I thought for sure Seatle was in salary cap hell??

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from patsbandwagonsince76. Show patsbandwagonsince76's posts

    Re: I thought for sure Seatle was in salary cap hell??

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to patsbandwagonsince76's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    In response to TravisBean's comment:

     



    It doesn't really matter with their space is. I've already said this 100 times in here. The cap jumping doesn't mean the players on the market and the teams with specific needs all align perfectly to spend in that offseason. Seattle's team was already built. Why is this so difficult for people to grasp?



    who is this poster and why are you using my name in a derogatory manner?



    Can't have told us 100 time he has only 10 posts! A newbie.



    It's Rusty. 100 times is a gross underestimate. Unless he meant 100 times in an hour.



    yea , I know, just giving him trouble for having so few posts. If he didn;t get kicked off so many times he would have over 50K by now.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from stinkman. Show stinkman's posts

    Re: I thought for sure Seatle was in salary cap hell??

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to patsbandwagonsince76's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    In response to TravisBean's comment:

     



    It doesn't really matter with their space is. I've already said this 100 times in here. The cap jumping doesn't mean the players on the market and the teams with specific needs all align perfectly to spend in that offseason. Seattle's team was already built. Why is this so difficult for people to grasp?



    who is this poster and why are you using my name in a derogatory manner?



    Can't have told us 100 time he has only 10 posts! A newbie.



    It's Rusty. 100 times is a gross underestimate. Unless he meant 100 times in an hour.

     

     



    That sounds like rusty as well. I'm not the brightest bulb but I know that's him lol.. 

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from carawaydj. Show carawaydj's posts

    Re: I thought for sure Seatle was in salary cap hell??

    In response to sportsbozo1's comment:

    Drafted really well and are lucky that their QB is still on his rookie contract. When these guys come off their rookie contracts Seattle will have some serious problems.



    +2

    They will not keep all of their talent once their rookie contracts come up.  I'll take the Patriot way. 

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from patsbandwagonsince76. Show patsbandwagonsince76's posts

    Re: I thought for sure Seatle was in salary cap hell??

    In response to carawaydj's comment:

    In response to sportsbozo1's comment:

    Drafted really well and are lucky that their QB is still on his rookie contract. When these guys come off their rookie contracts Seattle will have some serious problems.



    +2

    They will not keep all of their talent once their rookie contracts come up.  I'll take the Patriot way. 



    Sherman has a serious inferiority complex about being the best CB in the league. He will need to paid better than any other CB when he comes up. Guarantee.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from patsbandwagonsince76. Show patsbandwagonsince76's posts

    Re: I thought for sure Seatle was in salary cap hell??

    In response to TravisBean's comment:

    In response to patsbandwagonsince76's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to patsbandwagonsince76's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    In response to TravisBean's comment:

     



    It doesn't really matter with their space is. I've already said this 100 times in here. The cap jumping doesn't mean the players on the market and the teams with specific needs all align perfectly to spend in that offseason. Seattle's team was already built. Why is this so difficult for people to grasp?



    who is this poster and why are you using my name in a derogatory manner?



    Can't have told us 100 time he has only 10 posts! A newbie.



    It's Rusty. 100 times is a gross underestimate. Unless he meant 100 times in an hour.



    yea , I know, just giving him trouble for having so few posts. If he didn;t get kicked off so many times he would have over 50K by now.




    Who cares how many posts someone has? Can anyone logically answer this?  I am dead serious.

    I remember over a decade ago when these boards first cropped up, if not 15 years ago, these silly post count thingies never existed.

    Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, etc...All stupid ego ridden platforms as are board that count posts.

    It's quality not quantity anyway.  TCal has 5000 moron posts that contain 3-5 words, for example. Do the math.

    lol



    Sorry, can't really take someone seriously who has just 11 posts.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: I thought for sure Seatle was in salary cap hell??

    In response to TravisBean's comment:

    In response to BostonTrollSpanker's comment:

    "Seattle will have some serious problems"

    Yes but they'll have a Super Bowl to show for it, who knows maybe more than one. Well worth it. In the last five years that's more than we can say. And we have serious problems of out own, see: Wilfork, Edelman, Talib - never mind getting better as we need to, just keeping up with the roster that got whipped in the AFC title game. 

    The true test of cap hell - are fans complaining? Doubt Seattle fans have any complaints. Granted a QB on a rookie contract who is that good is nice to have



    I would take Russell Wilson in the postseason and how he runs an offense over Tom Brady based on what I've seen from him.

    Truth.

    Wilson does not cost 14 million per year taking up a huge part of the payroll only to crap himself when it counts. Nope, that's not Wilson. That's been Brady for years and years.

    We have no rings mostly because Brady has sucked. Literally one starting TE or WR goes down, and he's useless looking like a lost puppy who has never played the QB position before.

    So, enough with this stupid, short bus riding premise that somehow, some way we are not right there with our team build because the Pats are. Period.

    When Brady wakes up for 3 straight postseason games, we can win a SB.  Simple.

    A winning QB isn't an inconsistent, mediocre or at times crappy QB, at ANY time in the postseason.  Ever!

     




    Oh, dopey rusty..  .When will you ever learn?  Maybe you need your eyes checked as well as your pea brain.   You can scream till the cows come home.  NOBODY listens to you because you are a dope. a know nothing and a liar.  Well, nobody except the Mods, that is.

    I'm sure they are getting ready to ban you again as we speak.  Pretty sad when your new alias only lasts a day.  BWAHAHA.  Go away! Your crap is beyond old but still stinks.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from 42AND46. Show 42AND46's posts

    Re: I thought for sure Seatle was in salary cap hell??

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    Two teams offered DE Michael Bennett more money but he opted to re-sign with SEA for 4 years, $28.5 million, including $10 million in 2014.



    no Rusty is in IQ Hell

    it's a knee jerk thing: whatever team just won the SB is immediately in bad cap shape regardless...that's Russ Cap Rule Number 1

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: I thought for sure Seatle was in salary cap hell??

    In response to JohnHannahrulz's comment:

    Plenty of great players (Chancellor, Sherman, Wilson) on rookie contracts dont' see how that makes them cap hell. Should be a force for the next 2-3 years provided nobody important gets injured. The personel could change if Sherman (12-14m per year), Chancellor (6-8m per year) Wilson (12=16m per year)all have to be signed. The Seahawks are the essence of a team that has drafted very well the past 4 years. Cutting Red Bryant is not cap hell if you inevitably have to sign the three aforementioned players. It's foresight.



    I agree, good post. They will feel real restrictions after next year when the cba allows for russel wilson to get a new contract, that with Sherman and Harvin both making over 13 million a year.

    The Seahawks draft picks, all 7 rounds are what separates them from other teams. While they've signed a few solid free agents, they have some real expensive mistakes too. 

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: I thought for sure Seatle was in salary cap hell??

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    It was widely reported that they let the older Bryant go to create space for a slightly younger Bennett. They had a plethora of good D linemen last year, so they are in good shape.  

    The idea that they are advantaged because of cheap players is a crock, by the way.  Last year, they had one guy with an 11 million cap hit, two with cap hits in the 9 millions, two with cap hits in the 8 millions, one in the 7s, one in the 6s, one in the 5s, and three in the 4s. 

    Pats had Brady at 13.8, Mankins and Wilfork in the 10s, Mayo in the 5s, and Talib in the 4s.  Everyone else on the Pats was in the 3s and below. 

    Seattle spent a lot more at the top of their roster than the Pats.  They can shed a few of those high priced guys as they get older to make room to sign the good young guys. 

    Be interesting to see what the Pats do.  



    Literally means nothing. 

    Let me throw in an arbitrary year for large cap hits...In 2014(you know, this year?) The Pats have 9 players with a cap hit over 4 million dollars, and 12 over 3.5 million.. There yoi have it, we go out and spend more on free agents then most teams. In 2010 we had 8 with over 4 million in cap hits and 2007 we had 7. Players salaries go up and down each season.

    And why the hell would having a bunch of cheap players making huge contributions for your team not be an advantage? Crock?

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from seawolfxs. Show seawolfxs's posts

    Re: I thought for sure Seatle was in salary cap hell??

    Seahags obviously the team of the moment, they hit on some great draft picks, they have some great cap advantages.

    We will see how they handle success, What happens if they get injuries,Wilson is still small, can get hurt in a heart beat on the run,  Can they maintain their position for another 5 yrs or more?

    They play in a tough division, they made some great comebacks, they didn't always play well on the road. Will the low draft picks still play well?  Wilson doesn't throw great down the middle. Percy is a difference maker, can he stay on the field, Will they keep their home field advantage?

    I am not saying they won't be there, but things can change on a dime, If I were the Seahags fans I would expect another SB. Can they hold under the pressure

    we shall see, 

    better they won than PM

     

    btw, see you are back rusty, with your trade Mark Brady mugging. no problem here, am glad you have broadened the blame on more than just brady. But I sure wish I had your ability to see and know the inside of his head. Wish I could do that!

    And I am always upset that I don't get to see the posts you get thrown off for, maybe next time? But what's the over/under ? Lol

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bustify. Show Bustify's posts

    Re: I thought for sure Seatle was in salary cap hell??

    I see Rusty is back to blaming Brady for everything and ignoring draft busts like Tavon Wilson, Ras-I Dowling, and others. Ugh.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: I thought for sure Seatle was in salary cap hell??

    I tried to warn!

    This is what happens when you spend big and end up in salary cap hell, you win nothing and lose everything...oh wait a second....

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from seawolfxs. Show seawolfxs's posts

    Re: I thought for sure Seatle was in salary cap hell??

    In response to TravisBean's comment:

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:

    Seahags obviously the team of the moment, they hit on some great draft picks, they have some great cap advantages.

    We will see how they handle success, What happens if they get injuries,Wilson is still small, can get hurt in a heart beat on the run,  Can they maintain their position for another 5 yrs or more?

    They play in a tough division, they made some great comebacks, they didn't always play well on the road. Will the low draft picks still play well?  Wilson doesn't throw great down the middle. Percy is a difference maker, can he stay on the field, Will they keep their home field advantage?

    I am not saying they won't be there, but things can change on a dime, If I were the Seahags fans I would expect another SB. Can they hold under the pressure

    we shall see, 

    better they won than PM

     

    btw, see you are back rusty, with your trade Mark Brady mugging. no problem here, am glad you have broadened the blame on more than just brady. But I sure wish I had your ability to see and know the inside of his head. Wish I could do that!

    And I am always upset that I don't get to see the posts you get thrown off for, maybe next time? But what's the over/under ? Lol



    It's the truth.  When Brady wakes up in January, we can win a SB.  It's beyond arrogant to hold everyone else 's feet to the fire on the team and not Brady when Brady is the tea's best player and most important in an QB/offensive era.

    If anyone should shoulder most of the blame, it's him.  It's been going on for years. Before Mayo, McCourty, Nink or Arrington, you name it.

    Mankins and Brady have been cupcaking through regular seasons and then just not performing to their level of capability for the 3 games needed to win a SB.

    SOme others can step up for sure, but they do not escape accountability.

    Seattle won with a great D and a great, balanced offense, led by Wilson.  There was really no one on their offense that scared you.  It's HOW their offense was run and executed by their leader under Center.

    Did you see Wilson in the shotgun a lot in the postseason? Nope. Nor did I.

    Brady. It will come down to Brady just like it will for Manning. If they aren't very good, their teams will lose.

     



    Never said u didn't have a point to a degree

    but you couldn't take McHale away from Larry, and tell Larry to go out and win the championship anyway,

    Similarly with Brady and Gronk. you cannot take away the one truly elite player and tell the other halfbhe should get the same results as if he were there

    and TB showed no problem not passing against the colts, they came out against the donkeys and showed no ability to run, and both teams seemed to know it

    And as well as the Oline played against the colts, they sux against the broncos, and that  includes Mankins, The donkeys D was talking afterwards that they had no problem over powering the pats Oline. the Pats had no chance at running. 

    in that case, TB had to be perfect, he wasn't as he missed that first long one. But that was it, 

    Missing one play in the beginning of the game is not the reason they lost

    And still i don't know anyone who thought the Pats "should" win when Talib went out. Yes Seattle won with great D, But with all the injuries , who is saying they should play as well as the top teams Ds? And they didn't.

     

    so, for sure, you can call it your way, I don't see it.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: I thought for sure Seatle was in salary cap hell??

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    It was widely reported that they let the older Bryant go to create space for a slightly younger Bennett. They had a plethora of good D linemen last year, so they are in good shape.  

    The idea that they are advantaged because of cheap players is a crock, by the way.  Last year, they had one guy with an 11 million cap hit, two with cap hits in the 9 millions, two with cap hits in the 8 millions, one in the 7s, one in the 6s, one in the 5s, and three in the 4s. 

    Pats had Brady at 13.8, Mankins and Wilfork in the 10s, Mayo in the 5s, and Talib in the 4s.  Everyone else on the Pats was in the 3s and below. 

    Seattle spent a lot more at the top of their roster than the Pats.  They can shed a few of those high priced guys as they get older to make room to sign the good young guys. 

    Be interesting to see what the Pats do.  



    Literally means nothing. 

    Let me throw in an arbitrary year for large cap hits...In 2014(you know, this year?) The Pats have 9 players with a cap hit over 4 million dollars, and 12 over 3.5 million.. There yoi have it, we go out and spend more on free agents then most teams. In 2010 we had 8 with over 4 million in cap hits and 2007 we had 7. Players salaries go up and down each season.

    And why the hell would having a bunch of cheap players making huge contributions for your team not be an advantage? Crock?



    Hah . . . right now for 2014 Pats top cap hits are:

    Brady-14.8

    Wilfork--11.6

    Mankins-10.5

    Mayo-7.3

    Gronk-5.4

    McCourty-5.1

    Amendola-4.6

    Connolly-4.1 

    That's eight, not nine . . . and half of them have leg injuries of one sort or another.  

    The "ninth" ain't on the team anymore . . . he's sitting in jail, leaving the Pats with $7.5 million in dead money. 

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: I thought for sure Seatle was in salary cap hell??

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    It was widely reported that they let the older Bryant go to create space for a slightly younger Bennett. They had a plethora of good D linemen last year, so they are in good shape.  

    The idea that they are advantaged because of cheap players is a crock, by the way.  Last year, they had one guy with an 11 million cap hit, two with cap hits in the 9 millions, two with cap hits in the 8 millions, one in the 7s, one in the 6s, one in the 5s, and three in the 4s. 

    Pats had Brady at 13.8, Mankins and Wilfork in the 10s, Mayo in the 5s, and Talib in the 4s.  Everyone else on the Pats was in the 3s and below. 

    Seattle spent a lot more at the top of their roster than the Pats.  They can shed a few of those high priced guys as they get older to make room to sign the good young guys. 

    Be interesting to see what the Pats do.  



    Literally means nothing. 

    Let me throw in an arbitrary year for large cap hits...In 2014(you know, this year?) The Pats have 9 players with a cap hit over 4 million dollars, and 12 over 3.5 million.. There yoi have it, we go out and spend more on free agents then most teams. In 2010 we had 8 with over 4 million in cap hits and 2007 we had 7. Players salaries go up and down each season.

    And why the hell would having a bunch of cheap players making huge contributions for your team not be an advantage? Crock?



    Hah . . . right now for 2014 Pats top cap hits are:

    Brady-14.8

    Wilfork--11.6

    Mankins-10.5

    Mayo-7.3

    Gronk-5.4

    McCourty-5.1

    Amendola-4.6

    Connolly-4.1 

    That's eight, not nine . . . and half of them have leg injuries of one sort or another.  

    The "ninth" ain't on the team anymore . . . he's sitting in jail, leaving the Pats with $7.5 million in dead money. 

     



    So how many players did the pats invest over 4 million dollars to the cap to in 2014? Right 9, Ohhhhh, now it was the wrong players. Seattle invested in all the right ones though. Even though zac miller, Clemons,  and rice had almost 30 million in cap hits last year and didn't do s- - t.

    You are like pats eng in that you have a double standard for your own team.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from 42AND46. Show 42AND46's posts

    Re: I thought for sure Seatle was in salary cap hell??

    In response to TravisBean's comment:

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    Two teams offered DE Michael Bennett more money but he opted to re-sign with SEA for 4 years, $28.5 million, including $10 million in 2014.



    no Rusty is in IQ Hell

    it's a knee jerk thing: whatever team just won the SB is immediately in bad cap shape regardless...that's Russ Cap Rule Number 1



    Here is a fact for you:

    No one ever said Seattle was in a cap hell so RKrap is a liar. A liar.

    YOUR team is in a cap hell, however, got old QUICK and will be years from any kind of a legit SB run. YEARS.

    Baas released. Snee takes a paycut, ELi and Cruz wildly overpaid, Osi gone from last year and now Tuck and Nicks.

    Cap hell - NY GIants




    zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: I thought for sure Seatle was in salary cap hell??

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    It was widely reported that they let the older Bryant go to create space for a slightly younger Bennett. They had a plethora of good D linemen last year, so they are in good shape.  

    The idea that they are advantaged because of cheap players is a crock, by the way.  Last year, they had one guy with an 11 million cap hit, two with cap hits in the 9 millions, two with cap hits in the 8 millions, one in the 7s, one in the 6s, one in the 5s, and three in the 4s. 

    Pats had Brady at 13.8, Mankins and Wilfork in the 10s, Mayo in the 5s, and Talib in the 4s.  Everyone else on the Pats was in the 3s and below. 

    Seattle spent a lot more at the top of their roster than the Pats.  They can shed a few of those high priced guys as they get older to make room to sign the good young guys. 

    Be interesting to see what the Pats do.  



    Literally means nothing. 

    Let me throw in an arbitrary year for large cap hits...In 2014(you know, this year?) The Pats have 9 players with a cap hit over 4 million dollars, and 12 over 3.5 million.. There yoi have it, we go out and spend more on free agents then most teams. In 2010 we had 8 with over 4 million in cap hits and 2007 we had 7. Players salaries go up and down each season.

    And why the hell would having a bunch of cheap players making huge contributions for your team not be an advantage? Crock?



    Hah . . . right now for 2014 Pats top cap hits are:

    Brady-14.8

    Wilfork--11.6

    Mankins-10.5

    Mayo-7.3

    Gronk-5.4

    McCourty-5.1

    Amendola-4.6

    Connolly-4.1 

    That's eight, not nine . . . and half of them have leg injuries of one sort or another.  

    The "ninth" ain't on the team anymore . . . he's sitting in jail, leaving the Pats with $7.5 million in dead money. 

     



    So how many players did the pats invest over 4 million dollars to the cap to in 2014? Right 9, Ohhhhh, now it was the wrong players. Seattle invested in all the right ones though. Even though zac miller, Clemons,  and rice had almost 30 million in cap hits last year and didn't do s- - t.

    You are like pats eng in that you have a double standard for your own team.



    Why do you keep saying Chris Clemons was bad?  He was coming off an ACL injury, so he started slow last year, but he was a significant contributor by end of season.  He was actually very good pressuring Manning in the Super Bowl, and he was averaging more than 10 sacks a season in Seattle before last year when the injury slowed him.  

    Fact is, Seattle had a pass rush because they invested in pass rushers . . . 

     

    NEWARK, N.J. - There are good trades and there are bad trades, and the Chris Clemons deal with the Eagles was a good one for the Seahawks.

    "You win some," Seahawks general manager John Schneider said, "you lose some."

    Clemons has notched 38 sacks in four seasons since the Eagles dealt the pass rusher to Seattle, along with a fourth-round draft pick, for defensive end Darryl Tapp. In his previous five seasons in the NFL - two in Philadelphia - he had 20 sacks.

    Clemons said the increase in sacks and overall production - he does more than just take down quarterbacks - was mostly because of the opportunity that Seahawks coach Pete Carroll gave him.

    "When I first got to Seattle, Pete gave me an opportunity, not only to play but to start," Clemons said Tuesday at Super Bowl media day. "That wasn't an opportunity I had in Philadelphia. They already had their guys set in place and we knew coming in that I was going to be a role player and I was really going to work on third down and special teams.

    "When I got to Seattle, Pete changed all that."

    The Seahawks had a specific role in mind when they dealt for Clemons. Carroll's scheme utilized a hybrid front and his weakside outside linebacker - called the "Leo" - is mostly an edge pass rusher.

    Clemons was a reserve defensive end with the Eagles. When they signed him to a five-year contract before the 2008 season, defensive coordinator Jim Johnson envisioned using him in various ways.

    In his first season with the Eagles, he recorded four sacks, forced a fumble and returned a fumble 73 yards for a touchdown. But when Johnson died and Sean McDermott replaced him, Clemons' role decreased. He did finish 2009 with four sacks.

    But McDermott saw no place for Clemons on his 2010 defense and in March the Eagles unloaded him to Seattle.

    "I wasn't frustrated while I was in Philadelphia," said Clemons, 32. "It was a great atmosphere. Andy Reid was a great coach."

    The Eagles have been criticized because of the deal, especially after Clemons recorded 11 sacks in 2010. But sometimes players fit better in different schemes.

    Clemons followed up 2010 with another 11 sacks in 2011 and 111/2 in 2012. He tore the anterior cruciate ligament in his knee during the 2012 playoffs, though, and had his playing time trimmed this season.

    He still starts, though, and finished the season with 41/2 sacks in part-time duty. Clemons said he hopes to get to Broncos quarterback Peyton Manning, the least-sacked quarterback in the NFL, in Sunday's game.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from garytx. Show garytx's posts

    Re: I thought for sure Seatle was in salary cap hell??

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

    In response to TravisBean's comment:

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    Two teams offered DE Michael Bennett more money but he opted to re-sign with SEA for 4 years, $28.5 million, including $10 million in 2014.



    no Rusty is in IQ Hell

    it's a knee jerk thing: whatever team just won the SB is immediately in bad cap shape regardless...that's Russ Cap Rule Number 1



    Here is a fact for you:

    No one ever said Seattle was in a cap hell so RKrap is a liar. A liar.

    YOUR team is in a cap hell, however, got old QUICK and will be years from any kind of a legit SB run. YEARS.

    Baas released. Snee takes a paycut, ELi and Cruz wildly overpaid, Osi gone from last year and now Tuck and Nicks.

    Cap hell - NY GIants




    zzzzzzzzzzzzzz



    At one time the NY Giants might have been a cap hell but no longer.  I would like some insight to some rumors on FA for the Giants.   To my thinking they should have plenty of room under the cap.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from garytx. Show garytx's posts

    Re: I thought for sure Seatle was in salary cap hell??

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    Two teams offered DE Michael Bennett more money but he opted to re-sign with SEA for 4 years, $28.5 million, including $10 million in 2014.



    Who said this?  Probably in the future but not today.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: I thought for sure Seatle was in salary cap hell??

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    It was widely reported that they let the older Bryant go to create space for a slightly younger Bennett. They had a plethora of good D linemen last year, so they are in good shape.  

    The idea that they are advantaged because of cheap players is a crock, by the way.  Last year, they had one guy with an 11 million cap hit, two with cap hits in the 9 millions, two with cap hits in the 8 millions, one in the 7s, one in the 6s, one in the 5s, and three in the 4s. 

    Pats had Brady at 13.8, Mankins and Wilfork in the 10s, Mayo in the 5s, and Talib in the 4s.  Everyone else on the Pats was in the 3s and below. 

    Seattle spent a lot more at the top of their roster than the Pats.  They can shed a few of those high priced guys as they get older to make room to sign the good young guys. 

    Be interesting to see what the Pats do.  



    Literally means nothing. 

    Let me throw in an arbitrary year for large cap hits...In 2014(you know, this year?) The Pats have 9 players with a cap hit over 4 million dollars, and 12 over 3.5 million.. There yoi have it, we go out and spend more on free agents then most teams. In 2010 we had 8 with over 4 million in cap hits and 2007 we had 7. Players salaries go up and down each season.

    And why the hell would having a bunch of cheap players making huge contributions for your team not be an advantage? Crock?



    Hah . . . right now for 2014 Pats top cap hits are:

    Brady-14.8

    Wilfork--11.6

    Mankins-10.5

    Mayo-7.3

    Gronk-5.4

    McCourty-5.1

    Amendola-4.6

    Connolly-4.1 

    That's eight, not nine . . . and half of them have leg injuries of one sort or another.  

    The "ninth" ain't on the team anymore . . . he's sitting in jail, leaving the Pats with $7.5 million in dead money. 

     



    So how many players did the pats invest over 4 million dollars to the cap to in 2014? Right 9, Ohhhhh, now it was the wrong players. Seattle invested in all the right ones though. Even though zac miller, Clemons,  and rice had almost 30 million in cap hits last year and didn't do s- - t.

    You are like pats eng in that you have a double standard for your own team.



    Why do you keep saying Chris Clemons was bad?  He was coming off an ACL injury, so he started slow last year, but he was a significant contributor by end of season.  He was actually very good pressuring Manning in the Super Bowl, and he was averaging more than 10 sacks a season in Seattle before last year when the injury slowed him.  

    Fact is, Seattle had a pass rush because they invested in pass rushers . . . 

     

    NEWARK, N.J. - There are good trades and there are bad trades, and the Chris Clemons deal with the Eagles was a good one for the Seahawks.

    "You win some," Seahawks general manager John Schneider said, "you lose some."

    Clemons has notched 38 sacks in four seasons since the Eagles dealt the pass rusher to Seattle, along with a fourth-round draft pick, for defensive end Darryl Tapp. In his previous five seasons in the NFL - two in Philadelphia - he had 20 sacks.

    Clemons said the increase in sacks and overall production - he does more than just take down quarterbacks - was mostly because of the opportunity that Seahawks coach Pete Carroll gave him.

    "When I first got to Seattle, Pete gave me an opportunity, not only to play but to start," Clemons said Tuesday at Super Bowl media day. "That wasn't an opportunity I had in Philadelphia. They already had their guys set in place and we knew coming in that I was going to be a role player and I was really going to work on third down and special teams.

    "When I got to Seattle, Pete changed all that."

    The Seahawks had a specific role in mind when they dealt for Clemons. Carroll's scheme utilized a hybrid front and his weakside outside linebacker - called the "Leo" - is mostly an edge pass rusher.

    Clemons was a reserve defensive end with the Eagles. When they signed him to a five-year contract before the 2008 season, defensive coordinator Jim Johnson envisioned using him in various ways.

    In his first season with the Eagles, he recorded four sacks, forced a fumble and returned a fumble 73 yards for a touchdown. But when Johnson died and Sean McDermott replaced him, Clemons' role decreased. He did finish 2009 with four sacks.

    But McDermott saw no place for Clemons on his 2010 defense and in March the Eagles unloaded him to Seattle.

    "I wasn't frustrated while I was in Philadelphia," said Clemons, 32. "It was a great atmosphere. Andy Reid was a great coach."

    The Eagles have been criticized because of the deal, especially after Clemons recorded 11 sacks in 2010. But sometimes players fit better in different schemes.

    Clemons followed up 2010 with another 11 sacks in 2011 and 111/2 in 2012. He tore the anterior cruciate ligament in his knee during the 2012 playoffs, though, and had his playing time trimmed this season.

    He still starts, though, and finished the season with 41/2 sacks in part-time duty. Clemons said he hopes to get to Broncos quarterback Peyton Manning, the least-sacked quarterback in the NFL, in Sunday's game.



    He had twenty tackles and 4 sacks for 8 million dollars. Imagine the back lash by you guys if BB paid him 8 million for that...

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: I thought for sure Seatle was in salary cap hell??

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    It was widely reported that they let the older Bryant go to create space for a slightly younger Bennett. They had a plethora of good D linemen last year, so they are in good shape.  

    The idea that they are advantaged because of cheap players is a crock, by the way.  Last year, they had one guy with an 11 million cap hit, two with cap hits in the 9 millions, two with cap hits in the 8 millions, one in the 7s, one in the 6s, one in the 5s, and three in the 4s. 

    Pats had Brady at 13.8, Mankins and Wilfork in the 10s, Mayo in the 5s, and Talib in the 4s.  Everyone else on the Pats was in the 3s and below. 

    Seattle spent a lot more at the top of their roster than the Pats.  They can shed a few of those high priced guys as they get older to make room to sign the good young guys. 

    Be interesting to see what the Pats do.  



    Literally means nothing. 

    Let me throw in an arbitrary year for large cap hits...In 2014(you know, this year?) The Pats have 9 players with a cap hit over 4 million dollars, and 12 over 3.5 million.. There yoi have it, we go out and spend more on free agents then most teams. In 2010 we had 8 with over 4 million in cap hits and 2007 we had 7. Players salaries go up and down each season.

    And why the hell would having a bunch of cheap players making huge contributions for your team not be an advantage? Crock?



    Hah . . . right now for 2014 Pats top cap hits are:

    Brady-14.8

    Wilfork--11.6

    Mankins-10.5

    Mayo-7.3

    Gronk-5.4

    McCourty-5.1

    Amendola-4.6

    Connolly-4.1 

    That's eight, not nine . . . and half of them have leg injuries of one sort or another.  

    The "ninth" ain't on the team anymore . . . he's sitting in jail, leaving the Pats with $7.5 million in dead money. 

     



    So how many players did the pats invest over 4 million dollars to the cap to in 2014? Right 9, Ohhhhh, now it was the wrong players. Seattle invested in all the right ones though. Even though zac miller, Clemons,  and rice had almost 30 million in cap hits last year and didn't do s- - t.

    You are like pats eng in that you have a double standard for your own team.



    Why do you keep saying Chris Clemons was bad?  He was coming off an ACL injury, so he started slow last year, but he was a significant contributor by end of season.  He was actually very good pressuring Manning in the Super Bowl, and he was averaging more than 10 sacks a season in Seattle before last year when the injury slowed him.  

    Fact is, Seattle had a pass rush because they invested in pass rushers . . . 

     

    NEWARK, N.J. - There are good trades and there are bad trades, and the Chris Clemons deal with the Eagles was a good one for the Seahawks.

    "You win some," Seahawks general manager John Schneider said, "you lose some."

    Clemons has notched 38 sacks in four seasons since the Eagles dealt the pass rusher to Seattle, along with a fourth-round draft pick, for defensive end Darryl Tapp. In his previous five seasons in the NFL - two in Philadelphia - he had 20 sacks.

    Clemons said the increase in sacks and overall production - he does more than just take down quarterbacks - was mostly because of the opportunity that Seahawks coach Pete Carroll gave him.

    "When I first got to Seattle, Pete gave me an opportunity, not only to play but to start," Clemons said Tuesday at Super Bowl media day. "That wasn't an opportunity I had in Philadelphia. They already had their guys set in place and we knew coming in that I was going to be a role player and I was really going to work on third down and special teams.

    "When I got to Seattle, Pete changed all that."

    The Seahawks had a specific role in mind when they dealt for Clemons. Carroll's scheme utilized a hybrid front and his weakside outside linebacker - called the "Leo" - is mostly an edge pass rusher.

    Clemons was a reserve defensive end with the Eagles. When they signed him to a five-year contract before the 2008 season, defensive coordinator Jim Johnson envisioned using him in various ways.

    In his first season with the Eagles, he recorded four sacks, forced a fumble and returned a fumble 73 yards for a touchdown. But when Johnson died and Sean McDermott replaced him, Clemons' role decreased. He did finish 2009 with four sacks.

    But McDermott saw no place for Clemons on his 2010 defense and in March the Eagles unloaded him to Seattle.

    "I wasn't frustrated while I was in Philadelphia," said Clemons, 32. "It was a great atmosphere. Andy Reid was a great coach."

    The Eagles have been criticized because of the deal, especially after Clemons recorded 11 sacks in 2010. But sometimes players fit better in different schemes.

    Clemons followed up 2010 with another 11 sacks in 2011 and 111/2 in 2012. He tore the anterior cruciate ligament in his knee during the 2012 playoffs, though, and had his playing time trimmed this season.

    He still starts, though, and finished the season with 41/2 sacks in part-time duty. Clemons said he hopes to get to Broncos quarterback Peyton Manning, the least-sacked quarterback in the NFL, in Sunday's game.



    He had twenty tackles and 4 sacks for 8 million dollars. Imagine the back lash by you guys if BB paid him 8 million for that...



    If he got as much pressure on Manning for the Pats in the AFC Championship game as he did for Seattle in the Super Bowl he would have been worth it. 

    Avril and Clemons were a big part of that dominating win.  

    And why are you criticizing the Clemons signing just because he was coming off an ACL injury in 2013 and wasn't at 100% early in the season? If you're going to apply that standard then Wilfork and Kelly are busts too. The reality is that Clemons was an 11 sack guy three seasons in a row for Seattle, with roughly 50 tackles per season, 2 or 3 forced fumbles, and 4 or 5 passes defensed.  You obviously don't watch Seattle play much if you think Clemons was a bad player. 

     

     

     

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from 42AND46. Show 42AND46's posts

    Re: I thought for sure Seatle was in salary cap hell??

    In response to garytx's comment:

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

    In response to TravisBean's comment:

    In response to 42AND46's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    Two teams offered DE Michael Bennett more money but he opted to re-sign with SEA for 4 years, $28.5 million, including $10 million in 2014.



    no Rusty is in IQ Hell

    it's a knee jerk thing: whatever team just won the SB is immediately in bad cap shape regardless...that's Russ Cap Rule Number 1



    Here is a fact for you:

    No one ever said Seattle was in a cap hell so RKrap is a liar. A liar.

    YOUR team is in a cap hell, however, got old QUICK and will be years from any kind of a legit SB run. YEARS.

    Baas released. Snee takes a paycut, ELi and Cruz wildly overpaid, Osi gone from last year and now Tuck and Nicks.

    Cap hell - NY GIants




    zzzzzzzzzzzzzz



    At one time the NY Giants might have been a cap hell but no longer.  I would like some insight to some rumors on FA for the Giants.   To my thinking they should have plenty of room under the cap.




    Giants cap was never unworkable and was at worst tight but nothing that would hamper them to any great degree...now they have some breathing room so will be interesting off season for both our teams...the Giants last two subpar seasons had little to nothing to do with their cap despite what some fanatic might think

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from stillgridlocked. Show stillgridlocked's posts

    Re: I thought for sure Seatle was in salary cap hell??

    Seattle had $4.8 million in cap space before free agency. Some players have left so they have about $14 million to spend now not including Bennet.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share