It is Absolutely Imperative That We Spend To The Cap This Year

[Miguel]

Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought I read here that the Pats have until March 15, 2007 to pay out the guarantee money ahead to Brady and Seymour for it to count on the 2006 cap. If that's the case, why would they pay it out early and handcuff themselves if they could use it during the year to bring some FA's on board if there are future injuries, etc.?

It is not the case. The Pats have until the end of the regular season to make a deal that would affect the 2006 cap.

 

[Clonamery]

Ya think? But at the same time, we can potentially lower later cap years by re-signing some young studs early. That is, unless we expect them all to bolt when they're done here.

pats1, your thinking is so simplistic. Nobody here is getting all worked up over one loss. You seem not to be able to grasp the long term view and psychological good will that is being debated.

.

Actually, I thought pats1 was being realistic.

Maybe I thought this was another sky-is-falling-thread......but I could have misinterpreted though I think your expectations and worries in September won't be realized and/or acknowledged until February

 

[Wotan_the_Wanderer]

Spending to the cap at this point in the season will barely make ANY impact on the current season. In all likelihood, it would put a cap burden on next year's team as well.

Therefore, we'll see in February when the Pats are celebrating in Miami how "imperative" it was they they spend to the cap.

Agreed. Though I'm not happy with the cap situation, this late into the season with no non-scrub FA of worth waiting around to latch onto a team, this year's Pats are what they are. I also don't see the FO redoing Koppen's or Asante's contracts during the season so Brady, Sey, Colvin, Dillon or anyone else who's got some remaining signing bonuses due in the future will likely cash in at this season's conclusion if not sooner.

 

[Seymour93]

So are you then calling for a fundamental change in the Pats' free agency tactics?

(i.e. "The Reskins' way?")

I'm calling for a change in direction because clearly the secondary is not where it needs to be and the WR situation is a laughing stock. We're also playing AARP members at LB.

You implied that we've never signed a big name before which is blatently false. It's worked for us. We need to sign someone proven again, because clearly relying on project X to "pull a Vrabel/Patten" hasn't worked.

 

[maverick4]

Pats1, this is my main question: If we do not spend to the cap every year, how can we justify to our own players from now on to re-sign with us at below market value?

If the implicit trust/understanding to take less for yourself to spread dollars elsewhere is broken, then we will end up getting screwed over the long term.

.

 

[Miguel]

Had he given Branch and Vinatieri and McGinest and Givens all the deal they wanted it would have cost roughly $12-18M per year over the next 3 - 5 seasons caps and we would be facing making cuts elsewhere to retain the next group of indespensible talents.

I disagree with the notion that the Pats would be making cuts else wherere to retain the next group of indispensible talents. The Pats have more than enough future cap room to have the quartet without forcing cuts in other areas.

They tried to spend the windfall alone on retaining Adam on a pay as you go plan, and by adding (Mason) or retaining (Branch) 1 $5M WR for the next 4 years, and adding a #1 CB in Law or Townsend for the next 2-3 seasons.

This undercuts your notion. The Pats would not have made those offers if those offers would have adversely affected their future caps.

 

[Clonamery]

Pats1, this is my main question: If we do not spend to the cap every year, how can we justify to our own players from now on to re-sign with us at below market value?

If the implicit trust/understanding to take less for yourself to spread dollars elsewhere is broken, then we will end up getting screwed over the long term.

.

Fine but when haven't the Pats spent to the cap?

Where is YOUR trust?

 

[captain stone]

You never said such a thing. Some posters are quick to point the finger and accuse people of not believing in this team. Well as someone who questions the direction of the FO, I can assure you that I do believe that this is a playoff team just like last season's squad. But the thing is, is being a playoff team good enough? With the Patriots being the second most valuable franchise, charging fans $90 a ticket, they have higher standards; being just division winners doesn't cut it.

I keep hearing, "Well, we're keeping the money to re-sign our young starters." What is taking so long then? Have you heard anything about negotiations in progress? It's gotten to the point where it's hampering the club. There are going to be teams out there who are willing to pay over the odds for Koppen, Graham, and even Samuel, therefore we need to get these guys re-signed before the end of season when they hit the market. If the FO haven't learned from the Branch fiasco to not put things off, then they get what they deserve, a mediocre team.

It's going to be very difficult for us to bag another Colvin, no doubt. We had ex-players lobbying targets to NOT come to NE because they wouldn't get the money that they could receive elsewhere. That's really telling you something. Add to that, the perception that has formed league-wide is that we are cheap.

The FO has the power to turn things around however. Get the young guys re-signed ASAP; let one walk if you have to. Go into free agency pushing for high profile, good players. Don't settle for your supposed bargains like Caldwell and Beisel. As long as we have our current scouting system we will continue to draft well. As long as you draft well, you will be competitive. But as mentioned above, being competitive isn't enough for this franchise any more.

What he said.

"As long as we have our current scouting system we will continue to draft well." Improvement here is also needed. Aside from Wilfork and Watson, the 2004 draft, which should be providing us our talented depth, was an abomination. Let's all hope that it was just a momentary lapse of reason.

 

[pats1]

I'm calling for a change in direction because clearly the secondary is not where it needs to be and the WR situation is a laughing stock. We're also playing AARP members at LB.

You implied that we've never signed a big name before which is blatently false. It's worked for us. We need to sign someone proven again, because clearly relying on project X to "pull a Vrabel/Patten" hasn't worked.

2003 was the only season in the BB era the Pats have signed a big-name free agent (Colvin, Harrison).

It's no secret this team builds through the draft.

Look at the positions the Pats have focused on recently:

RB - 1st
TE - 1st, 1st, 3rd, 4th
OL - 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 5th, 6th
DL - 1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 4th, 4th (Klecko), 6th
DB - 2nd, 3rd, 3rd (G. Scott), 4th, 4th, 4th (D. Reid)

Want to know what that means?

The LBs and WRs are next up on the docket. Again, everything is a continuous cycle.

WR has already gotten a head start with Jackson. Also, it's not like the team hasn't been trying in that department. See: P.K. Sam, Bethel.

 

[Jimke]

The Pats have released or lost to free agency eight of their

starters plus Adam Vinatieri over the past two years. Consider

who they got to replace them and then ask yourself whether they

should change their policy with regard to free agency.

I don't believe they should sign big name players from other teams

but think they should do a better job re-signing their own even if it

means paying more money. We can't continue losing starters.

 

[Seymour93]

2003 was the only season in the BB era the Pats have signed a big-name free agent (Colvin, Harrison).

It's no secret this team builds through the draft.

Look at the positions the Pats have focused on recently:

RB - 1st
TE - 1st, 1st, 3rd, 4th
OL - 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 5th, 6th
DL - 1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 4th, 4th (Klecko), 6th
DB - 2nd, 3rd, 3rd (G. Scott), 4th, 4th, 4th (D. Reid)

Want to know what that means?

The LBs and WRs are next up on the docket. Again, everything is a continuous cycle.

WR has already gotten a head start with Jackson. Also, it's not like the team hasn't been trying in that department. See: P.K. Sam, Bethel.

I never criticized the draft strategy. What we're badly lacking in is quality FA signings.

Are we rebuilding? Do you think it's OK for this franchise to sit back, wait a few years for our draft picks to reach their potential and then compete with the best?

 

[mgteich]

We'll spend the cap. So that the players' poor psychological states can be settled down, we'll pay Seymour and Brady some of their 2007 monies this year. We will also pay some lineman $5M for special team tackles or some other LTBE bonus, and some monies will be pushed to next year. Is that what you mean about spending the cap this year? Does someone think that Kraft would just pocket the money? And just BTW, if he did, does someone really think that patriots would mutiny? One need high hips boots to go through all the BS in this thread.

Face it. There is no one to go out and sign. We might trade for someone who has a high 2006 salary, but we likely won't. There were at least two players that the patriots tried hard to get and didn't: Branch and Law.

We have lots of money available to make a big free agent splashes for key players in 2007 and 2008. We probably won't. We rarely do. The fans hate it until February. We could trade, and we probably will.

So, I think that the bottom line is that you would like to announce the payment of bonuses to Seymour and Brady, and announce whatever transactions it will take to spend the cap. Then you will all feel better and will think that the players will feel better and play better. What BS! IMHO, there is ONE player who lowered his requested his salary demands at the request of the FO so that the oney could go others. That man is Tom Brady.

Would I do something about extensions? Sure! During the bye, I would try to extend several players whose contracts end in 2006 and 2007. Banta-Cain, Bruschi, Wright and Gabriel come to mind.

 

[fillylabinga]

the cap room is reall 10mm, not 13mm, but NE owes Seymour a 6.6mm bonus. If that is paid this year, well they're down to 4.4mm of space.

I believe option bonuses, like signing bonuses, are prorated over the life of the contract for salary cap purposes.

Moving $6.66 million from Seymour's bonus next year to this year will increase the hit on the Pats 2006 cap, but not by $6.66 million.

I think the increase equals a quarter (the life of the contract) of the difference between his old 2006 bonus ($5.34 mm) and his new 2006 bonus ($12 mm).

Meaning an increase of $1.6-1.7 mm against the 2006 cap.

Meaning the Pats still would have over $8 mm to spend this year.

 

[Wotan_the_Wanderer]

The Pats have released or lost to free agency eight of their starters plus Adam Vinatieri over the past two years. Consider who they got to replace them and then ask yourself whether they should change their policy with regard to free agency. I don't believe they should sign big name players from other teams but think they should do a better job re-signing their own even if it means paying more money. We can't continue losing starters.

As well as the draconian manner in which the FO conducts negotiations that results in such acrimony. Not all the former vets who've left this franchise with a bitter taste in their mouths are represented by the Poston brothers.

 

[Miguel]

I believe option bonuses, like signing bonuses, are prorated over the life of the contract for salary cap purposes.

You are correct.

 

[maverick4]

Does someone think that Kraft would just pocket the money? And just BTW, if he did, does someone really think that patriots would mutiny? One need high hips boots to go through all the BS in this thread.

Despite what you think, I think these are legitimate concerns. I think the entire system will break down if players realize there is no point in staying here past their rookie contracts. If Kraft doesn't spend to the max, the message will be that not only do we low-ball and practice fiscal discipline, but that there is no point staying here below-value, since we don't care about maximizing all of our dollars.

.

 

[pats1]

Despite what you think, I think these are legitimate concerns. I think the entire system will break down if players realize there is no point in staying here past their rookie contracts. If Kraft doesn't spend to the max, the message will be that not only do we low-ball and practice fiscal discipline, but that there is no point staying here below-value, since we don't care about maximizing all of our dollars.

.

The Pats still aren't going to overpay for players in the offseason just for the sake of spending to the cap - to, as you put it, make other players happy.

If they don't feel there are any "marquee" players worth dishing out the dough to, then they won't, irrespective of whether the consequence will be $10 million under at this point or not.

And by now, any spending towards the cap is going to come in added money to current contracts.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Despite what you think, I think these are legitimate concerns. I think the entire system will break down if players realize there is no point in staying here past their rookie contracts. If Kraft doesn't spend to the max, the message will be that not only do we low-ball and practice fiscal discipline, but that there is no point staying here below-value, since we don't care about maximizing all of our dollars.

.

I go out for a while and this spending to the cap hysteria rages on. What part of they don't have to spend it this year if they can better spend it next year don't you comprehend? What leaders of the future do you want to re-sign? Asante Samuel - not sure they want to keep him and if they do they certainly won't overpay for a nickel back. Koppen? He's a solid center coming off a serious injury. He's not an all pro, but now that he's back on the field I don't doubt they will talk to his agent sometime between now and next March 15th. They have up until the end of December to do contract extensions and have it count and use this year for amortization. Graham? I'm not sure they want him that badly either. He's been injured a lot and is primarily a blocking TE. Branch was the priority, and we didn't know he was unsignable until three weeks ago. But Graham has already indicated they better make him a great offer or else. They may have already decided that or else is what it is. If they want to keep any one of them pending their market they can transition them.

If Caldwell and Gabriel look like they will work out well as #2-3 WR's going forward they may want to extend those two who are on very inexpensive 2 year deals before they develop delusions of grandeur like the rest of the WR's around here seem to. But I wouldn't extend either of them tonight, would you? As long as the cap money goes to the players, and not into an owners pockets, I don't think players care all that much. The more they save to have for next season or the season thereafter, the more that will be available for some of these other guys when their time comes. Overpaying any players or acquiring players who don't fit the system just to spend down the cap hurts every guy on the roster other than the guy you waste that money on. Those guys won't help these guys win and may cost them a job when money is tight again down the road because we spent it foolishly to placate a squirrely fan base.

Nobody in that locker room took less so they could overpay someone else. They took less so we could afford to maintain above average quality depth and so we could pay market for some of our fringe guys rather than have to fill the blanks with minimum salary scrubs. They took it so that when the starter they play along side went down for the season we would have a guy behind him who would still given them a fighting chance of winning. That is the freakin' system. They could do what Daniel Snyder does and cut veteran players every year so he can overpay the FA players du jour. You think his clubhouse is a very happy place? No, guys sometimes even pay to get the hell out of DC and despite all the money he throws at his players he just cannot field a championship caliber team. We've fielded one in 3 of the last 6 seasons. And the players who left here for greener pastures and the teams who were eager to overpay them haven't won a damn thing.

The system works best when it acquires quality players other less fiscally responsible teams were forced to cut due to cap constraints. This season there were few of those kinds of players cut because of a one time mega bump in the cap due to the signing of new television deals. The cap won't be going up exponentially from here on out and salaries across the board will catch up to that bump shortly. As they do veteran players with too high a cap # but a little something left in the tank including that hunger for a Lombardi will become available again. This team would be well served to keep rolling $3-5M forward for that eventuality. Because those kind of players sprinkled in between the real core (Brady, Bruschi, Harrison, Vrabel, Colvin and Seymour for now) and the young talent they draft well and coach up are what Belichick utilizes to maintain the system. Guys who just want their money are the no different than talent that simply cannot play within the system, and Belioli probably wishes the fan base and the media could just understand and appreciate and freakin' come to terms with that.

It is what it is.

 

[pats1]

I go out for a while and this spending to the cap hysteria rages on. What part of they don't have to spend it this year if they can better spend it next year don't you comprehend? What leaders of the future do you want to re-sign? Asante Samuel - not sure they want to keep him and if they do they certainly won't overpay for a nickel back. Koppen? He's a solid center coming off a serious injury. He's not an all pro, but now that he's back on the field I don't doubt they will talk to his agent sometime between now and next March 15th. They have up until the end of December to do contract extensions and have it count and use this year for amortization. Graham? I'm not sure they want him that badly either. He's been injured a lot and is primarily a blocking TE. Branch was the priority, and we didn't know he was unsignable until three weeks ago. But Graham has already indicated they better make him a great offer or else. They may have already decided that or else is what it is. If they want to keep any one of them pending their market they can transition them.

If Caldwell and Gabriel look like they will work out well as #2-3 WR's going forward they may want to extend those two who are on very inexpensive 2 year deals before they develop delusions of grandeur like the rest of the WR's around here seem to. But I wouldn't extend either of them tonight, would you? As long as the cap money goes to the players, and not into an owners pockets, I don't think players care all that much. The more they save to have for next season or the season thereafter, the more that will be available for some of these other guys when their time comes. Overpaying any players or acquiring players who don't fit the system just to spend down the cap hurts every guy on the roster other than the guy you waste that money on. Those guys won't help these guys win and may cost them a job when money is tight again down the road because we spent it foolishly to placate a squirrely fan base.

Nobody in that locker room took less so they could overpay someone else. They took less so we could afford to maintain above average quality depth and so we could pay market for some of our fringe guys rather than have to fill the blanks with minimum salary scrubs. They took it so that when the starter they play along side went down for the season we would have a guy behind him who would still given them a fighting chance of winning. That is the freakin' system. They could do what Daniel Snyder does and cut veteran players every year so he can overpay the FA players du jour. You think his clubhouse is a very happy place? No, guys sometimes even pay to get the hell out of DC and despite all the money he throws at his players he just cannot field a championship caliber team. We've fielded one in 3 of the last 6 seasons. And the players who left here for greener pastures and the teams who were eager to overpay them haven't won a damn thing.

The system works best when it acquires quality players other less fiscally responsible teams were forced to cut due to cap constraints. This season there were few of those kinds of players cut because of a one time mega bump in the cap due to the signing of new television deals. The cap won't be going up exponentially from here on out and salaries across the board will catch up to that bump shortly. As they do veteran players with too high a cap # but a little something left in the tank including that hunger for a Lombardi will become available again. This team would be well served to keep rolling $3-5M forward for that eventuality. Because those kind of players sprinkled in between the real core (Brady, Bruschi, Harrison, Vrabel, Colvin and Seymour for now) and the young talent they draft well and coach up are what Belichick utilizes to maintain the system. Guys who just want their money are the no different than talent that simply cannot play within the system, and Belioli probably wishes the fan base and the media could just understand and appreciate and freakin' come to terms with that.

It is what it is.

Amen, amen indeed.

 

[marcus]

!00% right:

On this board you get barbecued unless you are a cheerleader. If you say anything even slightly critical...justified or not you get attacked.


Lets be honest, the Pats FO badly miscalculated this offseason. If they had played it right, the PATS could have been a legitimate Super Bowl contender.

Biggest mistakes:

1) Letting Branch go
2) Not signing at least 2 pivotal impact free agents to replace our losses
3) Not closing the deal with Ty Law
4) Too late now for them to spend the dollars for this years team, allthey can do is restructure contracts for next year.