Reality Check

[Sandan]

I think I'm in the cat 3 as well Joe, yearly reviews like most of us

If I am MB I want to see progress and IMO to date we havee seen progress from RG.

• Contracts are done far better now
• We no longer let players go because of cap problems
• Mini camp Holdouts are history
• Long term holdouts in TC are history [yeah I know we occasionaly lose a few days, even a bit longer in exceptioanl cases like ML]. But still far better than it used to be
• We resign good players. Years ago we would have lost Q and AW
• Overall talent in the team is much improved

On the downside and with hindsight, hiring DG was not a stellar success.

What I would be looking for is another [apparently, as without time we wound't know for sure] good draft and barring some radical issues [like an injury pluaged season] more wins. For GM incremental improvements are the goal, ie I don't expect [but would love] a Superbowl next year.

Now for the new HC I'm expecting a lot more. With the players we have I would expect a fairly rapid turnaround

 

[LVCARDFREAK]

I think I'm in the cat 3 as well Joe, yearly reviews like most of us

If I am MB I want to see progress and IMO to date we havee seen progress from RG.

• Contracts are done far better now
• We no longer let players go because of cap problems
• Mini camp Holdouts are history
• Long term holdouts in TC are history [yeah I know we occasionaly lose a few days, even a bit longer in exceptioanl cases like ML]. But still far better than it used to be
• We resign good players. Years ago we would have lost Q and AW
• Overall talent in the team is much improved

On the downside and with hindsight, hiring DG was not a stellar success.

What I would be looking for is another [apparently, as without time we wound't know for sure] good draft and barring some radical issues [like an injury pluaged season] more wins. For GM incremental improvements are the goal, ie I don't expect [but would love] a Superbowl next year.

Now for the new HC I'm expecting a lot more. With the players we have I would expect a fairly rapid turnaround

ugggh

The things you mentioned are success from RG....From RG the VP of football operations, not RG the GM. The GM should be concerned with putting a winning product ont he field-via the draft, free agency, and a plan that himself and the coach (the one he hires) will work towards.

RG failes miserably as the GM. He does a much better job negotiating contracts and getting players in house. Hell he said it best "judge the product ont he field" how can you argue with that?

 

[kerouac9]

K9:

That's a pretty good list. And for the completists among us, the "guy in Seattle" is President of Football Ops/GM Tim Ruskell (who was previously the assistant GM in Atlanta with McKay) and the Ravens department of player personnel is run by GM/EVP Ozzie Newsome, who's followed a brilliant on-field career with almost equally impressive results in the front office.

And until/unless the Cardinals put someone in charge of personnel who deserves to be mentioned in the same breath with the guys you've listed, I'm afraid we're gonna see more of the same in the management of this team's roster.

WC

Yeah, I think that those guys (McKay, Angelo, Smith, Pioli, Ruskell, Newsome, Giants GM Ernie Accorsi, Tennessee Titans GM Floyd Reese) are the gold standard of NFL executives. Guys that are just below that level are guys like NY Jets GM Mike Tennenbaum, Dolphins GM Randy Mueller, and Chiefs GM Carl Peterson. Guys like Broncos GM Ted Sundquist are more like salary cap guys, and Bruce Allen with the Bucs.

I just hate to see the Arizona Cardinals "settle" for less than the best mind and talent that the NFL can provide, and this was an opportunity for the Cards to upgrade. I'm just really sad to see that they passed on another opporunity for greatness. The Cards could have gotten a league-wide respected guy like Mike Lombardi or looked to someone like Ron Wolff for help and balked at the opportunity.

I think that I've been pretty consistent is what I've asked for from the Cards, and that's not to settle for what's safe and to always try and improve their position in the league as best as they could. They stood pat again, and it's just a shame.

 

[Covert Rain]

Rod Graves shouldn't be the GM of a pop warner team. The only reason he still has this job is because he is friends with the Bidwells and they can control him. He is the ultimate Yes man. It's the Bidwells way of running the show behind the scenes with puppet strings while trying to create the illusion they are letting "football" people run things.

This organization has learned nothing. Now we can look forward to the next Rod Graves endorsed.....errrr...Bidwill endorsed coach who will be one of the lowest paid coaches with one of the lowest paid assistance in the NFL. WOW. Great Job Cards!!!! Way to prove that the organization has changed it's ways after the state gets you the stadium.

Didn't the Cards say things would change spending wise? Well they lied. This coaching search and the extension of Rod Graves proves that. They reported on the radio this morning that the Cards spoke to PC agent and they didn't want to spend that type of money on another coach.

So the Cards won't spend the money needed on coaching or free agents if they deem it's too much. So we can look forward to a discount coaching staff, a POP Warner GM and 10 to 20 million dollar cap space every year. Yep...the Cards sure have changed their ways since getting the new stadium alright.

 

[RedStorm]

K9 I notice how you pick part of my post to attack while ignoring tha other part.

Yes we should judge him by the product on the field but you have to give a GM a longer time frame than a HC. Particualry as the talent level on the team has noticably improved, they just aren't being used well.

I agree Nidan....The GM, person in charge, el supremo, president, must be evaluated over the long term. Whether football teams or US Presidents.

 

[BACH]

The Cards could have gotten a league-wide respected guy like Mike Lombardi or looked to someone like Ron Wolff for help and balked at the opportunity.

The Mike Lombardi that's turing things around for Al Davis in Oakland????

Great Choice!

 

[kerouac9]

The Mike Lombardi that's turing things around for Al Davis in Oakland????

Great Choice!

That's the thing. I think that a lot of the non-Art Shell personnel things that have gone on with the Raiders have been good. They have a really good defense, and they've had a number of solid drafts in the mid- to late rounds (like Kirk Morrison and Stuart Schweigart). They've assembled an excellent secondary and managed to keep their FAs off the market for the most part.

I think the same thing with whomever handles the Page 3 moves for the Washington Redskins. Like Art Shell, Dan Snyder perennially blows the marquee free agent signings, but it's the other executives who find the guys that keep the team operating once the owner's players inevitably fall short.

It's not that it might have been the best decision, BACH, but Michael Bidwill and company didn't even try to find out if they could get someone better. Isn't that even a little bit frustrating?

 

[40yearfan]

Rod Graves shouldn't be the GM of a pop warner team. The only reason he still has this job is because he is friends with the Bidwells and they can control him. He is the ultimate Yes man. It's the Bidwells way of running the show behind the scenes with puppet strings while trying to create the illusion they are letting "football" people run things.

This organization has learned nothing. Now we can look forward to the next Rod Graves endorsed.....errrr...Bidwill endorsed coach who will be one of the lowest paid coaches with one of the lowest paid assistance in the NFL. WOW. Great Job Cards!!!! Way to prove that the organization has changed it's ways after the state gets you the stadium.

Didn't the Cards say things would change spending wise? Well they lied. This coaching search and the extension of Rod Graves proves that. They reported on the radio this morning that the Cards spoke to PC agent and they didn't want to spend that type of money on another coach.

So the Cards won't spend the money needed on coaching or free agents if they deem it's too much. So we can look forward to a discount coaching staff, a POP Warner GM and 10 to 20 million dollar cap space every year. Yep...the Cards sure have changed their ways since getting the new stadium alright.

And we all know because it's on the radio, it has to be true.

 

[john h]

GMs [aka as VP ...] tend to have a longer tenure than Head coaches. That is largely as it takes longer to determine how effective they are. RG has been on the job 4 years now

Much of the success of any GM depends on his relationship with the owners. If you have an owner like Jerry Jones (who made himself the GM) or the Bidwills who seem to very much be involved with what the GM can do you might be one hell of a GM but in the wrong circumstance.

 

[Cardiac]

For what its worth on drafting Boldin:

The guy who really wanted him was the receivers coach at the time. He had been a coach at Florida and and remembered Boldin from his tenure there.

However, to suggest because of that Graves didnt like Boldin, or was going to pass on him is silly. That same story noted they considered him in the first round, but had Johnson rated higher (like virtually all of the 31 other teams).

In the draft process -- individual scouts and position coaches are asked their POV all the time. Isnt that how its supposed to work?

Graves/Mac/etc listened to a guy with near first hand knowledge of a draftee and made the right call. Again, isnt thats how it supposed to work.

The idea that drafting is some grand all-knowing personnel guy sitting by himself and making calls is naive.

Outstanding post. Pat Kirwan on Sirius stated that it is the everyone's responsibility to be passionate and speak up when a player they really want is still on the board.

 

[Paso Fino]

Yeah, I think that those guys (McKay, Angelo, Smith, Pioli, Ruskell, Newsome, Giants GM Ernie Accorsi, Tennessee Titans GM Floyd Reese) are the gold standard of NFL executives. Guys that are just below that level are guys like NY Jets GM Mike Tennenbaum, Dolphins GM Randy Mueller, and Chiefs GM Carl Peterson. Guys like Broncos GM Ted Sundquist are more like salary cap guys, and Bruce Allen with the Bucs.

I just hate to see the Arizona Cardinals "settle" for less than the best mind and talent that the NFL can provide, and this was an opportunity for the Cards to upgrade. I'm just really sad to see that they passed on another opporunity for greatness. The Cards could have gotten a league-wide respected guy like Mike Lombardi or looked to someone like Ron Wolff for help and balked at the opportunity.

I think that I've been pretty consistent is what I've asked for from the Cards, and that's not to settle for what's safe and to always try and improve their position in the league as best as they could. They stood pat again, and it's just a shame.

I couldn't agree with you more. As was indicated in an article in the New York Times a couple of days ago, the NFL front office people involved in personnel are absolutely vital to the success of a team because of the hard salary cap. It is imperative that there be people who can keep track of the strengths and weaknesses of all the roster NFL players as well as those who are not on a roster but could be used. The hard salary cap applies to players but not to the front office. Unless and until the Cardinals have absolutely top flight personnel people in the front office they will not be successful. I am not confident that they have that now.

 

[40yearfan]

I couldn't agree with you more. As was indicated in an article in the New York Times a couple of days ago, the NFL front office people involved in personnel are absolutely vital to the success of a team because of the hard salary cap. It is imperative that there be people who can keep track of the strengths and weaknesses of all the roster NFL players as well as those who are not on a roster but could be used. The hard salary cap applies to players but not to the front office. Unless and until the Cardinals have absolutely top flight personnel people in the front office they will not be successful. I am not confident that they have that now.

The only problem is that there are only so many of those people around and most of them that are really good have jobs. I wonder if the NFL has the same restrictions on negotiating with the office people as they do on the coaches and players? Even if they don't, it would still be pretty hard for the Cards to entice someone from one of the other teams, especially considering the Cards reputation.

 

[Covert Rain]

And we all know because it's on the radio, it has to be true.

And we all know because the Cards have such a stellar track record about spending that they should get the benefit on the doubt.

 

[40yearfan]

And we all know because the Cards have such a stellar track record about spending that they should get the benefit on the doubt.

I guess you're still living in the past. You need to add 6 digits to the year you are still living in. It's 2007, not 2001.

 

[Zeno]

This organization has learned nothing. Now we can look forward to the next Rod Graves endorsed.....errrr...Bidwill endorsed coach who will be one of the lowest paid coaches with one of the lowest paid assistance in the NFL. WOW. Great Job Cards!!!! Way to prove that the organization has changed it's ways after the state gets you the stadium.

Didn't the Cards say things would change spending wise? Well they lied. This coaching search and the extension of Rod Graves proves that. They reported on the radio this morning that the Cards spoke to PC agent and they didn't want to spend that type of money on another coach.

So the Cards won't spend the money needed on coaching or free agents if they deem it's too much. So we can look forward to a discount coaching staff, a POP Warner GM and 10 to 20 million dollar cap space every year. Yep...the Cards sure have changed their ways since getting the new stadium alright.

FWIW the lowest paid head coach in the NFL has his team guaranteed home field advantage throughout the playoffs in the NFC. The Bears even balked at tearing up his contract mid-season.

Just because you are paid a huge amount doesn't mean you are the most capable.

 

[joeshmo]

FWIW the lowest paid head coach in the NFL has his team guaranteed home field advantage throughout the playoffs in the NFC. The Bears even balked at tearing up his contract mid-season.

Just because you are paid a huge amount doesn't mean you are the most capable.

1 out of 32 is en exception not a rule though.

I posted an article the last time we had this debate about Cards coach spending. It is a statistical fact that the higher paid coaches do make the playoffs on a much more regular basis. And the ratio wasnt just a little bit in favor of the higher paid coaches it was a lot. Forgot what thread it was though.

 

[az240zz]

wow I just read all the posts and I'm tired.

After all this the question still remains, Is Rod Graves good at drafting or sighning free agents? If you go by the record the answer would have to be no. If you go by the talent level compared to 3 years ago you may have to say yes.

I think that this years draft and free agency period will give us the answer.

I am looking forward to see who is right and who is wrong.


az240z

 

[kerouac9]

The only problem is that there are only so many of those people around and most of them that are really good have jobs. I wonder if the NFL has the same restrictions on negotiating with the office people as they do on the coaches and players? Even if they don't, it would still be pretty hard for the Cards to entice someone from one of the other teams, especially considering the Cards reputation.

I don't know. There are--what--four billion people in the world? There are 32 GM positions available in the entire world in this sport? Don't you think that there might be a handful of people that could have made better decisions than you or I that the Arizona Cardinals might have just tried talking to?

Even if they decide that Rod Graves was still the best guy after talking to a half-dozen people, it doesn't make sense to me that Michael Bidwill didn't think to pick a couple other guys' brains about the subject.

 

[Zeno]

1 out of 32 is en exception not a rule though.

I posted an article the last time we had this debate about Cards coach spending. It is a statistical fact that the higher paid coaches do make the playoffs on a much more regular basis. And the ratio wasnt just a little bit in favor of the higher paid coaches it was a lot. Forgot what thread it was though.

I agree with you and I'm not saying we should have the lowest paid coaching staff in the NFL my point is just because we pay big bucks doesn't guarantee a good coach.

here is part of a Forbes article...

...The sweet spot for an owner, of course, is hiring a coach who can significantly improve a team's performance, without breaking the bank to do it. So which NFL coaches have provided owners with the highest return on their investments?

To find out, we analyzed the performance of each of the league's 32 teams since its current coach took the reins. We then compared the results to the team's performance during the five years that preceded his tenure. Coaches who improved their teams' fortunes were awarded points for increasing both the number of wins per season and the frequency with which they've led their teams to the playoffs, with an additional bonus for winning the Super Bowl (for which, incidentally, they are awarded the Vince Lombardi Trophy).

Points were then divided into the average salary a coach has earned since he's been with the team, producing a "dollars spent per point" figure used to determine which coaches provide the biggest bangs for the buck. The less spent per point, the more valuable — or cost-effective — the coach.

According to our results, the most valuable NFL coach is Bill Cowher of the Pittsburgh Steelers, who has taken his team to the playoffs in 10 of his 14 seasons and who won his first Super Bowl last season, all while averaging $2 million a year in salary since taking over in 1992. His 14-year tenure in Pittsburgh has cost the team just $191,277 per point, the lowest of any coach in the league. Cowher, having begun his career well before the industry's salary explosion of the early 2000s, owns an average career salary that is lower than the estimated $2.9 million median. But even based on his current $4 million income, he'd rank as one of the league's best investments.

Other top producers for the money include Cincinnati's Marvin Lewis ($214,411 per point), New England's Bill Belichick ($244,561), Denver's Mike Shanahan ($329,088) and Chicago's Lovie Smith ($239,474). Just missing our top 10 were Baltimore's Brian Billick ($489,386), a Super Bowl winner in 2000 who has raised his team's average win total to nine games from six since taking the helm seven years ago, and Philadelphia's Andy Reid ($519,950), who's averaged 10 wins a season since taking over in 1999, while leading his club to the playoffs five times.

Rookie coaches that have impressed so far, like the New York Jets' Eric Mangini, have a tougher time cracking the list — they haven't yet had the chance to accumulate postseason points. Look for such coaches to possibly move into most valuable territory in coming years (though one, New Orleans' Sean Payton, has already done enough in the 2006 regular season to qualify).

The biggest flops? In addition to Gibbs and Parcells, who respectively cost their clubs $2.1 million and $3 million per point, the list of costliest coaches includes the New York Giants' Tom Coughlin ($1.9 million per point), who has barely lifted his team's performance during the past three years despite a $3 million annual salary. But even he pales in comparison to Dennis Green of the Arizona Cardinals. Green, in his third year with the team and making $2.5 million a year, has yet to nudge the Cardinals' annual average win total past five, or to take the team to any playoffs. His cost works out to a whopping $8.2 million per point.

Sometimes, it pays to just promote an assistant and give him a token raise.

 

[joeshmo]

I guess you're still living in the past. You need to add 6 digits to the year you are still living in. It's 2007, not 2001.

Time to put this to rest once and for all for everyone including the ones who think we are the cheapest thing to walk the earth.

Time to bust out some facts so no one can make any assumptions from here on out about how we spend.

Graves first 3 years here (2003-2005):

NFL's average total salary spent on players - $80,895,521
Cardinals average total salary spend on players - $78,845,145

So while we were not dead last, 20th actually, we were and still are below average. I dont have the total amounts for the other teams for 2006 yet but I do know we were right in the middle this year even with the Matt and Edge bonuses.

Also to get rid of another notion while I am at it. Philly and NE whom some have stated we follow their cap model. Both spent and avergae of 7 Mill more then we did. Meaning they got and paid for 7 Mill worth more of players each year over a 3 year period maiking it total of 21 mill more spend then we did between 2003-2005, without having to spend it on high draft picks. I wont even get into how much they spend more on coaches. But I digress.

Now here is the odd part. We actually spent more then average in the 3 years prior to Graves being here (2000-2002). In fact we actually spent more money on players salary in 2000 then any other team.

NFL's average total salary spent on players - $62,185,980
Cardinals average total salary spend on players - $66,823,281

That actually puts us in the top 10 in those 3 years.

So to summarize we are actually spending less then the league average on players salaries compared to the rest of the league during Graves/Mikey control(or what ever control he has, we still dont know yet) but spending more then the average before they took control. And we are not following the NE and Philly model.

But while we are under average during the Graves/Mike era we arent even close to being dead last like a lot of poeple think we are. We are close to dead last in coaching salaries but not what we pay for players. So we arent nearly as cheap as some would lead you to believe. And this is only an answer to what has been spent. I didnt do any coorelations between how teams spend and if they have a history of winning over that time frame.

The top 10 teams in salary spent from 2003 to 2005 are in order -

Seattle Seahawks
Washington Redskins
Atlanta Falcons
New Orleans Saints
Minnesota Vikings
Baltimore Ravens
Houston Texans
Philadelphia Eagles
New England Patriots

Edit - Where you can check my facts if you feel the need.

http://asp.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/salaries/totalpayroll.aspx?year=2002

 

[joeshmo]

I agree with you and I'm not saying we should have the lowest paid coaching staff in the NFL my point is just because we pay big bucks doesn't guarantee a good coach.

Yeah I agree with that as well. Just that the odds are better that you will find a better coach and coaching staff.

 

[Duckjake]

NFL's average total salary spent on players - $80,895,521
Cardinals average total salary spend on players - $78,845,145

Hasn't the knock on the Cardinals has always been that they couldn't or wouldn't match the signing bonuses not total salaries?

Also the other complaint, mentioned in an article in 2003, was that they paid a lot of money on one or two "name" players and underpaid everyone else. That would be easy to check out simply by looking at the salary chart for the team.

I'll have to agree though that the "cheap" label came with Bidwill from St.Louis where the press tabbed him "Dollar Bill" and may or may not be applicable today.

However we've all heard Aeneas Williams complaints and many of us witnessed the Gedney and Esiason situations. We also know that it was only in the last few years that the Cards added staff like a nutritionist that other NFL teams had for years. On the other hand, playing Leinart this year as much as they did cost the Cardinals a bunch of money in bonus.

 

[kerouac9]

joe: just to be clear, I think you're talking about overall payroll over this time period (meaning signing bonuses, salary, and other bonuses) and not just "salary." Is this what you mean? Isn't the difference is that "salary" is what goes against the cap and payroll is the actual cash outlay to players?

I'm a little confused about the terminology.

 

[joeshmo]

Hasn't the knock on the Cardinals has always been that they couldn't or wouldn't match the signing bonuses not total salaries?

When I say Salaries paid out that means all money paid to players in any given year. Meaning it includes everything, signing bonus, base, and so on.

In usa todays way of thinking Salary=payroll.

Again it is all money paid to players in a given year. Which means the bonus we gave to Edge will be in the 2006 salary totals, but in the 2007 salary total only his base salary will be included becuase his bonus was already paid for in one check to edge during the 2006 season. Cap will spread that out over a time period. Salary counts it all in one season.

 

[40yearfan]

Time to put this to rest once and for all for everyone including the ones who think we are the cheapest thing to walk the earth.

Time to bust out some facts so no one can make any assumptions from here on out about how we spend.

Graves first 3 years here (2003-2005):

NFL's average total salary spent on players - $80,895,521
Cardinals average total salary spend on players - $78,845,145

So while we were not dead last, 20th actually, we were and still are below average. I dont have the total amounts for the other teams for 2006 yet but I do know we were right in the middle this year even with the Matt and Edge bonuses.

Also to get rid of another notion while I am at it. Philly and NE whom some have stated we follow their cap model. Both spent and avergae of 7 Mill more then we did. Meaning they got and paid for 7 Mill worth more of players each year over a 3 year period maiking it total of 21 mill more spend then we did between 2003-2005, without having to spend it on high draft picks. I wont even get into how much they spend more on coaches. But I digress.

Now here is the odd part. We actually spent more then average in the 3 years prior to Graves being here (2000-2002). In fact we actually spent more money on players salary in 2000 then any other team.

NFL's average total salary spent on players - $62,185,980
Cardinals average total salary spend on players - $66,823,281

That actually puts us in the top 10 in those 3 years.

So to summarize we are actually spending less then the league average on players salaries compared to the rest of the league during Graves/Mikey control(or what ever control he has, we still dont know yet) but spending more then the average before they took control. And we are not following the NE and Philly model.

But while we are under average during the Graves/Mike era we arent even close to being dead last like a lot of poeple think we are. We are close to dead last in coaching salaries but not what we pay for players. So we arent nearly as cheap as some would lead you to believe. And this is only an answer to what has been spent. I didnt do any coorelations between how teams spend and if they have a history of winning over that time frame.

The top 10 teams in salary spent from 2003 to 2005 are in order -

Seattle Seahawks
Washington Redskins
Atlanta Falcons
New Orleans Saints
Minnesota Vikings
Baltimore Ravens
Houston Texans
Philadelphia Eagles
New England Patriots

Edit - Where you can check my facts if you feel the need.

http://asp.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/salaries/totalpayroll.aspx?year=2002

Thanks for the info Joe. Question: Where do you find the coaches salaries?

BTW, was the reason for us spending the most in 2000 because of a Buddy Ryan hangover?