interesting take on media outrage so far on the pats

[Miguel]

Well, whether it applies to the current discussion, I don't know. But just some past history info:

2004 salary cap info from USAtoday for Colts; Miguel for Pats
Colts top 4 players = 32.6% ...... Pats top 4 = 27.5%
Colts top 4 were all offense ..... Pats top 4 were 2 offense and 2 defense
Colts top 5 players = 36.4% ..... Pats top 5 = 30.6%
Colts top 5 were all offense ...... Pats top 5 were 2 offense and 3 defense

The problem with using the USAToday database is that it does not list the dead money hits. Lawyer Milloy actually had the 4th highest cap hit on the Patriots in 2004. So the top 4 for the Pats were 2 on the defense, 1 on offense, and a Bill.

That's not a huge difference in philosophy I guess ??, but ...
In dollars, the Pats had 4.65M more to spread over their bottom 48 players than the Colts did.

I doubt that was true. The Patriots' adjusted cap number was a couple of million dollars less than the Colts. And the Patriots had over $6 million in dead money with just Milloy and Antowain. I can't recall the Colts releasing a player in 2003/2004 that would cause them to have a huge dead money cap hit.

In 2004, there was a more noticeable difference in the 'middle' class:
The Colts had 16 players with caps over 1M
The Pats had 22 players over 1M

That noticeable difference does not exist now in 2006.
There are 18 Pats with caps over 1M.
There are at least 16 Colts with caps over 1M.

 

[Miguel]

Miguel -
I admire you for attempting to "not be a homer" but in doing so, you are ignoring many salient facts.

1) Edgerring James is a 28 year old 1500+ yard a year RB.
2) David Thornton was the Colts best LB
3) Larry Tripplett was a solid DE for them.
4) Mike Vanderjagt, well "he's just a kicker"

The question is whether you think that the Colts should have paid these players what their new teams did.

Yes, the Pats have also lost some "middle class players" but the Colts haven't signed any of their "middle class" players. There are conflicting reports of them re-signing Domenic Rhodes and Gary Brackett. They still have a bunch of players they haven't re-signed. Players like Cato June, Rob Morris, James Mungro, Robert Mathis, and Rocky Calmus. And they have much less money than the Pats do.

Rhodes, Brackett, and Mathis are signed for the 2006 season, at least according to the NFLPA.site. June is a RFA.
The question should not be who has the most money but do the Colts have the money needed to address the holes. I think that they do.

 

[Miguel]

So I'll call it a day on the point, unless I get some hard and fast info on the relative flatness of these two organizations. Do they operate on different principals? Were that shown, one could make arguments about the relative merits of the approaches. If not, well, the much heralded "Patriot Way" is really a media concoction. I'm a long, long way out from arguing cap numbers with you.
PFnV

While it is true that the Colts had a top-heavy structure and devoted a good portion of their cap to the offense in the past, I think that the Colts have slowly adopting the Patriots way so what was true about the Colts in 2004 may no longer be true in 2006.

 

[arrellbee]

The problem with using the USAToday database is that it does not list the dead money hits. Lawyer Milloy actually had the 4th highest cap hit on the Patriots in 2004. So the top 4 for the Pats were 2 on the defense, 1 on offense, and a Bill.

I hear you. But I kind of think that the issue is actually active players and that dead money players are a different issue (altho the dead money obviously cuts down on what you spend somewhere)

I doubt that was true. The Patriots' adjusted cap number was a couple of million dollars less than the Colts. And the Patriots had over $6 million in dead money with just Milloy and Antowain. I can't recall the Colts releasing a player in 2003/2004 that would cause them to have a huge dead money cap hit.

I have no idea if the USAtoday data is close to accurate or not. But the total cap that they show for the Colts is 62.68M which kind of implies close to 18M dead space if they spent to their cap (plus/minus cap adjustments) whereas the Patriots according to your data had about 9M dead space.

That noticeable difference does not exist now in 2006.
There are 18 Pats with caps over 1M.
There are at least 16 Colts with caps over 1M.

Just curious - do you keep somewhat of a track on the Colts salary cap info or is there some resource somewhere that has their current info ?

Seems like the Colts must not have much room to sign any more 1M+ players while it's at least possible that the Pats could still sign several if they find the right veterans - so that spread could still increase this year.


I think the point is still valid (for 2004) that the Colts spent more of their money on the top few and took away from the 'middle' class. The Colts appear to have spent 23.598M on players 5 thru 22 while the Pats spent 29.804M on their 5 thru 22. That's over a 6M difference in that middle class.


p.s. It appears that your 2004 salary cap page has an html title of '2005'.

 

[Miguel]

I hear you. But I kind of think that the issue is actually active players and that dead money players are a different issue (altho the dead money obviously cuts down on what you spend somewhere)

Therefore, dead money should be included.

I have no idea if the USAtoday data is close to accurate or not. But the total cap that they show for the Colts is 62.68M which kind of implies close to 18M dead space if they spent to their cap (plus/minus cap adjustments) whereas the Patriots according to your data had about 9M dead space.

Like I said before, I have no idea what players that the Colts may have released in 2003/2004.

Just curious - do you keep somewhat of a track on the Colts salary cap info or is there some resource somewhere that has their current info ?

It is not that difficult to keep track of the Colts salary cap info if one wanted to and I do not. The Colts do not use LTBE/NTLBE incentives as much as other teams. Their contracts are pretty much straightforward, salary +signing bonus proration =cap number. One can take a look at the NFLPA.site and pretty much guess which players have 1M plus cap hits.
[/quote]

Seems like the Colts must not have much room to sign any more 1M+ players while it's at least possible that the Pats could still sign several if they find the right veterans - so that spread could still increase this year.

True.

I think the point is still valid (for 2004) that the Colts spent more of their money on the top few and took away from the 'middle' class. The Colts appear to have spent 23.598M on players 5 thru 22 while the Pats spent 29.804M on their 5 thru 22. That's over a 6M difference in that middle class.

My original point was not about 2004. There is no doubt in my mind that the Colts are in the middle of changing their cap philosophy.

p.s. It appears that your 2004 salary cap page has an html title of '2005'.

Will fix.

 

[patpatriot]

Yeah but...

Mike Reiss, Mike Holley and Tom Curran don't fall into any of those categories.

Curran - hardworking and knowledgeable but due to seeing his lazy drunken rabble-rousing colleagues gain greater success (as measured by $ and exposure TV etc) , I believe that he no longer wants to fight the good fight. He is being seduced by the Dark-Side. Look how little time it took Felger to go from purer-than-Ceasar's- wife "Journalist" to acknowledged media whore. Look how fast TJ went from Pats loyalist to disgruntled talking head. I'm actually of the opinion that the Schmerlas buffoon is among the most knowledgeable and fairest-minded football commentators in Boston. Sad.

 

[Warhorse]

Here is the idea in place for linebackers in the Colts system. We do not pay for linebackers who do not wow us. Marcus Washington didn't wow us, so he left to go to Washington where they overpayed. He also didn't really fit in the system. Same with Mike Peterson the year after Washington left. The Jags paid more than we wanted to spend on an average LB in our defense. This year it happened to be Thornton. When the linebackers were talked about, Cato June was the one who was always brought up as our best LB. In each of those instances we had someone to step in and play better in the vacant spot. When Washington left, Thornton slid over from WLB to SLB and played the spot within the system better. When Mike Peterson left, Cato June came in and didn't miss a beat. Rob Morris didn't fit, UDFA Gary Brackett did. And he just recently got a contract to stay and continue to be the starter. Thornton left and now Gilbert Gardner will slide into his spot.

Tripplett by the way was a DT not a DE for whoever made the mistake earlier. He was 3rd in the rotation and it took him 3 years before he listened to the coaches who told him to lose weight. When he lost the weight and had a good year during his contract year, he was bound to leave. Good riddance to him. On running downs, Corey Simon and Monte Reagor are the starters; on passing downs, Reagor and Raheem Brock are the starting DTs. Tripplett was a 2nd round pick who didn't live up to the potential in our system his first three years.

Edgerrin James became a workhorse back with no flash after his knee injury. He could flat grind it out and was a wonderful all around back, but he replaced Marshall Faulk who was similar when we traded him. We are not going to overpay for a position that we can just plug players into.

Reggie Wayne was deemed more important to the grand scheme because of the failed experiments of Jerome Pathon & E.G. Green. The Colts tried to find a WR opposite Harrison and never came up with an option until Wayne was drafted. Raheem Brock was a bigger priority due to his versatility on the defensive line. Gary Brackett came at a decent price for a hard working, blue collar fan favorite who liked his options better as a start for us than a backup with someone else.

In 2005 we were the second youngest team yet we fielded a playoff team. We pretty much rotate our young players in from the draft and keep the ones that fit, but we always have replacements ready (ex. linebackers and offensive line.)

 

[Garbanza]

Although the Indy defense was much improved last year - it was HIGHLY over-rated. The Indy defense is mediocre - Freeney CAN be a beast - but can be nuetralized too.

Big "yawn" from me.....

 

[DaBruinz]

Do you think that the Colts should have paid James what he got from the Cardinals??If no, then it does not matter if the Colts had the cap room or not. If the Colts thought that James was worth the price, he would be a Colt today.
Do you think that the Colts should have paid Thorton what he got from the Titans??If no, then it does not matter if the Colts had the cap room or not. If the Colts thought that Thorton was worth the price, he would be a Colt today.
Do you think that the Colts should have paid Tripplett what he got from the Bills??If no, then it does not matter if the Colts had the cap room or not. If the Colts thought that Thorton was worth the price, he would be a Colt today.

Miguel, the point is that the Colts couldn't have re-signed those 3 and filled out their middle class with the cap space they had. Having less than 10 million, it just couldn't be done. It makes absolutely no difference whether or not I thought that the Colts should have paid the players.

Huh, I was the one who first noted in this thread that the Pats have lost some of their middle-class depth.

Yes, and you ignored the fact that the Colts haven't re-signed any of their middle class players.

I do not know why Adam is included in the discussion since it is very likely that Freeney, Tarik Glenn, Mathis, Ryan Diem, Reagor, Raheem Brock, Jeff Saturday, and Stokley all have higher cap numbers than Adam.

This is what I have for numbers.
Manning - 10.5 million
Harrison - 6.4 million
Wayne - 5.1 million
Adam - 1.68 million
for a total of 23.7 million.

Breakdowns
For Manning see http://www.patscap.com/manning.gif
Harrison - 2 million salary, 1MM proration of 2004 signing bonus, $1.4 million proration of 2005 roster bonus, $2 million proration of 2006 proration.
Wayne - $2.6 million salary, $2.5 million signing bonus proration
Adam - $980,000 salary, $700,000 roster bonus

I might be wrong but I have some numbers to back up my claim. CHFF did not provide any.

Thank you for the numbers. It would seem that the Patriots, currently, have more tied up in Seymour, Vrabel, Colvin and Brady than the Colts have tied up in Manning, Harrison, Wayne and Vinatieri. My only question about the Manning breakdown is the "DEION PRO-RATION" and why the Colts get a 2 million discount for 2007-2009 for Manning.

 

[DaBruinz]

The question is whether you think that the Colts should have paid these players what their new teams did.

No. That isn't the question Miguel. The question is whether or not they could have. And the simple fact is that they couldn't have paid James, Thornton and Tripplett and still fielded a full team. They wouldn't have had the money to do so and field a successful team.

Rhodes, Brackett, and Mathis are signed for the 2006 season, at least according to the NFLPA.site. June is a RFA.
The question should not be who has the most money but do the Colts have the money needed to address the holes. I think that they do.

Thanks for putting up the info on those 3. ESPN did't have them updated. I know that Brackett had signed a deal, but there were rumors that it had been nullified by the league. Guess they were false.

Maybe the Colts DO have enough money to fill their holes. But the fact of the matter is that they have HAD to redo 2 of their major contracts to get where they are. The only contract that the Pats have "redone" is Corey Dillon's. And all they did there was spread the roster bonus out as a signing bonus.

 

[Miguel]

Miguel, the point is that the Colts couldn't have re-signed those 3 and filled out their middle class with the cap space they had. Having less than 10 million, it just couldn't be done. It makes absolutely no difference whether or not I thought that the Colts should have paid the players.

If the Redskins who were way over the cap could later go on a free agent spending spree, any team could have.

 

[Miguel]

Yes, and you ignored the fact that the Colts haven't re-signed any of their middle class players.

I did point out some of their middle class players were indeed signed or were tendered as RFAs.

It would seem that the Patriots, currently, have more tied up in Seymour, Vrabel, Colvin and Brady than the Colts have tied up in Manning, Harrison, Wayne and Vinatieri.

According to CHFF, that means that the Pats are determined to destroy their roster.

My only question about the Manning breakdown is the "DEION PRO-RATION" and why the Colts get a 2 million discount for 2007-2009 for Manning.

That's how the rule works.

 

[Miguel]

No. That isn't the question Miguel. The question is whether or not they could have. And the simple fact is that they couldn't have paid James, Thornton and Tripplett and still fielded a full team. They wouldn't have had the money to do so and field a successful team.

That's not a fact. That is your opinion. If the Redskins who were over the cap much more than the Colts were could go on free agency frenzy, any team can.

Maybe the Colts DO have enough money to fill their holes. But the fact of the matter is that they have HAD to redo 2 of their major contracts to get where they are. The only contract that the Pats have "redone" is Corey Dillon's. And all they did there was spread the roster bonus out as a signing bonus.

Big deal.

1.) If in 2004 the Colts had made those roster bonuses option bonuses, those option bonuses would have already been prorated.
2.) Teams including the Patriots have pushed out money in the past to the future.

 

[Warhorse]

Why is this such a big deal for the Colts to let go of viable talent and not resign them? The Patriots do the same thing. Why does it matter that our team puts a little more money into the top end of our roster? We won't ever go into cap hell. We'll be similar to the Patriots and be right up against the cap. We don't have much dead money.

The Patriots and the Colts offer two different opinions as to how the salary cap can be manipulated. We have our stars and the draft picks that move into starter roles when necessary, and we sign any free agents that fit our scheme (ex. Reagor & Simon). The Patriots use the draft and sign a slew of middle tiered free agents that fit their scheme and they resign their own free agents if it fits their scale.

 

[Pats726]

The Patriots and the Colts offer two different opinions as to how the salary cap can be manipulated.

I agree...time to move on..all teams have plans of the cap..some work better than others...some work better some years than others..

 

[PATSNUTme]

The NE "media" covering the Pats are:

1. Lazy good for nothings

2. Drunken good for nothings

3. Plagerizing scum suckers

4. All of the above

You have 12 seconds to answer

Mabe we should haave a poll using some of your observations above. I'll start one if yu don't mind.

The rest of this thread is interesting and informative. But I have the flu today and a head ache and I got really tired reading some of those other post.

 

[PatsSteve1]

That's not a fact. That is your opinion. If the Redskins who were over the cap much more than the Colts were could go on free agency frenzy, any team can.

* It'd be nice if Clayton updated his team salary cap page a little more often. It's still March 10th figures and a lot of money has been spent since then. I don't imagine it's that easy keeping track of all the team's situations unless he has a mole in the NFL/NFLPA office somewhere.

 

[Miguel]

* It'd be nice if Clayton updated his team salary cap page a little more often. It's still March 10th figures and a lot of money has been spent since then. I don't imagine it's that easy keeping track of all the team's situations unless he has a mole in the NFL/NFLPA office somewhere.

Yes, it would be nice. We would then get to hear some more stuff being made up.

 

[patpatriot]

Sure go ahead

Mabe we should haave a poll using some of your observations above. I'll start one if yu don't mind.

The rest of this thread is interesting and informative. But I have the flu today and a head ache and I got really tired reading some of those other post.

there should be another choice for ...innocent virgins who have not been corrupted yet by the diseased media lepers. Hope you are feeling better. I agree about cap discussions. It's like listening to bean counters argue over GAP (General Accounting Principles...I think).

 

[Miguel]

Also, Miguel, I understand you are the cap guru, but unless they did some really fancy book-keeping, I would find it very hard to believe that Manning, Harrison, Vinatieri and Wayne didn't eat up 30% of the Colts salary cap. If you have the numbers, great. I will admit I am wrong.

I'm still waiting for you to back up your claim or for you to admit that you were wrong. I took the time to provide you the numbers. The least you can do is keep your word.