"25% of Teams don't have a 1st rounder" -Why?

[Hail Casares]

A quarter of NFL teams don't have a first-round pick in next month's draft. After decades of draft capital being hoarded you're seeing more and more teams willing to trade it away to make runs at titles. I know for a time in the late 60's and 70's this was the case, but what is causing this current trend of it? The salary cap may not be as punitive as we would think with teams seemingly able to get around it each year with creative restructures. Are drafts getting deeper and more players can contribute right away?

[Brian wolf]

Creative restructures ... that's a good term, though we don't know how illegal or borderline some of it may be. With the success of Brady and Stafford, teams are searching for the next successful gun-for-hire, though it shouldnt be happening that quickly.

With a rookie payscale in place, teams dont have to worry as much about being patient, especially with QBs and can gamble more, though coaching up your draft classes is still the way to develop a football team. When the Seahawks were champions, their young team was hungry, coachable and cheap. Once the key players got paid, the team changed and free agency isnt always the answer when bonus money and players stuck in their ways tend to underachieve or disappoint fans.

[JuggernautJ]

"A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush?"

[Brian wolf]

I thought it was " a beer in the hand is worth two in the fridge" ... haha

[JuggernautJ]

Heh.
Either way the point is the same: A known commodity is worth twice a potential one.
Which is one of the primary reasons teams/GMs are willing to trade draft choices for established players.

[Reaser]

Different sport and their draft is even more of a crapshoot but last night on TNT Wayne Gretzky was basically laughing at teams that are bad but have acquired a boatload of draft picks over the next few years. Even made a comparison to the Rams giving away their picks for players, and said something alone the lines of: "draft picks only matter if you're not winning." His point essentially was the same as said above, known commodities. Players you already know are good are worth more than, 'we have an extra 2nd round pick two years from now, we're going to the Super Bowl!'

[RRMarshall]

Perhaps the late George Allen's "The Future Is Now" philosophy has taken hold in the current era where the pressure to win and avoid rebuilding years has become paramount. History teaches that eventually you have to pay the price, but perhaps free agency can mitigate this to some extent? It will be interesting to see how this unfolds and what the end results will be over the next 5-10 years.

[Bryan]

Perhaps the late George Allen's "The Future Is Now" philosophy has taken hold in the current era where the pressure to win and avoid rebuilding years has become paramount. History teaches that eventually you have to pay the price, but perhaps free agency can mitigate this to some extent? It will be interesting to see how this unfolds and what the end results will be over the next 5-10 years.

I tend to agree with this. I wouldn't use the phrase "avoid rebuilding years" though. I would say that the reality of "rebuilding years" doesn't exist in today's NFL. Teams seem to be able to cycle through multiple veteran free agents on a yearly basis, where in the past it seemed to be "build your team through the draft, when you are ready to win, vastly overpay for 1 or 2 free agents to put you over the top". If you didn't draft well, you would never win. If you signed the wrong free agent, you'd be stuck with that mistake for several years. I think teams have gotten better in managing the salary cap and managing their rosters. I wonder if the NFL landscape will revert to the 1970's model...teams that can manage their roster effectively remain strong for several years (Chiefs), teams that can't figure out the salary cap never get better (Bears).