Jonathan Kraft On Felger and Mazz last night [October 2009 thread]

[Deus Irae]

Re: Jonathan Kraft On Felger and Mazz Last Night

They could have kept Cassell, AT THE EXPENSE OF siging Free Agents.
See, they have to FUNCTION UNDER THE CAP.
The cap is an issue because you must choose among options and are limited from choosing all of your options.

So just so I understand your position is the cap has been FUNCTIONALLY non-existent so every transaction the Patriots have made for the last 'few years' are exactly the ones they would have made if the cap did not exist. Correct?
IF thats the way you want to leave it, go ahead and make your escape, its a good move.

I'm not making an escape. You're wrong, you know it, and continuing on with this is a waste of time. The Patriots would have been able to fit a franchise player as a backup quarterback under the cap PLUS keep Tom Brady, according to Belichick, and a franchise tag is the least forgiving contract in the sport, since the outlay can't be played with or moved to other seasons.

If you've got a problem understanding the point there, take it up with Belichick.

 

[emoney_33]

Re: Jonathan Kraft On Felger and Mazz Last Night

I'm not making an escape. You're wrong, you know it, and continuing on with this is a waste of time. The Patriots would have been able to fit a franchise player as a backup quarterback under the cap PLUS keep Tom Brady, according to Belichick, and a franchise tag is the least forgiving contract in the sport, since the outlay can't be played with or moved to other seasons.

If you've got a problem understanding the point there, take it up with Belichick.

And that in your opinion is better than using that cap money elsewhere?

 

[RobertWeathers]

Re: Jonathan Kraft On Felger and Mazz Last Night

You forgot the big one:

1999: Ty Law = 7rs/$50M

Using 2000 as the starting point for the data is horrible as the cap was completely mismanaged during the Carroll years. Notice the biggest gaps in money spent vs. cap are in those early years as BB was trying to get out from under those late '90s obligations?

Regards,
Chris

I left Law and Milloy out as they were outstanding cornerstone-type players. Yes- the cap was mismanaged under Grier, but their drafts were downright awful.

 

[Ring 6]

Re: Jonathan Kraft On Felger and Mazz Last Night

Ken Lucas release for salary cap relief 2009:

Panthers cut CB Ken Lucas for salary cap relief - USATODAY.com

Here is one that says franchising Cassel gives the Pats salary cap problems. It also points out that it would give them 7 players taking up 65 mill and allow only 58 mill to pay the other 46. Doesnt that make it difficult to FUNCTION in free agency? 2009

Patriots Facing Salary Cap Problems if They Franchise Matt Cassel -- NFL FanHouse

Heres one that says the Browns functionality of cutting player that they dont want to be associated with is hampered, by that non-existent cap

Browns Decision To Cut Donte' Stallworth Impeded By Big Salary Cap Hit | Bleacher Report


IT seems the Saints were in cap jail this year:
Considering the Saints' dire cap situation, it might not matter who hits the market. The club will do well to get Vilma back in the fold and sign a solid safety. Anything beyond that will be lagniappe.
Back-ended deals leave New Orleans Saints in bad salary-cap shape | Jeff Duncan on Saints - NOLA.com

The Jets making transactions to FUNCTION within salary cap constraints
New York Jets clear more cap room; decision to cut Brandon Moore remains perplexing | New York Jets - - NJ.com

Steelers cut veterans due to cap in 2007
Steelers cut Porter, Haynes to get under the cap - NFL - ESPN

Oh and again this May, Larry Foote, quality starter on the SB Champs is cut....WHY? Ummmm
Larry has been a big part of our success, but unfortunately, the realities of the salary cap made this decision inevitable," Kevin Colbert, the Steelers' director of football operations, said in a statement released by the team

NOT THE CAP????????????

Steelers cut veteran LB Foote, cite 'realities of the salary cap'


There you go, many examples, including the fact that the SB Champs couldnt keep one of their top players, and they cited the cap as making it an unfortunate and inevitable decision to cut a player who has been a big part of their success.


Tell me again how the cap has been FUNCTIONALLY NON-EXISTENT

 

[Pats726]

Re: Jonathan Kraft On Felger and Mazz Last Night

No, people are ticked off because someone dared to question the Patriots.

Firstly, the way Felger did that totally showed what he is..a smug idiot..who REALLY knows little about the total facts. The way he cut him off and kept Kraft from trying to explain things..THAT was rude beyond the pale. As I have said he had one isolated fact and NOTHING else....and could NOT even explain that if his life depended on it. Why do I say that? Because of how he cut Kraft off again and again. HE KNEW if Kraft talked he would be shown to be an idiot. I know...you are not defending him..BUT you are defending someone throwing grenades at a successful franchise LIKE that Green Bay writer in the 60s telling Lombardi and company how to run the Packers..that what they are doing is wrong. That is who you are defending here...pretty lame and dumb. Felger can attack the franchise all he wishes but frankly he shows again and again why he KNOWS nothing is only about himself and how his so called points don't hold water. He can and will attack this franchise all he can because that is his schtick..like Borges, Tomase and others who think their bread and butter is all about being contrarian. If it had been a real discussion he wouldn't have pulled some of the stunts he did...or if he knew had REALLY had any valid argument. He really has nothing..and THAT is quite obvious. Keep pumping him up and he'll have that stick up his behind all the more.

 

[emoney_33]

Re: Jonathan Kraft On Felger and Mazz Last Night

No, and that has nothing to do with what I've been discussing on this thread.

It sort of is, you are defending Felger who insinuated that because other teams have been saved by the raising cap (which is not known ahead of time), that the patriots should have been spending more in recent years.

 

[Ring 6]

Re: Jonathan Kraft On Felger and Mazz Last Night

I'm not making an escape. You're wrong, you know it, and continuing on with this is a waste of time. The Patriots would have been able to fit a franchise player as a backup quarterback under the cap PLUS keep Tom Brady, according to Belichick, and a franchise tag is the least forgiving contract in the sport, since the outlay can't be played with or moved to other seasons.

If you've got a problem understanding the point there, take it up with Belichick.

They certainly could have AT THE EXPENSE OF the free agents they signed.
How else would the 14 mill have fit under the cap.
They could have afforded to pay Tom Brady 70 million in salary this year, but that would have meant 52 other players at the minimum. What does that prove?

Taking a comment BB made out of context is a lame way to argue.

 

[Ring 6]

Re: Jonathan Kraft On Felger and Mazz Last Night

I'm not making an escape. You're wrong, you know it, and continuing on with this is a waste of time. The Patriots would have been able to fit a franchise player as a backup quarterback under the cap PLUS keep Tom Brady, according to Belichick, and a franchise tag is the least forgiving contract in the sport, since the outlay can't be played with or moved to other seasons.

If you've got a problem understanding the point there, take it up with Belichick.

But Im glad you arent escaping. I cant wait for your response to the articles I have posted that outline cap problems teams have had recently and how they have had to make decisions they wish they didnt have to because of the cap.
Be sure to respond to that one with why they are all stupid and dont realize that the cap is a non-existent factor in the functioning of an NFL Franchise these days.

 

[NE39]

Re: Jonathan Kraft On Felger and Mazz Last Night

Just whip up that list of all the teams in cap jail over the last 3 years for me.

The cap has gone up quite in bit in that time period, but that doesn't mean it isn't a factor. There are teams like the Redskins and Raiders who have heavily borrowed from the future, but aren't in cap jail. The cap is still a limiting factor.

For instance, last year the Panthers were very tight against the cap for quite a while with the Peppers and Gross deals. They had to watch all their backup OL leave in FA and were hamstrung until they freed up room by extending Delhomme. They weren't in "cap jail", but the cap was a major limiting factor in their offseason.

Another team in that circumstance was Indy the year before last. They re-upped guys like Saturday and Dallas Clark, and had little wiggle room left. To their credit, Bill Polian has done a very good job bringing in young players around their core, which allows them to have a top-heavy roster of big-time players and remain a top team.

The fact is, teams that have more money spread into the future have less flexibility in the present. The Pats manage their cap they way they do because they believe it gives them the best chance to remain competitive in the long term.

It is interesting Felger is hammering the Pats for spending only $487M in the 2004-2008 period while the Cowboys spent $515M (per the USA today numbers, I'm not sure where the $50M numbers comes from). The USA Today puts the Pats at the 13th most spent during the period. Who won the Super Bowl in those years?

2004 - NE ($487M, 13th)
2005 - Pit ($491M, 9th)
2006 - Ind ($497M, 6th)
2007 - NYG ($464M, 27th)
2008 - Pit ($491M, 9th)

What conclusions can be drawn? I don't know if you can draw any, as they are all in the ballpark. There really isn't a lot of difference.

FYI... the top spenders, like Was ($530M), Min ($528M), Dal ($515M), Sea ($515M) and NO ($502M). Those are the top-5 in that span, the only ones over $500M. Again, can any conclusions be drawn? I don't know.

 

[Ring 6]

Re: Jonathan Kraft On Felger and Mazz Last Night

here is another nice article.
It lists the salary cap status of all 32 teams on 2/13/09, before free agency.
It begs these questions:

There were 3 teams OVER the cap. Doesn't that cap cost exist and dont they need to function with respect to it?

There is a gap of 49 million of cap space between the highest and lowest. Doesnt that gap affect their ability to FUNCTION in free agency?

The commetary on at least 25 of the 32 teams centers on how they will use the cap room they have, create more, or how they have an advantage or disadvantage in offseason acquisitons due to their cap situaitons. Sounds like the FUNCTION based on their cap status, doesnt it?

How Much Room Does Your Team Have Under the NFL Salary Cap? | PlayerPress.com | Sportscaster Network | Sports News Powered by the Fan Community

 

[Ring 6]

Re: Jonathan Kraft On Felger and Mazz Last Night

The cap has gone up quite in bit in that time period, but that doesn't mean it isn't a factor. There are teams like the Redskins and Raiders who have heavily borrowed from the future, but aren't in cap jail. The cap is still a limiting factor.

For instance, last year the Panthers were very tight against the cap for quite a while with the Peppers and Gross deals. They had to watch all their backup OL leave in FA and were hamstrung until they freed up room by extending Delhomme. They weren't in "cap jail", but the cap was a major limiting factor in their offseason.

Another team in that circumstance was Indy the year before last. They re-upped guys like Saturday and Dallas Clark, and had little wiggle room left. To their credit, Bill Polian has done a very good job bringing in young players around their core, which allows them to have a top-heavy roster of big-time players and remain a top team.

The fact is, teams that have more money spread into the future have less flexibility in the present. The Pats manage their cap they way they do because they believe it gives them the best chance to remain competitive in the long term.

It is interesting Felger is hammering the Pats for spending only $487M in the 2004-2008 period while the Cowboys spent $515M (per the USA today numbers, I'm not sure where the $50M numbers comes from). The USA Today puts the Pats at the 13th most spent during the period. Who won the Super Bowl in those years?

2004 - NE ($487M, 13th)
2005 - Pit ($491M, 9th)
2006 - Ind ($497M, 6th)
2007 - NYG ($464M, 27th)
2008 - Pit ($491M, 9th)

What conclusions can be drawn? I don't know if you can draw any, as they are all in the ballpark. There really isn't a lot of difference.

FYI... the top spenders, like Was ($530M), Min ($528M), Dal ($515M), Sea ($515M) and NO ($502M). Those are the top-5 in that span, the only ones over $500M. Again, can any conclusions be drawn? I don't know.

The problem with those numbers is that they pretend all other things are equal and they are not.
To truly understand them, you would need to know:
1) How much unamortized cap costs did each team have at the start of 2004. If one team had very few players (or at least the highly paid ones) under long term contracts and another had many stars locked up in the early years of long term deals with big signing bonusses, their ABILITY TO SPEND was very different.
2) What was left unamortized at the end of 2008. If team A signed their QB in 2003 to a long term deal he was still under, and team B signed their QB to a long term deal DURING this time frame with a 50mill sb, they would have expended more from 04-08 but would be on the hook for more going forward, and would BY DEFINITION have to have a lower future real money expense due to the cap. (Assuming it continues in force)
3) It would also make sense to look at the needs of those teams because poor teams will tend to have more needs to fill with high priced players increasing their immediate cap expenditure.

Also, it is simply a fact that if you could adjust for those factors (to equate it to everyone starting at zero and ending at zero) every team that spends its full cap money would spend EXACTLY the same amount of cash. There is no disputing that, it is fact.

 

[Ring 6]

Re: Jonathan Kraft On Felger and Mazz Last Night

Of course I can. If you think he's wrong or lying, please list all the teams that have been in "cap jail" for the past 3 seasons.

Since I have done so, and proven that YOUR statement that FUNCTIONALY the cap IS NON EXISTENT, I think you should post here to lear up the discrepancy of Krafts words (which I believe were that the cap has risen a lot lately) and your words, that are being attributed to him that the CAP HAS BEEN FUNCTIONALLY NONEXISTENT otherwise Kraft would be wrong or lying, assuming your depiction of his words were accurate. Please clear that up so Jonathan isnt wrongly assailed.

 

[Pats726]

Re: Jonathan Kraft On Felger and Mazz Last Night

BTW I believe the 24 minute segment is available...as a sports podcast..from them...for any who missed it..I did not hear the start...only the end...

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Re: Jonathan Kraft On Felger and Mazz Last Night

You forgot the big one:

1999: Ty Law = 7yrs/$50M

Using 2000 as the starting point for the data is horrible as the cap was completely mismanaged during the Carroll years. Notice the biggest gaps in money spent vs. cap are in those early years as BB was trying to get out from under those late '90s obligations?

Good point. Lost in all the noise.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

Re: Jonathan Kraft On Felger and Mazz Last Night

I heard the call that started all this about two weeks ago. A caller brought up the USA Today article that had the Pats 30th at $92mil for 2008. Felgers response was, there it is folks, forget the cap, the cap isnt real, this is real money spent and proves what Ive been saying, that Pats are cheap.

To all the simple minds this was gold as understanding the cap means thinking and Felger and the boneheads that folow him cant or wont think.

Ill have to listen the the JK interview but I assume its more Felger being ignorant and obnoxious.
98.5 is just about to gtet deleted on my set buttons unless they get some better people in there.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Re: Jonathan Kraft On Felger and Mazz Last Night

I heard the call that started all this about two weeks ago. A caller brought up the USA Today article that had the Pats 30th at $92mil for 2008. Felgers response was, there it is folks, forget the cap, the cap isnt real, this is real money spent and proves what Ive been saying, that Pats are cheap.

To all the simple minds this was gold as understanding the cap means thinking and Felger and the boneheads that folow him cant or wont think.

Ill have to listen the the JK interview but I assume its more Felger being ignorant and obnoxious.
98.5 is just about to gtet deleted on my set buttons unless they get some better people in there.

You are not going to get the answers you are looking for as Felger was twisting the numbers to support his idiotic claims. he was completely misinformed and undeducated in the topic at hand.

There has been a lot of heathy debate here, and a few rat-holes to boot which is what I wanted when I started this thread. It's all good.

At a high-level, bottom line is that the Pats have pretty much spent to the cap and managed it well in terms if putting themselves to be in the best position to win year after year without mortgaging the future or winding up in "cap-jail" . The have fielded great teams as opposed to good ones that struggle to get to the wild card every year which is outstanding. Since 2000, they have led the NFL in least amout of dollars-per-win which tells me that they spend very effectively.

 

[Lloyd_Christmas]

Re: Jonathan Kraft On Felger and Mazz Last Night

But Im glad you arent escaping. I cant wait for your response to the articles I have posted that outline cap problems teams have had recently and how they have had to make decisions they wish they didnt have to because of the cap.
Be sure to respond to that one with why they are all stupid and dont realize that the cap is a non-existent factor in the functioning of an NFL Franchise these days.

He's not going to read what you posted... especially the links. He can't be bothered with facts... he is too busy verbally sparring to care about the actual topic.

He makes ridiculous arguments and then when they are completely disproved (after 16 pages of back and forth), he claims you have altered the debate and he only meant that the underlying facts were correct even if they prove nothing and do not support the arguments he originally defended.

I haven't seen anything like him since You Know Who. Then again, I stay off the political boards for this reason.

I, for one, am done with him. He cannot be reasoned with. It was fun at first to debate with him, but in the end, it is completely pointless to continue to do so.

 

[Ring 6]

Re: Jonathan Kraft On Felger and Mazz Last Night

He's not going to read what you posted... especially the links. He can't be bothered with facts... he is too busy verbally sparring to care about the actual topic.

He makes ridiculous arguments and then when they are completely disproved (after 16 pages of back and forth), he claims you have altered the debate and he only meant that the underlying facts were correct even if they prove nothing and do not support the arguments he originally defended.

I haven't seen anything like him since You Know Who. Then again, I stay off the political boards for this reason.

I, for one, am done with him. He cannot be reasoned with. It was fun at first to debate with him, but in the end, it is completely pointless to continue to do so.

I know all that and consider silence to mean he knows he is wrong but incapable of admitting it.

 

[Pats726]

Re: Jonathan Kraft On Felger and Mazz Last Night

What happened with this thread was a MORE OPEN discussion than what happened on that show..which to me is a LOT of the point....Felger is a brash self promoter who could not weather a REAL discussion...so he attacks, cuts off, filibusters and uses many other tactics for his full advantage. He's more the bully than the white knight fighting the good cause. IN an open discussion, facts and many angles would be discussed and terms would be defined so both would know EXACTLY what was being talked about.
Felger picked that number out of an article REALLY without understanding the foundation for it. It really showed throughout that time and the more he controlled it, the more his argument meant nothing.
Felger is a top notch BSer..who sometimes can't remember the position he took hours before..iy's all about attack, stirring things up and more..His mission is well known and should be NOTED among the likes of Borges and Tomase. It's all about ratings, self promotion and I am sure he LOVES that threads like this exist and HE is being talked about.
Pump him up more and there will be more of him and the other phonies and fakers. To have a perspective on what he is like is to look at other eras..the Packers in the 60s...The Steelers in the 70s, the Niners in the late 80s..and imagine a home reporter in those eras, in Green Bay, Pittsburgh and San Francisco taking on the home team..teams that have been strong, won Super Bowls. Frankly, IF there were any, I am sure they would be ignored and dismissed...Felger KNOWS more...and that is just it..he doesn't. Somehow he contends to know more about football than Belichick, more about business than Kraft and that is plainly DUMB!
He's nothing...plain and simple.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Re: Jonathan Kraft On Felger and Mazz Last Night

Felger's of the opinion that the Patriots are trying to keep the actual payroll a lot lower than it appears on the cap, and that the team is looking to spend only about $100 million dollars on player salaries. He's able to pull up some data to make his point seem plausible.

Kraft and company can deny that all they want, or they can explain it a way in whatever manner suits them, but the actual dollars spent in recent years has not been "to the cap", which is what Felger is calling them out on. I'm not saying that they should be spending each and every dollar up to the cap, because I don't think it's wise to do so every season, but Felger's argument does have at least a grain of truth in it.

Right - there's a REASON why they're doing what they're doing... there's a reason they do everything when it comes to cap, salary and player management.

We don't have to agree with what they're doing from a fan's perspective, but from a buisness management standpoint I'm sure it makes sense.

The reasoning could also be that this allows them the ability to spend money when a golden opportunity or major need presents itself ... i.e. they've got the organization and buisness on a 5 year plan that factors in a large bonus for Brady and the need to remain frugal until there's a sure fire opportunity to improve the team with a big Free Agent spending spree.

In the long term it makes for a stronger team... but if you only live in the "now" as a fan you're sure to be disappointed.