Re: Absolutely Priceless
posted at 3/10/2013 9:33 AM EDT
In response to wozzy's comment:
In response to pezz4pats' comment:
I'm concerned that 3 of them would take most of the available cap to sign or replace (with = or better talent) and that 15 others also need to be signed or replaced, yes.
That cap space is not free money to do with what ever they want. It has to replace or re-sign 1/3rd of the team for criss sakes. ( not to mention, hopefully IMPROVE it)
Do you not understand that?
Do you not understand that teams with less cap don't have to replace 1/3rd of their team?
When you finally grasp that, get back to me. K?
Where in the rule book does it state that the Pats can't cut players and free up more space?
You do realize that these cap numbers are fluid and that having room to maneuver is really the ideal situation?
So how does being one game from the Super Bowl and having some of the best cap flexibility in the NFL = bad?
When you finally grasp that... oh, never mind.
I guess it's right up there with the offense not scoring being the defense's fault, PER being more important than actually scoring, up being down, left being right and other Orwellian nonsense.
Never said there cap management approach was bad, just that they need to do a little better buying groceries with all that $$$$.
Whether you want to admit it or not, the constant flux of the same type of player given contracts, only to be replaced year after year is hurting the space and in turn, the team.
All these misfires that are a result of replacing the same player over and over, cost money.
That's money that could be used to get a better quality player. Rather than replacing the same guy (or handful of guys) repeatedly, why not get someone that can contribute for 3-4 yrs. Not only is it causing a dept problem, it causing a starter problem.
I know the Pats don't over pay, mostly, but the carasal of DB's, resulting in the 31st ranked D is a problem and has been since at least 2008.
Also my point about their available cap is valid. They cannot resign their legit starters. Replacing them on the cheap is not likely going to provide optimum results, as we've already witnessed for the past 5 years with the revolving door of safeties and CB's to replace two legit starters. We are still waiting for some sense of stability back there.
We are still waiting for someone to rush the passer and haven't had a true #1 receiver since Moss.. .. Sometimes you gotta spend a little money. Basically, you get what you pay for. You can't keep putting Delta O"Neils or Wheatlies in the back field and expect different results.
Yes, the team has remained competitive but I can tell you without reservation, that it's not because of that 31st ranked D. Like I said, which NFL QB has brought a 31st ranked D to the SB before? There's those darn crickets again.
18M to replace 1/3rd your team is not a lot of money. Yes I know it's fluid..Thanks TB.
Miami has 45M to replace 12 FA's. That leaves a whole lot more money to improve their team. That's 20M MORE to replace or resign 6 LESS players. That's being in great shape and if used correctly, they should improve. NOTE: used correctly!
Their problem is not cap hel1, but QB hel1 and even that may improve with a little time.
My point is that without last years DEAD MONEY, that figure would have been 40M for the Pats to spend or at the very least, if spent last year to improve the team instead of hurting it, possibly could have resulted in better players (that also don't have to be replaced AGAIN this year) and better results.