Re: Patriots Dead Money
posted at 2/12/2014 12:11 PM EST
In response to TrueChamp's comment:
But what if the evidence suggests that your business actually suffers at a greater expense when you go after"top rated, safer, expensive" recruits who didn't fit your unique company motto of putting the team before the employee?
What if your company became the leader in the industry and hit a higher profit margin then all competitors by living the philosphy of building around a core of employess that was developed from the top and then adding "value" employees all around them? Can that company's business model possibly be condemned?
And what is "high risk" exactly. I think each of our own opinion on high risk is causing this debate to carry on. The very point of signing "value players" is to minimize the risk/impact on the organization. You are committing a small portion of your budget to a few guys in order to find the best addition.
Going all out on unproven "big shots/top rated FA's" is way more of a high risk. Consider that 19 muliti year deals were given out in 2011 and 10 of them were released before this off season, and a few more will come soon. We see that over half of these big deals don't work, and in our case the only "high priced contracts" given out is to the players developed in our own system....Brady, VW, Seymour, Light, Mankins, Mayo, Nink, Ty Warren, Bruschi, etc.... and as I showed earier when we give out the big contracts to players from other teams we have seen the most problems...Adalius the prized FA given 35 million and washed out.Dillion(3 year big extension after his epic 2004 season and he got fat off the cash, literaly) Moss? One great year and then another guy we didn't commit hurt us, Stalworth, the prized FA given a 6 year deal and cut, Colvin, the prized FA hurt his 2nd game and was never the same player.
The risk is signing guys who were never coached by a very difficult man to be coached by, and risking that they will conform to the Patriot way. BB has shown low risk value players built around a high priced core he develops is the way to dominance yet still you guys attack?
I guess this argument comes down to you guys thinking BB should pay guys who are a risk to perform in his unique and difficult coaching system, as opposed to BB paying only the guys he drafts and develops and is absolutely certain they are great long term players. Pretty clear who is right and who is wrong in my eyes.
True you are missing the point completely. Those low cost risky ventures as you put it is fine it you aren't counting on them or if you only have a couple on the team at a time. However, we you fill the starting line up with them that's an issue. You can take a chance on a couple here or there but you can't completely rely on them or you are going to be in trouble when they fail.
Of all the guys you mentioned lets break it down -
Dillon - red flag - got lazy in Cinn and became a complainer in the locker room - Reason for release, got lazy and grumpy about number of reps run. In other words released for similar reasons we got ihm so "cheap"
Moss - red flag - cancer in locker made issue out of contract - Reason for release cancer in locker room and complaining about contract
Stallworth - no red flags but #2 WR talent at best - Reason for release paid him like a #1 and did perform up to that level, go figure (see Arrington)
Thomas - no red flags but had a Ravens personality - Reason for release personality conflict not related to performance. You think BB should have known the personalities could conflict?
With exception of Colvin everyone you listed failed because of red flags, overpaid for previous work, or personality conflict. All of those were known prior to signing. It's not like Stallworth didn't have an average season for himself or Lloyd for that matter. It's not like Thomas suddenly developed a new personality that conflicted with BB's. It's not like previous red flags didn't exist for both Moss and Dillon prior to signing. And if you want to talk about big signings how about Amendola who could get up to $31 mil for a guy who never stayed healthy and never performed higher than a #2 WR talent when healthy. That's called mismanagement.
No one is saying you need to sign every big FA on the market but we are suggesting that you invest more into players with less risk than players who cost a little less with more risk. And those you sign to big contracts DO YOUR HOMEWORK. It's not difficult to find out if a players personality will conflict with your own, nor is it difficult to investigate red flags and decide if the risk is worth the extension.
These are smart people. Some players just don't work but when a player fails for reasons you know prior to signing could be an issue maybe you shouldn't invest into them. All you have to do True is look at dead money. We are in the top half of the league every year in dead money, mostly from those risky players that didn't work out. You don't want to invest 2-3mil more for a less riskier player yet if you took one less risky player you could afford to give out that bigger contract. And if it didn't work out guess what you are no worse then you were before. Thomas, Colvin, Dillon, Moss, Bodden, Stallworth or any other "big" signings you want to toss out didn't prevent the team from signing other players and resigning their own to top of the league deals so why would a couple contracts like that suddenly sink them moving forward? What has changed that you can't absorb those types of deals other than you are already absorbing more dead money from released players with red flags.
BTW, maybe it's about time BB looking to simplify the system slightly. I'm not talking a huge shift but if we are having such difficulty finding players well the players are going to change moving forward so why keep tossing money and picks into the pit. Why not adapt and simplify it a little so that it's easier to intergrate players instead of having to burn out the Jones and Ninks of the world playing 95%+ of the snaps making them almost useless and worn out by the playoffs.