CAP Numbers

[40yearfan]

True, but to exercise that option the player or players have to agree to it and to get them to agree they have to be paid to make the changes so it ends up costing the Cards more cap money in the future.

Fans really need to look at my Kool Aid thread to see why being cap strapped right now isn't that big of a problem. The team added a lot of players the last two seasons and had what appears to be two very good drafts 2010 and 2011 so they don't need much in free agency this year.

Agree with everything but it costing the Cards more CAP money in the future. We are writing those dollars off up-front rather than throwing them into future years. That's why we have so much flexibility with the CAP.

 

[Duckjake]

Agree with everything but it costing the Cards more CAP money in the future. We are writing those dollars off up-front rather than throwing them into future years. That's why we have so much flexibility with the CAP.

But not if they were to restructure the current contracts of guys like Fitzgerald and Campbell. To free up Cap money now they'd have to defer it to later years by converting it to signing bonuses. Considering that the cap is expected to increase by as much as $30 million next year that wouldn't be a bad move. Not all players get extra money for restructuring but guys like Fitz and Campbell usually do.

 

[Goldfield]

You're not making sense. They didn't save any money. It was going to cost them that amount anyway. The only thing they did differently was to write it off all at one time rather than spread it out over several seasons and REALLY wind up in CAP hell. By handling the CAP the way they have been doing, if a situation like Manning comes up, they can restructure and still be able to sign him. Most teams don't have that luxury because they spread all the costs out as long as they can and eventually wind up with a CAP problem.

This is the way successful companies are run. They plan for the future and leave themselves an out in case of an unforseen problem. It's a conservative approach designed to keep you from winding up like our federal government.

It make sense. They could spend more money within the cap if they structure them differently. Yes "Cap Hell" as you call it becomes more of an issue. But that's if you go crazy and over spend every year. We both know the Cards won't do this.

Were in cap hell now because the Cards need to improve this roster, but they don't want to spend the money.

The cap is expected to go way up in the next few years. Now is as good as any to push back salaries.

 

[40yearfan]

But not if they were to restructure the current contracts of guys like Fitzgerald and Campbell. To free up Cap money now they'd have to defer it to later years by converting it to signing bonuses. Considering that the cap is expected to increase by as much as $30 million next year that wouldn't be a bad move. Not all players get extra money for restructuring but guys like Fitz and Campbell usually do.

I agree with you. The thing I was commenting on is that we have the flexibility to restructure because of the method of writing contracts that we use, charging the money out in the current year rather than spreading it out over several years. It's a very conservative way of doing business, but what else would you expect from a very conservative organization? I would probably do it the same way. I can't tell you if it is the correct business model or not as I know very little about how an NFL organization functions.

Regardless, because of how these contracts were structured, the Cards now have the option to really increase their CAP space, something a lot of other NFL teams can't accomplish.

 

[40yearfan]

It make sense. They could spend more money within the cap if they structure them differently. Yes "Cap Hell" as you call it becomes more of an issue. But that's if you go crazy and over spend every year. We both know the Cards won't do this.

Were in cap hell now because the Cards need to improve this roster, but they don't want to spend the money.

The cap is expected to go way up in the next few years. Now is as good as any to push back salaries.

The Cards spent $119,000,000 last year in player salaries. That's cash out the door. They spent the most of any NFL team. How can you say they didn't want to spend the money? How much more did you want them to spend?

BTW, we are not in CAP hell. Re-structuring will give us more than enough to sign any player we want including Manning if he decided to sign here.

 

[JAB]

You're not making sense. They didn't save any money. It was going to cost them that amount anyway. The only thing they did differently was to write it off all at one time rather than spread it out over several seasons and REALLY wind up in CAP hell. By handling the CAP the way they have been doing, if a situation like Manning comes up, they can restructure and still be able to sign him. Most teams don't have that luxury because they spread all the costs out as long as they can and eventually wind up with a CAP problem.

This is the way successful companies are run. They plan for the future and leave themselves an out in case of an unforseen problem. It's a conservative approach designed to keep you from winding up like our federal government.

Stop you're making way too much sense and being way too reasonable. I must ask you try to refrain from posting.

Sincerely

The sky is falling...........

 

[Duckjake]

Stop you're making way too much sense and being way too reasonable. I must ask you try to refrain from posting.

Sincerely

The sky is falling...........

NFC West Champions
NFC Champions
Super Bowl appearance
NFC West Champions
Wild Card Playoff Round Winner
5-11
8-8

Too late, the sky already fell. We're talking about getting it off our heads. Of course its all BIM's fault for leaving the roof open.

 

[JAB]

NFC West Champions
NFC Champions
Super Bowl appearance
NFC West Champions
Wild Card Playoff Round Winner
5-11
8-8

Too late, the sky already fell. We're talking about getting it off our heads. Of course its all BIM's fault for leaving the roof open.

NFC Champions / With a Hall of Fame quarterback
Super Bowl appearance / With a Hall or Fame quarterback
NFC West Champions / With a hall of fame quarterback
Wild Card Playoff Round Winner / With a Hall of Fame quarterback.
5-11 / Without a Hall of Fame quarterback, retiring a year early.
8-8 / With a young team, and almost little quarterback productivity on their way back up.

When was the last time you saw a Cardinals team manage a 500 record with the production we had at quarterback? This team has a lot of good young talent on it that improved three wins in one season with almost 0 consistent quarterback productivity. Our management has a salary cap, which is one reason were able to be competitive in the first place. You can't just go out and get it a Hall of Fame player at every position. Name one team that doesn't have a weakness? they all do, and that's because of the salary cap. University of Phoenix Stadium, plus a salary cap equaled the opportunity to compete. This team and organization is bouncing back from losing a player that during a three-year stretch played as well as anyone that has ever played in this league. They obviously have restructured the team minus consistency at quarterback to be very competitive or we would have gone backwards last season, not forwards. We're going to need a few more pieces, but not a lot. With the way the contracts were written we are going to have the cap room next season to finish the job. We will also know by next season exactly what we have on both sides of the ball due to having a full season and off-season to train and learn the system. What you see as tragedy, I see as improvement and hope in the future without a Hall of Fame quarterback playing at an all time high level. Remind me just how well did the Colts do after Peyton Manning went down? Do you think they will be sitting at 500 in year two next season? I think our organization is smarter than you think but that's just my humble opinion.

 

[Duckjake]

This team and organization is bouncing back from losing a player that during a three-year stretch played as well as anyone that has ever played in this league.

Which is exactly what I wrote. We're trying to get the sky off our heads.

All you have done is give the reasons the sky fell. If you don't think 2010 (and the first 7 games of 2011) and having to watch DeWreck Anderson, Max Hall and Kevin Kolb play QB guiding the Cardinals to a stretch where they lost 15 of 18 games, and the team finishing near the bottom of the NFL in almost ever statistical category, was the sky falling then I don't know what to tell you.

 

[JAB]

Which is exactly what I wrote. We're trying to get the sky off our heads.

All you have done is give the reasons the sky fell. If you don't think 2010 (and the first 7 games of 2011) and having to watch DeWreck Anderson, Max Hall and Kevin Kolb play QB guiding the Cardinals to a stretch where they lost 15 of 18 games, and the team finishing near the bottom of the NFL in almost ever statistical category, was the sky falling then I don't know what to tell you.

That would be a perfect rebuttal if we only played half a season. If you have to add only a half a season of stats to justify your skepticism that the sky is still firmly planted on top of our heads you have already failed. A season and a half is what it took to turn this ship around and I find that quite remarkable. With no off-season workouts and a short training camp and a lot of change in our lineup we were still able to jettison that sky off our heads and finish the season with a drastic improvement on the defensive side of the ball and at least enough quarterback production to pull out a lot of victories. I find it ironic when stat people pick and choose their stats. If I wanted to play the half season game I could show you a top-five defense and a team that won 7 out of their last 9 games, which of course would put us at the top of the league. Nevertheless, I see the season for what it was. Which IMO was great improvement and a lot of upside. Your exact words were "Too late, the sky already fell. We're talking about getting it off our heads." Nothing in that is past tense and IMO we have. You're more than welcome to that opinion I simply don't share it.

 

[Duckjake]

That would be a perfect rebuttal if we only played half a season. If you have to add only a half a season of stats to justify your skepticism that the sky is still firmly planted on top of our heads you have already failed. A season and a half is what it took to turn this ship around and I find that quite remarkable. With no off-season workouts and a short training camp and a lot of change in our lineup we were still able to jettison that sky off our heads and finish the season with a drastic improvement on the defensive side of the ball and at least enough quarterback production to pull up a lot of victories. I find it ironic when stat people pick and choose their stats. If I wanted to play the half season game I could show you a top-five defense and a team that won 7 out of their last 9 games, which of course would put us at the top of the league. Nevertheless, I see the season for what it was. Which IMO was great improvement and a lot of upside. Your exact words were "Too late, the sky already fell. We're talking about getting it off our heads." Nothing in that is past tense and IMO we have. You're more than welcome to that opinion I simply don't share it.

In what universe do 16 games constitute a half season? 5-11 in 2010. It was as bad a season as any Cardinal season in recent memory. The Sky fell. Going 6-18 and then winning 7 of 9 is a sign of starting to turn things around after they have hit rock bottom. In other words getting the sky off our heads.

 

[JAB]

In what universe do 16 games constitute a half season? 5-11 in 2010. It was as bad a season as any Cardinal season in recent memory. The Sky fell. Going 6-18 and then winning 7 of 9 is a sign of starting to turn things around after they have hit rock bottom. In other words getting the sky off our heads.

I guess the same universe that 24 games not 32 equals two seasons and a team is judged by that standard without taking the full second season into consideration. After all that's what you did with your first two comments you made absolutely no comment about the improvement the second half of that year. You backpedal with this statement which was exactly my stance all along. IMO it's not the same thing Especially considering you made no statement to refute that in your first two responses.

Please show me where you said we were on a up swing?

NFC West Champions
NFC Champions
Super Bowl appearance
NFC West Champions
Wild Card Playoff Round Winner
5-11
8-8

Too late, the sky already fell. We're talking about getting it off our heads.

Season and a half right here.

Which is exactly what I wrote. We're trying to get the sky off our heads.

All you have done is give the reasons the sky fell. If you don't think 2010 (and the first 7 games of 2011) and having to watch DeWreck Anderson, Max Hall and Kevin Kolb play QB guiding the Cardinals to a stretch where they lost 15 of 18 games, and the team finishing near the bottom of the NFL in almost ever statistical category, was the sky falling then I don't know what to tell you.

I think we have but I have been wrong befor. Anyways this is a debate not worth debating so I will just bow out at this point and mark it up to a mis-understanding in communication.

 

[40yearfan]

Stop you're making way too much sense and being way too reasonable. I must ask you try to refrain from posting.
Sincerely

The sky is falling...........

First time I've gotten that request here. I get it on the P & R board almost daily.

 

[Duckjake]

First time I've gotten that request here. I get it on the P & R board almost daily.

LOL It's hard to debate somebody who believes that 5-11, finishing last in the weakest Division in the NFL, and finishing near the bottom in almost every statistical category and then losing 6 of the first 7 games of the following season is a success.

 

[Cardiac]

That would be a perfect rebuttal if we only played half a season. If you have to add only a half a season of stats to justify your skepticism that the sky is still firmly planted on top of our heads you have already failed. A season and a half is what it took to turn this ship around and I find that quite remarkable. With no off-season workouts and a short training camp and a lot of change in our lineup we were still able to jettison that sky off our heads and finish the season with a drastic improvement on the defensive side of the ball and at least enough quarterback production to pull out a lot of victories. I find it ironic when stat people pick and choose their stats. If I wanted to play the half season game I could show you a top-five defense and a team that won 7 out of their last 9 games, which of course would put us at the top of the league. Nevertheless, I see the season for what it was. Which IMO was great improvement and a lot of upside. Your exact words were "Too late, the sky already fell. We're talking about getting it off our heads." Nothing in that is past tense and IMO we have. You're more than welcome to that opinion I simply don't share it.

Hey Jab, Paragraphs PLEASE.

 

[JAB]

Hey Jab, Paragraphs PLEASE.

I'm sorry for your inconvenience.

I will try to do better next time.

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[Hollywood]

LOL It's hard to debate somebody who believes that 5-11, finishing last in the weakest Division in the NFL, and finishing near the bottom in almost every statistical category and then losing 6 of the first 7 games of the following season is a success.

I think the point is that you are only telling part of the story....If you want to only use part of the picture to tell your story then you might as well say:

The Cards went 7-2 at the end of the season. Something that only 3 other teams did better. Thats 3 other teams in the whole league!

While everything in the statement is technically true it just uses a small portion of the whole to make us look like something we are not. When you take a step back and see more of the picture you see that:

-The Cardinals used to call 5-11 the norm, if not one of their better seasons
-They lost a major peice of the team (perhaps the most important and hardest replaced) and dropped to 5-11
-They followed the 5-11 season with a 3 win improvement the year after to finish 8-8 and did it with a big question mark still at the QB position and not one but 2 players who might fix the QB problem (maybe niether of them will pan out but either one is better than Anderson)

The Cardinals as an organization so much better than it was just 10 years ago in just about every way I don't understand how people can't/won't give them the benefit of the doubt.

The sky didn't fall (or maybe it did, depending on your defination of 'falling sky') we hit a speed bump and are in the process of getting back on track.
Look at the big picture and things look a lot better.....also, I don't trust any cap numbers. They mean nothing to me because they change too fast and vary too much from one source to another. I have seen good teams under the cap and bad ones maxed out. You want to know who is a good team and who is a bad team? Look at the standings, you are what your record says you are.

That is all....I will crawl back into my hole in the wall.