2011 NFL Draft Should Be Cancelled Without a New CBA

Without a new collective bargaining agreement (CBA), there should be no 2011 NFL Draft. 

OK, "draftniks" everywhere just had their hearts skip a beat. Indeed, I get as excited about the NFL's annual selection process as much as most anybody else.

But without a CBA, there is very little point in having a draft this April. 

Why?

The primary reason for canceling the draft has to do with the impact on the new rookies. Most experts feel that any lockout will last at least until the late summer.

That's the best case scenario, and without a new CBA, rookies can not be signed to contracts. Therefore, the likelihood of a highly drafted player like Auburn defensive lineman Nick Fairley getting into training camp on time or at all is slim and none.

Now, if the lockout extends to the regular season or further, the consequences could be much worse. Let's say a new deal is reached by October.

If a rookie signs a deal during the season, he likely won't have ANY impact on his new team in 2011. He'll be too busy learning his playbook.

That's if a rookie signs a deal at all. What's to keep a player from re-entering the draft if he doesn't like the team that drafted him or the spot he was drafted in? An NFL team only holds a player's rights until the next draft if I am not mistaken. Conceivably you could have teams waste high picks on players that never suit up for the team that originally drafts them. Somewhere, baseball " super agent" Scott Boras is smiling.

Now, consider that any new CBA is likely to have a rookie wage scale in place. In fact, according to Packers president Mark Murphy, who was cited in a Washington Post article, the league wants a system that would lock a quarterback who is taken with the first overall pick into an approximately six-year, $19.9 million contract.

That's a far cry from the six-year, $78 million deal with $50 million guaranteed that St. Louis Rams quarterback Sam Bradford received as the first overall pick in 2010.

Which means that a highly-rated quarterback like Missouri's Blaine Gabbert won't be forfeiting multiple million dollars in guaranteed money by re-entering the draft in 2012.

Adding to the silliness of the process, the ability of teams to move around in the draft will be significantly impacted by the fact that a team cannot trade a player without a CBA in place.

So let's say the Philadelphia Eagles would like to trade up for the No. 24 position into the top 10 of the draft. They can't use quarterback Kevin Kolb as part of a trade package.

To base draft positioning solely based on records and the exchange of current and especially future draft choices seems to unfairly favor teams with multiple existing draft selections. Shouldn't a team be able to trade one of its existing players to improve its draft position?

Sound like a confusing, bad situation? It is, which is why the simple and best solution is to cancel the 2011 NFL Draft if no CBA is reached beforehand.

Players who have already declared for the draft would be granted a waiver to return to school if academically eligible.

For those not wishing to return to college, they would be in limbo, or in the same kind of purgatory that established NFL veterans are now facing.

The biggest losers in canceling the draft would be the league (loss of television money), teams with early selections like the Carolina Panthers and teams with multiple picks such as the New England Patriots, who have two selections in each of the first three rounds.

Unfair? Too bad!

Maybe it will serve as motivation for a new deal so that fans get what they really want, which is more football on the field and not at the bargaining table.