Are we the Redskins? - Page 5 - New England Patriots Forums

PatsMyBoyz! · 03-07-2007, 07:25 PM

The Redskins just acquire players.There's no rhyme or reason behind the choices,they just buy the top FA's,put them out there with the #1 picks and figure the rest will take care of itself lol.
When the Pats get into FA people take notice because their signings make sense and address needs,thereby making them stronger and more of a threat. The division collectively mourned this weekend, Indy's nervous, and we've already been deemed SB bound by the braver pundits because we didn't just sign players,we got BETTER. Nobody picks the Skins to go to the SB no matter who they got,and there's a reason for that.
That said,I don't think given the salary increases that the Pats overspent for anybody. It's not even about the dollar amount anyway,it's about how it's structured. The Pats structured these contracts very well so far.

PatsMyBoyz! · 03-07-2007, 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shirtsleeve

Amen, Brother Salty!

Stallworth gives me the creeps. I sense a real cancer there, though not Moss level 4th stage lung cancer. Hopefully the offer he did/did not sign is laden heavier than a Grand Canyon mule with incentives.

Really? That's a strong statement so I'm respectfully curious what makes you feel that way? Everything I've read says he's a good lockerroom guy,good teammate,good work ethic,good player-but I'll admit the fact he walked away from the Pats' deal makes me think he's not as humble as we were led to believe and I definitely don't like his agent,but so far he hasn't done anything to make me see him as a cancer.
I'd also add though,that if he and his agent create a Branch-type situation or some kind of bidding war,deep threat be damned. That's a scenario I'd want us to have no part of.

DGreen28 · 03-07-2007, 11:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatsMyBoyz!

The Redskins just acquire players.There's no rhyme or reason behind the choices,they just buy the top FA's,put them out there with the #1 picks and figure the rest will take care of itself lol.
When the Pats get into FA people take notice because their signings make sense and address needs,thereby making them stronger and more of a threat.

The Redskins often times do have a reason for signing the players they do... but its not very practical. For example, had Brandon Lloyd had another 700-800 yard season, our offense would have looked VERY good and would have been much more dynamic than in the previous two years. However, this line of thought completely ignores the costs (draft picks, cap cost is negligible) of bringing the guy over and the odds that he would mesh well with the team.

Quote:

The division collectively mourned this weekend, Indy's nervous, and we've already been deemed SB bound by the braver pundits because we didn't just sign players,we got BETTER. Nobody picks the Skins to go to the SB no matter who they got,and there's a reason for that.

Skins were a pretty popular NFC Super Bowl pick after 2005... it just crashed and burned quickly. You don't know that you've gotten better until you actually hit the field and people saying you're going to the Super Bowl often means squat. Just look at the Chargers, Panthers, and Colts when they were favorited to contend for the championship they all crashed and burned.

Quote:

That said,I don't think given the salary increases that the Pats overspent for anybody. It's not even about the dollar amount anyway,it's about how it's structured. The Pats structured these contracts very well so far.

Honestly, if there's one thing I don't get its the concept of "structuring contracts well". Although I suppose its a given that I don't really know or care so much about it when the salary cap is Dan Snyder's ***** (what can I say? it's the only thing he does well).

TomBrady'sGoat · 03-08-2007, 06:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DGreen28

Skins were a pretty popular NFC Super Bowl pick after 2005... it just crashed and burned quickly. You don't know that you've gotten better until you actually hit the field and people saying you're going to the Super Bowl often means squat. Just look at the Chargers, Panthers, and Colts when they were favorited to contend for the championship they all crashed and burned.

Honestly, if there's one thing I don't get its the concept of "structuring contracts well". Although I suppose its a given that I don't really know or care so much about it when the salary cap is Dan Snyder's ***** (what can I say? it's the only thing he does well).

Huh? After 2005, does that mean last year, 2006? I checked ESPN.com's expert picks for '06 and 3 out of 12 picked the Skins to make the playoffs, and none of them picked Washington as NFC champ. Dr. Z at SI had them making the playoffs but losing in the wild card round. The only time I heard superbowl mentioned alongside the Redskins last year was from local yahoos. Your point remains that being the preseason favorite doesn't mean a whole heck of a lot, but lumping the Redskins into that group only serves to confuse things. It should be noted that in 2 of the last 3 years the preseason favorite has won the title (Indy this year and NE in '04), though that's presumably flukey.

It's hard to credit the Skins with great cap management when most teams entered this offseason with 20M+ in cap space and the Skins were in the negative. The way the Skins do it now is how every team did it in the late 90s (before NE proved you can win with cap restraint).

PatsMyBoyz! · 03-08-2007, 06:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DGreen28

The Redskins often times do have a reason for signing the players they do... but its not very practical. For example, had Brandon Lloyd had another 700-800 yard season, our offense would have looked VERY good and would have been much more dynamic than in the previous two years. However, this line of thought completely ignores the costs (draft picks, cap cost is negligible) of bringing the guy over and the odds that he would mesh well with the team.

Skins were a pretty popular NFC Super Bowl pick after 2005... it just crashed and burned quickly. You don't know that you've gotten better until you actually hit the field and people saying you're going to the Super Bowl often means squat. Just look at the Chargers, Panthers, and Colts when they were favorited to contend for the championship they all crashed and burned.

Honestly, if there's one thing I don't get its the concept of "structuring contracts well". Although I suppose its a given that I don't really know or care so much about it when the salary cap is Dan Snyder's ***** (what can I say? it's the only thing he does well).

Well,exactly. (see bolded portion above). You made my point.
An example of structuring would be desigining the contract so that most of the monies are paid out sooner rather than later,thus avoiding a future cap hit and also making the contract more palatable in case of a future trade,etc.
I'm no expert and it's a complicated concept. Suffice it to say the Pats built a sustained winning franchise during the cap years which is one of their hallmark achievements.
I have no idea if the Pats will get to the SB or not,but they are not a shot in the dark pick either,such as Miami was etc,and obviously the Skins were.