Artice - Cards, Fitzgerald not close to deal

[joeshmo]

EDIT: Sheesh, sorry about that Stout. I thought the green would be easier to read and it's even worse. Ahhh, if your eyes go bad reading this stuff, I'll get you a pair of glasses.

I thought I was having a relapse.

 

[joeshmo]

And what did it get the Redskins? They are the last team I would like the Cards to follow as an example.

I think you are a politician because you tried to disprove me with a fact that has nothing to do with your statement of,

"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."

I completely disproved that and point just to one team the Redskins, I could have just as easily pointed to the Patriots who were just one spot below the Redskins in total salary spent the last 5 years. Both teams have been putting off paying something until tomorrow by using a boat load of gaurantees yet the cap has yet to catch up to either team. The way of accounting for cap space had nothing to do about wins or loses just that your way of accounting thought process has no baring on a completely different accounting process becuase there is a 300 page book of different rules compared to your rules. To think of the cap process in the same way as taxes or the housing market is a complete mistake and would be wrong.

 

[joeshmo]

Well, then, joe. What deal do you think we could get for Fitz, realisitcally? And you know as well as I that the "even more starters" that that $17 million would be used for probably aren't all that great--we both know that the free agency crop is going to be pretty middling for the next few years.

Green Bay unloaded Javon Walker for a 2nd round pick. He also had two seasons left on his rookie deal. New England traded Deion Branch to Seattle for a low first-round pick. Do you honestly believe that some team is going to give up two first-day picks and a solid starter (likely at a premium position like pass rusher or cornerback) for the right to give Larry Fitzgerald 10% of their salary cap?

Cbus already answered what I thought was already obvious.

"Look at it this way.If the Cards did trade Fitz it would probably be contingent on that team working out a new deal for him."

Walker wasnt a top 5 pick. Never stated we could get 2 1st rounders in fact I used the same exact idea of your Moss example which is more then fair and we could easily get.

 

[joeshmo]

Sound thinking Stout. I wish someone would explain that to Fitz and his agent.

They know and will be the reason why a deal does get done.

Yet his agent is also probably also bringing up the deal Moss got like 5 years ago. 8 years 75 Mill.

 

[Stout]

It doesnt make sense to you becuase that isnt the issue. At least not one I am talking about, others maybe.

Thats not it at all, not even close. They are not mad at the contract, it is a standard top 5 incentive laden draft pick contract. They are mad that we have the only GM in the league to have ever let that contract get this far without doing something about it(not to say they havent done anything yet becuase we still have 5 days). Name one other GM who has let a top 5 rookie contract like the standard one that Fitz got reach the point of letting their player count over 16 Mill against their cap?

Joe, I swear, you're just picking over my brain and answering better than I could before I even check the board! Thanks for it, by the way.

Joe is exactly right. Fitz's rookie contract is exactly what had to happen. I have no beefs with that contract, and it was actually a good sign to see the team offer it. The problem enters when we did not get an extension signed. Like Joe said, NO teams allow their rookie contracts to go too far as we have done thus far with Fitz. It just doesn't happen. If we end up going into the season with a near 17 million dollar CAP hit for one player, we'll become the laughingstock of the league, and we'll cripple our ability to fill out the roster.

 

[Stout]

The contingency was and is that we can afford to pay Fitz's salary if we can't get him to rework his contract. And we still have that contingency, so yes it did work.

No, that is not the contingency. If that is the actual contingency, then we should clean the FO out this instance. That should NEVER HAVE BEEN the contingency, letting one player have a 17 MILLION DOLLAR CAP HIT. Letting one player take up something like 1/6 of our ENTIRE cap. Anyone who logically thinks that's even a good backup plan is deranged. Graves' plan was to have us sitting in this current offseason with a nice, large amount of unused cap. He wanted to 'keep our powder dry', if you'll recall. Guess what? If Fitz's extension doesn't go through, then we don't have our dry powder, and Graves will have massively failed. He would have allowed to happen what no GM has let happen to date, I think.

 

[Stout]

By-the-by, I know I'm going off on this issue, but let me reiterate that this is all reactionary to the current news. Should a deal get done, which is something I was very confident of up until as recently as a week ago, then a good tip of the hat will go to RG. Of course, it will have set us back in having time to re-sign Pace, but it will be a huge booster for us heading into FA.

 

[black]

The Fitz deal will probably happen, he wants to stay in AZ. That said, he will wait for the dollars and put his MTV cribs house on hold.

 

[Assface]

Joe, I swear, you're just picking over my brain and answering better than I could before I even check the board! Thanks for it, by the way.

Joe is exactly right. Fitz's rookie contract is exactly what had to happen. I have no beefs with that contract, and it was actually a good sign to see the team offer it. The problem enters when we did not get an extension signed. Like Joe said, NO teams allow their rookie contracts to go too far as we have done thus far with Fitz. It just doesn't happen. If we end up going into the season with a near 17 million dollar CAP hit for one player, we'll become the laughingstock of the league, and we'll cripple our ability to fill out the roster.

I don't mind that it hadn't been redone yet. Fitz didn't reach the escalators that kicked up his pay until this year. If Graves had decided last year to redo Fitz's contract halfway through his rookie contract most of the board would have called him stupid for doing that when there were more pressing needs. Come on, you know the reaction would have been, "way to go, Graves, redoing someone's deal halfway through when he hasn't even asked for it yet."

You yourself have pointed out why it behooves Fitz to sign an extension. His agent should have plenty of motivation to get it done because that's another pay day for him. Last year Fitz had no leverage and still had 3 years left so why would they have done it now? Too many of us here think it's like playing Madden where all you have to do is offer a contract and it's accepted.

Graves is going to make an offer that Fitz and his agent think is too low. They're going to counter with an offer that's too high. Eventually they'll meet in the middle that's good for everyone. As long as Graves has a ballpark figure that Fitz will end up at he can still plan for free agency and re-sign Pace.

 

[Stout]

I don't mind that it hadn't been redone yet. Fitz didn't reach the escalators that kicked up his pay until this year. If Graves had decided last year to redo Fitz's contract halfway through his rookie contract most of the board would have called him stupid for doing that when there were more pressing needs. Come on, you know the reaction would have been, "way to go, Graves, redoing someone's deal halfway through when he hasn't even asked for it yet."

You yourself have pointed out why it behooves Fitz to sign an extension. His agent should have plenty of motivation to get it done because that's another pay day for him. Last year Fitz had no leverage and still had 3 years left so why would they have done it now? Too many of us here think it's like playing Madden where all you have to do is offer a contract and it's accepted.

Graves is going to make an offer that Fitz and his agent think is too low. They're going to counter with an offer that's too high. Eventually they'll meet in the middle that's good for everyone. As long as Graves has a ballpark figure that Fitz will end up at he can still plan for free agency and re-sign Pace.

Oh, don't get me wrong. It shouldn't have been re-done before last season, no, not at all. That would have been silly. Still, he had an entire season and a chunk of offseason to get the deal done. That's proven to have been enough time for every other GM out there to get these types of deals done. 'Sup with RG?

I think they'll get a deal done, sure, but will it get done by next Friday? IMO, and in most people's opinions, it MUST be done by then.

 

[Assface]

Oh, don't get me wrong. It shouldn't have been re-done before last season, no, not at all. That would have been silly. Still, he had an entire season and a chunk of offseason to get the deal done. That's proven to have been enough time for every other GM out there to get these types of deals done. 'Sup with RG?

I think they'll get a deal done, sure, but will it get done by next Friday? IMO, and in most people's opinions, it MUST be done by then.

http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/showthread.php?t=106998

Over a third of the league is franchising players, many of these being the most respected GMs and best teams. The Pats didn't get a deal done with either Moss of Samuels and Asante is going to walk. I'm going to wait to see the results before I freak out. If Graves ends up dropping the ball on this offseason then I'll criticize him but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt first.

 

[Stout]

http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/showthread.php?t=106998

Over a third of the league is franchising players, many of these being the most respected GMs and best teams. The Pats didn't get a deal done with either Moss of Samuels and Asante is going to walk. I'm going to wait to see the results before I freak out. If Graves ends up dropping the ball on this offseason then I'll criticize him but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt first.

I'm talking about players in the back end of their rookie contracts who suddenly, because of incentives, have astronomical cap figures. Show me another player from that situation who carried a near 17 million dollar cap figure.

 

[Shogun]

Bad for us as fans, but good for him. Get your paper, kid. Trying to get market value does not make you any less of a team player than anyone else.

I pretty much co-sign Stout's thought on this.

 

[40yearfan]

It doesnt make sense to you becuase that isnt the issue. At least not one I am talking about, others maybe.

Thats not it at all, not even close. They are not mad at the contract, it is a standard top 5 incentive laden draft pick contract. They are mad that we have the only GM in the league to have ever let that contract get this far without doing something about it(not to say they havent done anything yet becuase we still have 5 days). Name one other GM who has let a top 5 rookie contract like the standard one that Fitz got reach the point of letting their player count over 16 Mill against their cap?

Name one GM that didn't do that. Can you give me some instances where GM's redid the contract a year before it was due? That's what Stout is saying should have been done. You're right that it is a standard contract and I'd be willing to bet you that a majority of GM's would handle it the same way Graves has. And another thing, it takes two to tango. It's obvious Fitz's agent has not been in any hurry to get this deal done. What makes you think he would have been willing to redo this contract any earlier? He certainly isn't in a hurry now.

What you and others are refusing to acknowledge is that even if the contract can't be restructured, we can still handle it and stay within our cap. How many NFL teams could say that? I call that foresight.

 

[40yearfan]

I think you are a politician because you tried to disprove me with a fact that has nothing to do with your statement of,

"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."

I completely disproved that and point just to one team the Redskins, I could have just as easily pointed to the Patriots who were just one spot below the Redskins in total salary spent the last 5 years. Both teams have been putting off paying something until tomorrow by using a boat load of gaurantees yet the cap has yet to catch up to either team. The way of accounting for cap space had nothing to do about wins or loses just that your way of accounting thought process has no baring on a completely different accounting process becuase there is a 300 page book of different rules compared to your rules. To think of the cap process in the same way as taxes or the housing market is a complete mistake and would be wrong.

You can say that about the Redskins, but not the Pats. They haven't bumped up against the Cap until the last couple of years. Sure you can put it off for a while, but it will get to you eventually and I'll guarantee you that it has happened at one time or another to every NFL team.

For anyone who is interested, the following web-site shows the money every team in the NFL has spent from the 2000 season through the 2007 season.

http://content.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/salaries/default.aspx

If you check this site out, you will see that no team has consistanly been in the top 5. There is even a time when the Cards spent the most money and I'll bet very few of you can guess the year it was.

EDIT: By the way, when you go to the web-site, use the Season Summary column on the top right hand side of the page, pick the total payroll tab and then pick any season from 2000 to 2007 and it will give you total payrolls for every team in the NFL for that particular season. Amazing how much the Cards have spent during those years compared to some of the other teams.

 

[40yearfan]

Joe, I swear, you're just picking over my brain and answering better than I could before I even check the board! Thanks for it, by the way.

Joe is exactly right. Fitz's rookie contract is exactly what had to happen. I have no beefs with that contract, and it was actually a good sign to see the team offer it. The problem enters when we did not get an extension signed. Like Joe said, NO teams allow their rookie contracts to go too far as we have done thus far with Fitz. It just doesn't happen. If we end up going into the season with a near 17 million dollar CAP hit for one player, we'll become the laughingstock of the league, and we'll cripple our ability to fill out the roster.

Will we be the laughing stock or will other GM's ask how RG managed to do that and not loose any of his premier players?

 

[40yearfan]

No, that is not the contingency. If that is the actual contingency, then we should clean the FO out this instance. That should NEVER HAVE BEEN the contingency, letting one player have a 17 MILLION DOLLAR CAP HIT. Letting one player take up something like 1/6 of our ENTIRE cap. Anyone who logically thinks that's even a good backup plan is deranged. Graves' plan was to have us sitting in this current offseason with a nice, large amount of unused cap. He wanted to 'keep our powder dry', if you'll recall. Guess what? If Fitz's extension doesn't go through, then we don't have our dry powder, and Graves will have massively failed. He would have allowed to happen what no GM has let happen to date, I think.

Well call me deranged then. I think he did a great job of putting us in this position to cover any eventuality. Not many GM's could have managed that and kept all their good guys. The more I think about it the smarter Graves gets.

By the way, I have absolutely no recollection of Graves saying we would have a large amount of unused cap space. Mind showing that to me?

 

[40yearfan]

I'm talking about players in the back end of their rookie contracts who suddenly, because of incentives, have astronomical cap figures. Show me another player from that situation who carried a near 17 million dollar cap figure.

There are none. Fitz is one of a kind and we are lucky to have him. If he wouldn't have hit those incentives, you'd be all over Graves for making such a poor draft pick.

 

[Stout]

Well call me deranged then. I think he did a great job of putting us in this position to cover any eventuality. Not many GM's could have managed that and kept all their good guys. The more I think about it the smarter Graves gets.

By the way, I have absolutely no recollection of Graves saying we would have a large amount of unused cap space. Mind showing that to me?

Oh, am I correct in assuming you refuse to recall Graves saying anything about not being big players last year because it was a bad FA period, and that we'd save cap space for next season? You don't remember that? If so, I call it selective memory. It was a specific reason given for structuring contracts the way we did last year. Okay, I didn't like it then, but maybe it would help us this year. Is it? No, because now we won't be able to go out and sign FAs.

Now, on to other quotes of yours:

What you and others are refusing to acknowledge is that even if the contract can't be restructured, we can still handle it and stay within our cap. How many NFL teams could say that? I call that foresight.

Most people would call it a colossal waste of cap space because we can't close the deal. That is, in fact, what it is.

Will we be the laughing stock or will other GM's ask how RG managed to do that and not loose any of his premier players?

No, we'll be the laughingstock. We weren't losing Fitz one way or the other--he's under contract. If this ballooned figure put us over the cap, we'd have simply cut someone else to get under the cap.

BOTTOM LINE: 40, do you really believe Graves saved cap money for this season in a plan to use almost 17 million of it to retain Fitz? Or do you think the plan was to extend Fitz and use that big cap chunk to help our team?

 

[Stout]

There are none. Fitz is one of a kind and we are lucky to have him. If he wouldn't have hit those incentives, you'd be all over Graves for making such a poor draft pick.

Eh, back up. Your answer ended after the first sentence, because the rest of your post had zero pertinence to the issue. There are none. GMs don't let players take up 1/6 of their cap space. They don't carry 17 million dollar cap numbers into a season for a single player. Thanks for agreeing with me, bud. Now tell me again how it's a good thing we have Fitz sitting at 17 million and Rod isn't to blame.

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

i'll bet you Graves has a balloon mortgage structure .

 

[40yearfan]

Oh, am I correct in assuming you refuse to recall Graves saying anything about not being big players last year because it was a bad FA period, and that we'd save cap space for next season? You don't remember that? If so, I call it selective memory. It was a specific reason given for structuring contracts the way we did last year. Okay, I didn't like it then, but maybe it would help us this year. Is it? No, because now we won't be able to go out and sign FAs.

No I don't and I haven't seen you put any verifiable quotes from him on here. You sure it isn't just your imagination?

Now, on to other quotes of yours:



Most people would call it a colossal waste of cap space because we can't close the deal. That is, in fact, what it is.

So you've decided that this deal won't get done because Graves is incompetent?



No, we'll be the laughingstock. We weren't losing Fitz one way or the other--he's under contract. If this ballooned figure put us over the cap, we'd have simply cut someone else to get under the cap.

BOTTOM LINE: 40, do you really believe Graves saved cap money for this season in a plan to use almost 17 million of it to retain Fitz? Or do you think the plan was to extend Fitz and use that big cap chunk to help our team?

No, he didn't plan to use $17 million as Fitz's cap hit this year is a little over $14 million. Next year is when the $17 million kicks in. He planned on being able to restructure the contract, but wasn't willing to not have a fall back position if Fitz and agent refused to deal. I call that smart money management.

 

[40yearfan]

Eh, back up. Your answer ended after the first sentence, because the rest of your post had zero pertinence to the issue. There are none. GMs don't let players take up 1/6 of their cap space. They don't carry 17 million dollar cap numbers into a season for a single player. Thanks for agreeing with me, bud. Now tell me again how it's a good thing we have Fitz sitting at 17 million and Rod isn't to blame.

C'mon Stout. At least get your numbers right. It's a little over $14 million due this year, not $17 million. Would you have rather that Fitz didn't make those incentives? Weren't you one of the ones hollering at the Cards for not using incentive laden contracts a few years back? Now you are blaming them for using an incentive laden contract? Is that not a tad bit hypocritical?

 

[Stout]

No, he didn't plan to use $17 million as Fitz's cap hit this year is a little over $14 million. Next year is when the $17 million kicks in. He planned on being able to restructure the contract, but wasn't willing to not have a fall back position if Fitz and agent refused to deal. I call that smart money management.

Incorrect. By Joe's spreadsheat, Fitz's cap number is $16,592,500, or almost 17 million. You forgot the bonus. Sorry, but I'm not going to let you get away with mitigating this disaster. He did not save his cap money for this season in any way, shape, or form to pay Fitz almost 17 million. If you believe that, you truly have become blinded to any kind of real criticism on Rod Graves.

 

[Stout]

C'mon Stout. At least get your numbers right. It's a little over $14 million due this year, not $17 million. Would you have rather that Fitz didn't make those incentives? Weren't you one of the ones hollering at the Cards for not using incentive laden contracts a few years back? Now you are blaming them for using an incentive laden contract? Is that not a tad bit hypocritical?

WRONG, as stated above. And, if you continue to misquote me as you do yet again, I'm going to simply assume you're being argumentative just to be argumentative and put you on my ignore list. NO ONE IS BLAMING THEM FOR THE CONTRACT. NO ONE, NO ONE, NO ONE. I figured that, maybe if I really made it jump out at you, you'd FINALLY read it. It was a standard rookie deal and a deal that we had to pony up if we wanted to sign Fitz as a rookie #3 pick in the draft. Sheesh. The difficulty is, as you admitted, no other GM has ignored a contract like this and let it come to term. If Graves does that, he's done (or should be). If he fixes the situation and manages a last-second extension, then I'll be ecstatic.

As for your politician-like lack of recollection, allow me to post a new thread.