Dansby Extenstion talks not looking good.

[joeshmo]

Talks arent looking good becuase they arent even happening really.

From Sommers Blog -

To see full blog go to - http://www.azcentral.com/members/Blog/KentSomers

It seems that once the season started negotiations havent gone anywhere and they havent even really talked all that much.

Dansby wanted a deal done before the season started and he and his agent seem inclined to just wait for the offseason now.(Negotiating tactic)

Things can happen really fast and always do. One minute you are 10 Million apart the next day you got a signed contract, becuase of that I am not worried yet until after the bye week, but this news is a little disconcerning. Plus now that he will be out 3-4 weeks with a strained MCL like Fransisco that may put a damper on things a bit but then it again it may make Dansby think twice about maybe excepting a deal sooner rather then later before a bigger injury happens. We shall see, stay tuned.

I predict if we dont see anything by this time after the bye week, it will get ugly in the offseason similar to the Briggs situation in Chicago this past offseason.

 

[Shane]

Who cares. Just tag him. He'll play.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

Not concerned.

We got a looooong time before this comes to a head.

 

[Mitch]

The Dansby situation is a real roll of the dice. The guy really hasn't turned in one consistently productive year since he's been a Cardinal...thanks to injuries, in part, and questionable off-season conditioning prior to this past off-season.

This year...his contract year...has been by far his best start because he did make a commitment to get in good football shape this off-season. But...would his commitment wane some if he were to sign a multi-year deal with good guanranteed money?

The same question marks and concerns were there for Darnell Dockett...yet this guy "gets it" now and is having a stellar year thus far.

Might Dansby follow suit?

One thing that's different about Dockett is that he's been realtively durable...Dansby has not.

Now Dansby is injured yet again...

Somers puts it well...Dansby may be risking a lot by holding out for free agency...especially when he has an injury prone tag.

But, then again, it doesn't appear the Cardinals are all than anxious to get him signed to an extension...at least right now...which may indicate that the Cardinals are pondering the questions mentioned at the top.

My feeling is that the Cardinals should wait until Christmas and assess Dansby's value at that time...make him the offer that they feel is fair...if Dansby rejects the offer, then let him move on. The franchise tag for Dansby would be a mistake.

Plus...even though Dansby has played well as the WILB in the 3-4, I still contend he's a better edge player, especially because he can give the Cards a legitimate pass rushing threat...something this team significantly lacks.

 

[82CardsGrad]

Not concerned... Dansby has been very inconsistent and injury-prone. IMO, the Cards are handling this situation as they should... I would hate to see the guy go as I do believe he's got a huge upside. However, the NFL season is 16 games, not 10, or 8...

 

[Cheesebeef]

letting Dansby go would be the height of stupidity.

 

[chicards11]

um...

Talks arent looking good becuase they arent even happening really.

From Sommers Blog -

To see full blog go to - http://www.azcentral.com/members/Blog/KentSomers

It seems that once the season started negotiations havent gone anywhere and they havent even really talked all that much.

Dansby wanted a deal done before the season started and he and his agent seem inclined to just wait for the offseason now.(Negotiating tactic)


is it confirmed that dansby is out for 3-4?
Things can happen really fast and always do. One minute you are 10 Million apart the next day you got a signed contract, becuase of that I am not worried yet until after the bye week, but this news is a little disconcerning. Plus now that he will be out 3-4 weeks with a strained MCL like Fransisco that may put a damper on things a bit but then it again it may make Dansby think twice about maybe excepting a deal sooner rather then later before a bigger injury happens. We shall see, stay tuned.

I predict if we dont see anything by this time after the bye week, it will get ugly in the offseason similar to the Briggs situation in Chicago this past offseason.

is it confirmed that dansby is out 3-4 weeks?

 

[Mitch]

letting Dansby go would be the height of stupidity.

Was franchising Eric Swann (who had somehwat similar question marks as Dansby) a smart decision?

Was letting Leonard Davis go a bad decision? Mike Gandy is playing a better LT than Davis did for one third of the money.

When players get tagged they hold the franchise hostage...

First they miss most or all of training camp...(which by the way makes them all the more injury prone when they return)

Then they act all disgruntled...

The team is allocating a hefty portion of that year's salary cap to a player who might not even be with the team the following year...unless he's tagged again...and that usually gets ugly fast.

While we all recognize Dansby's talent...at what point does the front office consider the risk/reward factor of franchising a player?...

For my money, if I were to franchise a player I'd want to be sure of the following:

(1) That player had given the team at least one consistently productive year...thus proving that he actually can provide the team with that.

(2) That player is as good as the top five players at his position...because that's what kind of money he will command.

(3) That player is dependable...good character, work ethic, off-season conditioning a strengthening record.

(4) That player provides leadership...otherwise, as disgruntled as tagged players and their agents get, there is likely to be a backlash that may affect team morale.

(5) Does the team have another player at that position who is a reasonable replacement already? (BTW--did the Cards lose a lot with Monty Beisel in the game?)

Tagging a player like Aeneas Williams made sense...

Tagging Dansby, based on his track record and performance throughout his initial contract, does not make sense at this point.

Signing him to an incentive laden contract does make sense because then Dansby can make top dollar if he produces.

But, as we know, agents are loath to negotiative incentive deals in lieu of guaranteed money.

 

[ThunderCard]

letting Dansby go would be the height of stupidity.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Was franchising Eric Swann (who had somehwat similar question marks as Dansby) a smart decision?

Was letting Leonard Davis go a bad decision? Mike Gandy is playing a better LT than Davis did for one third of the money.

When players get tagged they hold the franchise hostage...

First they miss most or all of training camp...(which by the way makes them all the more injury prone when they return)

Then they act all disgruntled...

The team is allocating a hefty portion of that year's salary cap to a player who might not even be with the team the following year...unless he's tagged again...and that usually gets ugly fast.

While we all recognize Dansby's talent...at what point does the front office consider the risk/reward factor of franchising a player?...

For my money, if I were to franchise a player I'd want to be sure of the following:

(1) That player had given the team at least one consistently productive year...thus proving that he actually can provide the team with that.

(2) That player is as good as the top five players at his position...because that's what kind of money he will command.

(3) That player is dependable...good character, work ethic, off-season conditioning a strengthening record.

(4) That player provides leadership...otherwise, as disgruntled as tagged players and their agents get, there is likely to be a backlash that may affect team morale.

(5) Does the team have another player at that position who is a reasonable replacement already? (BTW--did the Cards lose a lot with Monty Beisel in the game?)

Tagging a player like Aeneas Williams made sense...

Tagging Dansby, based on his track record and performance throughout his initial contract, does not make sense at this point.

Signing him to an incentive laden contract does make sense because then Dansby can make top dollar if he produces.

But, as we know, agents are loath to negotiative incentive deals in lieu of guaranteed money.

it should never get to the point where we have to franchise him. Thus the above is moot.

 

[Cheesebeef]

(BTW--did the Cards lose a lot with Monty Beisel in the game?)

let's see, 44 Year Old statue Vinny Testaverde escaped an unblocked blitz from Beisel and the Panthers rushed for a season high in yards against a team that had been consistently stuffing the run. Yeah, we lost a lot with Beisel in there. Anyone who thinks otherwise is fooling themselves.

But this is to be expected - the bandwaggon to shred Dansby has already started on the board even though he and Adrian have been the only consistent playmakers on this defense for the last four years.

 

[ajcardfan]

Beisel is a good, solid LB. But, he's not the playmaker Dansby is. Letting Dansby go would move LB right to the top of the list as a major need for next year.

 

[Mitch]

let's see, 44 Year Old statue Vinny Testaverde escaped an unblocked blitz from Beisel and the Panthers rushed for a season high in yards against a team that had been consistently stuffing the run. Yeah, we lost a lot with Beisel in there. Anyone who thinks otherwise is fooling themselves.

But this is to be expected - the bandwaggon to shred Dansby has already started on the board even though he and Adrian have been the only consistent playmakers on this defense for the last four years.

Talk about moot! Wilson turned in a Pro Bowl year. Has Dansby? Applying the term consistent to Dansby's play is a major stretch. This year was the exception for 5 games...but now he's hurt again.

We all see Dansby's talent, cheese...so noone is going to shred him on that count...however, even the front office must have real reservations about him because they haven't shown him the money the way they have with Dockett and Hayes.

 

[ajcardfan]

Talk about moot! Wilson turned in a Pro Bowl year. Has Dansby? Applying the term consistent to Dansby's play is a major stretch. This year was the exception for 5 games...but now he's hurt again.

We all see Dansby's talent, cheese...so noone is going to shred him on that count...however, even the front office must have real reservations about him because they haven't shown him the money the way they have with Dockett and Hayes.

You are correct Mitch, he has not consistently produced. In fact, I think part of the reason in shoving so much money onto this year's cap was to delay Dansby's next contract to the end of the season so they could see how he did this year.

Actually, that's pretty much just a grope in the dark. I still want to hear the exact reasoning so much cap space was eaten up.

 

[Mitch]

Beisel is a good, solid LB. But, he's not the playmaker Dansby is. Letting Dansby go would move LB right to the top of the list as a major need for next year.

You're right, AJ, Beisel isn't the blitzer that Dansby is...otherwise the drop off isn't all that much at WILB. Beisel had 10 tackles...and boy did he fill some holes rather quickly, didn't he? And he has pretty decent range.

Is Besiel the long term answer? No.

Could he be a short term answer with a solid draft pick behind him for a year? Quite possibly.

Regardless...Dansby isn't any good to anyone on the sidelines. And that's an issue with him, whether one wants to deny that or not.

 

[Russ Smith]

Beisel is a good, solid LB. But, he's not the playmaker Dansby is. Letting Dansby go would move LB right to the top of the list as a major need for next year.

Yep, we lose Dansby and I start the draft Rey Maualuga and alert the Arizona police Bandwagon posts.

 

[Mitch]

As for Dansby's sacks...he only has 2.5 this year in 6 games playing inside. It's not like he's lighting the world on fire in that reagrd.

 

[slanidrac16]

Doesn't players re-signing have to be done by week 10 or something like that or is that only if the team wants to apply some of the contract to the current year?

You also have to look at who is available in free agency. Do you throw x millions at Dansby or could somebody like Terrell Suggs be wooed to come here for x millions?

 

[cardsfanmd]

For my money, if I were to franchise a player I'd want to be sure of the following:

(1) That player had given the team at least one consistently productive year...thus proving that he actually can provide the team with that.

(2) That player is as good as the top five players at his position...because that's what kind of money he will command.

(3) That player is dependable...good character, work ethic, off-season conditioning a strengthening record.

(4) That player provides leadership...otherwise, as disgruntled as tagged players and their agents get, there is likely to be a backlash that may affect team morale.

(5) Does the team have another player at that position who is a reasonable replacement already? (BTW--did the Cards lose a lot with Monty Beisel in the game?)

quote]
I gotta disagree with you here Mitch. If a player possessed all of those qualities then we would never be in that position with him, we have already resigned him, or should have anyway. I think you are asking for too much. Decisions are never that easy, and if they were then Rod Graves would be much more popular.

Good to see you put up a nice post though, i have missed a lot of the stuff you did last year.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

(5) Does the team have another player at that position who is a reasonable replacement already? (BTW--did the Cards lose a lot with Monty Beisel in the game?)

you're off here. dansby was a BIG playmaker early this season. you might even argue he was the difference maker. almost every bit of disruption this year was attributable to him or dockett. and there was a CONSIDERABLE dropoff in disruption w/o dansby. note - no turnovers forced by the defense w/o dansby.

not sure if tagging him is appropriate, but you can't continue to let talented players leave without receiving compensation.

we don't have a replacement. and the last time we played around like this we ended up with rob frederickson instead of jamir miller. huge dropoff no matter the spin from the cards front office. this would likely be similar.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

As for Dansby's sacks...he only has 2.5 this year in 6 games playing inside. It's not like he's lighting the world on fire in that reagrd.

extrapolating that out over a season - that's around 7 sacks from the inside spot. that is lighting the world on fire. especially when you consider his range.

 

[Skkorpion]

Not worried about Dansby, as long as we tag him, because I agree with the point that we can't keep letting good players go nothing in return.

Tag him. Then trade him if he forces us into it. If he plays here under the tag and plays well and stays healthy, pay him accordingly.

If he dogs it or can't stay healthy, the FO has a tough decision to make, two years from now, before the 2010 season.

Personally, what happens this Sunday has my full attention and my worries.

 

[82CardsGrad]

Not worried about Dansby, as long as we tag him, because I agree with the point that we can't keep letting good players go nothing in return.

Tag him. Then trade him if he forces us into it. If he plays here under the tag and plays well and stays healthy, pay him accordingly.

If he dogs it or can't stay healthy, the FO has a tough decision to make, two years from now, before the 2010 season.

Personally, what happens this Sunday has my full attention and my worries.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Doesn't players re-signing have to be done by week 10 or something like that or is that only if the team wants to apply some of the contract to the current year?

You also have to look at who is available in free agency. Do you throw x millions at Dansby or could somebody like Terrell Suggs be wooed to come here for x millions?

why is it that most Cardinals fans always see this as an "either or" scenario? We will once again have a TON of caproom - meaning you can sign BOTH if we wanted to and structured them right.

As far as losing Dansby means it would move LBer to an area of need - AJ, LBer already IS an area of need. It needs to not only be maintained but bolstered as well.

 

[ajcardfan]

why is it that most Cardinals fans always see this as an "either or" scenario? We will once again have a TON of caproom - meaning you can sign BOTH if we wanted to and structured them right.

As far as losing Dansby means it would move LBer to an area of need - AJ, LBer already IS an area of need. It needs to not only be maintained but bolstered as well.

Oh, I agree. But losing Dansby would move it up to what I consider a top-tier need along with DE and CB.