Should the NFL dump the trade deadline?

Getty Images

The trade deadline has come and gone for 2015. Adjusted several years ago from the Tuesday after Week Six to the Tuesday after Week Eight to give teams more time to make transactions, it’s likely still too early for the bad teams to accept it — and for the contenders to roll the dice in an effort to get the guy they think will put them over the top.

Some would say they should push the trade deadline back even farther. I’ve got another suggestion.

Get rid of it altogether. I made the case for it earlier today on PFT Live.

32 responses to “Should the NFL dump the trade deadline?

  1. No. Teams don’t need to fire sale. This isn’t baseball.

    Part of the draw of the NFL when I was a child was stars staying with my team.

    We as fans cheer for laundry enough already.

  2. Yes. Its really kind of pointless anyway. How many teams actually use it? This year, there was one: Denver got Davis from SF. Let ‘um trade. At the very least it makes things more interesting down the stretch.

  3. Get rid of the trade deadline altogether? No way!

    That would only give the Denver Broncos all the time in the world to circumvent their salary cap to make room for guys like Joe Thomas.

    We all know how much the Broncos love cheating the cap!

  4. Its the liberal way, change something just to say it was your idea, while ignoring the initial logic behind the rule/law, and the repercussions of the desired change…

  5. The deadline is there for the teams. Not the fans or the media.

    Just because it’s not very useful for articles or fan hype doesn’t mean it doesn’t serve a purpose. In my opinion the salary cap prevents mass migration in the NFL. I for one am thankful for it. I would hate to see the core of my team get sold (along with hopes for a rebound the following year) then my team was 3-4 or 4-4.

  6. Baseball’s deadline is 2/3 of the way through the season. And even after that, trades can still happen; it’s just a little riskier to get done.

    Week 12 would make sense, but not much later. The guy getting traded still has to learn a new system.

  7. They will do what they want any ways but NO. Football is becoming like flag football anymore. The defense gets killed with penalties. I seen more and more offense of face mask and never gets called

  8. I say no too but I agree with going a little bit later, maybe after Week 10 as suggested and only after all the byes are done with so it’s an even playing field (the hallmark of the NFL).

    Eliminating it entirely allows proven salary cap cheaters like the Broncos more time to circumvent the cap.

  9. So before Week 17, a team that is 2-13 can trade away an impending Free Agent to a Playoff team?

    They get a few draft picks for a player that would only have one more game to play, so it costs them basically nothing to give that player up.

    The Playoff team could get a huge boost by adding an impending free agent star for their playoff games without having to pay them much since their contracts will be just prorated for Week 17 and the playoff games. All their other salary would be paid for the year, so Playoff teams could load up on star players for cheap.

    This would never work. You need to think this through a bit more, Florio.

  10. This wouldn’t change much, the impact of one or two players on a new team without going through any camps or offseason work would be minimal, especially for just a couple games.

    Without time to learn schemes, concepts and teammate tendancies, there are minimal positons players could contribute from that quickly. Situational pass rushers, kickers and returners are about it.

  11. There would be too many fire sales by extending it too long. As others pointed out, too much tanking as well. Suck for Luck was bad enough. Let’s not encourage more.

  12. Move it to week 9 or 10. That way teams pretty much know if there out of the playoffs or certain teams can decide if they need a player to put them over the top. Maybe put in a fee for the following year if a team cant afford the player now and have it count towards next years cap.

  13. Listened to Florio’s take and find a couple of flaws. Not only are you inviting 20 or so fire sales that could seriously impact the compete level of ‘second tier’ games further diluting the product and making it even easier for teams to pull an Indy and suck on purpose but the early season games could be adversely effected as well. In a marginal division? Horde cap room and buy your way to the top of it late in the season, no need to be competitive early if the other teams in your division have spent to the cap. After 10 games is the latest it should be. An extended trade deadline may make for an easier news cycle but not for a better game

  14. cguy7 | Nov 4, 2015, 1:34 PM MST
    Its the liberal way, change something just to say it was your idea, while ignoring the initial logic behind the rule/law, and the repercussions of the desired change…

    I love how some people carry hate so close to their hearts that it seeps into everything. Liberal way? You’re comment doesn’t even make sense! So what you’re saying is that things (i.e. NFL policy) shouldn’t change even if “the people” want it to? If the owners and players of the NFL want a change in the rules…especially an older arbitrary date set for trades..why shouldn’t they change it?

  15. I say get rid of it altogether. Footballs playbooks are too complex for players to be productive after a trade.

    Its pointless actually. I would venture to say the traded player is worth minimal value and has minimal productivity after the trade to a new team

  16. No, keep the deadline. Without it, Denver, i.e., might trade 3 no. 1s for Gurley in week 17 so they’d have him for the playoff run. The GM and coach might be gone in 2 years but the fans would still be stuck with them selling out the future.

  17. Probably. Teams value draft picks like gold bricks. 2) Hard to fit under accounted for $ under the cap mid year..3) with playbook, scheme and chemistry concerns..fitting new players in and integrating to a new team isn’t nearly as easy as basketball or say baseball. .hockey…usually a meaningless date for NFL

  18. They used to accuse the Red Wings of “renting” a good portion of their playoff rosters…that being said, pushing it back to week 12 would be awesome!

  19. Well, this depends. I am asking you directly, NFL: are you interested in making substantial profit? Because if you are, then you will get rid of the trade deadline (or at least postpone it by making it till like week 17 or something). First off, what exactly is the harm in doing so? Secondly, you cannot tell me that if they followed through with this, it would not result in more audience, publicity, and most importantly $$$ for the NFL. Think about it ppl.

  20. If you move the deadline later in the season, it gives the acquired player less time and practice reps in the new system. That may not matter for some positions, but it will for others. A WR for example, trying to learn a new offense, and get into a rhythm with the QB, would be nearly impossible in a short period of time. So if you are a team that needs a WR for the Super Bowl run, are you really going to get a return on investment, if he cant get up to speed?

    That is one of the issues, the later the deadline, the less time with a new team. But at the same time, when the deadline is earlier in the season, there are more teams that think they have a chance and they wont be looking to deal anyone

  21. wte1 says:
    Nov 4, 2015 3:31 PM
    Get rid of the trade deadline altogether? No way!

    That would only give the Denver Broncos all the time in the world to circumvent their salary cap to make room for guys like Joe Thomas.

    We all know how much the Broncos love cheating the cap!

    With the additional time, perhaps other teams that are known cheaters would find ways to bend the rules to their advantage as well.

  22. The deadline was already moved back a few years ago (from week 6 to 9) and that turned out to be a happy medium between too early (week 6) and too late (week 12 or later). In week 9 all but the worst teams still have a chance at playoffs which means they aren’t be in a hurry to dump players that have contracts expiring at the end of the year.

    Example: if going into week 12 the Bears are 2-9 (sorry Bears fans), what would stop them from trading Jeffery or Forte, both of whom were written about at this year’s deadline, for a 6th or 7th rounder? Both would have contracts for only 4 more games so the Bears couldn’t expect any value significant enough to actually make them better in the future. So one team rents a star player for a playoff run and potentially lets them walk after the playoffs, and the other team sells a star player for next to nothing. That’s sh*tty for the league all around.

    It works in hockey because many of the deadline trades involve future prospects – something very scarce and very valuable in the NFL – too valuable to actually deal for a rental player.

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.