|
|
Post by texaspat on Mar 23, 2022 18:52:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by lowfbiq on Mar 23, 2022 20:34:58 GMT -5
They got to do it in FA, that's their model. They certainly don't got no draft picks until the 4th round. First one is technically end of the 3rd but 3rd round comps are really 4th rounder values.
|
|
|
|
Post by patriotsnumero1fan on Mar 23, 2022 23:05:40 GMT -5
Cap? Lol. There’s ways for them to create cap space. I think they have a chance to resign beckham if he wants to come back. |
|
|
|
Post by TFB12 on Mar 23, 2022 23:12:36 GMT -5
LMAO!! When will people start admitting that the cap is just a 3 letter word. An excuse to blame bad rosters and bad roster management. The cap........  |
|
|
|
Post by rkarp on Mar 24, 2022 4:35:52 GMT -5
they will never learn
|
|
|
|
Post by irishmob7 on Mar 24, 2022 6:06:27 GMT -5
The same chuckleheads that slobbed over Brady’s knob for “taking less so it could help the roster!” now claim the cap isn’t real. It’s too rich
|
|
|
|
Post by garytx on Mar 24, 2022 6:27:11 GMT -5
The Rams will be against the cap for the next two years in which they keep the core together until 2025. After that with few draft picks they seem to fall into a hole. It is nonsustaining. But we'll just move the target about the salary cap with some other team by then.
|
|
|
|
Post by patslifer on Mar 24, 2022 6:53:08 GMT -5
The Rams will be against the cap for the next two years in which they keep the core together until 2025. After that with few draft picks they seem to fall into a hole. It is nonsustaining. But we'll just move the target about the salary cap with some other team by then. Can't teams keep kicking the cap can down the road if they cap continues to rise year after year? I get at some point things will come back to bite a team, but if it keeps getting raised it seems the type of signings we are seeing now, and the potential fallout from those signings will never be realized as long as the cap keeps climbing. |
|
|
|
Post by rkarp on Mar 24, 2022 6:56:08 GMT -5
The same chuckleheads that slobbed over Brady’s knob for “taking less so it could help the roster!” now claim the cap isn’t real. It’s too rich you do understand that cash and salary cap are different, right chucklehead? |
|
|
|
Post by ATJ on Mar 24, 2022 6:59:27 GMT -5
The Rams will be against the cap for the next two years in which they keep the core together until 2025. After that with few draft picks they seem to fall into a hole. It is nonsustaining. But we'll just move the target about the salary cap with some other team by then. Can't teams keep kicking the cap can down the road if they cap continues to rise year after year? I get at some point things will come back to bite a team, but if it keeps getting raised it seems the type of signings we are seeing now, and the potential fallout from those signings will never be realized as long as the cap keeps climbing. I see your point but even with the ever-increasing cap teams do have to manage (often micro-manage) the cap. Having said that I have to believe that teams can't just keep kicking it down the road without it catching up to them at some point. |
|
|
|
Post by rkarp on Mar 24, 2022 7:12:41 GMT -5
Can't teams keep kicking the cap can down the road if they cap continues to rise year after year? I get at some point things will come back to bite a team, but if it keeps getting raised it seems the type of signings we are seeing now, and the potential fallout from those signings will never be realized as long as the cap keeps climbing. I see your point but even with the ever-increasing cap teams do have to manage (often micro-manage) the cap. Having said that I have to believe that teams can't just keep kicking it down the road without it catching up to them at some point. I may have asked you this before, I do not recall. what does "catching up" mean? |
|
|
|
Post by thehub on Mar 24, 2022 7:24:23 GMT -5
Can't teams keep kicking the cap can down the road if they cap continues to rise year after year? I get at some point things will come back to bite a team, but if it keeps getting raised it seems the type of signings we are seeing now, and the potential fallout from those signings will never be realized as long as the cap keeps climbing. I see your point but even with the ever-increasing cap teams do have to manage (often micro-manage) the cap. Having said that I have to believe that teams can't just keep kicking it down the road without it catching up to them at some point. That last sentenced only applies to home financials and apparently does not apply to the Government or NFL teams. 🤷♂️😂 |
|
|
|
Post by ATJ on Mar 24, 2022 7:35:24 GMT -5
I see your point but even with the ever-increasing cap teams do have to manage (often micro-manage) the cap. Having said that I have to believe that teams can't just keep kicking it down the road without it catching up to them at some point. I may have asked you this before, I do not recall. what does "catching up" mean? Rather than continuing this silly game you seem to break out whenever the mood strikes you I’ll simply wish you a pleasant and productive day. I think we both know what that phrase means. |
|
|
|
Post by patslifer on Mar 24, 2022 8:00:04 GMT -5
I see your point but even with the ever-increasing cap teams do have to manage (often micro-manage) the cap. Having said that I have to believe that teams can't just keep kicking it down the road without it catching up to them at some point. I may have asked you this before, I do not recall. what does "catching up" mean? To me that means at some point in the future, the team will incur a set of charges that exceed the current year cap by which they will need to navigate through. Lots of things influence this. A bad signing who is paid well and is either cut or traded could potentially accelerate the catching up part. Dead money, etc. I don't think teams can totally avoid the cap and it's implications. They can shed high salaried players in favor of low salary players, restructure contracts, or whatever, but at some point I believe the bill comes due. |
|
|
|
Post by irishmob7 on Mar 24, 2022 8:00:16 GMT -5
The same chuckleheads that slobbed over Brady’s knob for “taking less so it could help the roster!” now claim the cap isn’t real. It’s too rich you do understand that cash and salary cap are different, right chucklehead? All cash spent impacts the cap, whether it be in the current year (e.g., salary) or amortized over the life of the contract (e.g., bonus). Did you think you made a point here? |
|
|
|
Post by rkarp on Mar 24, 2022 8:10:13 GMT -5
you do understand that cash and salary cap are different, right chucklehead? All cash spent impacts the cap, whether it be in the current year (e.g., salary) or amortized over the life of the contract (e.g., bonus). Did you think you made a point here? was just checking Mob the Brady contracts were never a matter of "less". it was always a matter of friendly for both. Brady got money upfront, quickly, and the team was able to account for it over future years. a win win for both sides. Brady never signed a deal that an agent announced it to be the biggest, but the back end never came to fruition (ie a Jamie Collins contract  Brady always took upfront and always got it all. |
|
|
|
Post by irishmob7 on Mar 24, 2022 8:38:08 GMT -5
All cash spent impacts the cap, whether it be in the current year (e.g., salary) or amortized over the life of the contract (e.g., bonus). Did you think you made a point here? was just checking Mob the Brady contracts were never a matter of "less". it was always a matter of friendly for both. Brady got money upfront, quickly, and the team was able to account for it over future years. a win win for both sides. Brady never signed a deal that an agent announced it to be the biggest, but the back end never came to fruition (ie a Jamie Collins contract  Brady always took upfront and always got it all. I don't necessarily disagree. They were mutually beneficial. Although I will say Brady could have easily gotten more if he wanted. He was smart, took nice contracts but didn't demand to be the highest every year bc he knew the importance of spreading resources across the roster to try to win as many Super Bowls as possible (also didn't hurt that his wife is a bajilionnaire!). That partnership worked out masterfully. My point remains - some posters that slobbed over Brady "taking less to help the team" are the same ones claiming the cap isn't real. They're contradicting views. Mutually exclusive. It's the same group that is the loudest on the forum about being right on all things roster building so it's pretty funny watching the schticks over the past 15 years play out. |
|
|
|
Post by garytx on Mar 24, 2022 8:40:56 GMT -5
The Rams will be against the cap for the next two years in which they keep the core together until 2025. After that with few draft picks they seem to fall into a hole. It is nonsustaining. But we'll just move the target about the salary cap with some other team by then. Can't teams keep kicking the cap can down the road if they cap continues to rise year after year? I get at some point things will come back to bite a team, but if it keeps getting raised it seems the type of signings we are seeing now, and the potential fallout from those signings will never be realized as long as the cap keeps climbing. They can and the cap will rise as time goes on as you say. The Rams situation is that a lot of the contracts are up and they still have $90mil spent in 2025. This in the addition of all the draft choices they gave away doesn't put them in a good situation from what I see. But they do continue their run for another 3 years especially with the NFC being QB starved right now. I can see how the conversation can get to "there is no salary cap". If managed right you can kick that can down the road a good piece. But I only see certain teams doing this as not everyone is following the Rams style of doing business. KC trades away Hill for cap reasons which I thought I would never see happen. Pittsburgh decides not to get into the QB trade talk which can affect the salary cap. I can only imagine what would be happening here if we were Steeler fans! I also think there's a time to play in FA and a time not to. Last year the Pats had little competition for FA. This year a lot of teams are in the fray. The Pats choose to sit out of the feeding frenzy that was probably expected after so many teams were shut out or could do little the year before. Next year a lot of these teams will be hand cuffed again because some dove in pretty good and the trades for high end QBs so I expect the Pats to be players next year. |
|
|
|
Post by rkarp on Mar 24, 2022 8:42:52 GMT -5
was just checking Mob the Brady contracts were never a matter of "less". it was always a matter of friendly for both. Brady got money upfront, quickly, and the team was able to account for it over future years. a win win for both sides. Brady never signed a deal that an agent announced it to be the biggest, but the back end never came to fruition (ie a Jamie Collins contract Brady always took upfront and always got it all. I don't necessarily disagree. They were mutually beneficial. Although I will say Brady could have easily gotten more if he wanted. He was smart, took nice contracts but didn't demand to be the highest every year bc he knew the importance of spreading resources across the roster to try to win as many Super Bowls as possible (also didn't hurt that his wife is a bajilionnaire!). That partnership worked out masterfully. My point remains - some posters that slobbed over Brady "taking less to help the team" are the same ones claiming the cap isn't real. They're contradicting views. Mutually exclusive. It's the same group that is the loudest on the forum about being right on all things roster building so it's pretty funny watching the schticks over the past 15 years play out. agree with your take on Brady my cap is crap take has always been; there is a salary cap. teams need to be mindful of the number. but there is no such thing as salary cap hell. with so many work arounds, so many options to move money, cut money, trade money, and a cap that is always rising, the answer to the salary cap is smart football decisions. |
|
|
|
Post by rkarp on Mar 24, 2022 8:45:29 GMT -5
Can't teams keep kicking the cap can down the road if they cap continues to rise year after year? I get at some point things will come back to bite a team, but if it keeps getting raised it seems the type of signings we are seeing now, and the potential fallout from those signings will never be realized as long as the cap keeps climbing. They can and the cap will rise as time goes on as you say. The Rams situation is that a lot of the contracts are up and they still have $90mil spent in 2025. This in the addition of all the draft choices they gave away doesn't put them in a good situation from what I see. But they do continue their run for another 3 years especially with the NFC being QB starved right now. I can see how the conversation can get to "there is no salary cap". If managed right you can kick that can down the road a good piece. But I only see certain teams doing this as not everyone is following the Rams style of doing business. KC trades away Hill for cap reasons which I thought I would never see happen. Pittsburgh decides not to get into the QB trade talk which can affect the salary cap. I can only imagine what would be happening here if we were Steeler fans! I also think there's a time to play in FA and a time not to. Last year the Pats had little competition for FA. This year a lot of teams are in the fray. The Pats choose to sit out of the feeding frenzy that was probably expected after so many teams were shut out or could do little the year before. Next year a lot of these teams will be hand cuffed again because some dove in pretty good and the trades for high end QBs so I expect the Pats to be players next year. if Hill were 25 years old and not soon to be 29 years old, does KC make this move? if the trade offers for Hill were a 4th round draft choice, or a 5th round draft choice, does KC make this move? I think in both cases they do not, and simply pay him. for me, they made a smart football decision, not a salary cap dump |
|
|
|
Post by garytx on Mar 24, 2022 12:12:03 GMT -5
They can and the cap will rise as time goes on as you say. The Rams situation is that a lot of the contracts are up and they still have $90mil spent in 2025. This in the addition of all the draft choices they gave away doesn't put them in a good situation from what I see. But they do continue their run for another 3 years especially with the NFC being QB starved right now. I can see how the conversation can get to "there is no salary cap". If managed right you can kick that can down the road a good piece. But I only see certain teams doing this as not everyone is following the Rams style of doing business. KC trades away Hill for cap reasons which I thought I would never see happen. Pittsburgh decides not to get into the QB trade talk which can affect the salary cap. I can only imagine what would be happening here if we were Steeler fans! I also think there's a time to play in FA and a time not to. Last year the Pats had little competition for FA. This year a lot of teams are in the fray. The Pats choose to sit out of the feeding frenzy that was probably expected after so many teams were shut out or could do little the year before. Next year a lot of these teams will be hand cuffed again because some dove in pretty good and the trades for high end QBs so I expect the Pats to be players next year. if Hill were 25 years old and not soon to be 29 years old, does KC make this move? if the trade offers for Hill were a 4th round draft choice, or a 5th round draft choice, does KC make this move? I think in both cases they do not, and simply pay him. for me, they made a smart football decision, not a salary cap dump It was both a smart decision and a cap dump. I don't see a difference in what they did as far as age goes. As far as the draft pick goes the trade would not have been done for such a small return. They would have found some other way to get the cap in line. A talent like Hill does not come across often. He was deemed too short but that proved to be folly as his speed is something else. Probably a better route runner than antisipated as well. |
|
|
|
Post by TFB12 on Mar 24, 2022 12:20:12 GMT -5
The same chuckleheads that slobbed over Brady’s knob for “taking less so it could help the roster!” now claim the cap isn’t real. It’s too rich LMAO!! The cap is there in writing, but it's so fluid that it's as if it's not even there. Come on.. get with the program. Brady gave BB advantages that no other team had. Every team can restructure contracts, move money around, add voidable years... manipulate the cap so many ways... but nobody gave their GM the advantage Brady did. Nobody! |
|
|
|
Post by patriotsnumero1fan on Mar 24, 2022 12:28:14 GMT -5
The same chuckleheads that slobbed over Brady’s knob for “taking less so it could help the roster!” now claim the cap isn’t real. It’s too rich LMAO!! The cap is there in writing, but it's so fluid that it's as if it's not even there. Come on.. get with the program. Brady gave BB advantages that no other team had. Every team can restructure contracts, move money around, add voidable years... manipulate the cap so many ways... but nobody gave their GM the advantage Brady did. Nobody! My thing was if brady took less then why didn’t the pats always go on shopping sprees left and right? The cap was way different when Brady played in the beginning. It was 85 million and under in 2005. In 2006 it made a leap from 85,500,000 from 102,000,000. |
|
|
|
Post by irishmob7 on Mar 24, 2022 12:54:17 GMT -5
The same chuckleheads that slobbed over Brady’s knob for “taking less so it could help the roster!” now claim the cap isn’t real. It’s too rich LMAO!! The cap is there in writing, but it's so fluid that it's as if it's not even there. Come on.. get with the program. Brady gave BB advantages that no other team had. Every team can restructure contracts, move money around, add voidable years... manipulate the cap so many ways... but nobody gave their GM the advantage Brady did. Nobody! What was the advantage, TFB? Assuming you're still referring to his "taking less so it could help the roster!" schtick. "It's like the cap isn't even there.....Brady gave BB an advantage with his contracts that nobody else could"  |
|
|
|
Post by TFB12 on Mar 24, 2022 14:13:53 GMT -5
LMAO!! The cap is there in writing, but it's so fluid that it's as if it's not even there. Come on.. get with the program. Brady gave BB advantages that no other team had. Every team can restructure contracts, move money around, add voidable years... manipulate the cap so many ways... but nobody gave their GM the advantage Brady did. Nobody! What was the advantage, TFB? Assuming you're still referring to his "taking less so it could help the roster!" schtick. "It's like the cap isn't even there.....Brady gave BB an advantage with his contracts that nobody else could"  I have explained it to you... I can't understand it for you. Go back and read my post you quoted again. A few times if needed. |
|
Brady always took upfront and always got it all. 
Brady always took upfront and always got it all. 
