fodder based on the signing bonus that a team offers.

The good news for undrafted players is that, if they make a team, they’ll make a lot more money.

The minimum salaries for NFL players have increased by $55,000 across the board.  For 2011, that means rookies will get $375,000.  Players with one year of service get $450,000.  Two years of service will push the minimum to $525,000.

Players with three years of service will make a minimum of $600,000.  For players with four to six years of service, the minimum salary is $685,000.  Seven to nine, $810,000.

For players with 10 years or more of service, the minimum salary is $910,000.

The amounts increase $15,000 per year in each of the next four seasons.

It’s believed that the program previously employed by the NFL to allow teams to sign veterans to one-year deals at a reduced camp number will apply in the new CBA.  If not, marginal veteran players could become far less attractive, given the $535,000 gap between the minimum pay for rookies and 10-year pros.

Permalink 22 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Sprint Football Live - Rumors, Top Stories, Union
22 Responses to “Minimum salaries shoot up under new deal”
  1. skoobyfl says: Jul 25, 2011 4:17 PM

    Well there’s a plus.

  2. touchdownroddywhite says: Jul 25, 2011 4:18 PM

    Two years entails a raise of 40%…. I wish that applied at any place I’ve ever worked.

    Such a bad deal those players had to get ironed out…

  3. broncobeta says: Jul 25, 2011 4:19 PM

    Oh to be 300 pounds…

  4. profootballwalk says: Jul 25, 2011 4:21 PM

    touchdownroddywhite says: Jul 25, 2011 4:18 PM

    Two years entails a raise of 40%…. I wish that applied at any place I’ve ever worked.

    ********************************************

    So what does that tell you about yourself?

  5. rcali says: Jul 25, 2011 4:22 PM

    And most NFL players are broke just after a few years after leaving the NFL? ONE CAR! ONE HOUSE! NO MR. T STARTER SETS!

  6. dcsween says: Jul 25, 2011 4:24 PM

    Is it annual or divided per game? Lots of these UDFAs are not going to get picked up even with the training camp roster expansions, but UDFAs will get picked up all season long as injuries will increase (due to the shortened off-season). On balance, seems like a wash … just different, not good or bad.

  7. lgbarn says: Jul 25, 2011 4:26 PM

    broncobeta says:Jul 25, 2011 4:19 PM

    Oh to be 300 pounds…

    —————————————————-

    You have to be able to do damage of a Bull Elephant that’s gone off the game reserve, not some guy looking to get his stomach stapled because he can’t stop eating twinkies…BIG DIFFERENCE

  8. bluvayner says: Jul 25, 2011 4:32 PM

    The drastically escalating minimum salary scale will serve to shorten careers. If a ten year vet and a second year player are both on the bubble, who do you think that they’ll keep? If a 10 year vet, and is willing to play for less than $910k, he should be allowed to.

  9. dcbassguy says: Jul 25, 2011 4:33 PM

    This really makes first year players more appealing.

    If as a GM you can save money by using 1st and 2nd year guys on special teams instead on 4th or 5th year guys, the leaves those GM’s more money at the top.

    I’d be more concerned as an entry level player 4 or 5 years in.

  10. smacklayer says: Jul 25, 2011 4:35 PM

    The problem with this kind of pay schedule is that unless you are a rock star player, look to be cut as you age. Look for this league to continue to get younger and younger. Even if you are a 10 year vet but still have a lot to contribute, you can’t take a pay cut to compete with a 2 or 3 year vet. Look for guys like LT and Moss to not play this year.

  11. pacificnw7722 says: Jul 25, 2011 4:38 PM

    “The good news for undrafted players is that, if they make a team, they’ll make a lot more money.”

    More incentive to give it your all…….better for the game.

  12. deconjonesbitchslap says: Jul 25, 2011 4:45 PM

    not bad for a job that you do for HALF a year.

    “oh but we work out in the offseason”

    pooooooorrrrr babies!

  13. realitypolice says: Jul 25, 2011 4:46 PM

    touchdownroddywhite says:
    Jul 25, 2011 4:18 PM
    Two years entails a raise of 40%…. I wish that applied at any place I’ve ever worked.

    Such a bad deal those players had to get ironed out…
    ===============

    Again, the PLAYERS had no need to get deal to get a deal “ironed out”. It was the OWNER’s who decided the deal needed to be redone.

    Thank God there is no opt out this time so that the billionaire businessman owners can’t decide in 5 years that they want to take ANOTHER shot at besting a group of football players in a negotiation.

    Because their track record so far? Not so great.

  14. thefiesty1 says: Jul 25, 2011 4:51 PM

    Poor guys are starving to death. How are the going to put food on the table? Good grief! The owners gave away the bank.

  15. encinitasraider says: Jul 25, 2011 4:52 PM

    WTF? How does the NFL get to tell a franchise how to pay thier players? You pay players what there worth.
    The only reason this was put into place was because of cheap arse teams not spending money. This is another reason AL DAVIS was against this deal.
    The NFL is turning into a joke……

  16. dcsween says: Jul 25, 2011 4:55 PM

    dcbassguy says:
    Jul 25, 2011 4:33 PM

    If as a GM you can save money by using 1st and 2nd year guys on special teams instead on 4th or 5th year guys, the leaves those GM’s more money at the top.

    I’d be more concerned as an entry level player 4 or 5 years in.

    >>>>>> Are you suggesting that John Beck should be concerned?

  17. alphaq2 says: Jul 25, 2011 5:03 PM

    I would say that its the veterans that will get the short end of the stick. I bet guys will be forced to retire a bit early because owners won’t want to pay such high minimum sallaries.

  18. phreakin says: Jul 25, 2011 5:04 PM

    encinitasraider: Al Davis is someone who OVERPAYS practically everyone. So I doubt that was the reason.

  19. charleswoodson says: Jul 25, 2011 5:28 PM

    Tiki’s head just hit the table: Who will want to pay him $910,000 guaranteed to be a 3rd down back?

    He was better off with the old minimum wage for 8+ year veterans.

    Oh well, there’s always broadcasting. Whoops. Been there, failed that.

  20. stealthjunk says: Jul 25, 2011 6:53 PM

    What a stupid system — good for young players, bad for vets at the tailend of their careers. I guarantee there will be veterans out there with 10+ years experience that would cut off their right pinky finger to play for only $500k/year. But no, the NFLPA says that is not OK and NFL owners will instead opt for younger players. Ironically, I bet the NFLPA thought this was a “win” in negotiations.

  21. liltifer says: Jul 25, 2011 8:16 PM

    “Tiki’s head just hit the table: Who will want to pay him $910,000 guaranteed to be a 3rd down back?”

    Tiki wasn’t going to sign for the old minimum or the new minimum. With less money going to unproven rookies just because they got drafted high, there’s more to go around to the vets.

  22. drpeppermd says: Jul 26, 2011 9:55 AM

    Jesus, there’s a lot of stupidity here in the comments. This isn’t something new. The minimum salary has ALWAYS gone up based on seniority. There’s been a thing where veterans who sign a one year deal for the minimum only count like $450k against the salary cap so that the veterans don’t get screwed. I very much doubt that the players would let that go away. In other words, same old same old.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!