There is currently a waiting game going on with the 2nd round picks drafted this year. The basics of the hold up center on one team going over expected slot with the guaranteed salary and the presence of a QB in the round that could help the other players earn higher guarantees. Each year the guaranteed percentages usually get higher but the expectation was that the top pick would gain the full guarantee and the 2nd would probably be at 95% or so. Here were last year’s numbers and how they compared to the prior season.
| Pick | 2023 Pct Guar | 2024 Pct Guar% | Change |
| 33 | 93.6% | 95.7% | 2.1% |
| 34 | 91.5% | 91.9% | 0.4% |
| 35 | 82.7% | 88.1% | 5.4% |
| 36 | 81.6% | 86.4% | 4.8% |
| 37 | 80.4% | 84.7% | 4.3% |
| 38 | 79.2% | 83.0% | 3.7% |
| 39 | 78.1% | 81.2% | 3.1% |
| 40 | 77.9% | 80.5% | 2.6% |
| 41 | 77.9% | 79.5% | 1.6% |
| 42 | 77.1% | 78.7% | 1.6% |
| 43 | 76.0% | 78.0% | 2.0% |
| 44 | 74.9% | 77.3% | 2.4% |
| 45 | 73.8% | 76.4% | 2.6% |
| 46 | 72.9% | 74.1% | 1.2% |
| 47 | 70.1% | 72.6% | 2.5% |
| 48 | 68.3% | 71.1% | 2.8% |
| 49 | 66.9% | 69.7% | 2.8% |
| 50 | 61.6% | 68.3% | 6.6% |
| 51 | 58.4% | 66.8% | 8.4% |
| 52 | 56.4% | 65.2% | 8.8% |
| 53 | 55.9% | 63.6% | 7.7% |
| 54 | 55.5% | 61.9% | 6.5% |
| 55 | 55.0% | 60.2% | 5.3% |
| 56 | 54.4% | 58.7% | 4.3% |
| 57 | 54.2% | 57.3% | 3.1% |
| 58 | 54.0% | 55.7% | 1.7% |
| 59 | 53.7% | 54.0% | 0.3% |
| 60 | 53.3% | 53.0% | -0.3% |
| 61 | 53.2% | 52.8% | -0.4% |
| 62 | 52.9% | 52.6% | -0.3% |
| 63 | 52.7% | 52.5% | -0.2% |
| 64 | 52.7% | 52.4% | -0.3% |
Odds are strongly against the entire round getting a 100% guarantee but if the top 5 can get there it will help the others grow at a quicker than expected rate.
The question is how much should the teams fight this? Based on historical data it is understandable why there may be some consideration given to the holding off on future guaranteed years. Here is the year by year breakdown of how long players remained with their original team who were drafted in round 2 from 2015 through 2022.
| YEAR | 4+ Years | 3+ Years | 2+ Years | 1+ Years |
| 2015 | 40.6% | 81.3% | 93.8% | 100.0% |
| 2016 | 37.5% | 71.9% | 93.8% | 100.0% |
| 2017 | 65.6% | 81.3% | 93.8% | 100.0% |
| 2018 | 68.8% | 78.1% | 93.8% | 100.0% |
| 2019 | 59.4% | 93.8% | 100.0% | 100.0% |
| 2020 | 68.8% | 87.5% | 100.0% | 100.0% |
| 2021 | 78.1% | 90.6% | 100.0% | 100.0% |
| 2022 | 78.1% | 90.6% | 100.0% | 100.0% |
Looking at the numbers you can see why this is a somewhat meaningful fight. Two years is a virtual guarantee for the 2nd rounders but the numbers do drop at three years and fall drastically at 4 years. My assumption is that over time the NFL would concede at a three year guarantee but would be more hesitant to get deep into those 4th year guarantees especially as the round progresses.
From a practical standpoint the players near the top of the round have the highest probability of lasting which is why the Texans just did what they needed to do to get their player signed quickly rather than haggling over 5% of the contract value since 100% vs 95% is the same thing. The issue is more about teams thinking about the figures raising the thresholds towards the bottom where teams want more flexibility to release players deeper into the contract.
Overall I think the union would be better served putting more and more energy into formulating a plan to reduce the length of rookie contracts so those who deserve big raises get it quickly but that battle is a few years away when the new CBA comes up. They can certainly try to chip away at things here but at some point those near the bottom of the round are going to lose their leverage and likely have to move into camp if the top part of the round doesn’t start moving the needle for everyone. It is probably more important for those players to get practicing than trying to add a few extra guarantees to their third year salaries.