Not trying to bash but an honest question about Rod Graves.

[Cheesebeef]

Oh, its possible. But only for a year or two. And then you crash and burn for the next 3-4 years. And God help you if you pick up a bust or two because you will be sitting on those contracts untill they run out. So it IS possible....just not wise. IMO

but it is wise continuing to do what we're doing, which has given us the worst four year period in the history of the Arizona Cardinals? And do you care to quantify the whole "year or two" thing with some evidence, especially in today's NFL when the cap substantially rises every year, leaving almost every team with salary cap room?

 

[Hollywood]

but it is wise continuing to do what we're doing, which has given us the worst four year period in the history of the Arizona Cardinals? And do you care to quantify the whole "year or two" thing with some evidence, especially in today's NFL when the cap substantially rises every year, leaving almost every team with salary cap room?

I can give you an example of what free spending can do. And I can do it with two words.

Buddy Ryan

Why do you think we were so bad during the years after he left. Heck, the only reason we made the playoffs during Tobin's years is because he was a heck of a coach imo.

 

[Cheesebeef]

I can give you an example of what free spending can do. And I can do it with two words.

Buddy Ryan

Why do you think we were so bad during the years after he left. Heck, the only reason we made the playoffs during Tobin's years is because he was a heck of a coach imo.

two words: Bad Answer.

Why? For starters, you complete ignored that the economics of the NFL have COMPLETELY changed since then. You're example holds no weight in light of the huge increases in the salary cap every year that has left even the most cap-strapped teams in good positions.

Meanwhile even with that being said, the above is pretty off-base considering that after Buddy Ryan left, the next four years were (unbelievably) the best four year stretch in Arizona Cardinals history, going 7-9, 4-12, 9-7 and 6-10, with teams that actually had a considerable amount of talent on them starting with Eric Swann, Rob Moore, Frank Sanders, Jamir Miller, Simeon Rice and Aeneas Williams.

Hell, even if you throw Buddy's years in there, you actually have 8-8, 4-12, 7-9, 4-12, 9-7, 6-10 - pretty much the strongest run the Cardinals have ever had where they reached .500 or better the only two times they've been in existence out in Arizona, as well as another 7-9 team. I mean, you do realize that when they were spending money, that in 3 of those 6 years, duing week 13, the Cardinals were actually positioned to control their own destiny for a playoff spot and in one of those years in the last week of the season, they were still playing for a shot at the playoffs? That's a hell of a lot better than being eiliminated by Halloween, which is what regularly happens on Graves' watch.

Meanwhile, as we're continually in good health cap-wise, apparently the "wise" way to do things, we've also been horrific the last four years. Doesn't make much sense does it?

 

[Hollywood]

that's nice and all, but you complete ignored that the economics of the NFL have COMPLETELY changed since then. You're example holds no weight in light of the huge increases in the salary cap every year that has left even the most cap-strapped teams in good positions.

Meanwhile even that's a bad example - after Buddy Ryan left, the next four years were (unbelievably) the best four year stretch in Arizona Cardinals history, going 7-9, 4-12, 9-7 and 6-10, with teams that actually had a considerable amount of talent on them starting with Eric Swann, Rob Moore, Frank Sanders, Jamir Miller, Simeon Rice and Aeneas Williams.

Hell, even if you throw Buddy's years in there, you actually have 8-8, 4-12, 7-9, 4-12, 9-7, 6-10 - pretty much the strongest run the Cardinals have ever had where they reached .500 or better the only two times they've been in existence out in Arizona, as well as another 7-9 team. I mean, you do realize that when they were spending money, that in 3 of those 6 years, duing week 13, the Cardinals were actually positioned to control their own destiny for a playoff spot and in one of those years in the last week of the season, they were still playing for a shot at the playoffs? That's a hell of a lot better than being eiliminated by Halloween, which is what regularly happens on Graves' watch.

Meanwhile, as we're continually in good health cap-wise, apparently the "wise" way to do things, we've also been horrific the last four years. Doesn't make much sense does it?

So you are good with 3 seasons of mediocrity out of 6. 9-7, 8-8 & 7-9? I believe there is a better way. It is just going to take a little longer. Good things come to those who wait, and I am willing to wait untill the end of this season and maybe the next (depending on how this season goes).

Now if I am wrong then I am wrong but I don't think I am. I see improvement in just about everything this team does. From the way it handles players to the talent on the field to the front office. The guy sitting next to me said we should sign one of the flag football QB's playing at the half last Saturday to replace Boyd. I told him that it was nice to hear that about the 3rd string QB instead of the starter. Remember how it was like that for MANY years. That is a sign of improvement to me. Watching us line up at the 1 and having the offense move the line into the endzone for a TD. That is a sign of improvement. I am excited about this season even though I am telling people that 8-8 will be a good season for me.

I see a lot more good than bad over the last four years. Green just kind of messed it up as far wins and losses, but we are back on track now.

 

[Cheesebeef]

So you are good with 3 seasons of mediocrity out of 6. 9-7, 8-8 & 7-9? I believe there is a better way. It is just going to take a little longer. Good things come to those who wait, and I am willing to wait untill the end of this season and maybe the next (depending on how this season goes).

Now if I am wrong then I am wrong but I don't think I am. I see improvement in just about everything this team does. From the way it handles players to the talent on the field to the front office. The guy sitting next to me said we should sign one of the flag football QB's playing at the half last Saturday to replace Boyd. I told him that it was nice to hear that about the 3rd string QB instead of the starter. Remember how it was like that for MANY years. That is a sign of improvement to me. Watching us line up at the 1 and having the offense move the line into the endzone for a TD. That is a sign of improvement. I am excited about this season even though I am telling people that 8-8 will be a good season for me.

I see a lot more good than bad over the last four years. Green just kind of messed it up as far wins and losses, but we are back on track now.

sorry, but I just can't argue with someone who sees more good than bad over the last four years when we've been as horrific as we've been. Nor can I argue with someone who keeps ignoring the glaring problem with his initial thesis, that the economics now are completely different from the Buddy era (nor acknowledges that the "free spending" during that time didn't actually hurt us at all, as we were still able to be more successful during that stretch than at any other time in Arizona Cardinals history).

 

[Hollywood]

sorry, but I just can't argue with someone who sees more good than bad over the last four years when we've been as horrific as we've been. Nor can I argue with someone who keeps ignoring the glaring problem with his initial thesis, that the economics now are completely different from the Buddy era (nor acknowledges that the "free spending" during that time didn't actually hurt us at all, as we were still able to be more successful during that stretch than at any other time in Arizona Cardinals history).

Higher dollar amounts isn't "completely different" economics. And we were more successful but not good. You can polish a turd but it is still a turd. I want to win....a lot....and for a long time. I don't see that happening by blowing your wad for a year or two and then HAVING to cut back because even though the cap is increased you are still over it.

 

[Russ Smith]

Higher dollar amounts isn't "completely different" economics. And we were more successful but not good. You can polish a turd but it is still a turd. I want to win....a lot....and for a long time. I don't see that happening by blowing your wad for a year or two and then HAVING to cut back because even though the cap is increased you are still over it.

It is different because in the past teams would defer and ultimately wind up way over the cap and have to go through cap hell. Now the cap is going up so much each year teams aren't going to see Cap hell, or at least not nearly as quickly as they used to.

The new contract and the steady increase is really changing the landscape that's why agents are complaining they have to change the rookie cap rules because there's far more cap money now.

 

[Hollywood]

It is different because in the past teams would defer and ultimately wind up way over the cap and have to go through cap hell. Now the cap is going up so much each year teams aren't going to see Cap hell, or at least not nearly as quickly as they used to.

The new contract and the steady increase is really changing the landscape that's why agents are complaining they have to change the rookie cap rules because there's far more cap money now.

Let me ask this question then. Why has the cap gone up so much the last couple of years. And I will tell you why I am asking. If it is something that can be counted on for years to come. and I mean you know it is going to raise by at least 'x' dollars every year then ok. But as I understand things it is always unknown how much the cap is going to go up and it went up more than everyone expected the last couple of years. If that is so how can you count on money that may or may not be there?

 

[jefftheshark]

There is a world of difference between "Free Spending Wisely" & "Free Spending Unwisely".

For example, compare & contrast the Redskins and the Patriots. Both have Owners who are willing and able to spend big dollars in an effort to help their team. However, when you look at the GM's who are in charge of spending these funds, a vast disparity in the results is found. A bad GM cannot turn himself into a good GM by simply throwing money at a problem. A good GM will take even limited resources at his disposal and make something positive happen with them.

Personally, I don't care how much the Bidwills spend on their team. What I do care about are the results Graves gets from what they spent.

JTS

 

[Russ Smith]

Let me ask this question then. Why has the cap gone up so much the last couple of years. And I will tell you why I am asking. If it is something that can be counted on for years to come. and I mean you know it is going to raise by at least 'x' dollars every year then ok. But as I understand things it is always unknown how much the cap is going to go up and it went up more than everyone expected the last couple of years. If that is so how can you count on money that may or may not be there?

Because of the new tv contracts and the bargaining agreement.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2006-07-07-salary-report_x.htm

Ignore the Michael vick pic and read the article.

"The salary cap for the upcoming NFL season is $102.5 million per team, an increase of $17 million above the 2005 figure. How big an increase is it? When the salary cap was set at $75 million in 2003, it was also a $17 million increase — from 1999 ($57.3 million). The cap was $52.4 million in 1998, so it has almost doubled in eight years."

That was last year, this year the cap is higher again. It's 109 million this year IIRC and is projected to be 116 million next year.

That means the cap will have doubled between 99 and 2008 from 58 to 116 million.

The cap was 85.5 in 2005, it was going to 94.5 for 06 but the CBA extension instead pushed it to 102, or 7.5 million more than expected and 16.5 million more than the prior year. That's why everyone had so much capspace and so few bigtime UFA's hit the market. It goes up another 7 million before this year and again next year.

Pastabelli said for the forseeable future it figures to continue to climb.

 

[joeshmo]

Let me ask this question then. Why has the cap gone up so much the last couple of years. And I will tell you why I am asking. If it is something that can be counted on for years to come. and I mean you know it is going to raise by at least 'x' dollars every year then ok. But as I understand things it is always unknown how much the cap is going to go up and it went up more than everyone expected the last couple of years. If that is so how can you count on money that may or may not be there?

Not the case sine the new CBA. Cap amounts of 102.5, 109, 116, and 123.5 in respective years.

Even when it wasnt known teams could still get a great estimate plus or minus 1-2% each year.

 

[Hollywood]

Because of the new tv contracts and the bargaining agreement.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2006-07-07-salary-report_x.htm

Ignore the Michael vick pic and read the article.

"The salary cap for the upcoming NFL season is $102.5 million per team, an increase of $17 million above the 2005 figure. How big an increase is it? When the salary cap was set at $75 million in 2003, it was also a $17 million increase — from 1999 ($57.3 million). The cap was $52.4 million in 1998, so it has almost doubled in eight years."

That was last year, this year the cap is higher again. It's 109 million this year IIRC and is projected to be 116 million next year.

That means the cap will have doubled between 99 and 2008 from 58 to 116 million.

The cap was 85.5 in 2005, it was going to 94.5 for 06 but the CBA extension instead pushed it to 102, or 7.5 million more than expected and 16.5 million more than the prior year. That's why everyone had so much capspace and so few bigtime UFA's hit the market. It goes up another 7 million before this year and again next year.

Pastabelli said for the forseeable future it figures to continue to climb.

If I am reading this right the cap went up just 6% last year....well that is what they were expecting from last year to this year. How much did players salaries go up. The articles say 5% in 2005. If that is constant that really means the cap went up 1% relitave to players salaries.

Am I right or did I screw something up?

 

[Russ Smith]

Not the case sine the new CBA. Cap amounts of 102.5, 109, 116, and 123.5 in respective years.

Even when it wasnt known teams could still get a great estimate plus or minus 1-2% each year.

Thanks I found a Pasquarelli article that went up to 08 but not beyond he just said it was expected to go up again in 09 and 123.5 shows that.

We'll have a lot of caproom next year, the problem is the rest of the NFL will have 7 million more themselves and most will use it to keep the guys we would like to sign.

There will be some guys always are, but it's not going to be a flood.

 

[Russ Smith]

If I am reading this right the cap went up just 6% last year....well that is what they were expecting from last year to this year. How much did players salaries go up. The articles say 5% in 2005. If that is constant that really means the cap went up 1% relitave to players salaries.

Am I right or did I screw something up?

I don't know because cap and salaries are not the same. Salaries doesn't include signing bonuses, roster bonuses, but the cap does.

The cap is a fixed % of the overall tv money, as that money goes up, so does the cap. When they extended the CBA I believe they also raised that fixed % but Joe would know that better than I would.

The point is it's going up ~ 7 million a year for the next few years, that's why agents are complaining they need to increase the rookie cap too.

note the Condon in that article I linked is Matt Leinart's agent.

 

[Hollywood]

I don't know because cap and salaries are not the same. Salaries doesn't include signing bonuses, roster bonuses, but the cap does.

The cap is a fixed % of the overall tv money, as that money goes up, so does the cap. When they extended the CBA I believe they also raised that fixed % but Joe would know that better than I would.

The point is it's going up ~ 7 million a year for the next few years, that's why agents are complaining they need to increase the rookie cap too.

note the Condon in that article I linked is Matt Leinart's agent.

I think I am about to screw something up in this next thought.

If what you are paying your players, the guys that you are resigning and the guys salaries that you have under contract, goes up by 7 million then you didn't really gain any ground. Everyone is back where they started from. So where is all this extra money that everyone keeps talking about coming from? The fact that we are under the cap every year and still resign our best players tells me we are doing the right thing because it lets us bring free agents in to improve the overall talent level on the team. The option there is do we shoot the wad on one guy or go for a couple of the "mid tier" guys.

Or did I screw something up?

 

[Cheesebeef]

The option there is do we shoot the wad on one guy or go for a couple of the "mid tier" guys.

I just don't see how you're not getting that you can DO BOTH - like the Pats or Seahawks have done forever. Or hell, even like we did where we "shot our wad" with Edge, yet still signed other players, extended our own and still could have signed another guy or two and STILL had the most cap room this offseason.

it's a different NFL now than it was back in the Buddy days (days which didn't even cripple us as you say they did).

Seriously, I can remember the Hawks going out and having a very productive FA run three years ago and everyone was saying how they would be in cap hell in a year and this and that - well, since then, they've been to the first round of the playoffs, a Super Bowl, been one play away from the NFC Title game and are the favorites to win the division again, with nary a sign of "cap hell" to be seen. Cap Hell just doesn't exist any more unless you have unbelievably incompetent people running the ship.

Hell, even for those who slam the Redskins as being a joke and in cap hell - you want to tell me what they're record is versus ours since Daniel Snyder took over?

 

[AZCB34]

I think I am about to screw something up in this next thought.

If what you are paying your players, the guys that you are resigning and the guys salaries that you have under contract, goes up by 7 million then you didn't really gain any ground. Everyone is back where they started from. So where is all this extra money that everyone keeps talking about coming from? The fact that we are under the cap every year and still resign our best players tells me we are doing the right thing because it lets us bring free agents in to improve the overall talent level on the team. The option there is do we shoot the wad on one guy or go for a couple of the "mid tier" guys.

Or did I screw something up?

If you do things correct, you can have it all and not worry about going after a top tier guy or two mid tier guys...but it all comes down to structuring everything correct.

The extra money is from the idea that the television deal brings in X amount of "new" money to the owners for them to apply to the cap each year and the thus the cap number goes up. A team can try and project the cap increases and structure thei deals accordingly so they are eating up tomorrows dollars today.

A good front office can do everything all at once and the result is most likely consistent winning/playoffs.

 

[Cheesebeef]

a good FO also shouldn't need to depend on FA as much because if you look at the best teams in the league, a lot of them have guys on their club who are homegrown. We definitely have that on offense, but besides AW, and maybe Dansby, the FO has just been horrific in drafting playmakers on defense, not to mention doling out big contracts to guys who in no way are deserving of them (Dockett).

 

[AZCB34]

a good FO also shouldn't need to depend on FA as much because if you look at the best teams in the league, a lot of them have guys on their club who are homegrown. We definitely have that on offense, but besides AW, and maybe Dansby, the FO has just been horrific in drafting playmakers on defense, not to mention doling out big contracts to guys who in no way are deserving of them (Dockett).

Yup...and to take it another step further, the good Fo's and teams seem to lose scads of FAs each year and keep on chugging along because of the homegrown aspect.

I would add Francisco to the list of guys who got rewarded without really deserving it. Rod needed to eat up space and Francisco was walking by and the rest is history.

 

[Hollywood]

a good FO also shouldn't need to depend on FA as much because if you look at the best teams in the league, a lot of them have guys on their club who are homegrown. We definitely have that on offense, but besides AW, and maybe Dansby, the FO has just been horrific in drafting playmakers on defense, not to mention doling out big contracts to guys who in no way are deserving of them (Dockett).

There is no arguing that we have drafted better on offense than defense.

 

[Cheesebeef]

There is no arguing that we have drafted better on offense than defense.

yeah, everyone can pretty much agree with that.

 

[Hollywood]

yeah, everyone can pretty much agree with that.

But the drafting on offense has been surpurb.

I thought it was a side effect of bpa stratagy. Maybe we drafted more offense than defense so I went and glanced at the draft history. Just a glance but it looked to favor the defense. Oh well.

 

[Cheesebeef]

But the drafting on offense has been surpurb.

I thought it was a side effect of bpa stratagy. Maybe we drafted more offense than defense so I went and glanced at the draft history. Just a glance but it looked to favor the defense. Oh well.

superb? I think that's a little generous - I'd say considering our draft position, it's been competent, at best. Q was a GREAT pick, no doubt - an absolute smash and Deuce looks like he may be a very good pick, but Fitz and Lienart were no-brainers, plain and simple. I'm not gonna pat the Cards on the back for not being completely incompetent as far as those two picks are concerned.

Otherwise, Step was a complete bust, Arrington has been a pretty big disappointment from a second round pick, BJ has been a relative bust, Wells is mediocre at best, Pope has done nothing of worth and the jury is still out on Levi (who does look like he could be good now, but it's wayyyy too early to say anything good or bad about him right now).

 

[Russ Smith]

I think I am about to screw something up in this next thought.

If what you are paying your players, the guys that you are resigning and the guys salaries that you have under contract, goes up by 7 million then you didn't really gain any ground. Everyone is back where they started from. So where is all this extra money that everyone keeps talking about coming from? The fact that we are under the cap every year and still resign our best players tells me we are doing the right thing because it lets us bring free agents in to improve the overall talent level on the team. The option there is do we shoot the wad on one guy or go for a couple of the "mid tier" guys.

Or did I screw something up?

Generally over the length of a contract the salary goes up and the caphit does too. We for years were signing flat contracts same salary each year so ours didn't really go up.

And of course you lose a half dozen or more guys each year and replace them so the salary is not constant.

But yes in theory as the cap goes up, players ask for more money.

 

[Duckjake]

But the drafting on offense has been surpurb.

I thought it was a side effect of bpa stratagy. Maybe we drafted more offense than defense so I went and glanced at the draft history. Just a glance but it looked to favor the defense. Oh well.

For some reason the Carinals have been more successful on offense than on defense for most of their history. Unlike most other positions they have been extremely successful in acquiring wide receivers.