Thrifty Cards Primed to Splurge

[Evil Ash]

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/cardinals/articles/0302cards0302.html

Thrifty Cards primed to splurge
Stadium, cap room could bring changes

Kent Somers
The Arizona Republic
Mar. 2, 2006 12:00 AM


For years, the Cardinals promised that a new stadium would allow them to become major players in free agency, competing with rich owners like Washington's Daniel Snyder, who has deep pockets for a short guy.

It's time for the Cardinals to make good on their vows. If team officials don't understand that, the folks in the lobby waiting to buy season tickets will be happy to tell them.

Events have converged to create a unique opportunity for the Cardinals to improve, provided they are willing to spend.

The new stadium is set to open in August. The team is about $22 million under the salary cap. And there's impending doom on the labor front, which will weaken the Cardinals' competition in free agency and could put an unexpected number of quality players on the market.

The NFL and the NFL Players Association have been negotiating an extension of the collective bargaining agreement for more than a year but have yet to reach a deal. Without an extension, teams face severe restrictions if free agency begins tonight at 10, Arizona time, as scheduled.

Signing bonuses can be prorated over just four years. Salaries can't increase by more than 30 percent a year. All incentives earned this year must be counted on the 2006 cap. Those changes will make it nearly impossible for teams with little or no cap space to sign free agents.

Without an extension, the salary cap this year is expected to be around $95 million for each team. With an extension, it could be around $108 million. That difference of $13 million is huge to teams such as Washington, Oakland and the New York Jets, all of which entered this week well over the cap.

Enter the Cardinals, one of a handful of teams in position to sign multiple free agents.

Team officials deny they have $23 million of cap space available, but they declined to reveal a different number. They point out that the $23 million figure doesn't include what they must spend on keeping their restricted free agents and signing rookies.

But even if those costs are deducted, the Cardinals have ample room to sign several top free agents. That's an unusual advantage that might not come again.

Say the team needs a center, which it does. Say LeCharles Bentley of the Saints is an unrestricted free agent, which he is. With their cap space, the Cardinals could offer Bentley a higher signing bonus than many teams, because they have the room to accommodate such a contract.

Or they could include a hefty roster bonus, which would count against the 2006 salary cap. That gives them an advantage that most other teams don't have.

The cap space also gives the team an edge with restricted free agents. That market has traditionally been small, because the player's current team has the right to match the offer.

With their cap space, however, the Cardinals could easily structure a contract that would make it difficult for a team to match.

But it's one thing to have salary-cap room and quite another to use it, as the Cardinals have proven in recent years.

In 2003, they entered the season with a weak roster and $12.5 million of cap space, yet they hesitated to add veterans who could help them win.

Fans won't tolerate the same philosophy this year, not with a shiny, new, taxpayer-approved stadium rising out of Glendale cotton fields.

Last time we checked, no one handed out rings for finishing first in salary-cap space.

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

I like the article.It puts a little pressure on the Cards front office.

 

[Shane]

I like the article.It puts a little pressure on the Cards front office.

 

[JeffGollin]

I like the article.It puts a little pressure on the Cards front office.
I have a contrary opinion (so what's new?)

First, the headline is misleading. According to Dennis Green and Rod Grave's, the Cards are not "primed to splurge" but will instead look to sensibly add 4 - 6 players who can help us but who are unlikely to necessarily be headline-grabbers.

Second, the piece comes across to me as an editorial cloaked as a news article. Other than bringing LeCharles Bentley's name forward, it does little more than state the obvious

Third, it doesn't tell Cardinal management anything it doesn't already know, and I don't think it will influence them either way.

Four, I always worry tying the "fannies in the seats" argument to personnel decisions. Winning will fill the stadium. Bringing in players solely for "entertainment value" is a sure path to disaster. (Of course, if the glitzy player is all the team needs in order to make it a winner, that's a different story).

The Cards will do what they do. They seem to have a plan with objectives. Some of us may not totally agree with their strategy for getting there (i.e. 1-2 studs vs. 4 -6 grinders), but the one thing we can hang our hat on so far this off season is that this is one of a handful of organizations that has made the cap work for them rather than against them.

 

[Pariah]

Last time we checked, no one handed out rings for finishing first in salary-cap space.

Hallelujah.

 

[Duckjake]

Question:

There is no revenue from the new stadium yet. Signing Bonuses have to be paid in a certain time frame. The Cardinals have been accused in the past of not having the cash to compete for players regardless of room under the cap because they couldn't pay the signing bonuses. Is this still a problems for the franchise? If so does it mean that the revenue from the new stadium won't have an impact until 2007?

 

[john h]

I like the article.It puts a little pressure on the Cards front office.
I have a contrary opinion (so what's new?)

First, the headline is misleading. According to Dennis Green and Rod Grave's, the Cards are not "primed to splurge" but will instead look to sensibly add 4 - 6 players who can help us but who are unlikely to necessarily be headline-grabbers.

Second, the piece comes across to me as an editorial cloaked as a news article. Other than bringing LeCharles Bentley's name forward, it does little more than state the obvious

Third, it doesn't tell Cardinal management anything it doesn't already know, and I don't think it will influence them either way.

Four, I always worry tying the "fannies in the seats" argument to personnel decisions. Winning will fill the stadium. Bringing in players solely for "entertainment value" is a sure path to disaster. (Of course, if the glitzy player is all the team needs in order to make it a winner, that's a different story).

The Cards will do what they do. They seem to have a plan with objectives. Some of us may not totally agree with their strategy for getting there (i.e. 1-2 studs vs. 4 -6 grinders), but the one thing we can hang our hat on so far this off season is that this is one of a handful of organizations that has made the cap work for them rather than against them.

All I want to know is are they going to spend the CAP money or not? If they are going to keep 10 mil then we are the same old Cards. Whether we sign a bunch of 2nd tier players of a couple of good players makes no difference to me. I just want to know they are trying and if they do not spend the CAP money they very simply are not trying - and that is a fact.

 

[WildBB]

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/cardinals/articles/0302cards0302.html

Right owwn

 

[CronosCard]

"..And in this corner.."

They need to spend it right; not letting DG go near the OLine, for instance.. I say if you can get Randle-El, get him, forget a back then till the second day of the draft, draft a bruiser-cruiser 250-255, 4.5-4.6solid. FA for OLine, backup LB backup CB, draft those players higher 2nd-3rd roundfor ILB or OLB
Same as for CB. I would not be disappointed atall if we went with Huff from Texas at #10. I think that's who I mean..Maybe it's the Virginia Tech guy..

 

[Ed Burmila]

The thing I simply don't get about this "strategy" is that Alexander and James are not question marks. This is not like most free agency classes, where second-rate players get top-5 salaries because they happen to be the best available player at their position (see Starks, Duane or Winfield, Antoine).

Anyone who looks at James and Alexander and argues that they do not have 3-4 elite seasons left in them is simply a cheapskate trying to make excuses for the Cardinals baffling reluctance to break their 25 year trend of not having a top-flight RB.

 

[Rats]

The thing I simply don't get about this "strategy" is that Alexander and James are not question marks. This is not like most free agency classes, where second-rate players get top-5 salaries because they happen to be the best available player at their position (see Starks, Duane or Winfield, Antoine).

Anyone who looks at James and Alexander and argues that they do not have 3-4 elite seasons left in them is simply a cheapskate trying to make excuses for the Cardinals baffling reluctance to break their 25 year trend of not having a top-flight RB.

I can see your point Ed, however I think both guys want to break the bank with there last contract and I would rather give a somewhat lesser contract to J. Lewis and still get that top flight back. I think they all have 3 or 4 good years left.