salary cap hell, huh?

  1. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: salary cap hell, huh?

    They were never going to let Pitta get away.  I would like to see NE sign Ed Dickson to a cheap deal.  Pretty decent "move TE"

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

    Re: salary cap hell, huh?


    I don't know about the terminology but when you have to cut half your starters, miss the playoffs after winning a SB and still have 6 starting roster spots to fill in 2014 then yeah, you had some issues no?

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

    Re: salary cap hell, huh?

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:


    I don't know about the terminology but when you have to cut half your starters, miss the playoffs after winning a SB and still have 6 starting roster spots to fill in 2014 then yeah, you had some issues no?




    The CAP may actually be higher than stated, 132/133 mil I think I heard.

    I do think teams don't need to be at the 2014 CAP number for a few more weeks so they have time to make his contract fit.

    I say good, perhaps we can get Jones easier now.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: salary cap hell, huh?

    In response to NoMorePensionLooting's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:


    I don't know about the terminology but when you have to cut half your starters, miss the playoffs after winning a SB and still have 6 starting roster spots to fill in 2014 then yeah, you had some issues no?




    The CAP may actually be higher than stated, 132/133 mil I think I heard.

    I do think teams don't need to be at the 2014 CAP number for a few more weeks so they have time to make his contract fit.

    I say good, perhaps we can get Jones easier now.



    That would great. Ravens definitely over payed for pitta as he just missed the whole season. I was hoping we could steal him for 3 years 12 milly or something but they were intent on keeping him.

    I would love to steal jones and send out a Jones Bones Crushing D line! 

     

    Seriously 6 starting spots who are not even on the team yet??? Wow!

    -  Click on the image to enlarge.

    Lineup BAL

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

    Re: salary cap hell, huh?

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:


    I don't know about the terminology but when you have to cut half your starters, miss the playoffs after winning a SB and still have 6 starting roster spots to fill in 2014 then yeah, you had some issues no?



    No. Ownership wanted to win a SB. They allowed Ray and Reed to stay 1 year too long, gambled and lost on Flacco, and missed on some draft choices. BUt they won a SB, and have plenty of cap space to restock the roster.

    THey missed going to the SB on a missed chip shot FG...they then won a SB....and they missed the playoffs by 1 game...



    Yes, they were 1 of 32 teams to "Go For It" and win. I think all ownership wants to win a super bowl...except Cleveland maybe!

    And I applaud Baltimore but the fact is they represent the typical NFL Super Bowls winner. It is so difficult to keep a good team together especially when your QB joins the "$ Club" they don't look to be in any better shape going into 2014 either. The Seahawks will feel this soon as the Saints are feeling it now and have been for years. There has really only been 1 guy to maintain a competitive team in the cap era for any significant amount of time. 

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

    Re: salary cap hell, huh?

    They have cap "issues" like a number of clubs, including the Pats to a much lesser extent. They're going to lose some good players, like Monroe and probably Oher because of the salary cap. Maybe Jones as well, and Dickson. So, those are guys that they would keep if they could, if there was no cap. But they will have to go, because of the salary cap.

    The Pats may lose Edelman and/or Talib for the same reason.

    As TC said, call it what you want, it's talented people walking out the door that you now have to replace, probably with lesser (or at least less experienced) players, due to the salary cap. 

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

    Re: salary cap hell, huh?

    "I don't know about the terminology but when you have to cut half your starters, miss the playoffs after winning a SB and still have 6 starting roster spots to fill in 2014 then yeah, you had some issues no?"

    First off they play in a MUCH tougher division than we do. If we played in that division we wouldn't make the playoffs as consistently either. 

    I also liked how they pushed the envelope a bit before Lewis and Reed retired. I'd like to see the Pats do the same while Brady is still here. 

    But I will admit losing Boldin was a big mistake on their part.

    But it does set up an interesting debate - would you rather win a champsionship and struggle for a couple years or make the playoffs every year before being spanked by a better team? 

    I'd prefer the former (winning a championship) and I think most fans would. The Pats, however, take a different philosophy. Pats management seems to think as long as you make the final four that's good enough because anyone can win from there. 

    Could be, but it hasn't proven true of late, and the NFC teams look excellent. We'll need to push to compete. 

    It's going to be a very interesting offseason.

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

    Re: salary cap hell, huh?

    In response to BostonTrollSpanker's comment:

    "I don't know about the terminology but when you have to cut half your starters, miss the playoffs after winning a SB and still have 6 starting roster spots to fill in 2014 then yeah, you had some issues no?"

    First off they play in a MUCH tougher division than we do. If we played in that division we wouldn't make the playoffs as consistently either. 

    I also liked how they pushed the envelope a bit before Lewis and Reed retired. I'd like to see the Pats do the same while Brady is still here. 

    But I will admit losing Boldin was a big mistake on their part.

    But it does set up an interesting debate - would you rather win a champsionship and struggle for a couple years or make the playoffs every year before being spanked by a better team? 

    I'd prefer the former (winning a championship) and I think most fans would. The Pats, however, take a different philosophy. Pats management seems to think as long as you make the final four that's good enough because anyone can win from there. 

    Could be, but it hasn't proven true of late, and the NFC teams look excellent. We'll need to push to compete. 

    It's going to be a very interesting offseason.



    The discussion would actually have to be,  would you rather your team over extend and "try" to win a super bowl but mortgaging a good part of your future and risk coming up empty on your SB hopes for that year. Because "going for it" like the ravens apparently did doesn't always mean you win. 

    Id rather our team stay competitive every single year and hopefully make the 1 or 2 plays they didn't make in what would have amounted to SIX Super Bowl Championships in 13 years.

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

    Re: salary cap hell, huh?

    In response to BostonTrollSpanker's comment:

    "I don't know about the terminology but when you have to cut half your starters, miss the playoffs after winning a SB and still have 6 starting roster spots to fill in 2014 then yeah, you had some issues no?"

    First off they play in a MUCH tougher division than we do. If we played in that division we wouldn't make the playoffs as consistently either. 

    I also liked how they pushed the envelope a bit before Lewis and Reed retired. I'd like to see the Pats do the same while Brady is still here. 

    But I will admit losing Boldin was a big mistake on their part.

    But it does set up an interesting debate - would you rather win a champsionship and struggle for a couple years or make the playoffs every year before being spanked by a better team? 

    I'd prefer the former (winning a championship) and I think most fans would. The Pats, however, take a different philosophy. Pats management seems to think as long as you make the final four that's good enough because anyone can win from there. 

    Could be, but it hasn't proven true of late, and the NFC teams look excellent. We'll need to push to compete. 

    It's going to be a very interesting offseason.




    Well said.

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

    Re: salary cap hell, huh?

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:


    I don't know about the terminology but when you have to cut half your starters, miss the playoffs after winning a SB and still have 6 starting roster spots to fill in 2014 then yeah, you had some issues no?

     



    No. Ownership wanted to win a SB. They allowed Ray and Reed to stay 1 year too long, gambled and lost on Flacco, and missed on some draft choices. BUt they won a SB, and have plenty of cap space to restock the roster.

     

    THey missed going to the SB on a missed chip shot FG...they then won a SB....and they missed the playoffs by 1 game...



    Yes, they were 1 of 32 teams to "Go For It" and win. I think all ownership wants to win a super bowl...except Cleveland maybe!

    And I applaud Baltimore but the fact is they represent the typical NFL Super Bowls winner. It is so difficult to keep a good team together especially when your QB joins the "$ Club" they don't look to be in any better shape going into 2014 either. The Seahawks will feel this soon as the Saints are feeling it now and have been for years. There has really only been 1 guy to maintain a competitive team in the cap era for any significant amount of time. 




    That 1 guy who mantained a competitive team for a significant amount of time had the luxury of having a quarterback who played at a high level that entire time...that's a big help. He also had the best coach in football to help, that's huge.  I've watched this team not have close to the most talent on it for years now...yet we still win, why do you think that is? Let me guess...Patrick Chung? Or is it Gregory? No it must be Arrington. No wait, it's Connoly. Wait a sec...it's because of Vollmer playing 5 games a year...yeah that must be it.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49Patriots. Show 49Patriots's posts

    Re: salary cap hell, huh?

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to NoMorePensionLooting's comment:

     

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:


    I don't know about the terminology but when you have to cut half your starters, miss the playoffs after winning a SB and still have 6 starting roster spots to fill in 2014 then yeah, you had some issues no?

     




    The CAP may actually be higher than stated, 132/133 mil I think I heard.

     

    I do think teams don't need to be at the 2014 CAP number for a few more weeks so they have time to make his contract fit.

    I say good, perhaps we can get Jones easier now.



    That would great. Ravens definitely over payed for pitta as he just missed the whole season. I was hoping we could steal him for 3 years 12 milly or something but they were intent on keeping him.

    I would love to steal jones and send out a Jones Bones Crushing D line! 

     

    Seriously 6 starting spots who are not even on the team yet??? Wow!

    -  Click on the image to enlarge.

    Lineup BAL




    Does New England have one?

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: salary cap hell, huh?

    In response to 49Patriots' comment:

     

    Does New England have one?



    https://www.profootballfocus.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Lineup-NE2.png

    And a thread about it too..

    http://boston.com/community/forums/sports/patriots/on-the-front-burner/pffcoms-patriots-projected-line-up/100/7035209

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

    Re: salary cap hell, huh?

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:


    I don't know about the terminology but when you have to cut half your starters, miss the playoffs after winning a SB and still have 6 starting roster spots to fill in 2014 then yeah, you had some issues no?

     



    No. Ownership wanted to win a SB. They allowed Ray and Reed to stay 1 year too long, gambled and lost on Flacco, and missed on some draft choices. BUt they won a SB, and have plenty of cap space to restock the roster.

     

    THey missed going to the SB on a missed chip shot FG...they then won a SB....and they missed the playoffs by 1 game...



    Yes, they were 1 of 32 teams to "Go For It" and win. I think all ownership wants to win a super bowl...except Cleveland maybe!

    And I applaud Baltimore but the fact is they represent the typical NFL Super Bowls winner. It is so difficult to keep a good team together especially when your QB joins the "$ Club" they don't look to be in any better shape going into 2014 either. The Seahawks will feel this soon as the Saints are feeling it now and have been for years. There has really only been 1 guy to maintain a competitive team in the cap era for any significant amount of time. 




    That 1 guy who mantained a competitive team for a significant amount of time had the luxury of having a quarterback who played at a high level that entire time...that's a big help. He also had the best coach in football to help, that's huge.  I've watched this team not have close to the most talent on it for years now...yet we still win, why do you think that is? Let me guess...Patrick Chung? Or is it Gregory? No it must be Arrington. No wait, it's Connoly. Wait a sec...it's because of Vollmer playing 5 games a year...yeah that must be it.



    Please, so did the Giants, the steelers, the Saints, the Colts, the ravens and the packers. 

    And yes Chung, Gregory and Arrington played small roles in it, but Mayo, Spikes, Nink, Highower, VW, Jones, Mccourty, Solder, Mankins, Light, Ridley, Vareen, Slater, Woodhead, Bjge, Gronk, Hern, WW, Edelman, Randy Moss, Stalworth, among many others, all had a lot to do with it too. Great QB's and coaches don't win Super Bowls alone, or didn't you know?

     
  16. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: salary cap hell, huh?

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:


    I don't know about the terminology but when you have to cut half your starters, miss the playoffs after winning a SB and still have 6 starting roster spots to fill in 2014 then yeah, you had some issues no?

     



    No. Ownership wanted to win a SB. They allowed Ray and Reed to stay 1 year too long, gambled and lost on Flacco, and missed on some draft choices. BUt they won a SB, and have plenty of cap space to restock the roster.

     

    THey missed going to the SB on a missed chip shot FG...they then won a SB....and they missed the playoffs by 1 game...



    Yes, they were 1 of 32 teams to "Go For It" and win. I think all ownership wants to win a super bowl...except Cleveland maybe!

    And I applaud Baltimore but the fact is they represent the typical NFL Super Bowls winner. It is so difficult to keep a good team together especially when your QB joins the "$ Club" they don't look to be in any better shape going into 2014 either. The Seahawks will feel this soon as the Saints are feeling it now and have been for years. There has really only been 1 guy to maintain a competitive team in the cap era for any significant amount of time. 




    That 1 guy who mantained a competitive team for a significant amount of time had the luxury of having a quarterback who played at a high level that entire time...that's a big help. He also had the best coach in football to help, that's huge.  I've watched this team not have close to the most talent on it for years now...yet we still win, why do you think that is? Let me guess...Patrick Chung? Or is it Gregory? No it must be Arrington. No wait, it's Connoly. Wait a sec...it's because of Vollmer playing 5 games a year...yeah that must be it.



    That same QB also took a below market deal for a player of his stature 



    yeah, a year ago and it only guaranteed him 58 million instead of the 28 he was initially guaranteed for. Didn't you already say that Brady didn't really take a pay cut?

    Don't now try and back track now and insinuate that brady is the only reason BB has maintained a competitive team by taking a below market extension a year ago which actually doubled his guaranteed money.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: salary cap hell, huh?

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    That same QB also took a below market deal for a player of his stature 



    True.  On the other hand it's not like he didn't get good value on his previous 2 extensions (the second of which made him the highest paid player in the NFL at the time and the first which put him towards the top).  I think Brady is worth every penny he has been paid by this organization, but let's not pretend he's been criminally underpaid for most of his career.

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

    Re: salary cap hell, huh?

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:


    I don't know about the terminology but when you have to cut half your starters, miss the playoffs after winning a SB and still have 6 starting roster spots to fill in 2014 then yeah, you had some issues no?

     



    No. Ownership wanted to win a SB. They allowed Ray and Reed to stay 1 year too long, gambled and lost on Flacco, and missed on some draft choices. BUt they won a SB, and have plenty of cap space to restock the roster.

     

    THey missed going to the SB on a missed chip shot FG...they then won a SB....and they missed the playoffs by 1 game...



    Yes, they were 1 of 32 teams to "Go For It" and win. I think all ownership wants to win a super bowl...except Cleveland maybe!

    And I applaud Baltimore but the fact is they represent the typical NFL Super Bowls winner. It is so difficult to keep a good team together especially when your QB joins the "$ Club" they don't look to be in any better shape going into 2014 either. The Seahawks will feel this soon as the Saints are feeling it now and have been for years. There has really only been 1 guy to maintain a competitive team in the cap era for any significant amount of time. 




    That 1 guy who mantained a competitive team for a significant amount of time had the luxury of having a quarterback who played at a high level that entire time...that's a big help. He also had the best coach in football to help, that's huge.  I've watched this team not have close to the most talent on it for years now...yet we still win, why do you think that is? Let me guess...Patrick Chung? Or is it Gregory? No it must be Arrington. No wait, it's Connoly. Wait a sec...it's because of Vollmer playing 5 games a year...yeah that must be it.



    That same QB also took a below market deal for a player of his stature 



    yeah, a year ago and it only guaranteed him 58 million instead of the 28 he was initially guaranteed for. Didn't you already say that Brady didn't really take a pay cut?

    Don't now try and back track now and insinuate that brady is the only reason BB has maintained a competitive team by taking a below market extension a year ago which actually doubled his guaranteed money.



    I was referring to his prior deal he signed for $60M when he could have held out for $100M



    This one in 2010?

     

    Tom Brady signs extension Updated: September 11, 2010, 3:13 PM ET ESPN.com news services

    Quarterback Tom Brady signed a four-year extension with the New England Patriots that will make him the NFL's highest-paid player, a source close to the negotiations confirmed Thursday night.

     

    More from ESPNBoston.com

    ReissAll's well that ends well, as Tom Brady's surreal day began with a car crash and ended with a record-breaking extension, writes Mike Reiss. Story

    Check out the Patriots blog
    Send Q's to Reiss' mailbag
    ESPNBoston.com

     

     

    Brady's contract is worth $72 million and guarantees him $48.5 million, a source familiar with the deal told ESPN NFL Insider Adam Schefter. The extension, which will be filed with the league Friday, will be added onto the final year of Brady's contract and runs through 2014, when he will be 37. Brady, 33, has said he wants to play until he's 40.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from mellymel3. Show mellymel3's posts

    Re: salary cap hell, huh?

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:


    I don't know about the terminology but when you have to cut half your starters, miss the playoffs after winning a SB and still have 6 starting roster spots to fill in 2014 then yeah, you had some issues no?



    No. Ownership wanted to win a SB. They allowed Ray and Reed to stay 1 year too long, gambled and lost on Flacco, and missed on some draft choices. BUt they won a SB, and have plenty of cap space to restock the roster.

    THey missed going to the SB on a missed chip shot FG...they then won a SB....and they missed the playoffs by 1 game...



    You are both right...the Ravens managed their cap in a way to allow them to win one and almost a second...but they ARE paying the price...they , as is every team, playing a "zero sum" game....They have decided that  Pitta is worth keeping but he'll never get the full contract, they'll back load the deal and cut him 2 or 3 years down the road when he's all used up...it's the way they manage players and the cap now...In order to keep Pitta, they have to cut some vet(s) they would otherwise want to keep...so will the Pats...it's cut or renegotiate.....it's also why so many underclessmen came out this year because next year the minimum length for a rookie contract goes up one year....now teams have little problem drafting someone for relatively cheap dollars, use them up for 4 or 5 years, then THEY get the choice to see who they want to give a good deal to.....

    The cap dictates the system

     
  22. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: salary cap hell, huh?

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to BostonTrollSpanker's comment:

    "I don't know about the terminology but when you have to cut half your starters, miss the playoffs after winning a SB and still have 6 starting roster spots to fill in 2014 then yeah, you had some issues no?"

    First off they play in a MUCH tougher division than we do. If we played in that division we wouldn't make the playoffs as consistently either. 

    I also liked how they pushed the envelope a bit before Lewis and Reed retired. I'd like to see the Pats do the same while Brady is still here. 

    But I will admit losing Boldin was a big mistake on their part.

    But it does set up an interesting debate - would you rather win a champsionship and struggle for a couple years or make the playoffs every year before being spanked by a better team? 

    I'd prefer the former (winning a championship) and I think most fans would. The Pats, however, take a different philosophy. Pats management seems to think as long as you make the final four that's good enough because anyone can win from there. 

    Could be, but it hasn't proven true of late, and the NFC teams look excellent. We'll need to push to compete. 

    It's going to be a very interesting offseason.



    The discussion would actually have to be,  would you rather your team over extend and "try" to win a super bowl but mortgaging a good part of your future and risk coming up empty on your SB hopes for that year. Because "going for it" like the ravens apparently did doesn't always mean you win. 

    Id rather our team stay competitive every single year and hopefully make the 1 or 2 plays they didn't make in what would have amounted to SIX Super Bowl Championships in 13 years.



    I havn't heard a reasonabl explanation for this logic yet so I'll give you a try True. What's a good part of your future?

    If you mean trading draft picks to move up, doesn't that only hurt you for 1 year and hurts you just as much as missing on a draft anyways?

    If you mean bigger contracts, can't you just dump the contracts and take a hit for a year or two, signing lower end talent to start (something the Pats do every year)?

    So at most it hurts you for 1 year via draft and maybe 2 years for FA? That doesn't sound like the future to me but I'd like to hear what you define as the future.

    The way I see it if you miss in FA you get dead money for a year or two and have to rely on draft picks, UDFA's, and low cost FA's for a couple years (sounds a lot like our currently system huh?). You miss in the draft and it means you need to spend a bit more in FA to replace that pick with a better vet but you only wasted one year of the draft and you have to count on more mid round guys and UDFA's (sounds a lot like our current system huh?). So, what's different from our current system than what teams would have to do if they miss on a couple FA's or miss on a draft pick they have to move up for?

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from portfolio1. Show portfolio1's posts

    Re: salary cap hell, huh?

    DId I miss something the past several years or did we not only come tantalizingly close to winning 2 OTHER SBs and SB berths but if not for INJURIES just might have succeeded?

    I hear all this talk about how this team or that team spends money or morgaged the future to "win now". But the teams that win it are the teams that are the members of the top 3 of their conference who are in the healthiest shape or at least relatively healthy. We were in a SB with Gronk and Mankins playing but essentially ineffective due to injuries. Had we been as healthy as the Ravens 2 years ago who knows. Had we been as healthy as Seattle this year who knows. I bet we would have made the SB... of course I dont know that... but if you look at the SB winners they are generally more healthy than the teams that did not make it.

    So if the RAvens had not been as healthy at the time of the late playoffs all the timely building would have meant nothing. ANd had we been healthy who knows what the Pats would have done...

     

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: salary cap hell, huh?

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

    DId I miss something the past several years or did we not only come tantalizingly close to winning 2 OTHER SBs and SB berths but if not for INJURIES just might have succeeded?

    I hear all this talk about how this team or that team spends money or morgaged the future to "win now". But the teams that win it are the teams that are the members of the top 3 of their conference who are in the healthiest shape or at least relatively healthy. We were in a SB with Gronk and Mankins playing but essentially ineffective due to injuries. Had we been as healthy as the Ravens 2 years ago who knows. Had we been as healthy as Seattle this year who knows. I bet we would have made the SB... of course I dont know that... but if you look at the SB winners they are generally more healthy than the teams that did not make it.

    So if the RAvens had not been as healthy at the time of the late playoffs all the timely building would have meant nothing. ANd had we been healthy who knows what the Pats would have done...

     



    Port we seriously can't use the injury excuse when 7 of our starters are known to get injured every year. Injures happen but there is a reason we seem to get a lot of them and that's because we have a lot of injury prone players, no that's not just bad luck.

    As for the playoffs every team that beat us dictated their game to us not the other way around. 07' was a great year but within the last 5 years we've simply been beaten by more talented teams, nothing else.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share