Leinart Contract/Negotiations Discussion

[Mainstreet]

I'm not wanting to start any more controversy here. But if Leinart is not signed soon, he will probably be useless as a back-up QB this season. I personally do not like the idea of Navarre being the primary back-up. Anyone want to speculate... without getting into an argument... how long the Cardinals should hypothetically wait to sign Leinart before going after another back-up QB?

Again, this is only hypothetical. I wanted Leinart signed already. I'm just wondering if the status quo continues, how long do the Cardinals wait before trying to get another back-up for Warner?

I'm asking this question because isn't there a point of no return for Leinart to be effective this season.

Please, I do not want to get involved in the blame game in regards to the Cardinals Management or Leinart's agents.

 

[conraddobler]

Why are you even responding. It is clear that you dont have a business degree so your opinion doesnt matter.

I mean the guy just told myself, Russ, Bach, yourself, that your opinion doesnt count. Does he even know what any of us do for a living or what our backgrounds are.

The Cardinals lately haven't had a problem with escalators, regular NFL contracts, etc.

I will agree they don't seem to spend to the cap each year but then again we haven't been one or two players away either.

I've maintained that some of that extra cap money goes to pay off the $ they have to put into the stadium, that's not the best thing from a fan perspective but to come back to 40's business point, we don't know what their finances are like.

My take after years of watching this team is that you are both right, to some extent we don't spend all we could, however, not having a stadium all these years has probably left them in a bit of a hole that may take a year or two to work out of.

Once the naming rights are done, I expect a lot of this will disappear but on a final note, none of this has a thing to do with Leinart's deal, that deal is what it is and was destined to be a problem from day one.

He dropped the farthest of any player in the draft value wise, until we see the final deal we don't know who was being unreasonable, when or how much, we may never know, but a rookie contract has very little to do with being cheap, it's mostly about two sides having varying opinions on the safety of the pick, maybe the Cardinals know more about his health than you do and are trying to protect themselves from that, or maybe Leinart is trying to hijack them.

I really doubt the cheap label applies here and as to not spending to the cap, you have more ground to stand on that issue than on the Leinart one IMO.

The Bidwills have never had a stadium of their own, they had to pay a large chunk to get it, largely it's been reported they would pay that off with the naming rights, those haven't come through yet.

In this former St. Louis Cardinal fan's opinion, you all should just drop this issue because when you got the team you promised them a stadium you didn't deliver for how long?

It dosen't matter how inept the management may have been in the past, when the team relocated there it was promised a stadium, inept or not that was fully public knowledge for anyone to check out, yet no stadium came with this or that excuse tied to it.

If they are cheap or have been cheap from a business standpoint it was required IMO. To fail to acknowledge that is just not being realistic IMO.

To expect them to start spending like mad as soon as the dollars roll in isn't realistic either, they have to pay down some debt more than likely so can't spend yet like they'd like to.

The signs are all there that they mean to, I'd say so far they've done a decent balancing act but opinions could differ.

 

[kerouac9]

I'm not wanting to start any more controversy here. But if Leinart is not signed soon, he will probably be useless as a back-up QB this season. I personally do not like the idea of Navarre being the primary back-up. Anyone want to speculate... without getting into an argument... how long the Cardinals should hypothetically wait to sign Leinart before going after another back-up QB?

Again, this is only hypothetical. I wanted Leinart signed already. I'm just wondering if the status quo continues, how long do the Cardinals wait before trying to get another back-up for Warner?

I'm asking this question because isn't there a point of no return for Leinart to be effective this season.

Please, I do not want to get involved in the blame game in regards to the Cardinals Management or Leinart's agents.

Foverer. The Cards will go into the season with John Navarre as the #2. Rohan Davey will be the #3 until Matt signs and Davey is released.

The only FA quarterback that I'd rather have than Navarre is Kerry Collins, who is like a good version of John Navarre, and he's not coming here.

 

[joeshmo]

I'm not wanting to start any more controversy here. But if Leinart is not signed soon, he will probably be useless as a back-up QB this season. I personally do not like the idea of Navarre being the primary back-up. Anyone want to speculate... without getting into an argument... how long the Cardinals should hypothetically wait to sign Leinart before going after another back-up QB?

Again, this is only hypothetical. I wanted Leinart signed already. I'm just wondering if the status quo continues, how long do the Cardinals wait before trying to get another back-up for Warner?

I'm asking this question because isn't there a point of no return for Leinart to be effective this season.

Please, I do not want to get involved in the blame game in regards to the Cardinals Management or Leinart's agents.

I think they should start thinking about it if it looks like matt is going to miss another preseason game.

But who is left out there to sign. Collins? And would we actually pay for Collins?

 

[Mainstreet]

I think they should start thinking about it if it looks like matt is going to miss another preseason game.

But who is left out there to sign. Collins? And would we actually pay for Collins?

IMO, it sounds like Leinart's camp might be using the Cardinals weakness at back-up as a real wedge... not that it wasn't already obvious.

Anyway, I think the Cardinals should start looking if only to give Leinart's camp something to think about. Is it too late for the Cardinals to explore an trade if things should just continue South?

Anyway, it would appear to me that if the Cardinals chose to sign a back-up QB like Collins, then they would have reached the point of giving up on getting Leinart signed.

I'm just exploring a worse case scenario. I'm certainly not wanting it to ever go there as it would be a terrible blow for the Cardinals... at least in the short term.

 

[English on tour]

IMO, it sounds like Leinart's camp might be using the Cardinals weakness at back-up as a real wedge... not that it wasn't already obvious.

Anyway, I think the Cardinals should start looking if only to give Leinart's camp something to think about. Is it too late for the Cardinals to explore an trade if things should just continue South?

Anyway, it would appear to me that if the Cardinals chose to sign a back-up QB like Collins, then they would have reached the point of giving up on getting Leinart signed.

I'm just exploring a worse case scenario. I'm certainly not wanting it to ever go there as it would be a terrible blow for the Cardinals... at least in the short term.

i think i would die if we didi that! i also think it would send the wrong message to the ML camp too!

 

[English on tour]

not being 'up' on contracts - im terms of dollars how much are we likely to be fighting over here ! millions?

 

[Mainstreet]

i think i would die if we didi that! i also think it would send the wrong message to the ML camp too!

I wouldn't like it either. But if the two sides remain at an impasse, it is certainly wise to look at the horizon.

In regards to this sending a wrong message to the Matt Leinart camp... if they are playing hardball and the Cardinals are offering a fair contract... maybe they need a little wakeup call.

 

[joeshmo]

I've maintained that some of that extra cap money goes to pay off the $ they have to put into the stadium, that's not the best thing from a fan perspective but to come back to 40's business point, we don't know what their finances are like.

My take after years of watching this team is that you are both right, to some extent we don't spend all we could, however, not having a stadium all these years has probably left them in a bit of a hole that may take a year or two to work out of.

My take after years of watching this team is that you are both right, to some extent we don't spend all we could, however, not having a stadium all these years has probably left them in a bit of a hole that may take a year or two to work out of.

And that I agree with to an extent. I was even fighting the fight with all my overbearingness alongside with Nidan at the beginning of the offseason in a discussion about gauranteed contracts and how we have never had the resources to keep up with the rest of the NFL because we didnt have a stadium. I was labeled as a kool aider in that thread.

I just think that there is a middle ground to this whole thing and have preaching it for some time. I just dont think that the 10/40 is a middle ground.

And the naming rights issue seems very odd to, that should be done by now and the money already in our pockets. What is up with that.

Once the naming rights are done, I expect a lot of this will disappear but on a final note, none of this has a thing to do with Leinart's deal, that deal is what it is and was destined to be a problem from day one.

I dont think this has anything to do with Matts deal either. He is going to get what he gets, and we already know his cap hit will be 1.8 mill no matter what this year.

If they are cheap or have been cheap from a business standpoint it was required IMO. To fail to acknowledge that is just not being realistic IMO.

I know it was required, again I stuck up for them concerning their ability to spend gauranteed money. And I agree with the rest of the 10 Mill in Cap space not being used on more gauranteed money. But the issue is with depth players who will make minimal amounts of money and little gauranteed money. Money that is already taken care off via revenue sharing. In fact the Cards will only us 65+% of the revenue sharing. Teams get 150 Million in revenue sharing and 65% of that is the cap. But the amount a team actually spends on players doesnt equal what the cap states. Becuase total players salaries is what a team spends on players in a given year including the whole amount of the gauranteed money. Just to clear it up.

We are spending 92 Mill against the cap as we speak once Matt signs.

But

We are only paying a total salary of - 80 Mill.

So of that 150 Mill we get in revenue sharing we are only spending 80 Mill of it on players giving us 70 Mill. of profit. Now that doesnt even include ticket sales, concessions, naming rights as well and a few other profit making items that I know I am missing. Players salaries are already more then convered from revenue sharing, the team is still making money hand over fist even with the expenses and debt included.

But lets say they arent. Is spending 3-5 More mill against the cap for 2-3 more depth players really going to hurt the teams finances. It is an honest question especially concerning the Money Making machine we call the NFL. And if 3-5 more mill is going to hurt this franchise that much in again the money making machine of the NFL, then you would have to call into question mangaments business sense and how they could screw up that good of a thing. And that is what I dont get, why would 3 or 5 More Mill hurt this team.

Also one more thing to bring up on revenue sharing. In the new CBA the highest revenue teams in the league give up a greater percentage to the revenue sharing then the bottom 10 do. So we are actually making more in revenue sharing then most other teams.

It is as simple as this. They have their stadium, they have their sold out stadium, they have 100% control of signage and nameing rights, they have a brand new TV deal as apart of their revenue sharing. We were told by the team point blank, "we have our stadium and we can spend like normal teams now". Why tell us that if that isnt what they are going to do until 2007. and why is 3-5 More Mill going to hurt this team so much, especially in light of the fact that they will still make profit even with their debt and expenses. Also we expect to use the rest of our 10 Mill by week 8 on extensions, why cant we spend 3 Mill now and 7 mill week 8(which I would agree is a good medium ground on this topic), we get a little more depth and plan for the future.

Just to get your opinion. Do you believe we will spend all of our 40 Mil in cap space next season? Or are we going to have to go another season with another excuse, such as we still have to pay the 147 Mill.

I guess I am just tired of the excuses especially when the team put themselves into that situation in the first by not getting in writting they would get a stadium when they first moved here. The team got themsleves into that situation, so now we as fans have been paying for it.

I am just tired of the excuses already. I dont know what change with me from 3 months ago to today but the 10/40 cap space and the promise they made to us about this year has a lot to do with it.

Thanks for bringing smart insightfull debate to this issue.

 

[joeshmo]

not being 'up' on contracts - im terms of dollars how much are we likely to be fighting over here ! millions?

Who knows with all of the missinformation that has been going around in the media.

But the prevailing idea seems to be taht they have agreed upon gauranteed money and years. But they are still fighting about incentives (how much and how easy or hard it would be to get those incentives)

 

[conraddobler]

And that I agree with to an extent. I was even fighting the fight with all my overbearingness alongside with Nidan at the beginning of the offseason in a discussion about gauranteed contracts and how we have never had the resources to keep up with the rest of the NFL because we didnt have a stadium. I was labeled as a kool aider in that thread.

I just think that there is a middle ground to this whole thing and have preaching it for some time. I just dont think that the 10/40 is a middle ground.

And the naming rights issue seems very odd to, that should be done by now and the money already in our pockets. What is up with that.



I dont think this has anything to do with Matts deal either. He is going to get what he gets, and we already know his cap hit will be 1.8 mill no matter what this year.



I know it was required, again I stuck up for them concerning their ability to spend gauranteed money. And I agree with the rest of the 10 Mill in Cap space not being used on more gauranteed money. But the issue is with depth players who will make minimal amounts of money and little gauranteed money. Money that is already taken care off via revenue sharing. In fact the Cards will only us 65+% of the revenue sharing. Teams get 150 Million in revenue sharing and 65% of that is the cap. But the amount a team actually spends on players doesnt equal what the cap states. Becuase total players salaries is what a team spends on players in a given year including the whole amount of the gauranteed money. Just to clear it up.

We are spending 92 Mill against the cap as we speak once Matt signs.

But

We are only paying a total salary of - 80 Mill.

So of that 150 Mill we get in revenue sharing we are only spending 80 Mill of it on players giving us 70 Mill. of profit. Now that doesnt even include ticket sales, concessions, naming rights as well and a few other profit making items that I know I am missing. Players salaries are already more then convered from revenue sharing, the team is still making money hand over fist even with the expenses and debt included.

But lets say they arent. Is spending 3-5 More mill against the cap for 2-3 more depth players really going to hurt the teams finances. It is an honest question especially concerning the Money Making machine we call the NFL. And if 3-5 more mill is going to hurt this franchise that much in again the money making machine of the NFL, then you would have to call into question mangaments business sense and how they could screw up that good of a thing. And that is what I dont get, why would 3 or 5 More Mill hurt this team.

Also one more thing to bring up on revenue sharing. In the new CBA the highest revenue teams in the league give up a greater percentage to the revenue sharing then the bottom 10 do. So we are actually making more in revenue sharing then most other teams.

It is as simple as this. They have their stadium, they have their sold out stadium, they have 100% control of signage and nameing rights, they have a brand new TV deal as apart of their revenue sharing. We were told by the team point blank, "we have our stadium and we can spend like normal teams now". Why tell us that if that isnt what they are going to do until 2007. and why is 3-5 More Mill going to hurt this team so much, especially in light of the fact that they will still make profit even with their debt and expenses. Also we expect to use the rest of our 10 Mill by week 8 on extensions, why cant we spend 3 Mill now and 7 mill week 8(which I would agree is a good medium ground on this topic), we get a little more depth and plan for the future.

Just to get your opinion. Do you believe we will spend all of our 40 Mil in cap space next season? Or are we going to have to go another season with another excuse, such as we still have to pay the 147 Mill.

I guess I am just tired of the excuses especially when the team put themselves into that situation in the first by not getting in writting they would get a stadium when they first moved here. The team got themsleves into that situation, so now we as fans have been paying for it.

I am just tired of the excuses already. I dont know what change with me from 3 months ago to today but the 10/40 cap space and the promise they made to us about this year has a lot to do with it.

Thanks for bringing smart insightfull debate to this issue.

I guess I'd have to know exactly how much real cap we've not spent over the years since we knew we were getting the stadium to fully analyze what might be going on.

Anyone know that number?

 

[Mainstreet]

And that I agree with to an extent. I was even fighting the fight with all my overbearingness alongside with Nidan at the beginning of the offseason in a discussion about gauranteed contracts and how we have never had the resources to keep up with the rest of the NFL because we didnt have a stadium. I was labeled as a kool aider in that thread.

I just think that there is a middle ground to this whole thing and have preaching it for some time. I just dont think that the 10/40 is a middle ground.

And the naming rights issue seems very odd to, that should be done by now and the money already in our pockets. What is up with that.



I dont think this has anything to do with Matts deal either. He is going to get what he gets, and we already know his cap hit will be 1.8 mill no matter what this year.



I know it was required, again I stuck up for them concerning their ability to spend gauranteed money. And I agree with the rest of the 10 Mill in Cap space not being used on more gauranteed money. But the issue is with depth players who will make minimal amounts of money and little gauranteed money. Money that is already taken care off via revenue sharing. In fact the Cards will only us 65+% of the revenue sharing. Teams get 150 Million in revenue sharing and 65% of that is the cap. But the amount a team actually spends on players doesnt equal what the cap states. Becuase total players salaries is what a team spends on players in a given year including the whole amount of the gauranteed money. Just to clear it up.

We are spending 92 Mill against the cap as we speak once Matt signs.

But

We are only paying a total salary of - 80 Mill.

So of that 150 Mill we get in revenue sharing we are only spending 80 Mill of it on players giving us 70 Mill. of profit. Now that doesnt even include ticket sales, concessions, naming rights as well and a few other profit making items that I know I am missing. Players salaries are already more then convered from revenue sharing, the team is still making money hand over fist even with the expenses and debt included.

But lets say they arent. Is spending 3-5 More mill against the cap for 2-3 more depth players really going to hurt the teams finances. It is an honest question especially concerning the Money Making machine we call the NFL. And if 3-5 more mill is going to hurt this franchise that much in again the money making machine of the NFL, then you would have to call into question mangaments business sense and how they could screw up that good of a thing. And that is what I dont get, why would 3 or 5 More Mill hurt this team.

Also one more thing to bring up on revenue sharing. In the new CBA the highest revenue teams in the league give up a greater percentage to the revenue sharing then the bottom 10 do. So we are actually making more in revenue sharing then most other teams.

It is as simple as this. They have their stadium, they have their sold out stadium, they have 100% control of signage and nameing rights, they have a brand new TV deal as apart of their revenue sharing. We were told by the team point blank, "we have our stadium and we can spend like normal teams now". Why tell us that if that isnt what they are going to do until 2007. and why is 3-5 More Mill going to hurt this team so much, especially in light of the fact that they will still make profit even with their debt and expenses. Also we expect to use the rest of our 10 Mill by week 8 on extensions, why cant we spend 3 Mill now and 7 mill week 8(which I would agree is a good medium ground on this topic), we get a little more depth and plan for the future.

Just to get your opinion. Do you believe we will spend all of our 40 Mil in cap space next season? Or are we going to have to go another season with another excuse, such as we still have to pay the 147 Mill.

I guess I am just tired of the excuses especially when the team put themselves into that situation in the first by not getting in writting they would get a stadium when they first moved here. The team got themsleves into that situation, so now we as fans have been paying for it.

I am just tired of the excuses already. I dont know what change with me from 3 months ago to today but the 10/40 cap space and the promise they made to us about this year has a lot to do with it.

Thanks for bringing smart insightfull debate to this issue.

Good exchange of thoughts, although I must admit I'm with Joeshmo.

I can understand the Cardinals not wanting to give Leinart... Vince Young type money (if it's without strings attached). However, I cannot understand why the Cardinals wouldn't want to make a bigger splash this year in their new stadium. Very seldom in life does one get a second chance at making a good first impression... which the Cardinals essentially have, to win the hearts of the fans. This year's draft, the signing of Edge and the new stadium were a great start.

I worry about Kurt and Edge behind this offensive line. I sincerely hope my fears are unfounded.

 

[Pariah]

You know what's funny about my position on the lienart debacle and the Cardinals' cap situation? I side with the Cardinals on the Leinart contract (based on what we know about the negotiations), but can't stand that they're not filling in the gaping holes in our depth.

 

[Zeno]

Believe me there are other guys on this board who agree with me, but they don't want to start a argument with joeschmo because he gets so belligerent and overbearing.

FWIW Joe & company have made a ton of sense with their arguments and I haven't seen a counterpoint from anyone that shows they are even close to being wrong.

 

[CatBoxBackFan]

Paul Calvici on Max Cards said that the money is set it is now the language and it could be tomarrow.This not my opinion just what I heard.

 

[BACH]

You know what's funny about my position on the lienart debacle and the Cardinals' cap situation? I side with the Cardinals on the Leinart contract (based on what we know about the negotiations), but can't stand that they're not filling in the gaping holes in our depth.

Me too...

 

[joeshmo]

Paul Calvisi just said on Maximum Cardinals that he could be signed by Monday.

I know this isnt Matt talk, but Paul Calvisi also spoke of Dansby, and he didnt sound all that confident in him at this point. Did anyone else get this feeling.

 

[joeshmo]

I guess I'd have to know exactly how much real cap we've not spent over the years since we knew we were getting the stadium to fully analyze what might be going on.

Anyone know that number?

You know what. I can live with saving money the past few years if they really did have to for the stadium, although they did put themselves in the situation in the first place.

But I cant live with it this year.

 

[joeshmo]

However, I cannot understand why the Cardinals wouldn't want to make a bigger splash this year in their new stadium. Very seldom in life does one get a second chance at making a good first impression... which the Cardinals essentially have, to win the hearts of the fans.

Very good point. The Cards have something not a lot of business dont get, a 2nd chance. Without even playing a football game they have this town by the balls hardcore. I havent been made fun of in my Cards gear since the end of the season. It is no time to rest, its a perfect time to not not only grab more fans, but to make the fence sitter finally stick like glue. I would say that spending that extra 3-5 Mill on valuable depth is a very good calculated investment for making even more money in the future.

You have this towns full attention, now keep them. I think that is a much more wise business decision.

 

[DevonCardsFan]

Bad news from ProFotball Talk:

LEINART DEAL NOT IN THE CARDS

A league source tells us that recent bargaining sessions between the Arizona Cardinals and first-round draft pick Matt Leinart have resulted in no real progress, and that a deal is unlikely through the weekend.

As of Thursday, the possibility of a breakthrough existed. Leinart is the lone remaining unsigned first-round pick.

The Cardinals launch their preseason schedule on Saturday, hosting the Steelers in the first game at the team's new stadium.

Without Leinart, who is listed third on the team's official depth chart, the only understudies to starter Kurt Warner are John Navarre, Rohan Davey, and Jeff Otis.

Profootball talk is so unreliable, it only makes me think Leinart will sign Monday when I hear this

 

[CatBoxBackFan]

Paul Calvici on Max Cards said that the money is set it is now the language and it could be tomarrow.This not my opinion just what I heard.

Yes I quoted myself,anyway this was just said also on NFL Network.

 

[arthurracoon]

Paul Calvici on Max Cards said that the money is set it is now the language and it could be tomarrow.This not my opinion just what I heard.

 

[MastersofCombat]

No matter what the Cardinals have to pay him 10th slotted money or it opens the gates of hell for future negotations to anyone else.

 

[D-Dogg]

Paul Calvisi just said on Maximum Cardinals that he could be signed by Monday.

Isn't Calvisi a Cardinals employee, or am I way off base on that? I thought he was paid by the club...

 

[ajcardfan]

Isn't Calvisi a Cardinals employee, or am I way off base on that? I thought he was paid by the club...

He is. He writes for their website and does reporting on radio and TV as well, I think.