New CBA BAD for Patriots...

[jct]

First off, we should recognize that our net FA loses to date have been very similar to Indy,Pittsburgh, and SD.
It hurts that we were outbid for Givens and lost Mcginest.
Please consider these 2 facts:
The new CBA gave NE a success tax.
The new CBA let all the poor cap managers get out of jail free and allowed them to spend money like water. (A fool and his money soon party)
Without the new CBA many quality veterans would have been cut.
Veterans would have signed for lower contracts.
NE would have been in the best possible position.

In the short term (next 2 years) our schedule is very favorable to new SB titles.
Now to accomplish this, they must be brilliant in picking up and developing the middle class of FA leftovers.

 

[mgteich]

Robert Kraft and Jonathan Kraft believe that the new CBA is good for the patriots. In fact, as someone else posted, the deal would not have been signed without their aggressive efforts.

You believe that the new contract is bad for the patriots.

Now, whose analysis should we accept?

First off, we should recognize that our net FA loses to date have been very similar to Indy,Pittsburgh, and SD.
It hurts that we were outbid for Givens and lost Mcginest.
Please consider these 2 facts:
The new CBA gave NE a success tax.
The new CBA let all the poor cap managers get out of jail free and allowed them to spend money like water. (A fool and his money soon party)
Without the new CBA many quality veterans would have been cut.
Veterans would have signed for lower contracts.
NE would have been in the best possible position.

In the short term (next 2 years) our schedule is very favorable to new SB titles.
Now to accomplish this, they must be brilliant in picking up and developing the middle class of FA leftovers.

 

[Willie55]

How is it bad for the Pats? They have $20 million to spend. Just because they dont spend their money like fools doesn't mean it's bad for them.

 

[Pats726]

The new CBA gave NE a success tax.
The new CBA let all the poor cap managers get out of jail free and allowed them to spend money like water. (A fool and his money soon party)

First off explain what parts of the new CBA has given NE a successs tax??? Or allowed cap amangers to spend money like water???
Please do explain that..I am intertested.

 

[jct]

New CBA

1) Success Tax: NE is one of the top 5 financially sucessful franchises, we must pay 3% (of profit) welfare to the lower 17 teams who qualify.
2) Washington who was 20M over went out and spent like no tommorrow.
Many of the best FAs are now under contract. (lists available at http://scout.scout.com/a.z?s=211&p=9&c=12&nid=83&lnid=83&yr=2006 )Like I said, we must now be brilliant signing what is left of the FAs available.
In the event of not having this CBA veterans would have been cut like crazy.
If you were a good veteran who had to play for minimum salary why wouldn't you come to NE where you'd have a real chance for a ring or two.

Having money available to spend sucks...
Seymour will now get much more money.
The goal isn't to have money to spend the goal is to have the best talent and team under contract. Right now with the available talent left in FA, this is becoming harder for us to do.

Of course the Krafts said this was a good deal. Politically it is the only thing to say. Labor peace and having football is good. But the facts are NE would have been better off without this deal.

 

[pats1]

Of course the Krafts said this was a good deal. Politically it is the only thing to say. Labor peace and having football is good. But the facts are NE would have been better off without this deal.

Jonathan Kraft created and pushed the proposal which became the deal. That's a fact.

 

[Pats726]

1) Success Tax: NE is one of the top 5 financially sucessful franchises, we must pay 3% (of profit) welfare to the lower 17 teams who qualify.

2) Washington who was 20M over went out and spent like no tommorrow.

Like I said, we must now be brilliant signing what is left of the FAs available.

OK a success tax..3% of profits...and how does THAT limit FA signings...especially if this does NOT affect the cap..that is the same???
The league still has salary caps that are the same from team to team..so??
If it does not limit it..then why the problem..and why did the Krafts approve of it????
Washington is spending money like water..OK..that is implying that this is all new..so why is that the case now?? What provisions in it, the new CBA allow that to happen??? Just teh fact that they are alone..doesn't mean anything...you complained about the CBA..so..you need to use that to explain this new behavier by Washington.
And why must the Patriots be brilliant to sign FAs??? This I do not at all understand.

 

[flutie2phelan]

Jonathan Kraft created and pushed the proposal which became the deal. That's a fact.

Evidently this is true.

But please remember that ... to the Kraft family ... the Patriots are more than a football team,
seeking success on the field.
They are also a business enterprise, seeking profit.
We fans care only about the first face, the team.

Jonathan and his father understand at a very visceral level that
payroll parity and labor peace are indispensable to the well-being of their BUSINESS.
Lose a season ... and they not only make no profit ... but they have
zero revenues with which to service the stadium debt ...
and keep the organization's infrastructure ticking over.
THAT is why they needed a new CBA.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jct
Of course the Krafts said this was a good deal. Politically it is the only thing to say. Labor peace and having football is good. But the facts are NE would have been better off without this deal.

I happen to agree with jct ... that the Patriots' football prospects
would have been comparatively much better without a new agreement ...
compared to many other teams in the league.
It was the business imperatives that impelled them to get a deal at any cost.

 

[jct]

I happen to agree with jct ... that the Patriots' football prospects
would have been comparatively much better without a new agreement ...
compared to many other teams in the league.
It was the business imperatives that impelled them to get a deal at any cost.[/QUOTE]

Thank you for understanding my meaning.
First off the sky is not falling, we will be competitive next year.
No matter what my opinion is, we must deal with the reality of today.
We do need to be brilliant this year in FA and the draft. (look at link above to see what is left for talent)
A number of teams are sitting on a sizable cap now with fewer and fewer quality guys available. Last years FA was a bust.(Starks,Beisel,C Brown)
We have a favorable schedule in 06 and 07
I don't want us just to be competitive...I want to win SBs

 

[Pats726]

OK a success tax..3% of profits...and how does THAT limit FA signings...especially if this does NOT affect the cap..that is the same???
The league still has salary caps that are the same from team to team..so??
If it does not limit it..then why the problem..and why did the Krafts approve of it????
Washington is spending money like water..OK..that is implying that this is all new..so why is that the case now?? What provisions in it, the new CBA allow that to happen??? Just teh fact that they are alone..doesn't mean anything...you complained about the CBA..so..you need to use that to explain this new behavier by Washington.
And why must the Patriots be brilliant to sign FAs??? This I do not at all understand.

Since these questions have NOT been answered....Let me say a few words about the deals Washington has made. For the details of this, try http://www.profootballtalk.com/rumormill.htm and scroll down to Saturday's information..."Redskin's deals Overblown"....as was said, the magnatude of the deals were basically wrong. ...as was stated in that..."Although the three contracts are all worth roughly $30 million over three years, the deals carry signing bonuses of $5 million and roster bonuses due in 2007 in the range of $4 million to $5 million. With minimum base salaries in 2006, the cap figures for each are roughly $1.5 million. Come 2007, those roster bonuses will be converted to guarantees, reducing the cap hits for next year so that the 'Skins can embark on another splurge.
Down the road, before the big salaries kick in, the deals will be extended, pay cuts will be taken, or the players will be cut."....While they look like these big deals, it's just NOT the case when details are looked at.
I still do not know why the Patriot's have to be briliant to sign FAs...what is different this year than last???

 

[tailgater]

Jonathan Kraft created and pushed the proposal which became the deal. That's a fact.

True. That just means, like 29 other teams, that they thought any CBA was better than no CBA. The Krafts don't like giving up their money anymore than the other owners.

If the future revenue streams don't develop, all the teams are screwed. If it never happens, the owners are going to have to dig deeper into their profits.

 

[jct]

New CBA BAD FOR NE...

Since these questions have NOT been answered....

I still do not know why the Patriot's have to be briliant to sign FAs...what is different this year than last???

Please do not be fixated on just the redskins (it is many teams). Per http://scout.scout.com/a.z?s=211&p=9&c=12&nid=83&lnid=83&yr=2006 most of the premium FAs have already been signed.

The difference is last year we had poor results in FA. Last year NE declined. Results which combined with our injuries and reduced draft kept us from going the distance to the SB.
Quite a few teams have exercised restraint so there will continue to be substantial competition for FAs.
Our net loss in FA thus far is 500 yds and 10 sacks. In the current market it will be challenging to replace this production.
To win it all this year we must be brilliant in FA and the draft.

 

[DaBruinz]

Please do not be fixated on just the redskins (it is many teams). Per http://scout.scout.com/a.z?s=211&p=9&c=12&nid=83&lnid=83&yr=2006 most of the premium FAs have already been signed.

The difference is last year we had poor results in FA. Last year NE declined. Results which combined with our injuries and reduced draft kept us from going the distance to the SB.
Quite a few teams have exercised restraint so there will continue to be substantial competition for FAs.
Our net loss in FA thus far is 500 yds and 10 sacks. In the current market it will be challenging to replace this production.
To win it all this year we must be brilliant in FA and the draft.

JCT -
How long have you been a fan of the game? Honestly? Because you don't seem to know a lot.

1) How did the Pats have a reduced draft last year? They got 3 players, at the very least, who will be, at the very least, solid starters in the NFL.

2) Free Agency last year was not as bad as you and others claim. The big thing you all seem to over-look is that the Pats didn't have a lot of money to spend to begin with and they did the best they could.

3) INJURIES more than anything else, tripped the Patriots up last year. From Tedy Bruschi's stroke, to Ted Johnson having to retire, to losing 2 starters on the O-line and 6 of the 10 DBs by week 9 that the Patriots started the season with. Not to mention the nagging injuries to Faulk, Dillon, Ashworth, etc etc.

4) Scout.com doesn't have a ton of credibility in my book. And who cares if all the "PREMIUM" Free agents are gone. All "PREMIUM" means is that the player has name recognition. There are still plenty of quality free agents out there. If you actually stopped and looked for yourself, you'd see that.

 

[jct]

JCT -
How long have you been a fan of the game? Honestly? Because you don't seem to know a lot.

1) How did the Pats have a reduced draft last year? They got 3 players, at the very least, who will be, at the very least, solid starters in the NFL.

2) Free Agency last year was not as bad as you and others claim. The big thing you all seem to over-look is that the Pats didn't have a lot of money to spend to begin with and they did the best they could.

3) INJURIES more than anything else, tripped the Patriots up last year. From Tedy Bruschi's stroke, to Ted Johnson having to retire, to losing 2 starters on the O-line and 6 of the 10 DBs by week 9 that the Patriots started the season with. Not to mention the nagging injuries to Faulk, Dillon, Ashworth, etc etc.

4) Scout.com doesn't have a ton of credibility in my book. And who cares if all the "PREMIUM" Free agents are gone. All "PREMIUM" means is that the player has name recognition. There are still plenty of quality free agents out there. If you actually stopped and looked for yourself, you'd see that.

It seems like you took a tangent of what I said and twisted it to mean something I didn't say.

Let's review the facts of last years FA and Draft.
Last year we lost: Law,Andruzzi,Patten,Traylor,T Johnson and Klemm
We signed: Starks,Beisel,C Brown???
Last year we drafted 32nd, Last year we traded picks toward this years draft.
We drafted very well for the players we picked. However it was reduced by being last in the round and picks traded away (towards the next year and Starks).
We declined last year.
As for evaluation of talent, you may know more than all the professionals out there, the teams paying for these guys production and the full time journalists who work at scout.
I think what NE does better than almost everyone else is selection and development of talent. Please look at the facts instead of just blind fanatical loyalty to our team.
We need a brilliant FA and draft.

 

[jct]

We've only lost 7 FAs so far.
Brighter days are ahead!