Gannon roasted for pep talk

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
46,247
Reaction score
11,852
Do you have the courage of your convictions? Let’s make a friendly wager: for every game the cards cover the spread, I’ll provide unique unqualified praise for JGMO.

If the Cards fail to cover the spread, you have to make a criticism of them.

You’re so sure they’ll exceed expectations…
Can I be in?
 

PACardsFan

ASFN Icon
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
10,250
Reaction score
12,207
Location
York, PA
Does "being competitive" have a quantitative definition for you then? Because "being closer than within the margin set by Vegas" seems pretty close to me. I don't know how else you'd define it.
Let’s say the Cardinals are a 6 point dog & are tied midway through the 4th quarter, but Washington scores late and wins by 7. I would consider that competitive even though they lost the point spread. I’m sure they will have a few ugly losses, as their schedule looks tough, but last year they were outscored 340-449. Regardless of their record, narrowing that spread would be a step in the right direction.
 

PACardsFan

ASFN Icon
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
10,250
Reaction score
12,207
Location
York, PA
This thread is proof we are all looking for something, anything to talk about the Cards. Jeez, let's see how he coaches first.
I just laugh at some of the people that seemed put off by what he said. Are you kidding me lol. The Cardinals under KK were soft as $hit, undisciplined, with ZERO football IQ. We may not have enough talent this year to win enough games, but we won’t have to worry about the other 3 areas I listed.
 

kerouac9

Klowned by Keim
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Posts
38,389
Reaction score
29,775
Location
Gilbert, AZ
Let’s say the Cardinals are a 6 point dog & are tied midway through the 4th quarter, but Washington scores late and wins by 7. I would consider that competitive even though they lost the point spread. I’m sure they will have a few ugly losses, as their schedule looks tough, but last year they were outscored 340-449. Regardless of their record, narrowing that spread would be a step in the right direction.
So you’re afraid that Gannon is going to lead the team to a late collapse and have to say one bad thing about him?

Very courageous.
 

pemory09

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Jan 3, 2016
Posts
2,537
Reaction score
3,085
Yeah, that clip does make him look like a weird geek, but I’ll for sure be “on the bus” if we start to resemble a disciplined team with a clue.
 

schutd

ASFN Addict
Joined
Oct 15, 2002
Posts
6,216
Reaction score
2,079
Location
Charleston, SC
Interesting that people call posters darksiders, but those darksiders are the ones who are most frustrated by the tanking. @kerouac9 called out for being negative when he has spoken up against this idea of intentionally losing and the person who is calling him out, the ultimate homer @PACardsFan , is fine with the Cardinals intentionally losing this year in hopes of the future promise of winning.
Can one know they are going to lose, but still argue they aren't doing it intentionally? I kind of think so.

From a business standpoint, MO is trying to set this team up for long term success ( I believe). The business side of that requires a massive roster reset, along with ensuring near term financial flexibility, and maneuvering for an ample amount of draft picks to try and lower the curve to return to competitiveness. The business side take priority over the winning-the-games side of it for a year to be that measn to the end.

You call it tanking. Maybe, but that word infers something way more nefarious than I think is going on. To me, tanking is something one does for one's own personal gain. This team is taking some severe lumps this year, in order to ensure they can start fresh, and build with players that they want to have be a part of it, not the leftovers from the previous regime.

You guys say intentionally losing, I say the losing is a by-product of the process.
 

Garthshort

ASFN Addict
Joined
Aug 11, 2002
Posts
9,497
Reaction score
5,752
Location
Scarsdale, NY
These posts do remind me of the Succession program when the head of the Clan, in speaking of his children said, "These are not serious people". Or something to that effect.
 

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Conner
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
36,490
Reaction score
34,464
Location
Charlotte, NC
Interesting that people call posters darksiders, but those darksiders are the ones who are most frustrated by the tanking. @kerouac9 called out for being negative when he has spoken up against this idea of intentionally losing and the person who is calling him out, the ultimate homer @PACardsFan , is fine with the Cardinals intentionally losing this year in hopes of the future promise of winning.
I know you are addressing PACardsFan, but I would say my feelings on tanking goes like this:

I don't want the team to tank, but it's inevitable from all the moves made, so I might as well accept it. Nothing I say can stop it.

It's kind of like a root canal. You know the surgery is going to suck, but the pain right now will go away. There is no full promise it's going to work, but it's a better option than what is currently going on.

I read @kerouac9 saying he thought they could have been in the hunt this year, but I think that's a Kool aid proposition. I don't think it would have been possible except for the most extreme of situations and even then, the roster makeup would have made it unsustainable long term.

Even during the 10-2 start, if you go back and look, I was saying the team wasn't sustainable because of the finances and build of the team. It was always headed this way.
 

lobo

ASFN Lifer
Joined
Feb 16, 2006
Posts
3,310
Reaction score
230
Location
Inverness, Il
Can one know they are going to lose, but still argue they aren't doing it intentionally? I kind of think so.

From a business standpoint, MO is trying to set this team up for long term success ( I believe). The business side of that requires a massive roster reset, along with ensuring near term financial flexibility, and maneuvering for an ample amount of draft picks to try and lower the curve to return to competitiveness. The business side take priority over the winning-the-games side of it for a year to be that measn to the end.

You call it tanking. Maybe, but that word infers something way more nefarious than I think is going on. To me, tanking is something one does for one's own personal gain. This team is taking some severe lumps this year, in order to ensure they can start fresh, and build with players that they want to have be a part of it, not the leftovers from the previous regime.

You guys say intentionally losing, I say the losing is a by-product of the process.
Well said. Actually there are some of the posters who experience schadenfreude that probably extends a lot further than rooting for sports team. Sad...real fluffing sad.
 

PJ1

ASFN Icon
Joined
Sep 21, 2002
Posts
12,162
Reaction score
5,234
Location
Nashville TN.
Can one know they are going to lose, but still argue they aren't doing it intentionally? I kind of think so.

From a business standpoint, MO is trying to set this team up for long term success ( I believe). The business side of that requires a massive roster reset, along with ensuring near term financial flexibility, and maneuvering for an ample amount of draft picks to try and lower the curve to return to competitiveness. The business side take priority over the winning-the-games side of it for a year to be that measn to the end.

You call it tanking. Maybe, but that word infers something way more nefarious than I think is going on. To me, tanking is something one does for one's own personal gain. This team is taking some severe lumps this year, in order to ensure they can start fresh, and build with players that they want to have be a part of it, not the leftovers from the previous regime.

You guys say intentionally losing, I say the losing is a by-product of the process.
Agree. The path chosen to make this team a winner creates short term pain with the hopes of building a winner in the future. You can disagree with it and I am certainly not sold on it but as you say it is a by product of the process.
 

kerouac9

Klowned by Keim
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Posts
38,389
Reaction score
29,775
Location
Gilbert, AZ
The business side of that requires a massive roster reset, along with ensuring near term financial flexibility, and maneuvering for an ample amount of draft picks to try and lower the curve to return to competitiveness.
This assumes facts not in evidence. We went into free agency with top 5 cap space. You can torture syntax as much as you like, but we planned to be bad, we likely will be bad, and we maybe only have one or two building blocks for the future.
 

BritCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Posts
22,462
Reaction score
40,977
Location
UK
This whole Twitter storm in a teacup was just dumb. Seeing people I respected jump on the bandwagon made me reconsider my opinion of them.

Has nobody ever seen Mike McCarthy or Andy Reid do these things? Or for that matter practically every coach. How about we just let him coach and stop nit picking?
 

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Conner
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
36,490
Reaction score
34,464
Location
Charlotte, NC
This assumes facts not in evidence. We went into free agency with top 5 cap space. You can torture syntax as much as you like, but we planned to be bad, we likely will be bad, and we maybe only have one or two building blocks for the future.
The Cardinals had $30 million or so going into free agency, but that kind of money doesn't really buy all that much and requires some pushing money into the future year.

I think if I took the job as Arizona Cardinals GM with the situation earlier this year, I would probably have done a lot of what Monti did. He has a QB coming off a significant injury and with significant questions on whether he is the QB of the future...and also said QB just signed a big extension.

So unless you are 100% committed to Murray, you would need to plan for his replacement. That means you have to prepare for a big cap hit in the coming years. How is it a viable way cap wise to trade Murray and still field a viable team? Not commit long term dollars to players and roll over cap space.

This process is likely to suck for us, but how will we feel when the Cardinals draft Maye/Williams and another key building block and trade Murray for draft capital? Murray's contract will look great to any team trading for him and that should increase his trade value.
 

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Conner
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
36,490
Reaction score
34,464
Location
Charlotte, NC
This whole Twitter storm in a teacup was just dumb. Seeing people I respected jump on the bandwagon made me reconsider my opinion of them.

Has nobody ever seen Mike McCarthy or Andy Reid do these things? Or for that matter practically every coach. How about we just let him coach and stop nit picking?
Just looking for more things to criticize per usual.
 

kerouac9

Klowned by Keim
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Posts
38,389
Reaction score
29,775
Location
Gilbert, AZ
This process is likely to suck for us, but how will we feel when the Cardinals draft Maye/Williams and another key building block and trade Murray for draft capital? Murray's contract will look great to any team trading for him and that should increase his trade value.
Imagine thinking that Monti Ossenfort will be able to trade veteran players for valueable draft capital at this point. Talk about assuming facts not in evidence.

We have less comparative cap space in 2024 than we did going into 2023, but whatever. Trust the process.
 

RON_IN_OC

https://www.ronevansrealty.com
Joined
Mar 10, 2004
Posts
27,139
Reaction score
35,588
Location
BirdGangThing
Imagine thinking that Monti Ossenfort will be able to trade veteran players for valueable draft capital at this point. Talk about assuming facts not in evidence.

We have less comparative cap space in 2024 than we did going into 2023, but whatever. Trust the process.
So the 37 players signed for 2024 and $73 million available is less than they had this year?

They only have $8 million in dead money for next year, thus far.
 

kerouac9

Klowned by Keim
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Posts
38,389
Reaction score
29,775
Location
Gilbert, AZ
So the 37 players signed for 2024 and $73 million available is less than they had this year?

They only have $8 million in dead money for next year, thus far.
Free agents aren't signed in a vacuum; you have to compete for them. We went from being top 5 in cap space to somewhere outside the top 10.

We have enough 2024 cap space to move on from Kyler Murray, but not enough to probably take a leap forward unless all our draft picks from this year and next work out.
 

RON_IN_OC

https://www.ronevansrealty.com
Joined
Mar 10, 2004
Posts
27,139
Reaction score
35,588
Location
BirdGangThing
Free agents aren't signed in a vacuum; you have to compete for them. We went from being top 5 in cap space to somewhere outside the top 10.

We have enough 2024 cap space to move on from Kyler Murray, but not enough to probably take a leap forward unless all our draft picks from this year and next work out.
They have 7th most cap space for 2024. All of that could change, higher or lower, depending on what they and other teams do with contract extensions and cuts throughout the 2023 league year.

 

BritCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Posts
22,462
Reaction score
40,977
Location
UK
They have 7th most cap space for 2024. All of that could change, higher or lower, depending on what they and other teams do with contract extensions and cuts throughout the 2023 league year.


Pretty sure that doesn't include rollover either. Currently we have the 2nd most to rollover.

Also doesn;t include moving on from Ertz and/or Conner.
 

BritCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Posts
22,462
Reaction score
40,977
Location
UK
Free agents aren't signed in a vacuum; you have to compete for them. We went from being top 5 in cap space to somewhere outside the top 10.

We have enough 2024 cap space to move on from Kyler Murray, but not enough to probably take a leap forward unless all our draft picks from this year and next work out.

We aren't competing against all teams for all players though.

If we are 5th in cap space it doesn't mean the 4 teams above us are after the same CB or same DT. They might be set at thos epositions, or have a scheme that doesn't fit.

TBH, I'm not a big fan of free agency in general. I'd rather build through draft and trades. It's rare to sign an FA that's great, most of them turn out to be just ok players. With guys who's deals have expired anyway, guy that get cut for cap reasons are a different story (Watt, Nuk etc).

I think if we go out and blow our wad on 6 "good FA's" next year 1-2 might be "good", 2 will be average and 2 will be poor.
 
Top