Serious offers for Cassel yet? [mergedx2]

[sieglo]

Can we please stop resurrecting old threads about Cassel?

Please. It's getting old.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Re: Can we please stop resurrecting old threads about Cassel?

Here's a clue. Do not open the threads. It's easy!

 

[BelichickFan]

Re: Can we please stop resurrecting old threads about Cassel?

Here's a clue. Do not open the threads. It's easy!

You can't tell if they're old or new until you open them unless you look at the number of replies first. Another week of this and I'm finding a quieter board to post at, this is ridiculous.

 

[WeezyFbaby]

Re: Can we please stop resurrecting old threads about Cassel?

Please. It's getting old.

very much agreed

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Re: Can we please stop resurrecting old threads about Cassel?

He's right, it is getting old and I say that as possibly Matt's most solid supporter since 2005. Thing is the server struggles with what happens here game day without adding more crap to the mix. And the board used to be a lot more intelligent and a better resource for hardcore Patriot/football fans before we expanded our horizens and ended us with more kneejerk pissing matches than actual rational football discussion. People used to come here to exchange opinions and possibly learn something in the process, rather than vent bitterness and cement ignorance.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Re: Serious offers for Cassell yet?

Yes ... the no trade is looking quite intelligent right now.

Box has always been a few steps ahead of the doom & gloom crowd.

Aw shucks, tweren't nawthin'.

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Can we please stop resurrecting old threads about Cassel?

Why shouldn't people bring up those threads? Was it necessary to have so many "Cassel sucks" threads made in the first place? Did the people who started those threads and/or fed into the idiotic frenzy follow up those posts with mea culpas?

The board doesn't allow for "You were wrong" threads, so the only way to make such posts is to place them in appropriate threads. By nature, those threads aren't likely to be hot off the press.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Re: Can we please stop resurrecting old threads about Cassel?

He's right, it is getting old and I say that as possibly Matt's most solid supporter since 2005. Thing is the server struggles with what happens here game day without adding more crap to the mix. And the board used to be a lot more intelligent and a better resource for hardcore Patriot/football fans before we expanded our horizens and ended us with more kneejerk pissing matches than actual rational football discussion. People used to come here to exchange opinions and possibly learn something in the process, rather than vent bitterness and cement ignorance.

I liked the one FBN found, it made me look smaht as a box of rocks...

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Re: How many #1 picks for Cassel?

Waiting to mid-season seems pointless. I don't see BB bringing in another QB unless Cassel is injured - if he had any doubts he'd have started making moves before now to give the new guy time in the system. Frankly, if Cassel has another solid game today, offer a one year extension guaranteed in the $10 million range, with a "no Franchise Tag" clause:
- it protects Cassel "now" with no 2008 cap hit;
- it allows him to become a UFA in uncapped 2010;
- it keeps your reserve QB pool strong in case Tommy's rehab is slow;
- the Pats retain the option of trading him before the 2009 draft if Tommy's rehab is on track (freeing up that $10 million under the cap). In return for the first two items, the team gets a discount off the Tag price. Win/Win.

Can you guarantee something and then unguarantee it, as Felger might say... If it were that simple one of us could probably be managing the Pat's cap. If we guaranteed him a $10M salary in 2009 and then couldn't trade him (because of late season suckitude or injury) we would really be royally screwed... Holding the tag in YOUR back pocket to use or not at your discretion post season is far more manageable...

 

[MassPats38]

Re: Can we please stop resurrecting old threads about Cassel?

If the goal is to simply throw a past thread in someone's face, I would suggest the simple route used by many of linking to the thread in the context of a current discussion or quoting the same. It does not take a rocket scientist to do that, and it saves everyone not involved in the dissing the trouble of figuring out where old discussion ends and new discussions begin.

At this point I am waiting to see "Bledsoe or Brady?" or "Grogan or Eason?" threads. As far as gloating about being right or wrong about Cassel, I would suggest waiting a few games before raising the victory sign lest we have another potential wave of "you were wrong in calling me wrong" thread resurrections if he has on off game or two.

Another suggestion, as the subjects tend to be ambiguous and not indicative of whether the thread is old, edit the thread subject to give a date or "Old Thread" label so those not in on the private joke know the thread is not worth reading.

 

[CrazyDave]

Re: Can we please stop resurrecting old threads about Cassel?

Please. It's getting old.

I agree.
Way old.

 

[WeezyFbaby]

Re: Serious offers for Cassell yet?

is there any real chance we trade this guy?? i think this thread is nuts if u trade him u might as well mail in the season. I think these guys still wanna win, right now cassel is the best option for doing that. getting rid of him would be the end of the season IMO

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Re: Can we please stop resurrecting old threads about Cassel?

Why shouldn't people bring up those threads? Was it necessary to have so many "Cassel sucks" threads made in the first place? Did the people who started those threads and/or fed into the idiotic frenzy follow up those posts with mea culpas?

The board doesn't allow for "You were wrong" threads, so the only way to make such posts is to place them in appropriate threads. By nature, those threads aren't likely to be hot off the press.

Because at the end of the day two wrongs don't make a right? It's part of a continuing problem here.

The board sucks because the people who started those threads continue to post equally moronic threads and thoughts in threads regularly irrespective of callouts because when called out at the time it usually unleashes a lot of freedom of speech rants or objectivity rants or worse. And people continue to respond in kind. None of this adds anything to this board, it just continues to drag it down.

Ian's goal here back in the day seemed to be a board that reasonably self moderated. Expansion and reluctance to support earlier efforts to do just that unfortnately killed any shot of that happening here absent moderator intervention which is apparently not paletable to lots of folks on both sides. The alternative du jour has become ever expanding server capacity to accommodate chaos...which will in part be needed to accommodate future rounds of I told you so threads. And there will be a lot more of them now as those called out over Cassel decide to get even any time they see the inkling of an opportunity to get back at those they perceive as arrogant know it alls or merely jerks determined to embarass them for being on the wrong side of an opinion war...

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Can we please stop resurrecting old threads about Cassel?

Because at the end of the day two wrongs don't make a right? It's part of a continuing problem here.

It's not wrong to point out the mistakes of other posters. Again, creating "gloat" threads is not allowed, so the only place to point out the errors of a poster who made a "Matt Cassel sucks" thread is in an old thread. It's the nature of the rules.

The board sucks because the people who started those threads continue to post equally moronic threads and thoughts in threads regularly irrespective of callouts because when called out at the time it usually unleashes a lot of freedom of speech rants or objectivity rants or worse. And people continue to respond in kind. None of this adds anything to this board, it just continues to drag it down.

This doesn't make the board "suck". There has been almost nothing noteworthy to post about in the past couple of days, so it's been a way to kill time. Go scan the first two pages and that becomes pretty clear. I haven't done a lot of posting in the threads that are being pulled back up, but I understand those who have and I sympathize with them. It's the same few people making ridiculous "Player sucks" posts over and over, so calling them out is the only way to expose their silliness.

Ian's goal here back in the day seemed to be a board that reasonably self moderated. Expansion and reluctance to support earlier efforts to do just that unfortnately killed any shot of that happening here absent moderator intervention which is apparently not paletable to lots of folks on both sides. The alternative du jour has become ever expanding server capacity to accommodate chaos...which will in part be needed to accommodate future rounds of I told you so threads. And there will be a lot more of them now as those called out over Cassel decide to get even any time they see the inkling of an opportunity to get back at those they perceive as arrogant know it alls or merely jerks determined to embarass them for being on the wrong side of an opinion war...

Last season, it was Maroney, just as an example. It became a season long topic. It's just the nature of the beast when you pit homers against Chicken Littles. The problem isn't the posts, and it's not expansion. The problem is people, on both sides, who form an opinion prior to getting the facts, and the problem gets compounded when those people aren't willing to review their opinions when new data becomes available.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Re: How many #1 picks for Cassel?

Can you guarantee something and then unguarantee it, as Felger might say... If it were that simple one of us could probably be managing the Pat's cap. If we guaranteed him a $10M salary in 2009 and then couldn't trade him (because of late season suckitude or injury) we would really be royally screwed... Holding the tag in YOUR back pocket to use or not at your discretion post season is far more manageable...

Okay, from the beginning:

Why do you want Matt Cassel under contract in 2009?
- A. Rehab insurance.
- B. Trade option.
- C. Is there a "C?"

Both A & B above benefit the NE Patriots, but they do little to nothing for Cassel himself. As long as we're looking at benefits to the team, which is more important, A or B? I'd choose A - an extra draft pick in 2009 isn't worth as much if you don't have a QB to lead the team next Fall (which starts with the Offseason program in March).

Option one: Franchise Tag.
Option two: Negotiate a deal.
Option three: Do nothing and let him go into UFA status.

You're trying to lock in a player who is a UFA in 2009:
- Is the Franchise Tag the simplest way to do it given that most players consider it an imposition? Especially as this also threatens to make him an RFA under the 2010 rules. (That's as close to a prescription for a hold out in 2009 as you could want.)
- Are you serious about wanting him on the team?
- What is the value of this player to the club "now?"
- What is the value of a #1 QB?

Why would you want to "not" guarantee his salary? Guranteeing his 2009 salary is a concession to get him to sign an extension when he reasonably could be expected to get a competitive contract as a UFA. He gets a guaranteed year of injury insurance, in return, he agrees to less than the Tag price. Give something to get something.

Franchise Tag is a club the players hate, using it for 2009 not only "gurantees" a higher 2009 cap cost (Miguel's estimated $14 million vs. my offer of $10 million), but it also guarantees bad blood with the player - you are directly threatening his earning potential in 2010. Using the Tag as a concession to concede in an effort to negotiate an extension is a reasonable option, and one that works in the team's favor while giving the player something he wants. If you are worried about the 2009 cap, there is still some 2008 cap to play with, mix it up.

Sign an extension now, the bye week allows things to be haggled out with little repercussion on the team's game preparations. Make a serious offer for a player filling the #1 QB role. If your primary reason is to have Cassel on the roster as rehab insurance, then don't worry about trade options - if he's the player you think he is, the offers will be there.

Mo, if you want to do a crazy Al Davis, by all means use the Franchise Tag and club Matt about the head and shoulders. Just don't whine if he under-performs on you. I'd like to think the Kraft organization here will show a little loyalty to the kid who is helping pull this team up by the bootstraps after losing Tommy.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Re: Can we please stop resurrecting old threads about Cassel?

It's not wrong to point out the mistakes of other posters. Again, creating "gloat" threads is not allowed, so the only place to point out the errors of a poster who made a "Matt Cassel sucks" thread is in an old thread. It's the nature of the rules...


So people are ending around the no gloat policy...wonderful solution.


This doesn't make the board "suck". There has been almost nothing noteworthy to post about in the past couple of days, so it's been a way to kill time. Go scan the first two pages and that becomes pretty clear...


It's gameday 45 minutes from the second start of a Brady backup vs. a division rival and there's nothing to talk about. Explains why there isn't even a game thread...



Last season, it was Maroney, just as an example. It became a season long topic. It's just the nature of the beast when you pit homers against Chicken Littles.

No, it's what happens when you allow chicken littles and homers to and others to pidgeon hole each other as nothing more than that. And ignore the fact that there can be both reason for rational concerns and cause for optimism at the same time. Hysterics on polar extremes divide the board and effectively conquer it's efforts to be an itelligent and informative place to visit and post.

Even what you often end up doing, thread hijacking to argue minutae, drags this place down. And i don't consider you a chicken little or a homer and more than I consider myself either or...

 

[Deus Irae]

Re: Can we please stop resurrecting old threads about Cassel?

So people are ending around the no gloat policy...wonderful solution.

You know better than that. It's not as if you never point out when others are wrong. There are ways to do it that are allowed, and ways that aren't, that's all.

It's gameday 45 minutes from the second start of a Brady backup vs. a division rival and there's nothing to talk about. Explains why there isn't even a game thread...

How is that the fault of Cassel threads? Pats1 has been the traditional starter of the thread, and he hasn't done it today. I don't see how this is an issue.

Have you been starting threads on the Dolphins this week? Other than Joey Porter (Which was discussed) and Chad Pennington (Which has been mostly ignored), what exactly is there to get fired up about when it comes to a Dolphins team that's won 1 of their last 17 games?

No, it's what happens when you allow chicken littles and homers to and others to pidgeon hole each other as nothing more than that. And ignore the fact that there can be both reason for rational concerns and cause for optimism at the same time. Hysterics on polar extremes divide the board and effectively conquer it's efforts to be an itelligent and informative place to visit and post.

Ummm... some people ARE homers and some people ARE Chicken Littles.

Even what you often end up doing, thread hijacking to argue minutae, drags this place down. And i don't consider you a chicken little or a homer and more than I consider myself either or...

What you call "drags this place down", I call "holds people to accountability." I'm sure many people agree with your interpretation of my posts, just as I'm sure that others don't.

 

[TruthSeeker]

Re: Serious offers for Cassell yet?

Looks like you are reacting after reading the title and first post that was opened in 2006.

And, right after Patjew hinted that this is 2008.

TruthSeeker must take stronger steps to seek the truth...

Initially, I was mildly irritated when FBN raked up this old thread. Don't know whether he really fell for it or was cleverly waking us up. But reading these responses (and many more to come I presume), I think it should be a great way to spend the morning before the games.

Maybe I shouldn't have pointed this out for fear for stopping the rants...But lets see how many really READ the posts.

I have seen the light.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Re: How many #1 picks for Cassel?

Okay, from the beginning:

Why do you want Matt Cassel under contract in 2009?
- A. Rehab insurance.
- B. Trade option.
- C. Is there a "C?"

Both A & B above benefit the NE Patriots, but they do little to nothing for Cassel himself. As long as we're looking at benefits to the team, which is more important, A or B? I'd choose A - an extra draft pick in 2009 isn't worth as much if you don't have a QB to lead the team next Fall (which starts with the Offseason program in March).

Option one: Franchise Tag.
Option two: Negotiate a deal.
Option three: Do nothing and let him go into UFA status.

You're trying to lock in a player who is a UFA in 2009:
- Is the Franchise Tag the simplest way to do it given that most players consider it an imposition? Especially as this also threatens to make him an RFA under the 2010 rules. (That's as close to a prescription for a hold out in 2009 as you could want.)
- Are you serious about wanting him on the team?
- What is the value of this player to the club "now?"
- What is the value of a #1 QB?

Why would you want to "not" guarantee his salary? Guranteeing his 2009 salary is a concession to get him to sign an extension when he reasonably could be expected to get a competitive contract as a UFA. He gets a guaranteed year of injury insurance, in return, he agrees to less than the Tag price. Give something to get something.

Franchise Tag is a club the players hate, using it for 2009 not only "gurantees" a higher 2009 cap cost (Miguel's estimated $14 million vs. my offer of $10 million), but it also guarantees bad blood with the player - you are directly threatening his earning potential in 2010. Using the Tag as a concession to concede in an effort to negotiate an extension is a reasonable option, and one that works in the team's favor while giving the player something he wants. If you are worried about the 2009 cap, there is still some 2008 cap to play with, mix it up.

Sign an extension now, the bye week allows things to be haggled out with little repercussion on the team's game preparations. Make a serious offer for a player filling the #1 QB role. If your primary reason is to have Cassel on the roster as rehab insurance, then don't worry about trade options - if he's the player you think he is, the offers will be there.

Mo, if you want to do a crazy Al Davis, by all means use the Franchise Tag and club Matt about the head and shoulders. Just don't whine if he under-performs on you. I'd like to think the Kraft organization here will show a little loyalty to the kid who is helping pull this team up by the bootstraps after losing Tommy.

If he underperforms on you Box he'll will cost us $10M in 2009. If he underperforms on me he'll cost nothing (not tagged) or the balance of whatever is guaranteed to him in a 3 year extension I have discussed at length if you bothered reading those threads, having the capacity to spread the hits incrementally over 3 years (2008, 2009, 2010). I've advocated trying to get a deal done early that can work for both sides without crippling either where the future is concerned. The only way I see to accomplish that is to give him a boost close to the guaranteed money Schaub got on his starters deal ($7M guaranteed) for starting this year and the promise of at least something approaching the balance of the guarantee Anderson got ($14M) after the season ended on his supposed breakout season.

And do it in a way (bonus structure) that assures him he will either start here (because we need him to) or get traded no later than 2010 because we aren't going to pay him that money but someone else will... He'd be a lot more tradeable still signed for 2 years with $8-9M guaranteed (plus incentives) than either tagged or guaranteed $10M, but the fact remains he's going to have to sign an extension with whomever he starts for going forward...

But he would also be tradeable tagged as a franchise QB (and probably proud as hell to wear it for a couple of weeks (considering until now he was perceived as a QB who hadn't started since 7th grade...while a deal is brokered that will net him $25M in guarantees...). I have stated repeatedly he will only be tagged to be traded because that other guy will be back with his $14M cap it...

People also forget that due to the labor situation the market/contracts may be funky in 2009 as agents opt to forego long term deals in anticipation of a possible uncapped year unfolding as Boomtown...

And Box, don't ever compare me to Al... What you propose is closer to an Al miscalculation than anything I've suggested.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

Re: How many #1 picks for Cassel?

Well heck Mo, I'm sorry I stepped on your crank and teased you about crazy Al's megalomania. Thank you for the Felger insinuation, it's rare, but I might have thought about the impact a guaranteed 2009 salary could create. I will cheerfully concede you are more into capology and more able to count higher than 10 without slipping off your shoes then I am. I do, however, think I have some understanding of the human element involved.

You propose extending Cassel three years and spreading out the cap hit. Capwise that's sound enough, but what makes you think Cassel wants another three years behind Tommy? I wouldn't if I was a young QB who believes he can compete for a starting position in the NFL. He's got an opportunity and were I in his shoes I'd be setting my sights on seizing that opportunity and entering Free Agency. I would not be interested in a three year deal where I risk being trapped behind the best QB in today's game. One year that gets me to an uncapped 2010 and provides me some guarantees if I'm injured this season, you could tempt me. Hey, that's just me I guess.

You propose letting him go through the season and tagging him if he looks to offer some trade value in the offseason. I'd be signing that right away and putting the Pats in a hole for $14 million, then I'd participate in the offseason program to keep my conditioning up and hold out of camp until I had a concession that prevented another tag in the uncapped 2010 season. How tagging Matt is fiscally more responsible than my proposal continues to evade me - yes, I understand "underperforming" in 2008, but define what that is for a 7th round draft pick with a total of two combined starts in college and the NFL? I'll wager even BB isn't entirely comfortable with those goalposts, even conceding that he has an applicable standard for generic 4th year veteran backups in his notebook.

The human element, as I see it, doesn't care for your more fiscally team-weighted proposals. You don't care for mine with a guaranteed 2009. Trade value vs. Rehab insurance. Fear of a late season collapse vs. faith in your ability to evaluate and coach young players. Unlike some of the gentle and imaginative souls you've enjoyed visiting with these past few weeks, I believe BB kept Cassel because he does have faith the young man can carry his share of the team burden to reach the playoffs and be competitive. If he's wrong? It is what it is, you make chicken soup.