Keim Time Year 2 Upgrading The Offense

[Bodha]

Its not complicated, no need for a thesis on how to fix this Offense.


Oline.

thats all. Put better talent on the O line and this is a playoff team, all other players/positions kept the same.

 

[az jam]

Then Doug asks him what he think about Manziel and Keim stonewalls him. Won't talk about the college players and the draft.

Link to page where you can download the interview, on the right side, down a bit, "Steve Keim, AZ Cardinals GM - Thursday January 16": http://www.arizonasports.com/20/1360439/Doug--Wolf--Arizona-Sports-620

I heard the interview and I think this is why Keim didn't want to talk about Manzeil on Thursday:

McKenzie’s public comments on Manziel were premature

Posted by Mike Florio on January 16, 2014, 9:36 PM EST


At a time when college coaches surely are getting a little uneasy about the ever-increasing number of underclassmen choosing to leave early, the NFL could be looking for a way to placate the Nick Sabans of the world by making an example out of someone.

Enter Raiders G.M. Reggie McKenzie.

By speaking publicly about former Texas A&M quarterback Johnny Manziel before Manziel officially has been declared eligible for the draft, McKenzie violated the league’s Anti-Tampering provisions. As one league source said in response to McKenzie’s remarks about Manziel, “That’s a league fine.”

The NFL’s rule relating to college players is clear: “Club personnel who make public comments about the football ability or NFL potential of underclassmen who have not yet been officially declared eligible for the draft will be subject to discipline by the Commissioner.”

While the deadline for declaring for early admission to the draft has come and gone, Manziel and none of the other underclassman have been “officially declared eligible for the draft.” That’ll happen Saturday.

Is it a technical violation for McKenzie to speak about Manziel two days early? Yes. Is it a harmless violation? Absolutely. But between the rookie wage scale backfiring on college football by luring more players to the NFL so that they can start logging years toward their second contracts and the NFL’s overt tracking of and speculation about players who will or may declare early for the draft via the league-owned website, the power-that-be in pro football may need to do something to appease the powers-that-be in college football.

If so, McKenzie has made it very easy for the league to make an unambiguous statement.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

how do u know it?

He is a football GM, he better.

I know I would.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

What does everyone think?

I think Fitzgerald has already made an ungodly amount of money in the NFL, and that with him being nearer the end of his career his best bet to get the most money, and a shot at a ring is here in Arizona.

Honestly.

No team values Fitzgerald as much as the Cardinals, and if this team can go 10-6 in the division whose top two teams are playing for the NFC crown then they are contenders.

Finally? I think Fitzgerald gets 10 TDs, over 1000 yards, and at least 90 catches next year.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

Very good article Mitch.

I was pysched to see it up on the board this morning, it is going well with my Sunday coffee.

My only question would be why the Cardinals would spend a first round pick on a right guard when they have Colledge, Watford, and Fanaika on the roster ?

If they were to draft a right guard, then what would they do with Watford ? That would be a waste of a pick from last season, IMO.

 

[Garthshort]

To paraphrase the beer commercial, "It's Mitchell time". A great rundown on the offense, but it will (IMO) all come down to Larry being willing to restructure his contract. I think that he's so image conscious, that he wouldn't not do so, and if he does it will free up the necessary CAP money to make the changes that Mitch sees necessary to improve the offense. However, as we ALL KNOW, that while it is fun to speculate on the Draft, at this time it makes no sense until we see who the team signs/doesn't sign in FA.
But make no mistake Mitch's take on the Cards is great way to take our minds off the Super Bowl with either Seattle or SF. Thanks again, Mitch.

P.S. Mitch, if you ever get back to your old stomping grounds, Emily Shaw's , is reopening next week, as The Inn at Pound Ridge. NYC star owner/chef Jean George is the new owner.

 

[Mitch]

Very good article Mitch.

I was pysched to see it up on the board this morning, it is going well with my Sunday coffee.

My only question would be why the Cardinals would spend a first round pick on a right guard when they have Colledge, Watford, and Fanaika on the roster ?

If they were to draft a right guard, then what would they do with Watford ? That would be a waste of a pick from last season, IMO.

BA&SK have very high standards, as you well know, Rugby. They want to dominate up front. Maybe they convert Watford to center and groom him as Sendlein's eventual successor---but Cyril Richardson is head and shoulders better than any RG on the roster, which is why he will be in the conversation if he's still on the board. So is David Yankey.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

BA&SK have very high standards, as you well know, Rugby. They want to dominate up front. Maybe they convert Watford to center and groom him as Sendlein's eventual successor---but Cyril Richardson is head and shoulders better than any RG on the roster, which is why he will be in the conversation if he's still on the board. So is David Yankey.

Watford to center ?

I don't think it will happen, but I would love to see it happen. That would be great.

Ok, so you sell me on the move to center, but Cyril Richardson would have to be an absolute game changer to pick a RG in the first round.

BTW, I like David Yankey in the later rounds, maybe even the second. Very versatile. Could play RT, RG, and backup LG. I don't know if he could pull off playing LT in the NFL though.

 

[Mitch]

To paraphrase the beer commercial, "It's Mitchell time". A great rundown on the offense, but it will (IMO) all come down to Larry being willing to restructure his contract. I think that he's so image conscious, that he wouldn't not do so, and if he does it will free up the necessary CAP money to make the changes that Mitch sees necessary to improve the offense. However, as we ALL KNOW, that while it is fun to speculate on the Draft, at this time it makes no sense until we see who the team signs/doesn't sign in FA.
But make no mistake Mitch's take on the Cards is great way to take our minds off the Super Bowl with either Seattle or SF. Thanks again, Mitch.

P.S. Mitch, if you ever get back to your old stomping grounds, Emily Shaw's , is reopening next week, as The Inn at Pound Ridge. NYC star owner/chef Jean George is the new owner.

Garth---if Fitz doesn't help the team out, he cannot save face about all the comments he's made about wanting to win a ring. Everyone will then know, Fitz re-signed with the Cardinals because of the money. He should be very conscious of avoiding that image, don't you think?

Hey thanks for the update on The Inn at Pound Ridge! If we win the Super Bowl, Garth, I am personally coming down there and treating you to dinner!

 

[Garthshort]

Mitch, thanks for the dinner invite. But the Cards better hurry, as I turn 77 in July.

 

[cardpa]

Mitch, thanks for the dinner invite. But the Cards better hurry, as I turn 77 in July.

Don't worry your good for at least 10 more years.

 

[Chopper0080]

My sticking point would be in regards to your value of #3 WR over TE. When Jim Dray gets more snaps than Andre Roberts, you probably want to upgrade Dray's spot over Roberts.

 

[GuernseyCard]

Garth---if Fitz doesn't help the team out, he cannot save face about all the comments he's made about wanting to win a ring. Everyone will then know, Fitz re-signed with the Cardinals because of the money. He should be very conscious of avoiding that image, don't you think?

Hey thanks for the update on The Inn at Pound Ridge! If we win the Super Bowl, Garth, I am personally coming down there and treating you to dinner!

So, Fitz signs a contract in good faith and is now to be portrayed as a bad guy if doesn't acquiesce to a salary reduction at this point?

Fitz has $12.75 in salary due this year. Turn part of that ($10m) into a bonus and you create $8M in CAP room. There's your help. The longer re-structuring, given that the back end of his contract is a virtual team option, can be re-done in 2015.

 

[Bodha]

Oline, Oline, Oline


Nobodys a bigger supporter of "Find the future Franchise QB" than me, but it wouldnt matter if we had Tom Brady Jr. if this Oline isnt overhauled.

This is a good draft. We can very well find 2-3 new franchise pieces for our Oline here.

for example:

1st rnd: Cyril Richardson or David Yankey - both G's. Both All-Pros
2nd rnd: James Hurst - LT or RT.
3rd rnd:Weston Richburg - C-small school, but dominant

Boom, stud Oline. Not to mention it allows us to get rid of contract heavy Lyle and College

 

[Reddog]

So, Fitz signs a contract in good faith and is now to be portrayed as a bad guy if doesn't acquiesce to a salary reduction at this point?

Fitz has $12.75 in salary due this year. Turn part of that ($10m) into a bonus and you create $8M in CAP room. There's your help. The longer re-structuring, given that the back end of his contract is a virtual team option, can be re-done in 2015.

Totally agree. Even if he wanted to take a cut his agent will never let him. This is about restructure and that is on the Cards to make it work or let him walk.

 

[john h]

What's the plan if Fitz chooses to keep his contract in it's current form?

After our past season and with Palmer on board I think Fitz will do what is good for the team. He is not all about money I do not think.

 

[GuernseyCard]

Oline, Oline, Oline


Nobodys a bigger supporter of "Find the future Franchise QB" than me, but it wouldnt matter if we had Tom Brady Jr. if this Oline isnt overhauled.

This is a good draft. We can very well find 2-3 new franchise pieces for our Oline here.

for example:

1st rnd: Cyril Richardson or David Yankey - both G's. Both All-Pros
2nd rnd: James Hurst - LT or RT.
3rd rnd:Weston Richburg - C-small school, but dominant

Boom, stud Oline. Not to mention it allows us to get rid of contract heavy Lyle and College

Rookie, rookie, rookie, etc, etc - Boom - one dead QB.

 

[BACH]

So, Fitz signs a contract in good faith and is now to be portrayed as a bad guy if doesn't acquiesce to a salary reduction at this point?

Fitz has $12.75 in salary due this year. Turn part of that ($10m) into a bonus and you create $8M in CAP room. There's your help. The longer re-structuring, given that the back end of his contract is a virtual team option, can be re-done in 2015.

He did sign it in good faith, but the rational of how the contract is constructed is very clear. Every year of the next five years Fitz has huge base salaries with small to little bonuses - meaning: Play up to it and we keep you, fall short of expectation and you'll be cut.

As Fitz IMO is still a quality WR pro-bowl level WR (he has fallen from top two to around top 10 IMO) and there are still five years left on the deal his base salary can for the next two years be turned into a signing bonus with relative ease and lower the cap hit with up to $12M over the next two years. That would move the decision two years further out on the horizon (but also create up to $12M or 2x$6M in dead money if he's cut after that)

 

[Reddog]

He did sign it in good faith, but the rational of how the contract is constructed is very clear. Every year of the next five years Fitz has huge base salaries with small to little bonuses - meaning: Play up to it and we keep you, fall short of expectation and you'll be cut.

As Fitz IMO is still a quality WR pro-bowl level WR (he has fallen from top two to around top 10 IMO) and there are still five years left on the deal his base salary can for the next two years be turned into a signing bonus with relative ease and lower the cap hit with up to $12M over the next two years. That would move the decision two years further out on the horizon (but also create up to $12M or 2x$6M in dead money if he's cut after that)

That dead money would be spread over the rest of the contract so if there is $12M in savings that would leave $4M in additional dead money in 16,17 & 2018.

 

[BACH]

That dead money would be spread over the rest of the contract so if there is $12M in savings that would leave $4M in additional dead money in 16,17 & 2018.

That's what I'm saying right here:

(but also create up to $12M or 2x$6M in dead money if he's cut after that)

But a team can spread the hit over two years, so I both the base salary of this year and next year are turned into signing bonuses that would save $12M, but as you say those $12M would in theory leave $4M extra in dead money for 16,17 &18. It does, however, not work that way. If the Cards then choose to cut Fitz prior to the '16 season all $12M would count against the cap there or could be spread over '16 end '17.

 

[CardLogic]

Totally agree. Even if he wanted to take a cut his agent will never let him.

This is the second time in fairly recent posts that I have seen this idea expressed when discussing player contracts.

The agent works for the player, not the other way around. Certainly the agent will strongly counsel the player against agreeing to a pay cut, because the agent's main focus is maximizing earnings, for both the player and himself. But that decision is up to the player not the agent. To say the agent won't let them makes no sense.

I'll get down now. . .

 

[Jim Otis]

This is the second time in fairly recent posts that I have seen this idea expressed when discussing player contracts.

The agent works for the player, not the other way around. Certainly the agent will strongly counsel the player against agreeing to a pay cut, because the agent's main focus is maximizing earnings, for both the player and himself. But that decision is up to the player not the agent. To say the agent won't let them makes no sense.

I'll get down now. . .

Yep , players have been known to fire their agent .

 

[Cardiac]

This is the second time in fairly recent posts that I have seen this idea expressed when discussing player contracts.

The agent works for the player, not the other way around. Certainly the agent will strongly counsel the player against agreeing to a pay cut, because the agent's main focus is maximizing earnings, for both the player and himself. But that decision is up to the player not the agent. To say the agent won't let them makes no sense.

I'll get down now. . .

I will agree with this but I've been asking for examples of players who have taken a pay cut. There must be some but I can't recall any so I'm not sold that it will or can happen.

Yep , players have been known to fire their agent .

True, like Los firing his agent when the Cards supposedly had a deal worked out with him. Thing is he went to the Dolphins for a ton of money. So my point is players typically fire agents it they think the agent isn't getting them enough money. Not because the player wants to give a team a home town discount.

 

[cardfaninfl]

This "pay cut" talk is assuming Larry is paid like an hourly/salary employee. The way Fitz's contract is structured he will only see:

1. Prorated portion of his Signing Bonus - 100%
2. Any Guaranteed Salary written into the contract - 100% (I could find no information confirming or denying any/percentage of his Base Salary being guaranteed)
3. Workout Bonus. 0% if he is released.
4. Base Salary for each game played. 0% if he is released.

His contract structure almost insures Larry will not be a Cardinal (or any other team) under the current contract, for the 2015 season. Heck, you could make the argument that it would make more sense to take the "Dead Money" hit, now.

Even though it is impossible to CUT what is guaranteed, it is very likely the rest of the contract won't be worth the paper it is written on, in the near future. It doesn't matter if Fitzgerald wants to play his entire career with Arizona, it doesn't matter if he wants to help the team and the Salary Cap... what does matter is Fitz's (and his agent's) practical intelligence.

Restructure a contract that will better insure the player, and his agent, will see money in the future. Thinking the Cardinals will honor the entire length of the contract (when it is designed specifically to do the opposite) is silly. You can't CUT an extremely unlikely scenario.

 

[Arizona's Finest]

My sticking point would be in regards to your value of #3 WR over TE. When Jim Dray gets more snaps than Andre Roberts, you probably want to upgrade Dray's spot over Roberts.

I totally agree. I think Somers is WAY off here. I expect TE to be a big time target in offseason. Pitta, Pettigre, or a first 3 round pick IMO.

Move Housler down to #2, and keep Ballard OR Dray but not both. 2 TEs are on the field ALL the time in BA's offense.