Idle thoughts

[DaBruinz]

Did you lose money on the Steelers game? I'm just curious because you seem so mad.

Whether he lost money on the Steelers game is moot. The fact is that each and every week we are seeing gross egregious errors by the officials. The NFL, however, has proven it doesn't care. They proved that when they didn't address any of the officiating issues after the Pittsburgh/Seattle SB which saw Pitt, literally, handed the game because of bad calls.

The same thing happened in the Pitt game this week. As much I as Hate the Squeelers, they got jobbed at the end of the game.

 

[Patjew]

Whether he lost money on the Steelers game is moot. The fact is that each and every week we are seeing gross egregious errors by the officials. The NFL, however, has proven it doesn't care. They proved that when they didn't address any of the officiating issues after the Pittsburgh/Seattle SB which saw Pitt, literally, handed the game because of bad calls.

The same thing happened in the Pitt game this week. As much I as Hate the Squeelers, they got jobbed at the end of the game.

Yeah, I don't have a dog in this fight. I was just curious.

But I do agree that there is ALOT of room to improve the officiating in the NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE.

 

[Miguel]

THAT'S the point. He's not agreeing to a 2 year deal for short money and no starting position. What he IS agreeing to is to get $5MM RIGHT NOW, and allowing the Pats to have trading rights to a team who will give him the big money deal he's dreaming about. ASSUMING he remains healthy and playing well. BIG ASSUMPTION

You say big.

I ask how big??

Is there a 1% chance of him remaining healthy and playing well??

5%
10%

Because Cassel would, IMO, have to be a fool to agree to a deal that pays him $3 million in 2009. Let's say that the Pats find out in February that it is not 100% guaranteed that Brady will play in the 2009 season. What then stop the Pats from NOT trading Cassel and having him start for them for $3 million in 2009 and be an RFA in 2010??

 

[jczxohn1]

Great analysis, as usual, Ken. Here's my humble comments--
1. Haven't heard anyone trying to factor in the possibility of an uncapped year and the outcome of the contract talks into Cassel's future. Might he be more likely to stick around for one more year, with unlimited vistas on the horizon?

2. Have gone on record as being against full-time refs. I know a ref who is also an airline pilot. On the whole I think they do a great job. This always comes up whenever someone gets a hair cross-ways because of the outcome of some point spread. It's ridiculous.

3. My feelings about Felger are well-known. ( See below.)

4. 11-5, 10-6, I'd be satisfied with either, as this season is only going to make this team stronger. Neither would be a bad record for what will eventually be seen as a rebuilding year.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

You say big.

I ask how big??

Is there a 1% chance of him remaining healthy and playing well??

5%
10%

Because Cassel would, IMO, have to be a fool to agree to a deal that pays him $3 million in 2009. Let's say that the Pats find out in February that it is not 100% guaranteed that Brady will play in the 2009 season. What then stop the Pats from NOT trading Cassel and having him start for them for $3 million in 2009 and be an RFA in 2010??

Ken's theory is plausible but his finances are not. As I sit here typing it's all Matt Cassel on NFLN, so the ship I launched may have sailed on an extention (which would have had to have been for 2 more years and at least $14M in guaranteed money from someone and apparently signed at least a week ago... )

 

[Fencer]

By the way -- after 8 or so years of not starting, I don't think Cassell is going to sign a contract that risks leaving him stuck as a backup for ANOTHER year.

Sorry. Our payoff for grooming him most likely begins and ends with:

A. A year of valuable service.
B. A comp draft pick.

 

[BelichickFan]

By the way -- after 8 or so years of not starting, I don't think Cassell is going to sign a contract that risks leaving him stuck as a backup for ANOTHER year.

Sorry. Our payoff for grooming him most likely begins and ends with:

A. A year of valuable service.
B. A comp draft pick.

Not sure I follow your logic. If he doesn't want to be a backup, and I agree with that, then he likely wouldn't sign the Franchise Tag and would, instead, find a team to be traded to.

 

[Pats726]

Did you lose money on the Steelers game? I'm just curious because you seem so mad.

Not at all..in fact I have never wagered on a game..When one sees call non-calls go in one direction...if one really cares about a football game, one would wonder. That was an atrocious game for the officials and one HAS to wonder is it incompetence or something deeper. That the NFL refuses to really look at what is going on with officials is a total disgrace. The passion is about a sport that is great but could be even better.

 

[Miguel]

Great analysis, as usual, Ken. Here's my humble comments--
1. Haven't heard anyone trying to factor in the possibility of an uncapped year and the outcome of the contract talks into Cassel's future. Might he be more likely to stick around for one more year, with unlimited vistas on the horizon?

Current cap room for all 32 teams (10/23/08) - KFFL Community

Teams are not using all of the cap now so IMO it does not really matter if 2010 will be uncapped in the sense that teams are currently squeezed by the cap.

Teams will be using the LTBE incentive move to push their unused 2008 cap space into 2009. Will there be teams with a lot of cap room in 2009??? Yes.
Here's why Cassel will not agree to a one-year deal at a low salary. He will be an UFA in 2009 and a RFA in 2010 if 2010 is uncapped. If he is a RFA in 2010, his tender amount will be the higher of
1.)110% of his 2009 salary
2.) $1,176,000 for the 2010 League Year for Right of First Refusal and Original Draft Round Compensation
$1,759,000 in the 2010 League Year for Right of First Refusal and One Second Round Draft Selection
$2,521,000 for the 2010 League Year for Right of First Refusal and One First Round Draft Selection
$3,168,000 for the 2010 League Year for Right of First Refusal And, One First Round Draft Selection, and One Third Round Draft Selection

If Cassel is tagged by the Pats, he is looking to get at least $14.6 million in new money in 2009. The difference in the aforementioned amounts speak for themselves.

 

[Patjew]

Not at all..in fact I have never wagered on a game..When one sees call non-calls go in one direction...if one really cares about a football game, one would wonder. That was an atrocious game for the officials and one HAS to wonder is it incompetence or something deeper. That the NFL refuses to really look at what is going on with officials is a total disgrace. The passion is about a sport that is great but could be even better.

Thanks. Like I said, I was just curious. And I do not at all disagree with you.

 

[Fencer]

Not sure I follow your logic. If he doesn't want to be a backup, and I agree with that, then he likely wouldn't sign the Franchise Tag and would, instead, find a team to be traded to.

I was arguing against Ken's theory that Cassell would willingly sign a contract RIGHT NOW at a big discount to a one-year franchise tag number.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Whether he lost money on the Steelers game is moot. The fact is that each and every week we are seeing gross egregious errors by the officials. The NFL, however, has proven it doesn't care. They proved that when they didn't address any of the officiating issues after the Pittsburgh/Seattle SB which saw Pitt, literally, handed the game because of bad calls.

The same thing happened in the Pitt game this week. As much I as Hate the Squeelers, they got jobbed at the end of the game.

Excuse me, they won. What are you talking about?

Oh, you're talking about the people who bet on the game. Well, that sure wasn't the Steelers, their players, their coaches or their owners.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Ken's theory is plausible but his finances are not. As I sit here typing it's all Matt Cassel on NFLN, so the ship I launched may have sailed on an extention (which would have had to have been for 2 more years and at least $14M in guaranteed money from someone and apparently signed at least a week ago... )

Exactly. The idea is right on - but the numbers would need to be changed (for 2009) in order for Cassel to sign. Give him $5 million now and enough to play for next year (in case the Patriots don't trade him) in order to retain the rights to trade him is a reasonable shot.

 

[DaBruinz]

Excuse me, they won. What are you talking about?

Oh, you're talking about the people who bet on the game. Well, that sure wasn't the Steelers, their players, their coaches or their owners.

Just because they won doesn't mean they weren't jobbed at the end of that game.

 

[patfanken]

I was arguing against Ken's theory that Cassell would willingly sign a contract RIGHT NOW at a big discount to a one-year franchise tag number.

OK, OK, pardon me for being less than articulate in explaining why EXTENDING Cassel THIS year is the best way to gain SOME compensation for him beyond a comp pick in the 2010 draft.

Right now Cassel is making around $500,000 Yet he is starting at a position where currently in the league starters make in the range of $6-12MM and elite QBs make even more. My thought, and I have had it for weeks now, is in exchange for allowing the Pats to control his contract through 2009, Cassel would get a lump some right now (BEFORE THE FINAL REPORT CARD ON HIS SEASON IS WRITTEN).

I put down $5MM as a signing bonus, it could be higher...or lower, the bottom line is that for this CURRENT YEAR, Cassel would be paid a salary commensurate with his starting position on a playoff contender. Obviously this would have been cheaper for the Pats if they'd done it before the Indy game, but it still could be done.

What Cassel gains is IMMEDIATE financial security. Now regardless of what happens the rest of the year he is financially protected from potential injury or the fact that teams will adjust enough to render him ineffective...and thus uninteresting to other teams (see Trent Edwards who at one time was the "flavor of the month").

The bottom line is that the 2nd year of the contract doesn't mean sh!t. You can put any number there. All the second year does is give the Pats his negotiation rights. The team that trades for him (ASSUMING that he continues to remain healthy and playing well) doesn't care about that year. No team will trade for him WITHOUT signing him to a multi year contract, so WHATEVER the second year is, its going to be ripped up.

So in essence, Cassel gives up VERY little, since (again assuming he remains healthy and effective) he is likely to get a starting job and a new 3-5 year contract at the going rate for an NFL starting QB (which is a great 'going rate"). Essentially all he gives up is the complete freedom to choose where he will go, and even that could be negotiated in the extension... to some degree. And on the plus side he gets some big money NOW, without the risk of injury or bad play.

THUS I see this is a win win situation for BOTH sides. Mr Kraft has to fork over $5+MM to MC that he isn't normally subject to, in exchange for a few draft picks. Under my scenario, MC will STILL get his big money deal AND a starting position in the QB starved NFL, , BUT the Pats would be compensated for developing a decent starting QB.

I hope that this clears up my opinion.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

OK, OK, pardon me for being less than articulate in explaining why EXTENDING Cassel THIS year is the best way to gain SOME compensation for him beyond a comp pick in the 2010 draft.

I hope that this clears up my opinion.

I'm sure the Pats are trying to find a way to make the most of this. Who knows exactly what that is, but I'm sure they're working on it.

 

[mgcolby]

Oh..really...sorry..in that case, he's got an ax to grind..which makes what he says even more BS in my opinion. a bit of conflict of interest?? No? How about how the officials messed up the end of the Pitts game? really KNOWING the rules?? Pathe Frankly..these little cliques of officials prorecting themselves do nothing to help themselves..One day the NFL will do something about officials...because they will be forced to as they will be losing credibility...Maybe this is the year...but more than not, Goodell will do zero. Let Perreira lie some more...and see nothing wrong as he usually does. It's a JOKE!!!

Why be such a d!ck? Disagree but don't be an a jerk about it!

 

[patfanken]

I totally disagree with that..part timers?? That is almost a joke that that is still the case.
a----And you KNOW this because?? I always enjoy how someone states what would happen without ANY knowledge first hand...just speculates that officials would leave. Maybe...maybe not. you know what?? IF X, Y Z official cares more about his lawyering job or banking or whatever..then MAYBE he's REALLY not caring at all that much about the game. (Not to bring CoachB into it..but he always looks for people that love football...other interests??...LOL...) I would say fine with that..they are in a very small percentile of officials...maybe 120 or so...and I think if THAT is not what they want..fine.. NOW as far as losing experience..maybe that would happen..or maybe NOT as you think. There also might be other officials from college who might like that...so?? I am sure there will be many who would wish to become full time NFL officials. (More on the whole experience thing later..)

This is a silly remark. Do you have any idea of the preparation these "part time" officials go through, or the support they already get from the league. Are you delusional enough to believe that refs DON'T review tape. :That they DON'T get reports on what to look in the game. Teams routinely inform the refs PRIOR to games to alert them to special formations or gadget plays. The league is CONSTANTLY sending refs clips on what are or are not a penalties in particular circumstances. All refs ROUTINELY go to training camps to work with teams on what is or is not allowed. To explain new rules or interpretations.

OBTW. I know for a FACT that the league would lose in excess of a minimum of 40% of their current officials if they forced them to become full time at once...and thats on the LOW side.

Where are you going to find the replacements. All college refs are part time. What would you pay them for being full time.

BTW- I have no problem with full time refs. Its just that the fact remains, BECAUSE THEY ARE HUMAN, mistakes will STILL be made. So you are trading a period of instability while you transitioning from part time to full time, for little or no gain. It just doesn't make sense.

b[[/QUOTE]----And because other officials in another sport are NOT good as full time..that means what?? Reallly nothing at all. Compare apples and oranges..it doesn't work.[/QUOTE]

Not at all! I'm merely pointing out that because you are using humans to officiate games, they will ALWAYS be subject so SOME error. Now that is an straight apples to apples comparison

c

----I don't buy stats like that and then Go WOW they are doing a great job!! Each official looks at certain things and there are always mistakes in games..but it has MORE to do with consistency than things not called..and such. And it is amazing that so many calls are right..that is good. And I will mention other things later..but I am not GLOWING in praise for officials in the NFL..BAD calls?? Many many more than just 4 5 a week..I would bet there are plenty that are not mentioned in every game..and as much of the calls is the non calls and the timing of them.

I don't think we disagree here. No one is more critical of what I consider bad PI or illegal contact calls than I. Where we DO disagree is that I don't believe having full time refs would solve that problem. There would still be guys throwing flags every now and then based on what they PERCEIVED happened rather than on what ACTUALLY happened (see the Mike Vrabel holding call). I'm afraid the only way that problem would be solved is if the NFL refs called the rules based on MY interpretation of the rule. (subject of a very long thread in the future. )

[[/QUOTE]d---As to yout BS...what happened in the Jets game was PURE embarrassment to anyone who CARES about the game..Vrabel gets called for holding..while Law holds Moss and gets NO flag at all?? Are you going to tell me if the officials are given film training as to what IS holding and what is not..that this would still happen?? Apprently there are officials on the same crew who call things differently NOT EVEN other crews. Where is there any consistency? [/QUOTE]

The very fact that you AREN'T aware that in the preseason and before EVERY game NFL officials do EXTENSIVE film training, and have seen COUNTLESS clips of what is or is not holding, PI, etc. They are being constantly made aware of changes in interpretations and sent clips of every contraversial call of the past week with commentaries. Not seemingly to be aware of this kind of makes your diatribe moot.

Again I understand your frustration with seemingly bad calls. The fact is that until you can replace the human element entirely, there are going to be bad calls, just as long as humans are running the officiating. The loss you would see in the transition in going to full time refs would be much greater than the gain...and at a higher cost.

 

[Miguel]

The bottom line is that the 2nd year of the contract doesn't mean sh!t. You can put any number there.

Except that the 2nd number will affect the 2008 cap hit, Cassel's cap number until he is indeed traded, and maybe his 2009 dead money hit.

 

[Miguel]

THUS I see this is a win win situation for BOTH sides. Mr Kraft has to fork over $5+MM to MC that he isn't normally subject to, in exchange for a few draft picks. Under my scenario, MC will STILL get his big money deal AND a starting position in the QB starved NFL, , BUT the Pats would be compensated for developing a decent starting QB.

I hope that this clears up my opinion.

Let's say Cassel does not extend his contract by a year. Why would this not happen if this is such a win-win deal??