Re: Adrian Wilson Unsure About Future
posted at 2/1/2014 7:13 PM EST
In response to DeadAhead2's comment:
In response to mthurl's comment:
In response to Muzwell's comment:
In response to mthurl's comment:
The question was why we had 4 million in cap space opposed to Denver's 6.6, I think I answered that pretty well. Denver spent more, they added better players. We didn't spend as much and the players we brought in because they were cheaper, didn't work out, therefore we had to go out and sign more guys who won't be here next year either. It's kind of like a viscous little cycle. Thirteen teams spent more actual money than us, that's good with you, right? Yet our actual ticket prices are the highest in the NFL...it's good business, it sure is. See Kraft is smart, he knows what he is doing even if you don't. You sure you worked in business? Because if you did you'd realize it's no longer about winning around here - it was once, but those days are long gone...now I know you'll say you're just fine with that and it's all Brady's fault anyway, but I expect more than that.
Yesterday Kraft said he could go for it every year if he wanted to, no one is asking for that, but once in a while would be nice.
You love Brandon Lloyd - even compared his numbers to Jerry Rice (lol) - well why wasn't Lloyd here this year? Because he was too expensive! Do you think Lloyd could of helped this team? Honest question, do you? Because you've praised the guy for over a year. Now what would Lloyd of cost this team this year? We could of afforded him. And don't say we released him because he was a head case, it was reported we reached out to him after we cut him to come back at a lower number. It's always about the budget around here. Always. Patriot Place is expensive, have you seen that place? No you haven't. There is vacancy signs on the windows - Monday through Saturdays is a ghost town there - that place is a big reason why we are so concerned with budgets now.
The total money spent really doesn't matter. I understand you think Denver made better choices on where they spent, and that they have less dead money, $11.9 mil vs. $16.6 for the Pats. Good for them. But you sidestepped the question, what is "going for it"? How do you know if a team is going for it vs. a team that is not.
Regardless of how the money was spent (that's a separate discussion, which is ongoing at any given time on this board in about a dozen threads), the bottom line is the Pats spent all but $4 mil of their available pool of money and Denver spent all but $6.6 mil. But it's been said that Denver is going for it and the Pats are not. How does that work?
It would seem to me that having more dead money would mean you're spending plenty, just made some mistakes - but I don't care about that right now. I'm just trying to understand this notion of "going for it."
Going for it is when there are let's say three safeties available..a Dashon G., Steven Gregory and let's say a Pollard...and then you come away with Gregory instead of Goldson. Now you did this to save money - you did this because actual cash spent was something you wanted to keep at a certain level. Then over the course of three years you end up spending a second round pick on a safety, a third round pick on a safety and then sign another safety in free agency...all with the sole purpose of trying to find a better safety than the one you saved all that money on. In the end you may of saved yourself money, but then again you also had to waste resources to fill that need (when you have other needs as well). So going for "it" is signing Goldson (or someone) and paying that guy...spreading that money out...paying that bonus it would be needed to acquire such a player and spreading that bonus out along the length of that contract. The bonus is the real money - it's the cash spent - it's what gets good players to sign.
I could do another comparison with Jonathan Fanene and Red Bryant - we had Bryant sitting in front of Belichick, but Bryant wanted to be paid...hence a major factor in us NOT getting him and us signing Fanene. Going for "it" would be us paying that contract and spreading it out...us paying that bonus. Do things like this hurt our future? Yes. Does signing the wrong guys and having to waste second round picks on the same position over and over hurt us? Yes, even more.
Going for it is spending, it's the out of pocket money that really hits an owner's wallet. It's not the favorable contracts that land you subpar players who you can cut and not have to worry about a dime of that cash coming out of your actual pocket (dead money). That's going for it...again it's not something you do every year, but in my opinioin it would of been a good idea a few years ago (I thought it was warranted) and I think it's a great idea now. What's the down side? The player you acquire could suck here. The player you spend that money on may decline in performance and you are stuck with him and the bonus/contract you spread out through his deal...it could potentially hurt you at some point..it also could win you a Super Bowl (see Giants, Pittsburgh, Ravens). I can live with a 8-8 season while we suffer through a season of paying for a few bigger contracts/salary cap hell. I would gladly do that for another Super Bowl, hell yes! What is the worst that could happen? We don't win a Super Bowl (which we haven't done in a decade) and then we end up with a top 12 pick because of our poor record? That's bad? That's so scary? No it isn't, what is scary is our owner is dead set against going over the budget, that is scary because Brady is not a guy who comes along very often...neither is Belichick.
Goldson??! LOL! TB is in cap hell! They just fired their GM.
Do you drink moron juice daily? Oh my good grief. There is a reason why these players take the highest bid and go to the worst team possible that is vying for their services, and then those teams suck.
Goldson and this contract. Bawhah
You bash Meriweather for years in here and then wanted Goldson with this contract:
3/13/2013: Signed a five-year, $41.25 million contract. The deal contains $22 million guaranteed, including a first-year roster bonus of $4.5 million, Goldson's first- and second-year salaries, and a fully guaranteed 2014 roster bonus of $3 million. 2014: $6 million (+ $3 million roster bonus), 2015-2016: $7.5 million (+ $500,000 workout bonus), 2017: $6.75 million (+ $500,000 workout bonus)
They just fired everyone numb nuts, why do you think that is? Because they have no quarterback you moron! Are you telling me Goldson isn't a better safety than anyone we have here? Is that what you are telling me? Are you saying Gregory is a better player than Goldson? LOL! Bawahahaha!
Do you think it was better having Tavon Wilson, Adrain Wilson, Steven Gregory, and that kid from Rutgers over Goldson? You ever watch Goldson play? I guarantee dwarf Welker wouldn't be running around laying big hits on defensive backs if Goldson was out there. That's a guarantee, no doubt, money, death and taxes. It sooner or later takes good football players to win...guys that cost something. You wouldn't understand this as you like losing. You like praising average football players until they are shown the door (see Chung and many many others).
You don't understand football, that is clear. What a loser, Nissan Sentra driving fool you are.
And did you just compare Goldson to Merriweather? You magnificent idiot!! I get it! Merriweather>Goldson...according to our village idiot!