Leinart Contract/Negotiations Discussion

[joeshmo]

You keep batting the $40 million around and I keep telling you it isn't the panacea you'd like to make it out to be. Player costs are going to sky rocket and that $40 million will disapear in a hurry. I notice you didn't address that issue.

Already did address. See post right above yours. A little premature posting much.

Same old Cards song. I get sick of hearing it. If you can't realize the difference between this team and the Cards of 4 years ago, you have you head in the sand. These guys are really trying to accomplish something and they are doing it the correct way. Just because some fans are impatient and want to spend the teams money doesn't faze them and it's a good thing.

Not a single person has said anything about comparing this team to 4 years ago. And every single person will admit to that. But not seeing clear cut issues in the now is having your head in the sand. It is called being a realist. we are getting closer but we have a ways to go, that is not debatable, especially after yet another long hold out, yet another year with a butt load of cap space, yet another year of more then our share of depth issues, yet another year of a lossing record.

I Like Mikey a alot. I just dont have the patients after 50 years of losing to wait for him to get full control of this team.

It's amazing to me how some of you think that this team is the only team with depth issues. Name one team in the NFL that doesn't have a problem with that. There is barely enough talent to go around to get starters, but to expect to field a team with back-ups as good as the starters is ridiculous, but hey, you got money so spend it on something even if it won't help cause you'll make the fans feel better.

Putting words in ours mouths. And it makes be believe you havent read a single post.

Again no one has said we are the only team. Its just that we are the only team who still has 10 Mill left to fix not all it but some of it. And we dont even have to spend all of that money. And no one is expecting to get starters or depth players as good as starters. We are speaking of good depth, heck even solid depth. That is what we have been speaking of this whole time. We arent talking about Law or Dwight Smith. We are speaking of the RW Mquarters, Will Allens of the world.

 

[kerouac9]

Really? You can say that for a fact? I seem to remember a few players that were grossly overpaid.

Really? Who? Compare their deals with others' who you think have deals commensurate with their performance.

 

[joeshmo]

But you don't put the greed factor into it. When the cap money comes out next year, it's going to be a near riot. If you think TO's agent was crazy when he wanted to renogotiate a new contract after only one year, wait until the cap goes up 40% in one year. You're going to have guys with pinky injuries sitting out games trying to get new contracts. It's going to be like winning the lottery. Agents will be coming out of the woodwork and acting like long lost family members.

It wont go up 40%. It will go up 6.5%. That has already been agreed upon in the CBA. So has the 2008 offseason, but the media hasnt released it yet.

The cap went up more then 6.5% this offseason and teams had more cap space then ever, there wasnt a feeding frenzy. Average contracts went up accordingly to that raise and all of the agents and teams realized that. Where was the greed this offseason, a year when the cap went up more so then it has gone up in 10 years. The so called feeding frenzy next year will be less then this past offseason.

Why didnt Ed Reed wait to sign an extension until next year, why didnt Roy Willams or countless other players that have already extended. is it that those agents arent greedy?

If the feeding frenzy didnt happen this past offseason what makes you think it will next offseason?

 

[joeshmo]

Really? You can say that for a fact? I seem to remember a few players that were grossly overpaid.

That happens every year.

Take a look at the CB feeding frenzy of the 2003 or was it the 2004 offseason.

 

[joeshmo]

No one is going to agree on this so we will agree to disagree.

Its just that Cap economics and the FA process is a hot button topic with me. I have studied it from the beginning. Really, has anyone else been a big enough geek/nerd to read the whole CBA then write a 100 page masters thesis on it. Still working on the new CBA by the way.

Since it is a hot button topic with me I may have insulted a few people. If I did just know that wasnt my intentions.

So I will leave it at that since this is getting nowhere and can only go down from here. Especialy since K9 is getting back involved. I keed, I Keed.

So make your rebuttals and I will Listen off the air.

Unless you want to argue that to.

 

[Sandan]

Nidan. Come on bro.

Did Pariah really have to expalin it?

I understand what you are saying, all I'm suggesting is that they aren't as stupid as you seem to suggest.

I suspect that there were not a raft of FAs available to fit the positions we needed. If you can see the holes, don't you think the Cardinals staff can.

I expect that there were many reasons why [name a player] wasn't signed. That might include old, injured, didn't want to come here, not sa good fit for our system, way over priced for their ability.

Many reasons, to assume anything else suggests they are too stupid to see this or that BB Snr vetoed any more spending. I suspect it is the second option you are trying so desperatly to convice us of.

Who knows maybe you are correct but also equally possibly you are wrong. As 40 says, once the cap goes up the cash demands of the players will skyrocket. I expect your currently mythical $40M will evaporate fast, if indeed it is real [I have no idea]

 

[spanky1]

All you have to is give me one legit reason why we still have 8-10 Mill in cap space when there will be 40+ Mill in cap space next season.

1. It isnt to sign anyone else. Becuase if we were going to sign someone else we would do it by now. And it isnt to sign vet min players because you dont need that much money to do so.

2. It isnt to sign someone who will get cut. Cuts are about as usefull as June 1st cuts. If some one is cut we dont need 8-10 mill for them.

3. It isnt to extend players, because the only reason you extend players during the season is to take advantage of cap space for the future year, we already know for a fact we will have 40+ mill in cap space next season so it isnt to help for cap issues next season.

4. It isnt an injury fund, as any player to replace an injured player at this point will only be a vet min contract. So you only need 2 Mill. Max when most teams only keep 1.

So one simple question. Why keep 8-10 Mill in the bank this year when it is known for a fact you will have 40+ Mill next season? Why?

If you can come up with even one good answer to that very much so valid question, I will concede.

I'll concede to your point if you can list three viable players that we need (RT; CB and pick a position that you feel we should address) that would be starters or better than the players at positions of need than we have.

 

[BACH]

I could have said ultra conservative. Or act like no other team in the NFL. take your pick.

Not true, Joe....

The Eagles, Vikings and Ravens also use this cap strategy(Philly-Model). Look back at the last 3 - 4 years and these four teams has had the most cap space at the beginning of FA almost every year.

I'm kinda caught in the middle of this discussion, because I support both sides. There are pros and cons about using this cap strategy, and I feel both side fail to see the opposite. I really like this cap strategy, because of three things:
1. The team is always in good cap situation, meaning no cap casualties and room for the unexpected cap casualty.

2. This strategy is perfect when being among the best in the draft. Under Keim/Graves/Green we have become one of the best teams to draft players (Looking exclusively on the last 4 years perhaps even the best team in the league). The abundency of cap space is going to help keep all these young talented players, that have outplayed their draftstatus (Dockett, Green, Hayes, Dansby, Blackstock etc. etc.)

3. Under this cap strategy there are several guideline of what Free Agents you can or cannot sign, but if the criterias are met (only long-term mega-deals to young players getting their 2nd deal) the team can outbid anyone for that player. The best players on the market aren't signed by WAS, OAK or TB, because their bogus-deals cannot compete with the deals offered by the Eagles, Ravens Vikings or us. We needed a RB this season and we got Edge (The best in the market), The Eagles needed a DE (They also got the best in Howard), the Vikings needed OL (Hutch) and the Ravens was the only team able to afford McNair. This is not a coincidence!

CONS:
1. The same guideline for Free Agency also prevents the teams from signing quality veteran players for depth or to fill that one hole in the starting line-up. The whole idea of the strategy is to never hurt your cap situation in the future or never to interfer with the long-term plans. So when this former Pro-bowler on the downslope of his career in his 11th season asks for a huge SB on a 5-year deal, you cannot give it to him because it would hurt the cap when he retires after two seasons.
You cannot sign that way over the hill guy to be a back-up either, because you more than likely have already adressed that position in the draft over the last couple of years and that veteran player would force a young player with way more upside off the roster.

2. The cap strategy gives the impression of the team being cheap and not willing to spend money on the best team that you can buy. I don't think the team is being cheap for using this strategy, because the cap space gets used every year to extent players, which puts the team in even better cap situation next season. BUT there is no argumentation against the owner not doing all that he can to be succesful now, because it's a fact that the long-term succes overrides attempts of improving the team for this next season.

Overall, I agree with cap strategy that the team has exercised since RG/MB took over, but I also have to question it for this season.
This is year 3 of Green's coaching tenure and the year, where the entire plan for "the new Cardinals" should come together. I don't understand why RG/MB didn't go a bit outside the guidelines to ensure that this is going to be the year.
Second, the new CAP means huge increases in the salary cap, which means more money to every team in the league, making them able to keep more of their FAs. That means less quality FAs and thereby a smaller advantage of using the Philly-Model. I don't think we could have fixed our RT situation in this FA, but we could easily have upgraded the secondary at CB and FS - without hurting our chances of keeping Dockett, Davis, Dansby and Hayes.

 

[Cardiac]

Not true, Joe....

The Eagles, Vikings and Ravens also use this cap strategy(Philly-Model). Look back at the last 3 - 4 years and these four teams has had the most cap space at the beginning of FA almost every year.

I'm kinda caught in the middle of this discussion, because I support both sides. There are pros and cons about using this cap strategy, and I feel both side fail to see the opposite. I really like this cap strategy, because of three things:
1. The team is always in good cap situation, meaning no cap casualties and room for the unexpected cap casualty.

2. This strategy is perfect when being among the best in the draft. Under Keim/Graves/Green we have become one of the best teams to draft players (Looking exclusively on the last 4 years perhaps even the best team in the league). The abundency of cap space is going to help keep all these young talented players, that have outplayed their draftstatus (Dockett, Green, Hayes, Dansby, Blackstock etc. etc.)

3. Under this cap strategy there are several guideline of what Free Agents you can or cannot sign, but if the criterias are met (only long-term mega-deals to young players getting their 2nd deal) the team can outbid anyone for that player. The best players on the market aren't signed by WAS, OAK or TB, because their bogus-deals cannot compete with the deals offered by the Eagles, Ravens Vikings or us. We needed a RB this season and we got Edge (The best in the market), The Eagles needed a DE (They also got the best in Howard), the Vikings needed OL (Hutch) and the Ravens was the only team able to afford McNair. This is not a coincidence!

CONS:
1. The same guideline for Free Agency also prevents the teams from signing quality veteran players for depth or to fill that one hole in the starting line-up. The whole idea of the strategy is to never hurt your cap situation in the future or never to interfer with the long-term plans. So when this former Pro-bowler on the downslope of his career in his 11th season asks for a huge SB on a 5-year deal, you cannot give it to him because it would hurt the cap when he retires after two seasons.
You cannot sign that way over the hill guy to be a back-up either, because you more than likely have already adressed that position in the draft over the last couple of years and that veteran player would force a young player with way more upside off the roster.

2. The cap strategy gives the impression of the team being cheap and not willing to spend money on the best team that you can buy. I don't think the team is being cheap for using this strategy, because the cap space gets used every year to extent players, which puts the team in even better cap situation next season. BUT there is no argumentation against the owner not doing all that he can to be succesful now, because it's a fact that the long-term succes overrides attempts of improving the team for this next season.

Overall, I agree with cap strategy that the team has exercised since RG/MB took over, but I also have to question it for this season.
This is year 3 of Green's coaching tenure and the year, where the entire plan for "the new Cardinals" should come together. I don't understand why RG/MB didn't go a bit outside the guidelines to ensure that this is going to be the year.
Second, the new CAP means huge increases in the salary cap, which means more money to every team in the league, making them able to keep more of their FAs. That means less quality FAs and thereby a smaller advantage of using the Philly-Model. I don't think we could have fixed our RT situation in this FA, but we could easily have upgraded the secondary at CB and FS - without hurting our chances of keeping Dockett, Davis, Dansby and Hayes.

This says it all for me, outstanding post Bach.

It's been like watching your parents fight (Joeshmo / 40yr fan), are both outstanding fans and posters.

The Cards front office has made huge strides and is fairly close to running this team like a top notch organization. I believe that Billy still has too much influence (any input is too much) and that's why FS, OT, LB and or CB depth was not addressed. We didn't need to address all of them but more than none.

OT is not only a HUGE concern this year but also next year. BIG is in the last year of his contract and will command major money. We don't have a proven starter at RT and there is not a single backup on this team that can play RT and especially LT. I understand there weren't a lot of options in FA this year but some kind of help at this position was necessary.

This team is very close to being a contender, OT is the screaming need and will be the reason if we don't make the playoffs.

 

[Pariah]

list three viable players that we need ...that would be starters or better than the players at positions of need than we have.

No one is saying we should have brought in starters. We're saying we should have brought in depth.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

Think the discrepancy is Leinart hasn't signed yet.

OK... got it...

 

[Crazy Canuck]

It is actually 8 to 10 Mill.

I use the high end of the speculation to better help my arguement.

Well, we all do that at some point, on some issue...

 

[joeshmo]

Overall, I agree with cap strategy that the team has exercised since RG/MB took over, but I also have to question it for this season.
This is year 3 of Green's coaching tenure and the year, where the entire plan for "the new Cardinals" should come together. I don't understand why RG/MB didn't go a bit outside the guidelines to ensure that this is going to be the year.
Second, the new CAP means huge increases in the salary cap, which means more money to every team in the league, making them able to keep more of their FAs. That means less quality FAs and thereby a smaller advantage of using the Philly-Model. I don't think we could have fixed our RT situation in this FA, but we could easily have upgraded the secondary at CB and FS - without hurting our chances of keeping Dockett, Davis, Dansby and Hayes.

And that sums it all up perfectlly.

 

[joeshmo]

Who knows maybe you are correct but also equally possibly you are wrong. As 40 says, once the cap goes up the cash demands of the players will skyrocket. I expect your currently mythical $40M will evaporate fast, if indeed it is real [I have no idea]

First off all do you think I am just making up this 40 Mill.? You think I am just spouting off a lie. What a laod of crap. I know for a fact that is how much we will have as of today. For Example from John Clayton after we signed Edge and the other 2 FA's. But not before Wells and the rookies.

"Cardinals | $67M available for 2007 cap
Mon, 13 Mar 2006 14:42:58 -0800

John Clayton, of ESPN.com, reports the Arizona Cardinals have $67 million in cap space for 2007."

As for cash demands going up. Why wasnt there a feeding frenzy this past offseason when the cap went up more this year then it will next year?

I suspect that there were not a raft of FAs available to fit the positions we needed. If you can see the holes, don't you think the Cardinals staff can.

I expect that there were many reasons why [name a player] wasn't signed. That might include old, injured, didn't want to come here, not sa good fit for our system, way over priced for their ability.

Many reasons, to assume anything else suggests they are too stupid to see this or that BB Snr vetoed any more spending. I suspect it is the second option you are trying so desperatly to convice us of.

There were players that fit us or we wouldhave never called the,, set of interviews, have them on a plane pretty much, only to cancel all of them after we signed edge. Only tosee them sign else were for fair contracts.

the Cards Coaching staff can see the wholes. Green has already stated his disatisfaction with them in the media. Not sure if all of management can.

As for BB vetoing any more spending. I will believe the 4 sources who have inside info of the situation to a guy who will go to the ends of the earth to protect the owners and doesnt have a media pass. You dont want to believe them or keep on ignoring the signs, making excuses, thats your choice.

 

[joeshmo]

I'll concede to your point if you can list three viable players that we need (RT; CB and pick a position that you feel we should address) that would be starters or better than the players at positions of need than we have.

Are you ready any of the posts so far?

Not once has anyone even implied talking about bringing in a starter. Not once. Why you keep bringin it up is odd to me.

We are talking about players better then Tate, better then Wakefield, more game time proven then Hayes, more proven then your boy Fransisco who for some reason should be compared to Whiterspoon (still wondering about that one.).

 

[joeshmo]

Not true, Joe....

The Eagles, Vikings and Ravens also use this cap strategy(Philly-Model). Look back at the last 3 - 4 years and these four teams has had the most cap space at the beginning of FA almost every year.

The beginning of FA yes. But they get more out of their cap before the season starts then we do.

The Eagles and Minny also use special cap loop holes that we dont use. I forget were the article on it was.

You know what I am talking about RUSS. I think you are the one that posted it a while ago.

He made a mention of it here but I cant find the article.

http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/showpost.php?p=846641&postcount=30

The eagles also usually have one of the highest rookie caps becuase they have 10 Million draft picks every year.

All 3 teams also have a tradition of winning. We dont.

As for the Ravens they were at the bottom of cap to spend this past offseason.

 

[joeshmo]

The Cards front office has made huge strides and is fairly close to running this team like a top notch organization. I believe that Billy still has too much influence (any input is too much) and that's why FS, OT, LB and or CB depth was not addressed. We didn't need to address all of them but more than none.

And thats were I am at.

Especially that last sentence.

You and Bach posted what I wanted to get across in two paragraphs that took me 50 posts to say.

 

[kerouac9]

The Eagles, Vikings and Ravens also use this cap strategy(Philly-Model). Look back at the last 3 - 4 years and these four teams has had the most cap space at the beginning of FA almost every year.

Here's the thing, BACH. While the Vikes, Ravens, and Eagles are among the top 3-4 teams in cap space at the beginning of every free agent period (seemingly), I think that they generally do a good job of actually spending a lot of that cap on free agents. That's not something that the Cards did this season, despite a plethora of talent that would have improved the proverbial belly of this team.

Until the Arizona Cardinals seem willing to make such a move, we're still behind these franchises in terms of organization.

 

[Russ Smith]

The beginning of FA yes. But they get more out of their cap before the season starts then we do.

The Eagles and Minny also use special cap loop holes that we dont use. I forget were the article on it was.

You know what I am talking about RUSS. I think you are the one that posted it a while ago.

He made a mention of it here but I cant find the article.

http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/showpost.php?p=846641&postcount=30

The eagles also usually have one of the highest rookie caps becuase they have 10 Million draft picks every year.

All 3 teams also have a tradition of winning. We dont.

As for the Ravens they were at the bottom of cap to spend this past offseason.

I think it was Jason KGME who pointed that out. I forget specifics but the Eagles write contracts with incentives such that it increases their cap space the next year. IT's a loophole they've been exploiting, without really using, for several years.

 

[Russ Smith]

You keep batting the $40 million around and I keep telling you it isn't the panacea you'd like to make it out to be. Player costs are going to sky rocket and that $40 million will disapear in a hurry. I notice you didn't address that issue.

Same old Cards song. I get sick of hearing it. If you can't realize the difference between this team and the Cards of 4 years ago, you have you head in the sand. These guys are really trying to accomplish something and they are doing it the correct way. Just because some fans are impatient and want to spend the teams money doesn't faze them and it's a good thing.

It's amazing to me how some of you think that this team is the only team with depth issues. Name one team in the NFL that doesn't have a problem with that. There is barely enough talent to go around to get starters, but to expect to field a team with back-ups as good as the starters is ridiculous, but hey, you got money so spend it on something even if it won't help cause you'll make the fans feel better.

The part of the 40 million that's deceptive is that part of the reason it's so high is that we have our own contracts expiring. That increases the amount of money you have to spend, but people often forget that means you HAVE to sign replacement players(or keep your own) and that cuts into the 40. But Joe's point is still true, have we ever spent anywhere near 40 million in any offseason just keeping our own players?

We know we're going to have more money to spend next year and after that because the cap is going up. OL depth is a problem around the NFL of course but can't believe as bad as our OL was last year that we really thought signing one FA and drafting one guy, both guards, was going to solve our lack of depth at Tackle problem.

 

[40yearfan]

It wont go up 40%. It will go up 6.5%. That has already been agreed upon in the CBA. So has the 2008 offseason, but the media hasnt released it yet.

The cap went up more then 6.5% this offseason and teams had more cap space then ever, there wasnt a feeding frenzy. Average contracts went up accordingly to that raise and all of the agents and teams realized that. Where was the greed this offseason, a year when the cap went up more so then it has gone up in 10 years. The so called feeding frenzy next year will be less then this past offseason.

Why didnt Ed Reed wait to sign an extension until next year, why didnt Roy Willams or countless other players that have already extended. is it that those agents arent greedy?

If the feeding frenzy didnt happen this past offseason what makes you think it will next offseason?

If the cap is going up by $40 million as you have said numerous times, it's a heck of a lot more than 6.5%!!! You've been kicking that figure around this whole thread. Are you now changing your mind? Do you even read what I post?

 

[Crazy Canuck]

The beginning of FA yes. But they get more out of their cap before the season starts then we do.

The Eagles and Minny also use special cap loop holes that we dont use. I forget were the article on it was.

You know what I am talking about RUSS. I think you are the one that posted it a while ago.

He made a mention of it here but I cant find the article.

http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/showpost.php?p=846641&postcount=30

The eagles also usually have one of the highest rookie caps becuase they have 10 Million draft picks every year.

All 3 teams also have a tradition of winning. We dont.

As for the Ravens they were at the bottom of cap to spend this past offseason.

Well, the Philly winning tradition is relatively new, and, lest we forget - the historic record between the Cards and Eagles has the Cards up by one.

Sorry, for the digression. Keep going guys... it's interesting...

 

[40yearfan]

Already did address. See post right above yours. A little premature posting much.



Not a single person has said anything about comparing this team to 4 years ago. And every single person will admit to that. But not seeing clear cut issues in the now is having your head in the sand. It is called being a realist. we are getting closer but we have a ways to go, that is not debatable, especially after yet another long hold out, yet another year with a butt load of cap space, yet another year of more then our share of depth issues, yet another year of a lossing record.

I Like Mikey a alot. I just dont have the patients after 50 years of losing to wait for him to get full control of this team.



Putting words in ours mouths. And it makes be believe you havent read a single post.

Again no one has said we are the only team. Its just that we are the only team who still has 10 Mill left to fix not all it but some of it. And we dont even have to spend all of that money. And no one is expecting to get starters or depth players as good as starters. We are speaking of good depth, heck even solid depth. That is what we have been speaking of this whole time. We arent talking about Law or Dwight Smith. We are speaking of the RW Mquarters, Will Allens of the world.

No I'm not putting words in your mouth. Same old Cardinals. You guys have been spouting that mantra forever. You aren't happy unless you have something to bitch about and this Leinhart not being signed deal has just made your day. Now you can start pointing fingers again and all is right with the world.

 

[40yearfan]

Really? Who? Compare their deals with others' who you think have deals commensurate with their performance.

See post 779

 

[seesred]

Monday would be great as Matt will have a full week to get in the flow again and play a mquarter next week.

GBR
40