What is with this roster?

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    When I look at this roster, I see question marks in the secondary and big questions in the receiving corps and $10,000,000 being unused.

     



    MORON:

     

    Teams need at least 3-5 million for operating costs. No team spends to the penny under the cap.

    Some get pretty close and guess what? Those teams suck.

    YOu very new to football and this board.  So, your analysis is not taken seriously here by anyone.

    The WR corps is deep and talented. TEs? Same thing. LOADED at RB. LOADED on the O Line.

    Loaded at LB, talent at CB and a very nice starting front line. There is some question at quality with the depth at Safety, but at least there is continuity there for once.

    The board sees a big question mark for your brain.

    [/QUOTE]

    Operating costs?  What exactly do you classify under operating costs?  

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    I guess you didn't watch the pre-season, or maybe you don't remember how far Brady went with Reche Caldwell... I'd love to elaborate but I feel myself getting dumber with each post.

    This happens every year, the doom and gloomers say the end is near, that the dynasty is over... every year they are wrong.

     

     



    People are wrong about the dynasty being over?  Next week is the beginning of the 2013 season.  When was the last time this "dynasty" won the Superbowl?

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    A new dynasty was possibly under way in 2011, but Brady and Welker lost focus and blew it for the team and fans.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    if a new dynasty was under way in 2011, how come in 2013 35% of the roster is new since 2011? A dynasty is supposed to last more than 1 game that Brady supposedly blew, correct? A dynasty is supposed to last more than 1 year, correct?

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

     

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

     

     

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

     

     

     

     

     

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    When I look at this roster, I see question marks in the secondary and big questions in the receiving corps and $10,000,000 being unused.

     

     

     

     



    MORON:

     

     

     

     

    Teams need at least 3-5 million for operating costs. No team spends to the penny under the cap.

    Some get pretty close and guess what? Those teams suck.

    YOu very new to football and this board.  So, your analysis is not taken seriously here by anyone.

    The WR corps is deep and talented. TEs? Same thing. LOADED at RB. LOADED on the O Line.

    Loaded at LB, talent at CB and a very nice starting front line. There is some question at quality with the depth at Safety, but at least there is continuity there for once.

    The board sees a big question mark for your brain.

     

     

     



    Operating costs?  What exactly do you classify under operating costs?  

     

     

     

     

     



    Roster moves maybe?  Or, if you need to make a trade due to circumstances out of your control, like we did with Talib last year, maybe?

     

     

    Go look at the teams who finish very close to the cap.

    What do they have in common? They suck!

     

     



    Okay, that's fair.  I wouldn't call those operating costs (I'd call maintaining the field an operating cost), but I agree you need some room to bring in players during the season to adjust to unexpected events.

     

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to russgriswold's comment:


    MORON:

     

    Teams need at least 3-5 million for operating costs. No team spends to the penny under the cap.

    Some get pretty close and guess what? Those teams suck.

    YOu very new to football and this board.  So, your analysis is not taken seriously here by anyone.

    The WR corps is deep and talented. TEs? Same thing. LOADED at RB. LOADED on the O Line.

    Loaded at LB, talent at CB and a very nice starting front line. There is some question at quality with the depth at Safety, but at least there is continuity there for once.

    The board sees a big question mark for your brain.



    You often write about operating costs when it comes to salary cap discussions.  Which operating costs count against the cap?

    Loaded at RB: 

    Blount was awful last season and was acquired for next to nothing.
    Bolden hasnt' accomplished anything in his career.
    Develin couldn't make the Bengals practice squad.
    Ridley is a good player.
    Vereen hasn't done much as a pro.

    That's loaded?

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

     

     



    The highest scoring offense in NFL history scored 14 points in SB 42.

     

     

     

    There's your answer. Our QB is Tom Brady. This little thing you and your fellow BBWs have going here is annoying.

    The 52 other players aren't in there to kiss the ground Brady walks on. This isn't winning one for the gipper.

    Brady had it all. His weapons, his shotgun spread gameplans, but he blew it.  Twice.

    He can blame himself.

    It's all over now, though. BB reined it in. Hey!  We even have a FB on the roster again! A real one!

    lmao

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Does anyone else hear a record skipping? 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    No, but fans do when Brady makes excuses every January after throwing 3 TDs and 7 INTs in his last 3 AFC title games.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    rather than resort to your 2 lame retorts, blame Brady and call me names, how about realistically and seriously stating your opinion, which you shockingly fail to do....

    are you happy with Vellano and Fortson behind Kelly and Vince?

    if Talib is dinged up aside from the Bills, Bucs and Jets games, take a look at the QB's this defense will be facing. are you comfortable with Ryan the first CB off the bench?

    you said AWilson was just what this defense needed. he was going to be HUGE. those were your words. now he isnt here. who fills those huge shoes? Tavon? Harmon?

    unless you hear a post game comment from Ghost or a coach, dont assume a Ghost miss is on him...it very likely could be on the holder who has you know, never held a FG before.

    are you going to be happy with Blount as your KO return man?

    dont say I am anti BB. Dont say I am a Jets fan. Dont say I work for ESPN. Dont say I said something about Sanchez 4 years ago...use your own words, and tell us how comfortable you are with this team

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bungalow-Bill. Show Bungalow-Bill's posts

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

     


    He's dumb as a bag of rocks. Brady would kill himself trying to get him to learn this offense, so yes, in no way would a primma donna DUMB WR be a fit here. Yes.

     

    Not a fit.

     



    Aaron Hernandez was a really smart guy huh. Dez is a freakish athlete. Brady would love him.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

    Go look at the teams who finish very close to the cap.

    What do they have in common? They suck!

    2012 season, least salary cap room:

    San Francisco 49ers: $3,394,599 Division winner Conference Champ game Superbowl
    New York Giants: $3,119,114
    San Diego Chargers: $2,862,095
    Atlanta Falcons: $2,834,873  Division winner Conference Champ game
    New Orleans Saints: $2,272,081
    Oakland Raiders: $1,347,040
    Baltimore Ravens: $606,858 Division winner Conference Champ game Superbowl Champions


    Yes.  They suck.

     

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to rkarp's comment:

     

    This roster does not feel like a BB roster as it currently sits. Does anyone ever remember a team like this to start a season? Assuming this is a SB contending team, is there too much youth and too little talent? 

    -35% of the roster is first or second year players

    -if Ghost starts the season with some misses, before this board erupts and calls for his head, lets remember that 33% of a successful FG is on the holder, and Allen has never done this in his life

    -Talib in numerous seasons has missed games with injury. McCourty has played injured the past 2 seasons. Dennard may or may not be suspended. The replacements are Tavon Wilson and 2 rookies. 

    -is LaGarrett Blount really an option at KR? If this team is going to be a 3 and 4 WR spread offense I want Boyce on the field, not getting nicked up on KR. In no uncertain terms do I wish to see McCourty on KR

    -Kelly, Vince and who? This team needs another big body at DT

    -I am of the opinion this is a better team with RasI, Love, Mesko and Washington on the roster. 

    -no one knows any of the behind the scenes situations as the flow of information is non existent. Every one is cognizant of the cap. But does it seem every decision on the roster is made on the cheap? This team has had 2 years of very solid amount of cash to improve the team, and so far the results have been mediocre at best (including last years disaster) 

    -to repeat what so many have said on this board...thankul that TB is on this roster. Lucky the AFC east is still nothing to worry about (although I still have my eye on the Phins)

    -still a week to go and changes can be made on the fly. Today, I am not a happy fan with this roster

     



         Years of poor BB drafts are coming home, to roost: Again, here's the list of BB draft busts, since 2006:

     

    1.) 2006: RB Laurence Maroney, the 21st overall pick in 2006, WR Chad Jackson, the 36th player selected overall, TE David Thomas, the 86th overall player taken, and TE Garrett Mills, the Pats' 106th overall pick;

    2.) 2007: FS Brandon Meriweather, the 24th overall pick; 

    3.) 2008: CB Terrence Wheatley, the 62nd overall pick, OLB Shawn Crable, the 78th overall pick, and QB Kevin O'Connell, the 94th overall selection in 2008;

    4.) 2009: SS Patrick Chung, the 34th overall player selected, DT Ron Brace, the 40th player selected, CB Darius Butler, the 41st overall selection, WR Brandon Tate, the 83rd overall selection, and LB Tyrone McKenzie, the 97th overall pick;

    5.) 2010: DE Jermaine Cunningham with their 53rd overall pick, WR Taylor Price, 90th overall pick;

    6.) 2011: CB Ras-I Dowling, 33rd overall;

    7.) 2012:  S Tavon Wilson, 48th overall, DE Jake Bequette, 90th overall;

    8.) 2013: It's very early, but does anybody from this draft class appear to be an impact player?

         So...since 2006, BB has had two (2) busts with #1 picks, in 2006 and 2007, busts with three super high second rounders in 2006, 2009 and 2011, along with five (5) other 2nd round misses - EIGHT (8) overall, and six (6) third round misses (not counting Mills, who was a high 4th round pick)....thats' 16 misses on picks in the first through third round in seven years. Horrible. Time to bring in a draft consultant for BB, and/or  completely revamp the scouting process, and methods of player selection.  

     

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to Bungalow-Bill's comment:

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     


    He's dumb as a bag of rocks. Brady would kill himself trying to get him to learn this offense, so yes, in no way would a primma donna DUMB WR be a fit here. Yes.

     

    Not a fit.

     

     



    Aaron Hernandez was a really smart guy huh. Dez is a freakish athlete. Brady would love him.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    ...and the Patriots may have drafted him if he fell to the 4th round, he didn't.

    Both guys had troubled pasts. Hernandez was known to be a very smart football guy in the film and whiteboard testing. SO yes he was a very smart football guy. I have no idea if Dez was as well, he may have.

    Bottom line is the Pats had a certain level of risk they were willing to take with those guys, if Dez did have the football smarts that is.

    One guy fell where the risk level became acceptable and the other didn't.

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

    Truly a rather typical BDC Pats forum thread.  I have a couple of questions to those who have absolutely vilified BB and this 53 man roster but first my concerns about the roster:
    1) Depth at DT is questionable;

    2) Starting secondary should be good, not great, good.  Could improve over the season. Depth here is rather young.

    Those are my concerns.

    Now my questions.

    1) This team better with Ras I, seriously?  The guy couldn't stay on the field.  Please, don't say if he's healthy he's better.  Can't cover squat if you're not on the field. (Yeah, I'm disappointed that he couldn't cut it, doesn't change my question.)

    2) Slater hasn't done anything?  Really?  One of the best ST players in the league.  He's not supposed to be on the roster as a wideout.

    3) Which way do you want it?  The guy completely remakes the wideout roster because it was deficient and he gets criticized for it?  Egad.

    4)  The team is young on both sides of the ball.  For a team that has been a contender ever since BB got here and will be this year and why is this an issue.  For crying out loud. BB is criticized cause his team is geting old and now he takes in the ear because they're young.

    5) Mesko released; Allen gets the job and this is a problem?  As others have pointed out Allen may be the best punter coming out of college in years and he's on the Pats roster for dirt money. 

    6) Season has started yet.  We have no clue what the injury picture will be going forward and the guy keeps some cash set aside (albeit $10 million) for contingencies and he's an idiot for not spending to the cap.  Really?

    7) Here it is please I am asking for someone to provide a credible refutation of the info in this link:  http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/content/decade-the-making-the-ultimate-nfl-draft-grades/2419/

    Don't nitpick the draft picks.  Provide something authoritative if you would please that demonstrates that BB is the putrid GM some on this forum contend that he is.

    I like this 53-man and yeah, I'm a fan and I'm a fan of the way the team does business.

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

    In response to rkarp's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    This roster does not feel like a BB roster as it currently sits. Does anyone ever remember a team like this to start a season? Assuming this is a SB contending team, is there too much youth and too little talent? 

    -35% of the roster is first or second year players

    Yes they seem a little young. ...but too little talent? Based on what? The fact you are saying so much of the roster is based on 1st and 2nd year players then how do you actually know what you really have have for total team talent yet? Secondly, a good GM or team builder does not just collect talent. He fills roles with football players (if it is a football team). Going after say a CB or choose any position who excels for some other team in some other system but you know or suspect will not work or get your systems or team culture is just dumb and wasteful. Did we not already do stuff like that with Ocho, etc? Yet everyone was oh yeah baby a real WR for Brady, blah blah. This board is a bunch of frauds. The big pharma companies could make a killin advertising Bipolar medication on thses boards.

    -if Ghost starts the season with some misses, before this board erupts and calls for his head, lets remember that 33% of a successful FG is on the holder, and Allen has never done this in his life

    So you already know Allen is getting the holding job over Mallet? Mallet has experience doing that. If Allen does indeed get that gig over Mallet are you suggesting that both the position coach as well as Ghost has not signed off on that and feel comfortable about it based on proven ability through camp and practice?

    -Talib in numerous seasons has missed games with injury. McCourty has played injured the past 2 seasons. Dennard may or may not be suspended. The replacements are Tavon Wilson and 2 rookies. 

    Personally I felt the 2 rookies looked very good for rookies being thrown into the fire playing vanilla defense with no game planing and asked to do various things so that they could be evaluated. 

    -is LaGarrett Blount really an option at KR? If this team is going to be a 3 and 4 WR spread offense I want Boyce on the field, not getting nicked up on KR. In no uncertain terms do I wish to see McCourty on KR

    They barely even get half the kick offs out of the end zone these days with most teams simply taking kness and taking the ball on the 20. Blount, SLater, and I have no problem with using Boyce, otherwise you might as well wrap him in bubble wrap and not play him at all. They are all capable enough to get the ball out past the twenty. They might not be home run threats on a regular but there are only a handful of those in the league, if that. According to Babe TB is so great he carries this team all on his own and is infallable. What difference does it make where you give him the ball he ca't be stopped or slowed down apparently. lol

    -Kelly, Vince and who? This team needs another big body at DT

    They picked up a big body in Francis who is known for being able to anchor and we saw that Vellano can anchor as well. We have to wait for another big body "with push/rush" apparently till after week 6, if Armstead is what they hope him to be? Veterans will get some potential looks after week one.

    -I am of the opinion this is a better team with RasI, Love, Mesko and Washington on the roster. 

    If Ras-I were "fully" healthy I would agree, he might get some call or looks after week 1 when his salary is no longer guaranteed, if that applies to him? Love, nope (not since diabetes). Mesko nope, its a net net plus you save money now and don't potentially lose both he and Allen at the end of the season like Gould and Vinatieri. Washington? For what? Just for the potential kickoff return?

    -no one knows any of the behind the scenes situations as the flow of information is non existent. Every one is cognizant of the cap. But does it seem every decision on the roster is made on the cheap? This team has had 2 years of very solid amount of cash to improve the team, and so far the results have been mediocre at best (including last years disaster) 

    They have a system they follow and it's the same since the run has started. So no the last two years have not been different in my opinion. They simply operate within their framework. Two things have become very evident from observing folks around here however. 1) Everyone must always only buy designer name brands for all their purchases of anything since they only think a player with a name or costs a boat load are any good. 2) They must never ever have a problem with their company hiring a guy as good as them or very marginally better than them at the same job but paying that new hire three times as much as they make. They must never get upset or disgruntled about it. I'm retired but I know that never would have been ok with me. Yet everyone on here always wants the Pats to do just that.

    You mentioned last years disaster? What disaster? The AFCCG? So not having a good day or getting beat by a better team is a disaster? Was it a disaster because they had no talent? If yes then I assume you think the 2007 season AND superbowl loss was also a disaster because they had no talent as well? I mean it couldn't be that they came out and got beat on any given Sunday by a team hungrier to play better on that day could it? I mean honeslty that can not be possible.

    -can you tell I am not happy with this roster? 

    Yep but that is OK you passionately want them to be the best they can be. Strong fan.

    -to repeat what so many have said on this board...thankul that TB is on this roster. Lucky the AFC east is still nothing to worry about (although I still have my eye on the Phins)

    -still a week to go and changes can be made on the fly. Today, I am not a happy fan with this roster

     




     

    [/QUOTE]


    Low with a breakdown for the jets fan.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: What is with this roster?

    That list was from the beginning of training camp.  Here's the list of teams that spent more than the Pats from the start of the season:

    Vikings:  $8.2 million. Wild Card

    Dolphins:  $7.1 million.

    Packers:  $6.9 million. Division winner

    Cardinals:  $6.6 million.

    Redskins:  $6.1 million. Division winner

    Jets:  $5.9 million.

    Cowboys:  $5.7 million.

    Colts:  $5.3 million. Wild Card

    Panthers:  $5.3 million.

    Bears:  $4.5 million.

    Saints:  $4.1 million.

    Rams:  $4.0 million.

    Chargers:  $3.5 million.

    Raiders:  $2.3 million.

    Giants:  $2.2 million.

    Lions:  $2.0 million.

    Steelers;  $1.6 million.

    Ravens:  $1.4 million. Superbowl

    Falcons:  $1.3 million.  NFL Conference

    Texans:  $882,000. Division winner

    49ers:  $880,000.  Superbowl

    Tell us again, just one more time, how team that spend too close to the cap suck.

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    That list was from the beginning of training camp.  Here's the list of teams that spent more than the Pats from the start of the season:

    Vikings:  $8.2 million. Wild Card

    Dolphins:  $7.1 million.

    Packers:  $6.9 million. Division winner

    Cardinals:  $6.6 million.

    Redskins:  $6.1 million. Division winner

    Jets:  $5.9 million.

    Cowboys:  $5.7 million.

    Colts:  $5.3 million. Wild Card

    Panthers:  $5.3 million.

    Bears:  $4.5 million.

    Saints:  $4.1 million.

    Rams:  $4.0 million.

    Chargers:  $3.5 million.

    Raiders:  $2.3 million.

    Giants:  $2.2 million.

    Lions:  $2.0 million.

    Steelers;  $1.6 million.

    Ravens:  $1.4 million. Superbowl

    Falcons:  $1.3 million.  NFL Conference

    Texans:  $882,000. Division winner

    49ers:  $880,000.  Superbowl

    Tell us again, just one more time, how team that spend too close to the cap suck.




    Good afternoon Stalker

    Image and video hosting by TinyPic

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to ATJ's comment:

    Truly a rather typical BDC Pats forum thread.  I have a couple of questions to those who have absolutely vilified BB and this 53 man roster but first my concerns about the roster:


    1) Depth at DT is questionable;

    Agree, and considering the lack of an effective pass rusher the last number of years, especially from the interior to me this is one I really scratch my head about. Esp since BB is known for deep DL's. This could also effected the secondary

    2) Starting secondary should be good, not great, good.  Could improve over the season. Depth here is rather young.

    It's essentially the same group as last year which showed some improvement as the year progressed but was still a subpar secondary as a whole. I expect them to get better but the depth being unproven is a strong worry and the lack of depth on the DL might hurt the secondary than the extra year improved it

    Those are my concerns.

    Now my questions.

    1) This team better with Ras I, seriously?  The guy couldn't stay on the field.  Please, don't say if he's healthy he's better.  Can't cover squat if you're not on the field. (Yeah, I'm disappointed that he couldn't cut it, doesn't change my question.)

    Yeah I wasn't expecting much from Ras and thought he was on the buble to begin with. Ryan should replace him easily but they should have done more with the extra cap space

    2) Slater hasn't done anything?  Really?  One of the best ST players in the league.  He's not supposed to be on the roster as a wideout.

     Love Slater enough said

    3) Which way do you want it?  The guy completely remakes the wideout roster because it was deficient and he gets criticized for it?  Egad.

    I think people are concerned because of the amount of youth. The odds of all three being productive without hiccups aren't in the Pats favor. And the two vets have missed more games than played in the last two years doesn't help with those concerns.

    4)  The team is young on both sides of the ball.  For a team that has been a contender ever since BB got here and will be this year and why is this an issue.  For crying out loud. BB is criticized cause his team is geting old and now he takes in the ear because they're young.

    They are young but they dont last on the team because most aren't that good. How many draft picks have we seen cut after a couple years and how many UDFA's join the team every yera and last for more than a year? If you have 12+ players who have a year or less experience on the team and they barely last more than a year then they aren't that good to begin with. You need a healthy balance and you need youth to stick around. One's that only last a year or two don't help the team other than bringing the average age of the roster down

    5) Mesko released; Allen gets the job and this is a problem?  As others have pointed out Allen may be the best punter coming out of college in years and he's on the Pats roster for dirt money. 

    Mesko was a proven consistent punter, Allen is a bit of an unknown. High potential but it's a concern until w see him do it on gameday

    6) Season has started yet.  We have no clue what the injury picture will be going forward and the guy keeps some cash set aside (albeit $10 million) for contingencies and he's an idiot for not spending to the cap.  Really?

    Please tell me what player is worth spending that much on after cuts or off teh street FA's. Wouldn't the funds have been better spent on some of the concerns you yourself have? SS's, DT's, and CB's went for short term deals for much less than previous years. Since $5mil is lost when the season ends and that $5mil could have been used on more depth wouldn't you have preferred to do that over going into the season with more ? marks

    7) Here it is please I am asking for someone to provide a credible refutation of the info in this link:  http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/content/decade-the-making-the-ultimate-nfl-draft-grades/2419/

    Don't nitpick the draft picks.  Provide something authoritative if you would please that demonstrates that BB is the putrid GM some on this forum contend that he is.

    This article is from 11' and doesn't reflect resent cuts or failures. Heck 1 of the pro-bowlers was Meriweather and it goes back to 00'. Not many players from 00' are still currently on the roster. But how about the last 5 years. How many high picks just haven't contributed anything and have been cut or look like they could be cut during/end of year? Heck they have Ras as a bodes weel pick

    I like this 53-man and yeah, I'm a fan and I'm a fan of the way the team does business.



    Overall I'm less concerned by the O but the D scares me. I thought they were moving in the right direction but this offseason feels like they are a shell. Outside of starters I have major concerns about everything but the LB's on D which doesn't give me the warm and fuzzies since the D has been the biggest issue the last couple years and the area they've spent the most resources in to fix

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    That list was from the beginning of training camp.  Here's the list of teams that spent more than the Pats from the start of the season:

    Vikings:  $8.2 million. Wild Card

    Dolphins:  $7.1 million.

    Packers:  $6.9 million. Division winner

    Cardinals:  $6.6 million.

    Redskins:  $6.1 million. Division winner

    Jets:  $5.9 million.

    Cowboys:  $5.7 million.

    Colts:  $5.3 million. Wild Card

    Panthers:  $5.3 million.

    Bears:  $4.5 million.

    Saints:  $4.1 million.

    Rams:  $4.0 million.

    Chargers:  $3.5 million.

    Raiders:  $2.3 million.

    Giants:  $2.2 million.

    Lions:  $2.0 million.

    Steelers;  $1.6 million.

    Ravens:  $1.4 million. Superbowl

    Falcons:  $1.3 million.  NFL Conference

    Texans:  $882,000. Division winner

    49ers:  $880,000.  Superbowl

    Tell us again, just one more time, how team that spend too close to the cap suck.



    Source?

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to shenanigan's comment:

    Source?



    The internet.

    It's called google. 

    Here, try this:

    Type:  www.google.com into your address bar.

    Into the search box, enter "2012 NFL Salary Cap Numbers".

    If you find something vastly different then what I've posted, please feel free to return here and call me a liar.  Unlike the Forum Jester, I'm not a liar and I don't post lies. 

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    In response to shenanigan's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    Source?

     



    The internet.

     

    It's called google. 

    Here, try this:

    Type:  www.google.com into your address bar.

    Into the search box, enter "2012 NFL Salary Cap Numbers".

    If you find something vastly different then what I've posted, please feel free to return here and call me a liar.  Unlike the Forum Jester, I'm not a liar and I don't post lies. 

    [/QUOTE]

    I already tried that and every link I found has different numbers than you posted.

     

    Jacksonville Jaguars: $25,115,885

    Tennessee Titans: $19,970,080

    Cleveland Browns: $17,774,764

    Kansas City Chiefs: $16,548,048

    Cincinnati Bengals: $16,309,693

    Philadelphia Eagles: $15,879,570

    Tampa Bay Buccaneers: $15,740,231

    Indianapolis Colts: $14,595,514

    Green Bay Packers: $11,255,804

    Denver Broncos: $10,878,461

    New England Patriots: $10,873,988

    Minnesota Vikings: $10,595,534

    Carolina Panthers: $8,769,801

    Seattle Seahawks: $7,470,071

    Buffalo Bills: $7,382,319

    Dallas Cowboys: $7,188,021

    Washington Redskins: $6,970,162

    New York Jets: $6,044,153

    Arizona Cardinals: $4,552,576

    Miami Dolphins: $4,458,211

    Houston Texans: $4,053,256

    Chicago Bears: $3,976,700

    Detroit Lions: $3,775,829

    Pittsburgh Steelers: $3,734,063

    St. Louis Rams: $3,602,486

    San Francisco 49ers: $3,394,599

    New York Giants: $3,119,114

    San Diego Chargers: $2,862,095

    Atlanta Falcons: $2,834,873

    New Orleans Saints: $2,272,081

    Oakland Raiders: $1,347,040

    Baltimore Ravens: $606,858

     

    this looks to be the most reliable from NFL.com

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

     

    That list was from the beginning of training camp.  Here's the list of teams that spent more than the Pats from the start of the season:

    Vikings:  $8.2 million. Wild Card

    Dolphins:  $7.1 million.

    Packers:  $6.9 million. Division winner

    Cardinals:  $6.6 million.

    Redskins:  $6.1 million. Division winner

    Jets:  $5.9 million.

    Cowboys:  $5.7 million.

    Colts:  $5.3 million. Wild Card

    Panthers:  $5.3 million.

    Bears:  $4.5 million.

    Saints:  $4.1 million.

    Rams:  $4.0 million.

    Chargers:  $3.5 million.

    Raiders:  $2.3 million.

    Giants:  $2.2 million.

    Lions:  $2.0 million.

    Steelers;  $1.6 million.

    Ravens:  $1.4 million. Superbowl

    Falcons:  $1.3 million.  NFL Conference

    Texans:  $882,000. Division winner

    49ers:  $880,000.  Superbowl

    Tell us again, just one more time, how team that spend too close to the cap suck.

     



    While I think Rusty's assertion is from the hip and baseless I do not get your point either.

     

    You are making it sound like it is a guaranteed fact that if the Pats spend more they will be better or win more games.

    From your own posting here it looks like 21 teams spent more than the Patriots.

    Yet ONLY TWO of those 21 teams went further than the Patriots did in the post season.

    Those stats go against the perceived basis of your argument in my opinion. At least as a more probably likelihood that it would make a difference.

    In FACT to go one step further, when you look at the two teams who did go further, 1) Has who many consider the best or at least one of the best GM's in the league. Ozzie Newsom. 2) The other picked at the top of the draft since 2005. So yeah they should be pretty darn good.

    since 2005

    1st

    6th

    11th

    29th (trade they would have been picking 7th or something)

    10th

    11th

    7th

    30th

    The ability to pick in the top 11 pick 7 years in a row should make a huge difference. They are not winning because they spend a lot of money but because they finally got a good coach to also go along with a loaded roster that comes will sucking for so many years in a row. 

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to shenanigan's comment:

    this looks to be the most reliable from NFL.com



    Those were the first numbers I posted, up to date as of the beginning of August.

    The second set of numbers is from the first week of September.

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    In response to shenanigan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Source?

     



    The internet.

     

    It's called google. 

    Here, try this:

    Type:  www.google.com into your address bar.

    Into the search box, enter "2012 NFL Salary Cap Numbers".

    If you find something vastly different then what I've posted, please feel free to return here and call me a liar.  Unlike the Forum Jester, I'm not a liar and I don't post lies. 

    [/QUOTE]


    No...you just stalk certain posters...LMAO....what a schmuck...

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:


    While I think Rusty's assertion is from the hip and baseless I do not get your point either.

    You are making it sound like it is a guaranteed fact that if the Pats spend more they will be better or win more games.

    From your own posting here it looks like 21 teams spent more than the Patriots.

    Yet ONLY TWO of those 21 teams went further than the Patriots did in the post season.

    Those stats go against the perceived basis of your argument in my opinion. At least as a more probably likelihood that it would make a difference.

    In FACT to go one step further, when you look at the two teams who did go further, 1) Has who many consider the best or at least one of the best GM's in the league. 2) The other picked at the top of the draft since 2005. So yeah they should be pretty darn good.

    since 2005

    1st

    6th

    11th

    29th (trade they would have been picking 7th or something)

    10th

    11th

    7th

    30th

    The ability to pick in the top 11 pick 7 years in a row should make a huge difference. They are not winning because they spend a lot of money but because they finally got a good coach to also go along with a loaded roster that comes will sucking for so many years in a row. 



    I'm not making it sound like anything.  Along with others, I have been calling for Belichick to spend money.  Rusty claims that teams that get too close to the cap suck.  Three of the four teams closest to the cap went to the Conference Championship. 

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

    Re: What is with this roster?


    Teams that get too close top the cap end up having to cut decent players to meet immediate needs in OTHER positions...it hems them in...it makes sense....it hurts long term plannin g and cap management...it's stupid management...no business can operate successfully over time if it's flexability is deterred/ limited and operating marign is too tight...

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

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to skinnyrexraptor's comment:


    Teams that get too close top the cap end up having to cut decent players to meet immediate needs in OTHER positions...it hems them in...it makes sense....it hurts long term plannin g and cap management...it's stupid management...no business can operate successfully over time if it's flexability is deterred/ limited and operating marign is too tight...



    Unless you are dealing with contracts this year which many starting caliber players took 1 year deals. 1 year deals don't hurt long term. Given lack of depth wouldn't you have liked to have another starting caliber CB that went for under $5mil for 1 year or one of the SS that took a subpar contract for short term (1-2 years) or one of the DT's that took a 1 year deal? BTW since we have all the extra cap space we should be able to clean up after the 53man cut downs with all those decent players you said other teams have cut. So, tell me where are all these decent players because we could use a couple right now for depth?

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to russgriswold's comment:



    Source the link, please, so we can see it.

    Most of these teams also don't win 12 games minimum like we do. The Chargers and Giants missed the playoffs last year and might again.

    Get it?

    That's not good.

    I already told you why Baltimore is an aberration example.  Ray Lewis gave a speech and the Denver Safety was a moron.

    Their season was on ice in December. They had some things go their way, good for them, but that doesn't dispel my point.

    IN fact, Baltimore just had to replace like 60+% of its starting D, lost their best WR and starting Center and their feeble TE stable behind Pitta has them in trouble.

    Again, nice job winning the SB, but if they miss the playoffs this year, bad cap management will be a big reason why.

    Book it.



    If the Pats won any Supebowl since the 2004 season and missed the playoffs the following year, I'd be okay with that.

    As for my link, I'm not known as someone who lies about things.  In fact, I'm known as an honest person around these parts.  You want to dispute my info?  You don't believe it's true?  Feel free to do the work yourself and prove my info false.

    It's not hard to find information online.  Google is pretty cool.  Do search engines baffle you like smartphones do?

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: What is with this roster?

    In response to russgriswold's comment:


    Also, moron, he spent plenty of money this offseason in Amendola, Kelly, resiging Talib and Arrington.

    These are good players, some of whom at the top of the league within their skill sets.

    Generally speaking, not having a methodical budget plan and being too close to the cap, especially year after year, is not a good thing.

    Yes.

    I count 4 teams on your list who missed the playoffs and all of them might miss them 2 years in a row.

    Case closed.

    Pressure is on in SF and Atlanta. Nice teams, nice talent, well built, but that crap catches up to ya if you aren't winning it.  It's SB or bust for both of those teams. As you can see neither has won one yet.



    Hasn't it been Superbowl or Bust for New England for the past decade?

    "These are good players, some of whom at the top of the league within their skill sets."

    Which players are you referring to here?

     

Share