Pats are in position to spend some dough in an uncapped year

[Rob0729]

The CBA doesn't prevent him from overspending to lock up his own players, though.

I'm sure they will pay several of their key players.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Jonathan tried to clear up a couple of misconceptions when he was on with Felger this week.

Seems the USA Today Data Base is not the authority on spending it purports to be. While they did not mention figures, Felger did admit that the ones Jonathan provided him on the Patriots spending were substantially higher than USA Today's.

The other misconception is that his dad said what Felger keeps insisting he did. Jonathan said they will not enter into deals that they feel may cause them problems down the road just because it's an uncapped year. He never said they would sign no long term deals because of the potential lockout. They are being conservative, which has been their business model all along. So while the may well be active in FA (and he hinted perhaps in RFA because of the unique dynamic that exists this season) it won't be a case where they overpay because of the lack of cap. They clearly expect in any new CBA there will be one. And they always balance the long view with the short as any good business man will.

He also reiterated that there were substantial talks with Wilfork's camp last season and that they want to retain him but the sides simply could not reach an accord that satisfied both. And here that is what it takes to get deals done.

 

[FootballFan85]

The 2001 Super Bowl was primarily won through free agency. In fact, many of the starters and most key players during the Super Bowl era were acquired in free agency (or trades) including Mike Vrabel, Roman Phifer, Rodney Harrison, Ted Washington, Corey Dillon, Larry Izzo, Joe Andruzzi, Bobby Hamilton, David Patten, Christian Fauria, Otis Smith, Tyrone Poole (he was key in 2003), Keith Traylor, and Rosey Colvin. How did the Pats build these guys internally?

Vrabel wasnt anything when he was on Pittsburgh and he turned into a star while on the Pats. Aside from him, yes Corey Dillon and Rodney Harrison were key pickups, but the rest of that list is not exactly guys that would demand a mint in free agency, and even those guys are over a period of multiple years.

The Pats were not a team to go out and use free agency as a way to try and buy a championship by bringing in a whole bunch of stars but it seems like that is exactly what people here are looking for as a solution. They want Kraft to go out and dump the bank bringing in guys, but that just isn't the way to do it.

Moss is not a long term asset. Welker with his knee blown out is now an unknown. Remember when Marvin Harrison came back from his knee injury? Not even close to the same player. The run game is a big question mark. The defense is in dire need of upgrading.

This team needs quite a lot of work if it wants to enjoy long term, sustainable success similar to when it was winning championships. Spending a bunch of dough trying to patch those holes with expensive free agents might bring a year of success. Patching those holes through bringing in character guys and by building stars in those positions through the Pats own system is a much better option.

 

[upstater1]

Reiss said today in his chat that he would be surprised if teams used the uncapped yr and spent a lot because if there is a cap in the future say 2011 they could be in trouble handling those salaries.According to him its a little overhyped.

Reiss point doesn't make sense to me given the 50% rule.

I mean, you can frontload contracts by 50% in an uncapped year. Once those contracts drop by 50% in the second and succeeding years, THEN you're fine.

Theoretically, you can have a $300 million payroll next season, and you're still fine the next year if every contract goes down by 50%.

So I can't understand Reiss's point.

 

[Rob0729]

Ted Washington was on the Pats in 2001? I thought he came later.

Vrabel wasnt anything when he was on Pittsburgh and he turned into a star while on the Pats. Aside from him, yes Corey Dillon and Rodney Harrison were key pickups, but the rest of that list is not exactly guys that would demand a mint in free agency.

The Pats were not a team to go out and use free agency as a way to try and buy a championship by bringing in a whole bunch of stars.

You need to read my post again. I wrote:

In fact, many of the starters and most key players during the Super Bowl era were acquired in free agency (or trades) including Mike Vrabel, Roman Phifer, Rodney Harrison, Ted Washington, Corey Dillon, Larry Izzo, Joe Andruzzi, Bobby Hamilton, David Patten, Christian Fauria, Otis Smith, Tyrone Poole (he was key in 2003), Keith Traylor, and Rosey Colvin.

Other than Izzo (who was a special teamer), all of the players I listed were starters and/or key players during the Super Bowl years.

 

[Rob0729]

Jonathan tried to clear up a couple of misconceptions when he was on with Felger this week.

Seems the USA Today Data Base is not the authority on spending it purports to be. While they did not mention figures, Felger did admit that the ones Jonathan provided him on the Patriots spending were substantially higher than USA Today's.

The other misconception is that his dad said what Felger keeps insisting he did. Jonathan said they will not enter into deals that they feel may cause them problems down the road just because it's an uncapped year. He never said they would sign no long term deals because of the potential lockout. They are being conservative, which has been their business model all along. So while the may well be active in FA (and he hinted perhaps in RFA because of the unique dynamic that exists this season) it won't be a case where they overpay because of the lack of cap. They clearly expect in any new CBA there will be one. And they always balance the long view with the short as any good business man will.

He also reiterated that there were substantial talks with Wilfork's camp last season and that they want to retain him but the sides simply could not reach an accord that satisfied both. And here that is what it takes to get deals done.

So basically, if the USA Today is underestimating payroll and Miguel's number is at least close, the Pats would have even more room if you are judging real dollars.

The Pats can still spend money, be conservative about the future, and still be competitive. They did that in 2007 when they signed Stallworth and Washington. They gave them big contracts and bonuses, but they ended up being glorified one year deals with options. The Pats probably wouldn't do it the same way, but I am sure they are looking for similiar tricks where they can be competitive and still not screw themselves for the future.