Urgent
In the Starting Line-Up
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2005
- Messages
- 3,114
- Reaction score
- 1,949
Interesting take on Pats salary cap situation from Reiss:
Obviously very secretive guys. Funny to hear even Reiss beg for information...
I personally find it hard to believe the current CBA would include penalties for previously-acceptable cap behavior in the 2004 or 2005 season. (I assume Reiss means 2004 & 2005 as 'previous two seasons', not 2005 and the just-completed 2006 season when he speaks of the Brady and Seymour deals.) Why would teams agree to penalties in the future for actions in the past that were perfectly acceptable at the time? It would be like taking a draft pick away from any team that had two first rounders in a previous draft.
I wonder what Miguel's take on this is.
Mike Reiss said:And as for the millions in cap space, I've been doing some research on this area and believe I've uncovered some interesting information in regards to the team's cap spending that sheds a little bit of a different light on things. Because the team had such high cash spending the previous two years -- with the top-level Tom Brady and Richard Seymour deals leading the way -- the Patriots project to be one of a handful of teams who will actually be penalized by the league as part of the new CBA, and I believe will lose some cap space in a future season (possibly 2007) because of that. The Colts are also part of the small handful of teams who I think will be penalized; it's sort of like the luxury tax in baseball. I believe the Patriots would do a service to their fans by explaining this intricacy of the salary cap -- assuming I have it correct -- because I sense there is a perception out there that the team is not spending compared to other teams. In actuality, they've spent to a level that is actually going to penalize them.
Obviously very secretive guys. Funny to hear even Reiss beg for information...
I personally find it hard to believe the current CBA would include penalties for previously-acceptable cap behavior in the 2004 or 2005 season. (I assume Reiss means 2004 & 2005 as 'previous two seasons', not 2005 and the just-completed 2006 season when he speaks of the Brady and Seymour deals.) Why would teams agree to penalties in the future for actions in the past that were perfectly acceptable at the time? It would be like taking a draft pick away from any team that had two first rounders in a previous draft.
I wonder what Miguel's take on this is.