Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

ChrisBabcock wrote:I've never fully understood why the Bucs no longer had his rights and became available to be redrafted (presumably because they failed to sign him in a year) but yet the Bills still had Jim Kelly's rights 3 years after drafting him.

Draft rights has always been a murky topic for me. It's hard to get definitive answers. My understanding of the Jim Kelly situation is that any NFL team could have drafted Kelly in 1984 or 1985 and held his rights for that calendar year while they attempted to sign Kelly. The fact that no other team drafted Kelly in the subsequent years meant that his rights were still retained by Buffalo.

But that is just my guess. I don't understand the instances where the drafted player doesn't sign, plays for a few years in the CFL/USFL, and then returns to the NFL. Is he a free agent? Does the team that originally drafted him still retain his rights? This happened with Tom Cousineau...he was drafted by the Bills, played for a few years in the CFL, then returned to the NFL. I don't know if was an actual rule, but Cousineau was a restricted free agent...he could negotiate a contract with any NFL team, but the Bills had the option of matching the deal and forcing Cousineau to play for Buffalo. I'm not really seeing the logic with it, but that is how it happened. The Oilers threw big money at Cousineau, the Bills matched the deal and offered to trade Cousineau's rights to the Browns for a boatload of draft picks.

The timeline is weird. Cousineau never signed with Buffalo, the Oilers had an offer on the table to Cousineau, yet the Bills were allowed to trade Cousineau's rights to Cleveland. It doesn't make any sense, but Rozelle went to great lengths to avoid any form of actual free agency. And trivia on trivia...one of the draft picks received for Cousineau was used by Buffalo to draft Jim Kelly.

Yes, Jackson was draft eligible after a year had passed. The New York Times reported on that a few times leading up to the draft, including when the Broncos discussed trading for his rights in February -- when Tampa still held his rights.

Chances are the answers are outlined in the CBAs. Those likely spell everything out. A secondary source would be the official NFL rulebooks for those years, and maybe the NFL bylaws, but my first guess would be the CBAs. Kelly's draft was under the 1982 agreement, Cousineau's was under the 77 agreement. So maybe something had changed. The 77 agreement was the first after the Mackey Rule case -- so it's possible that there was some language in there for a contract offer from another NFL team. Just an educated guess.

Also, I know that in the 60s NFL teams retained draft rights -- the 49ers still held Goose Gonsoulin's rights in 1967 even though he first signed with the Dallas Texans and then was traded to and played for Denver in 1960. A few other players have told me similar stories -- that an NFL team still held their rights. So, it probably was the same with the NFL/USFL. I know that the Rams traded Doug Flutie during the 86 season after picking him in the 85 draft. Irv Eatman played for KC after being drafted by them in 83 and playing in the USFL. And going way back (sorry -- remembering things as I'm typing) Elroy Hirsch played for the Rams after the AAFC Chicago Rockets for a few years. I'm guessing they likely still held his rights.

It is indeed murky, but typing all of this out, it seems as though NFL teams might hold rights if the player signs with another football league, but not if he chooses to not play football for a year. But I would start with the CBAs, rulebook, and bylaws to find out for sure. (Using the good ol' search tool).

GameBeforeTheMoney wrote:Yes, Jackson was draft eligible after a year had passed. The New York Times reported on that a few times leading up to the draft, including when the Broncos discussed trading for his rights in February -- when Tampa still held his rights.

Chances are the answers are outlined in the CBAs. Those likely spell everything out. A secondary source would be the official NFL rulebooks for those years, and maybe the NFL bylaws, but my first guess would be the CBAs. Kelly's draft was under the 1982 agreement, Cousineau's was under the 77 agreement. So maybe something had changed. The 77 agreement was the first after the Mackey Rule case -- so it's possible that there was some language in there for a contract offer from another NFL team. Just an educated guess.

Also, I know that in the 60s NFL teams retained draft rights -- the 49ers still held Goose Gonsoulin's rights in 1967 even though he first signed with the Dallas Texans and then was traded to and played for Denver in 1960. A few other players have told me similar stories -- that an NFL team still held their rights. So, it probably was the same with the NFL/USFL. I know that the Rams traded Doug Flutie during the 86 season after picking him in the 85 draft. Irv Eatman played for KC after being drafted by them in 83 and playing in the USFL. And going way back (sorry -- remembering things as I'm typing) Elroy Hirsch played for the Rams after the AAFC Chicago Rockets for a few years. I'm guessing they likely still held his rights.

It is indeed murky, but typing all of this out, it seems as though NFL teams might hold rights if the player signs with another football league, but not if he chooses to not play football for a year. But I would start with the CBAs, rulebook, and bylaws to find out for sure. (Using the good ol' search tool).

Even with the CBA information, I still think there is a large gap between the CBA language, how Rozelle interpreted the CBA language, and what actually happened. I can read the rules regarding the 1985 Supplemental Draft, but Rozelle's interpretation and what actually happened are three varying events. Getting back to the Cousineau situation, nothing about it makes sense, so I suspect there can't possibly be CBA language that is relevant to what actually happened. Oilers offer Cousineau $3.5M, Bills have opportunity to match offer, Bills evidently match the offer without Cousineau signing up to play for the Bills (which was the entire problem in the first place), Bills allowed to trade the rights to Cousineau to Cleveland for a stockpile of draft picks, Cousineau ends up with Browns.

So, in essence, the Browns traded a bunch of draft picks to save $1. If the Oilers were allowed to offer $3.5M, why did the Browns need to trade with the Bills? Wouldn't it have made more sense for the Browns to offer $3.5M + $1 to Cousineau? It doesn't make any sense, but it is perfectly in line with how Rozelle did things. It's like Rozelle proactively ended any type of bidding war for Cousineau. But what if Buffalo didn't ostensibly 'match' Houston's offer...would Cousineau have become an Oiler with the Bills receiving no compensation?

Here's a bit more info on the CBA that might help clarify it.

https://frontofficenfl.com/2018/03/13/t ... ee-agency/

"The Right of First Refusal and Compensation (1977-1988)

The settlement of the Mackey case led to a revision of the Rozelle Rule, with new forms of free agency restrictions in the 1977 collective bargaining agreement.

A free agent’s original team held the right of first refusal, enabling it to retain its player by matching any contract offer by another team. The original team was also entitled to draft choice compensation from the team signing its player. However, there was an actual structure, based on a player’s NFL experience and his new salary, which determined the number and caliber of draft picks to be awarded.

This allowed teams rights to its players that, contractually, no longer existed.

The 1982 collective bargaining agreement also still included the right of first refusal and draft pick compensation but adjusted draft compensation to align with multiple tiers of salaries."

So, reading above, I'm guessing that the Bills might have thought they could get more from Cleveland than in compensation.

GameBeforeTheMoney wrote:Here's a bit more info on the CBA that might help clarify it.

https://frontofficenfl.com/2018/03/13/t ... ee-agency/

"The Right of First Refusal and Compensation (1977-1988)

The settlement of the Mackey case led to a revision of the Rozelle Rule, with new forms of free agency restrictions in the 1977 collective bargaining agreement.

A free agent’s original team held the right of first refusal, enabling it to retain its player by matching any contract offer by another team. The original team was also entitled to draft choice compensation from the team signing its player. However, there was an actual structure, based on a player’s NFL experience and his new salary, which determined the number and caliber of draft picks to be awarded.

This allowed teams rights to its players that, contractually, no longer existed.

The 1982 collective bargaining agreement also still included the right of first refusal and draft pick compensation but adjusted draft compensation to align with multiple tiers of salaries."

So, reading above, I'm guessing that the Bills might have thought they could get more from Cleveland than in compensation.

This is helpful. Thanks for sharing!

Sure thing!

Happy to help.

Jim Kelly wrote in his 1992 autobiography that the Bills held his rights for 4 years from the day he was drafted. After the USFL folded, the Bills still held his NFL rights. The L.A. Raiders apparently wanted Kelly, but they couldn't draft him like they did Bo. They had to trade for his rights, and GM Bill Polian refused to budge.
Kelly had been reluctant to sign with Buffalo in 1983, and he wrote that he could have sat out the 1986 season and signed with any team in 1987. But in the summer of 1986, Kelly hadn't played football in over a year (his two USFL seasons were in the spring of 1984 and 1985.) He didn't want to sit out a 2nd year, so he began negotiations with Buffalo.
I don't know why, but the rules that applied to Kelly in the 1983 draft were very different than the rules that applied to Bo in the 1986 draft.

That's really interesting. It would be great if someone looked into that. On the surface, it seems like a team can hold the rights if a player is in another league and can hold his rights until he's not playing in that league. They only get (or at least got) a year to sign players they draft who don't sign with another league. Maybe that's why Kelly could have sat out a year and signed with anyone (or perhaps could have been re-drafted). Buffalo would have had a year to get things done and if they didn't, back to the draft pool he goes. Great story about Kelly either way and interesting that he originally didn't want to play in Buffalo.

GameBeforeTheMoney wrote:That's really interesting. It would be great if someone looked into that. On the surface, it seems like a team can hold the rights if a player is in another league and can hold his rights until he's not playing in that league. They only get (or at least got) a year to sign players they draft who don't sign with another league. Maybe that's why Kelly could have sat out a year and signed with anyone (or perhaps could have been re-drafted). Buffalo would have had a year to get things done and if they didn't, back to the draft pool he goes. Great story about Kelly either way and interesting that he originally didn't want to play in Buffalo.

Yea I remember watching that 1983 draft special (and reading subsequent articles on it) just how adamant Kelly was about wanting to go someplace warm and how truly upset he was that Buffalo drafted him. However he was supposedly resigned to signing there until that call was put through...all he needed was a slight glimmer of hope that he didn't have to play in Buffalo and he was off.

Leads me to believe if Kelly was under center for the Bills in 1983 (and with how things disintegrated in the following years with Kay Stephenson/Hank Bullough) I wonder if he would've even made it in Buffalo to the beginning of the Levy era. He really joined the Bills at just the right time in 1986. If he was forced to take this lumps between 1983-1986...who knows

GameBeforeTheMoney wrote:That's really interesting. It would be great if someone looked into that. On the surface, it seems like a team can hold the rights if a player is in another league and can hold his rights until he's not playing in that league. They only get (or at least got) a year to sign players they draft who don't sign with another league. Maybe that's why Kelly could have sat out a year and signed with anyone (or perhaps could have been re-drafted).

Maybe, and I don't know for sure, but Kelly (and co-author Vic Carucci) specifically wrote in Kelly's autobiography that Buffalo held his rights for 4 years, with no mention of the USFL impacting the length of time. My impression from reading the book was that the Bills would hold Kelly's rights for 4 years, regardless if he played in the USFL, or worked in a marketing company.