Artice - Cards, Fitzgerald not close to deal

[joeshmo]

schmo's take is dead on. Eugene Parker uses brinkmanship well. Deals can be made in a day or two when the time pressure is on.

Let's see what happens. It is interesting stuff. Something being ignored here is that there is pressure on Fitz too. Players know if a guy is being too selfish, too me me me. And all players care about how they are viewed by their teammates.

Good Point.

 

[Brewster10]

As stated by someone above.. Fitz shouldnt have to settle for less cause the dopes in our front office put together this ridiculous contract..

Why should he take less money? Just to do Graves a favor? He is guarenteed 31+ for the next two yrs...

What incentive does he have to restructure? He's owed that money the next two seasons, and when he's an FA in 2010 he's gonna another huge signing bonus and contract..

He holds all the power.. and it's a terrible situation for the Cards to be in..

At this point i'd say deal him but the fact that Anquan has been coming up with these nagging injuries and we have no other decent receiver on the roster.. Cards basically need to keep Fitz given the uncertainty and lack of depth at the WR position right now..

 

[az jam]

As stated by someone above.. Fitz shouldnt have to settle for less cause the dopes in our front office put together this ridiculous contract..

Why should he take less money? Just to do Graves a favor? He is guarenteed 31+ for the next two yrs...

What incentive does he have to restructure? He's owed that money the next two seasons, and when he's an FA in 2010 he's gonna another huge signing bonus and contract..

He holds all the power.. and it's a terrible situation for the Cards to be in..

At this point i'd say deal him but the fact that Anquan has been coming up with these nagging injuries and we have no other decent receiver on the roster.. Cards basically need to keep Fitz given the uncertainty and lack of depth at the WR position right now..

Any team that he would be dealt to would have to take on his ridiculous contract. There are not going to be any buyers for that!!

 

[Stout]

Thanks for answering 40's horrible point, Joe. Two different animals, Fitz's contract and the atrocious contracts given our FAs last offseason.

Bottom line is, Graves made his bed and he has to lie in it. I've been saying it like a broken record, and I'll say it again...IT MAKES SENSE TO FITZ TO EXTEND. As long as he gets a good contract that will bump up his guaranteed money enough he will sign it, guaranteed. We have to be creative enough to offer that. It doesn't sound like we are. It sounds like we're trying to get too much of a home town discount. Let's see, we're what, 6 days from FA, and STILL hoping for a home town discount to get a deal done? Pathetic. Graves needs to sack up, stop wasting time, and hammer a deal out. He's had an eternity to do this, and it doesn't sound to me like he's done more than plod along slowly and hope it gets done.

Like someone said, we had all of these problems (Dansby, Pace, Fitz), and we KNEW about them, while the season was still going. We didn't manage to get a Dansby extension done. Taken alone, not a big deal, because we had the Franchise Tag safety net. We didn't get Pace re-signed. We didn't get Fitz extended. We cut some players that needed cutting, which took no brainpower. We did manage to get Berry to take a paycut, which while a great move, was not that difficult to accomplish. So, out of all the big issues we had, Graves has thus far accomplished ZERO of them. On top of that, we have fewer good players under contract from last year because Graves gobbled up our cap space and kept us from signing more quality players. Now, his own lack of initiative looks to hamstring us before the FA period even starts. Not too good for the home team from where I'm sitting.

Now, is there time to get things done still? Sure, a veritable eternity in negotiating time. If, however, Graves doesn't come to his senses NOW, then those 6 days will be gone in the blink of an eye. If Fitz hits FA with the deal he has now, Graves should be fired at 12:01 on March 1st. He's made some nice, small moves so far this offseason. Now he has to earn his pay and get the tough stuff accomplished. Now. Not tomorrow, not mid-March. NOW.

 

[red desert]

Where did I say those 2 didn't earn their current contracts. Their contracts arent huge right now. I said they will not have earned the contracts they will end up getting such as Fitz. I would spend more money on QB, RB, OL, DL, LB, and DB before I started shelling out big money to WR's. It just is not a good investment, and history has shown as much.

You didn't. My bad.

 

[Syracusecards]

If I'm Fitz's agent, I'm telling Fitz that we're not doing a deal unless it's the deal of the century. Think about it, Fitz can make crazy money the next two years. Then, when he's a free agent, there will probably have been deals with other wr's that will push any contract he wants way up in value. Anything he gets in a deal right now, will be trivial in 2 years. Hopefully Fitz will be a team guy and urge his agent to get a deal done, but it still worries me. We have absolutely zero leverage and Fitz stands to make a ton of money for the next 2 years, and then get ridiculous money after he's a FA.

 

[HookemCards]

If I'm Fitz's agent, I'm telling Fitz that we're not doing a deal unless it's the deal of the century. Think about it, Fitz can make crazy money the next two years. Then, when he's a free agent, there will probably have been deals with other wr's that will push any contract he wants way up in value. Anything he gets in a deal right now, will be trivial in 2 years. Hopefully Fitz will be a team guy and urge his agent to get a deal done, but it still worries me. We have absolutely zero leverage and Fitz stands to make a ton of money for the next 2 years, and then get ridiculous money after he's a FA.

Well we do have some leverage. He could get hurt and not recieve anything beyond an injury settlement this year. Usually about half your salary so around 8 mil. Or he could sign a 8 year extension with 32 mil signing bonus and huge salaries in 7th and 8th year and restructure then. 8 mil or 32 mil??

 

[40yearfan]

Manning also got over 40 Mill total in gauranteed in his bank account from day one to take his so called pay cuts. Premier players do not take pay cuts for the sake of the team they take them to get more up front money in their bank accounts. For ever restructure that they do they get an equal or greater check made out to them.

And the Colts had no problem working this deal out which also allowed them to get the final piece of the puzzle that brought them the championship. If he hadn't have restructured, the team would have never gotten the players necessary to win the SB. That's all I'm asking Fitz to do but he and his agent want to play hardball.

As for last statement, not even close to the same scale or the same issue. Signing bonus spread out over the life of the deal vs. roster bonus against the cap in one season, that was the issue and isn't even close to the same issue as back loading. Back loading was never brought up nor an issue. Not to even mention that Fitz backloaded deal is on a completely different scale. half of his 60+ Mill deal was for the last 2 years of the 6 year deal. There is backloading then there is BACKLOADING. Not even sure why I am speaking as if fitz deal was a back loaded deal because it wasn't. It was an incentive laden deal.

Absolutely is the same. You of all people were the one tooting the horn to have the Cards do the back end loading to be able to get higher priced players on this team. If we hadn't have paid the money out last year, we would really be in sad shape this year. So you hollered at Graves last year because you wanted him to take more player debt on and now you are hollering at him because he did with Larry a couple of years ago what you were wanting him to do last year with several other players. You can't have it both ways.

 

[40yearfan]

Thanks for answering 40's horrible point, Joe. Two different animals, Fitz's contract and the atrocious contracts given our FAs last offseason.

Bottom line is, Graves made his bed and he has to lie in it. I've been saying it like a broken record, and I'll say it again...IT MAKES SENSE TO FITZ TO EXTEND. As long as he gets a good contract that will bump up his guaranteed money enough he will sign it, guaranteed. We have to be creative enough to offer that. It doesn't sound like we are. It sounds like we're trying to get too much of a home town discount. Let's see, we're what, 6 days from FA, and STILL hoping for a home town discount to get a deal done? Pathetic. Graves needs to sack up, stop wasting time, and hammer a deal out. He's had an eternity to do this, and it doesn't sound to me like he's done more than plod along slowly and hope it gets done.

Like someone said, we had all of these problems (Dansby, Pace, Fitz), and we KNEW about them, while the season was still going. We didn't manage to get a Dansby extension done. Taken alone, not a big deal, because we had the Franchise Tag safety net. We didn't get Pace re-signed. We didn't get Fitz extended. We cut some players that needed cutting, which took no brainpower. We did manage to get Berry to take a paycut, which while a great move, was not that difficult to accomplish. So, out of all the big issues we had, Graves has thus far accomplished ZERO of them. On top of that, we have fewer good players under contract from last year because Graves gobbled up our cap space and kept us from signing more quality players. Now, his own lack of initiative looks to hamstring us before the FA period even starts. Not too good for the home team from where I'm sitting.

Now, is there time to get things done still? Sure, a veritable eternity in negotiating time. If, however, Graves doesn't come to his senses NOW, then those 6 days will be gone in the blink of an eye. If Fitz hits FA with the deal he has now, Graves should be fired at 12:01 on March 1st. He's made some nice, small moves so far this offseason. Now he has to earn his pay and get the tough stuff accomplished. Now. Not tomorrow, not mid-March. NOW.

And you also were a big proponent of the Cards taking on more player debt last year without any inkling of how they would handle it down the road. I don't care how good your credit is, you eventually have to pay the piper. Thank goodness the Cards FO doesn't think the way you guys do or we would wind up like a lot of the teams are doing right now. Almost good enough for a year or two and then sink to the bottom and start over.

The team is being built the right way. It might not be fast enough for you, but it is being built non the less.

 

[joeshmo]

Absolutely is the same. You of all people were the one tooting the horn to have the Cards do the back end loading to be able to get higher priced players on this team. If we hadn't have paid the money out last year, we would really be in sad shape this year. So you hollered at Graves last year because you wanted him to take more player debt on and now you are hollering at him because he did with Larry a couple of years ago what you were wanting him to do last year with several other players. You can't have it both ways.

No one is having it both ways becuase you keep talking about something we have never ever talked about concerning the way Graves did contracts last year. You are debating an issue we have never even talked about. You still dont get it. No one was speaking about back loading deals. Spreading out cap space through the life of the deal is a completely different animal to back loading a contract and adding 15 Mill base salaries to the final 2 years of the deal. It is a fundamentally different way of cap accounting, heck just a completely different way of any kind of accounting. If you don't get the difference then I am not sure what more I can say.

And for a second time, Fitz deal was not back loaded. It was incentive laden.

Have already explained that we would not be in any worse cap shape this year if we went with more signing bonuses. Even if we did 50% signing bonus vs. 50% roster bonus last year we would have had 4 more Mill to spend to fill holes or depth and would have only added 1.5 more mill of cap space to this season cap. 1.5 more mill would not have changed anything this year.

Thats not even to say I fault Graves last season after thinking about it and have said it many times. The market was crap we could have had more depth but over all the market stunk, and have also said many times I liked the roster bonus idea in theory just that he needed to fine tune it.

The only fault I have with Graves at this point in time is that he should have had the foresight to see Fitz getting his easily reached incentive and started this process last year. That is the only problem I have.

And the Colts had no problem working this deal out which also allowed them to get the final piece of the puzzle that brought them the championship. If he hadn't have restructured, the team would have never gotten the players necessary to win the SB. That's all I'm asking Fitz to do but he and his agent want to play hardball.

Once more Manning got paid highly more so then any other player has ever been paid in a 2 year time span to restructure. He restructured not out of the goodness of his heart but because the colts paid him to restructure. Players do not restructure for the good of the team, they restructure because they get a brand spanking new check to put into their bank accounts, or they are older and know for a fact that they wouldnt even be able to make what they restructured to on the open market. If that is all you are asking Fitz to do then you to should expect him to get paid very very well for restructuring just like Manning did.

 

[Shane]

Just trade him already and be done with it.

 

[joeshmo]

Just trade him already and be done with it.

I know you are joking but in all honesty I think I would be fine with that. Even though I think he is a better WR then Boldin. It sounds crazy to trade him but think about it. It means that Boldin cant complain about a new deal for another 2 years and it means that we would have enough to re-sign Pace, sign Faneca, and sign one other starter. On top of what we would get in return for Fitz(draft picks/players). I think we would be a better more deep team and I love Fitz.

I hate paying WR's.

 

[Stout]

Thanks, Joe. Very well said. You're comparing apples to oranges to kiwis, 40. Fitz's cap difficulties aren't coming from backloaded salary, but from incentives he has reached. The contracts last year ate up cap space that year and didn't save much cap space for this year anyway. As has been stated by Joe, Peyton Manning ended up getting more guaranteed money instead of having paper money on his contract that he'd never see. Saved cap space, but paid Manning more. All of these above are different issues entirely.

The problem is that you're defending a contract approach last year that was supposed to give us cap space this year. Well, were has all the cap space gone? Graves' inability to get the Fitz deal done is killing us. He's moved slowly and now all of a sudden he's got his back against the wall. He HAS to get it done, or he has to get fired. That simple. This is his job at its very basic. Competent GMs do not let the team stop dead in its tracks because of one player's contract.

 

[40yearfan]

No one is having it both ways becuase you keep talking about something we have never ever talked about concerning the way Graves did contracts last year. You are debating an issue we have never even talked about. You still dont get it. No one was speaking about back loading deals. Spreading out cap space through the life of the deal is a completely different animal to back loading a contract and adding 15 Mill base salaries to the final 2 years of the deal. It is a fundamentally different way of cap accounting, heck just a completely different way of any kind of accounting. If you don't get the difference then I am not sure what more I can say.

And for a second time, Fitz deal was not back loaded. It was incentive laden.

Have already explained that we would not be in any worse cap shape this year if we went with more signing bonuses. Even if we did 50% signing bonus vs. 50% roster bonus last year we would have had 4 more Mill to spend to fill holes or depth and would have only added 1.5 more mill of cap space to this season cap. 1.5 more mill would not have changed anything this year.

Thats not even to say I fault Graves last season after thinking about it and have said it many times. The market was crap we could have had more depth but over all the market stunk, and have also said many times I liked the roster bonus idea in theory just that he needed to fine tune it.

The only fault I have with Graves at this point in time is that he should have had the foresight to see Fitz getting his easily reached incentive and started this process last year. That is the only problem I have.



Once more Manning got paid highly more so then any other player has ever been paid in a 2 year time span to restructure. He restructured not out of the goodness of his heart but because the colts paid him to restructure. Players do not restructure for the good of the team, they restructure because they get a brand spanking new check to put into their bank accounts, or they are older and know for a fact that they wouldnt even be able to make what they restructured to on the open market. If that is all you are asking Fitz to do then you to should expect him to get paid very very well for restructuring just like Manning did.

Joe, I got a degree in accounting once upon a long time ago and I will guarantee you that no matter how you slice and dice the numbers, they are still numbers and anytime you put off paying something until tomorrow and keep doing that, it will eventually catch up with you and kill you.

That's the only problem with the housing market today. People bought more house than they could afford thinking they had a good investment and would be able to sell at a profit at a later date. Many investment counselers were pushing this and a lot of people took their advice. The market went to pot and now they are stuck. Believe me, this same type of thing is going to happen to the NFL. The only question is when.

People are going to get tired of paying through the nose for this type of entertainment and seeing these rich, pampered stars quibbling over whether they get $40 million or $50 million dollars in the next 5 or 6 years. And you know what? It might not be a bad thing for football to have some bad years. Get back to the basics and play football because you love the game.

 

[Stout]

Joe, I got a degree in accounting once upon a long time ago and I will guarantee you that no matter how you slice and dice the numbers, they are still numbers and anytime you put off paying something until tomorrow and keep doing that, it will eventually catch up with you and kill you.

That's the only problem with the housing market today. People bought more house than they could afford thinking they had a good investment and would be able to sell at a profit at a later date. Many investment counselers were pushing this and a lot of people took their advice. The market went to pot and now they are stuck. Believe me, this same type of thing is going to happen to the NFL. The only question is when.

People are going to get tired of paying through the nose for this type of entertainment and seeing these rich, pampered stars quibbling over whether they get $40 million or $50 million dollars in the next 5 or 6 years. And you know what? It might not be a bad thing for football to have some bad years. Get back to the basics and play football because you love the game.

I think you'd need a Dolorian and Michael J. Fox in order to pay incentives earned in the final year of a contract in the first year of the contract, 40. Unless you can find those things, then you're dead wrong. Fitz's problems, Joe said, are from playing incentives that he has earned. One of them is for making the Pro Bowl, if memory serves. Please tell us all how to not pay that now and how we could have payed him for making the Pro Bowl this year in an earlier contract year?

 

[40yearfan]

Thanks, Joe. Very well said. You're comparing apples to oranges to kiwis, 40. Fitz's cap difficulties aren't coming from backloaded salary, but from incentives he has reached. The contracts last year ate up cap space that year and didn't save much cap space for this year anyway. As has been stated by Joe, Peyton Manning ended up getting more guaranteed money instead of having paper money on his contract that he'd never see. Saved cap space, but paid Manning more. All of these above are different issues entirely.

Wrong. They are all issues to pertain to how the front office has done business. You contend that we could have added players last year and still had more cap space than we have now. If Graves hadn't have paid that money up front last year, we would owe 25% of it this year. If you think that wouldn't affect our cap this year, you are not thinking straight.

Fitz's contract has been in place for 3 years now. I didn't hear one person complain about how it was structured until it came back to bite us in the butt this year. Now it's a bad deal. How come it wasn't a bad deal when it was negotiated?

The problem is that you're defending a contract approach last year that was supposed to give us cap space this year. Well, were has all the cap space gone? Graves' inability to get the Fitz deal done is killing us. He's moved slowly and now all of a sudden he's got his back against the wall. He HAS to get it done, or he has to get fired. That simple. This is his job at its very basic. Competent GMs do not let the team stop dead in its tracks because of one player's contract.

Did you at any time hear Graves say we would have a bunch of cap space this year? The only people who said that last year were posters on this board. Nobody questioned it. Then all of a sudden, it becomes apparent that they were wrong. There never was a bunch of cap space available for this year. It was only the supposition of some on this board who didn't take into account all of the varibles that go with managing the cap. The cap space hasn't gone anywhere.

The front office anticipated this and had a plan in place to cover us in the event of any contingency. Instead of complimenting them for their foresight, we castigate them because we didn't realize there was a problem until about a month ago. Good thing they don't do business like some of us do.

 

[Jetstream Green]

the joys of negotiation

Pesonally, I don't think Fitz wants to be a Cardinal ever since Denny Green was cut loose but with my personal opinion cast aside, this is a agent and a player trying to get the most money out of the situation and it does not surprise me in the least that Fitz is no where close to wanting to make a deal this early in the game. In the end, only Fitz really knows what he wants to do and any talk from either side of the contract in question will not give their full hand especially to the public. I still want Fitz as a Cardinal and hope that it happens.

 

[40yearfan]

I think you'd need a Dolorian and Michael J. Fox in order to pay incentives earned in the final year of a contract in the first year of the contract, 40. Unless you can find those things, then you're dead wrong. Fitz's problems, Joe said, are from playing incentives that he has earned. One of them is for making the Pro Bowl, if memory serves. Please tell us all how to not pay that now and how we could have payed him for making the Pro Bowl this year in an earlier contract year?

Stout, read my posts. Where have I ever said we should pay him up front? That is something you a few others on here have stated. Did you not say in one of you posts that the Cards should have recognized this problem last year and taken care of it then.

How would you suggest they should have done that? They spent all of the available cap monies and picked up what they could in that year instead of pushing the problem into this year and having us face an even bigger problem.

 

[Stout]

Did you at any time hear Graves say we would have a bunch of cap space this year? The only people who said that last year were posters on this board. Nobody questioned it. Then all of a sudden, it becomes apparent that they were wrong. There never was a bunch of cap space available for this year. It was only the supposition of some on this board who didn't take into account all of the varibles that go with managing the cap. The cap space hasn't gone anywhere.

The front office anticipated this and had a plan in place to cover us in the event of any contingency. Instead of complimenting them for their foresight, we castigate them because we didn't realize there was a problem until about a month ago. Good thing they don't do business like some of us do.

Sorry, but I had to turn off that godawful red bolded text.

Now, to answer your post, YES, I most certainly did hear Graves say that. He claimed that last year we had a weak FA class and that he wanted to, and I quote, "Keep the powder dry" for next year. Well, guess what? It's now next year and our powder ain't dry. You're surprised that this makes people unhappy? His philosophy clearly didn't work.

And that contingency that the FO had in place was...was...was...I'm sorry, I'm still waiting for the contingency plan. Where's all the cap space? Where's the dry powder? You think we should compliment them for their foresight? Where was their foresight in coming up with what to do if their all-pro WR made the Pro Bowl? Their foresight has possibly ruined this offseason for us. There, I gave them the proper credit for their foresight.

 

[Syracusecards]

Joe, I got a degree in accounting once upon a long time ago and I will guarantee you that no matter how you slice and dice the numbers, they are still numbers and anytime you put off paying something until tomorrow and keep doing that, it will eventually catch up with you and kill you.

That's the only problem with the housing market today. People bought more house than they could afford thinking they had a good investment and would be able to sell at a profit at a later date. Many investment counselers were pushing this and a lot of people took their advice. The market went to pot and now they are stuck. Believe me, this same type of thing is going to happen to the NFL. The only question is when.

People are going to get tired of paying through the nose for this type of entertainment and seeing these rich, pampered stars quibbling over whether they get $40 million or $50 million dollars in the next 5 or 6 years. And you know what? It might not be a bad thing for football to have some bad years. Get back to the basics and play football because you love the game.

40, I think a good example of what Joe is saying is KW's contract. He didn't reach an incentive that would have paid him another 500K. As opposed to if we said "ok, in the later years of his contract, we'll just automatically pay the 500K". If Fitz didn't hit the incentives, it wouldn't count so much against the cap. I think that's what he's saying. Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Stout]

Stout, read my posts. Where have I ever said we should pay him up front? That is something you a few others on here have stated. Did you not say in one of you posts that the Cards should have recognized this problem last year and taken care of it then.

How would you suggest they should have done that? They spent all of the available cap monies and picked up what they could in that year instead of pushing the problem into this year and having us face an even bigger problem.

Stout, read my posts. Where have I ever said we should pay him up front?

This is in direct response to Joe's post.

Joe, I got a degree in accounting once upon a long time ago and I will guarantee you that no matter how you slice and dice the numbers, they are still numbers and anytime you put off paying something until tomorrow and keep doing that, it will eventually catch up with you and kill you.

You said it. I didn't make it up.

How would you suggest they should have done that? They spent all of the available cap monies and picked up what they could in that year instead of pushing the problem into this year and having us face an even bigger problem.

Thank you Karl Rove. They 'technically' spent all of the available cap monies last year. They did NOT sign all the starters/depth players last year that they could afford. They overinflated contracts last year that specifically ate up our available cap. But you worry that the problem would have been pushed to this year? As Joe has already explained (and you apparently missed or ignored), we could have structured the contracts in a friendlier way and signed more players, with minimal impact upon this year's cap.

The bottom line is that they signed Fitz to a deal with incentives. The incentives kicked in and he now has almost a 17 million dollar cap figure. No good GM or FO would ever allow that to stand. Instead of arguing semantics over past mistakes with me, 40, talk about how Graves is going to take care of the mess he himself created. They are bells and whistles that all teams give out, and other teams somehow find a way not to have a 17 MILLION DOLLAR CAP FIGURE for a player, let alone a WR.

 

[Stout]

40, I think a good example of what Joe is saying is KW's contract. He didn't reach an incentive that would have paid him another 500K. As opposed to if we said "ok, in the later years of his contract, we'll just automatically pay the 500K". If Fitz didn't hit the incentives, it wouldn't count so much against the cap. I think that's what he's saying. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Hey, you read Joe's post and understood it...cool!

 

[WildBB]

The bottom line is that they signed Fitz to a deal with incentives. The incentives kicked in and he now has almost a 17 million dollar cap figure. No good GM or FO would ever allow that to stand. Instead of arguing semantics over past mistakes with me, 40, talk about how Graves is going to take care of the mess he himself created. They are bells and whistles that all teams give out, and other teams somehow find a way not to have a 17 MILLION DOLLAR CAP FIGURE for a player, let alone a WR.

I'll chime in on this. Fitz was the 3rd player taken in the draft the year Denny Green came on board. Denny's Godson and former ballboy or whatever.

The FO didn't want him to hold out to start his (Denny's) regime off right. He was one of the first players to recieve escalators that the org. formerly refused to negotiate. Most on this board questioned why the FO would'nt give the escalators, since the Cardinals were traditionally one of the only ones not to negotiate contracts that way for high draft picks, and hence had alot of holdouts.

So this is the mess we're left with, Fitz' deal.Problem is how much more guaranteed $$ can the team offer him over the 31 mil. that's allready due him the next two yrs? Next season something has to get done with that mess of a deal for the org. standpoint and good for the team. This year the incentive isn't big enough for him to re-up IMO.

And that's a shame cause it might probobly cost us Pace.

 

[black]

I have read every post in this thread and you all have brought some very good points.

Trading Larry would be a stupid mistake. If Larry keeps up the pace, we could very well see 2 Cardinal receivers in the HOF.

I think the Cards were a better team than their record showed last season, and where the Cards sit right now they will do ok next season. I mean, if the Cards didnt pick anyone in the draft or anyone in FA, they will still improve. Now, I know this isnt going to happen, but the Cards are on an upswing, no sense dwelling on what happened with Larrys' contract. Pay the man already.

As far as being a team player, there are other players that can put up or shutup.

 

[DaisyCutter]

I know you are joking but in all honesty I think I would be fine with that. Even though I think he is a better WR then Boldin. It sounds crazy to trade him but think about it. It means that Boldin cant complain about a new deal for another 2 years and it means that we would have enough to re-sign Pace, sign Faneca, and sign one other starter. On top of what we would get in return for Fitz(draft picks/players). I think we would be a better more deep team and I love Fitz.

I hate paying WR's.

What do you think a realistic deal for Fitz would be, though? The Vikings got a Top 10 pick (who has been a spectacular bust), Napoleon Harris (a former disappointing late-first round pick), and a 7th-round pick to be determined for Randy Moss in his prime.

I don't really like paying WRs, either, but I like even less getting $0.60 on the dollar for one of the Top 20 players in the NFL. Re-sign Fitz, trade Boldin (who has a contract that you'll get better return on), and then you'll improve the depth of your team with the second-round pick you'd get for Boldin.

What do you realistically think is a best-case trade scenario for Larry Fitzgerald with the contract that he's carrying?