36 Mil to Spend: TT is going to stay skimpy on spending...

[bobblehead]

Re: 36 Mil to Spend: TT is going to stay skimpy on spending.

Like he has done every year since being here. With the salary cap era coming to what appears to be an end in the near future, with the shared revenue the nfl puts otu there to pay for salaries and all that jazz, TT yet again is choosing to just not spend money.

*sigh*

I am not saying be the jets last year. I am not saying turn into the redskins every year.

What I am saying is show some damn commitment to wining a Super Bowl. The only reason we even were close 2 years ago was because #4 came through in tight game after tight game. The defense wasn't very good that year save our two CB's, and yeah ryan grant was a surprise only after we had been an all passing team half the season.

Lets face it: TT has not shown one ounce of commitment to winning a super bowl, just commitment to making us a division competitior every year. I don't want to just dance around wining the division: I want another super bowl.

And, TT just doesn't look like he's comitted to get there. We have a young improving team. Great. AR got a golden boy contract after a few games.

Where is Jennings big deal? Why is our OL still a mess years after TT took over.

*sigh* It would just be nice for our GM to actually show in action that he actually wants to win a super bowl. This rebuilding crap has gotta just be thrown out the window. The great franchises out there just don't "rebuild". They have down periods, but they are still trying to get that ring.

tank?

Absolutly no need for that shit Grampa.

TANK!!!!

[bobblehead]

The only reason we even were close 2 years ago was because #4 came through in tight game after tight game. The defense wasn't very good that year save our two CB's, and yeah ryan grant was a surprise only after we had been an all passing team half the season.

We must have watched a different season...I do recall the season opener when BF almost threw the game away with an ugly pick (no offensive TD's in that game).

I recall San Diego where Barnett iced the game with a late pick. the 2008 D would have given up a TD and lost it. Barnett was the D player of the week.

I remember the first Bears game where BF tossed 2 picks to tie Blanda for the career best...er worst mark.

The next week we came back and BF tossed 2 more picks against washington in leading us to 10 offensive points, but chuck woodson picked up a fumble and went 50+ for a TD to save us.

After the bye week BF led us to 13 total points (a TD on a blown coverage was the first score) in regulation and the Defense made a great last second stand to get us to OT. Pretty sure BF's awesome pass in OT wouldn't have happened with the 2008 Defense on the field.

Ah then came the chiefs where BF tossed a pre halftime Pick with a 6-0 lead...ooops, we ended up going in down 7-6. I do admit that the second half of that game was BF at his best though.

Week 10 was the breakout of Grant, and the defense threw a shutout...all BF's inspiration no doubt.

week 11 we beat a 44 year old QB while getting a punt return TD from TWill and Cory Williams was Def. player of the week.

We then beat the powerhouse Lions...something happened the next week in Dallas, but I have blocked it out for some reason...no doubt it was one of those great BF perfomances you speak of so I have selectively deleted it from my memory.

Weeks 14,15 and 17 we dominated powerhouse teams....Rams, Raiders and Lions again. Our defense gave up 34 total points in those games....and again I'll block out week 16, but I'm quite sure BF didn't play too well (or anyone else).

And Mad, before you break out the quarter please consider that I wasn't inflamatory, I'm merely refuting (quite well) a stupid statement of:

The only reason we even were close 2 years ago was because #4 came through in tight game after tight game. The defense wasn't very good that year.....

If people make foolish statements like this they deserve to see the truth.

[Lurker64]

I agree entirely with bobblehead both in that the defense and special teams being clutch was an important part of the success in 2007 and the defense and special teams being the opposite of clutch was an important part of the lack of success in 2008 and in that he should not be banned for pointing this out.

[gex]

I agree entirely with bobblehead both in that the defense and special teams being clutch was an important part of the success in 2007 and the defense and special teams being the opposite of clutch was an important part of the lack of success in 2008 and in that he should not be banned for pointing this out.

Well, for Bubble it should at least merit the flipping of the coin.

[packerbacker1234]

36M is 9M over the actual cap. That is a one year block of cash, not permanent cap space. If the cap is reinstated in '10 and the same amount as '09, spending that 9M makes you 9M over the cap in '10 if you pay as you go.

We don't have 36M in cap space any more.

Bigby = 1.5M
Hunter = 1M
Martin = 1M
Kuhn = 1M
Bush = 1M

They displace 5x300K

We currently have 32M in cap space.

9M is the carry forward I doubt TT spends using pay-as-you-go rules. That is money for frontloading (which has the effect of converting carry forward into long term cap space), and the yearly injury contingency (team has to carry at least 2-3M in cap space in case guys get hurt, guys on IR count towards the cap, as do the replacements brought in).

23M is the usable cap space.

Jennings is looking at Berrian money. Roughly 8M. He makes 800K. 7.2M net effect to the cap.

15.8M remaining

Colledge is looking at Scott money. His time at T is concerning, he could push for more. Roughly 5M. He makes 800K. 4.2M net effect to the cap.

11.6M remaining

Collins just went to the pro bowl, and was an all-pro. None of the S's on the market are his caliber, but they set the market. His agent should push for 6M/yr, but TT will try to keep it to 5M/yr. Lets say they split at 5.5M/yr. He makes 900K. 4.6M net effect to the cap.

7M remaining.

The rookies drafted this year will cost about 4M, and will probably displace about 2M worth of players, for a net effect of 2M to the cap.

5M remaining.

Leftovers looking at new deals in the near future (within a year) are Kampman, Pickett, Spitz, Blackmon, Driver, Clifton, Jolly, Chillar, Williams (he's an ERFA so forced to play at 400K if he signs the tender, but I can see a Grant situation where the ERFA tender is far less than he is worth). Of those Spitz, Blackmon, Jolly, and Williams will be high net players (the rest already make a lot of money, a new contract doesn't have a huge effect on the cap). If we stay put at #9, our first round pick is going to cost 5M to the cap next year (because of the rookie salary cap, first round rookies don't count much toward the cap until their second year).

Our cap space isn't nearly as good as it looks.

You're also going out a limb assuming TT actually does anything with them. At the present, of all the guys you listed, none of them our FA right now. Meaning? TT isn't going to touch them. When they do become FA he'll talk to them, sure, but they all come due around the same time and let facts be what facts are: They will all want big contracts and we can't afford to pay them.

[cpk1994]

36M is 9M over the actual cap. That is a one year block of cash, not permanent cap space. If the cap is reinstated in '10 and the same amount as '09, spending that 9M makes you 9M over the cap in '10 if you pay as you go.

We don't have 36M in cap space any more.

Bigby = 1.5M
Hunter = 1M
Martin = 1M
Kuhn = 1M
Bush = 1M

They displace 5x300K

We currently have 32M in cap space.

9M is the carry forward I doubt TT spends using pay-as-you-go rules. That is money for frontloading (which has the effect of converting carry forward into long term cap space), and the yearly injury contingency (team has to carry at least 2-3M in cap space in case guys get hurt, guys on IR count towards the cap, as do the replacements brought in).

23M is the usable cap space.

Jennings is looking at Berrian money. Roughly 8M. He makes 800K. 7.2M net effect to the cap.

15.8M remaining

Colledge is looking at Scott money. His time at T is concerning, he could push for more. Roughly 5M. He makes 800K. 4.2M net effect to the cap.

11.6M remaining

Collins just went to the pro bowl, and was an all-pro. None of the S's on the market are his caliber, but they set the market. His agent should push for 6M/yr, but TT will try to keep it to 5M/yr. Lets say they split at 5.5M/yr. He makes 900K. 4.6M net effect to the cap.

7M remaining.

The rookies drafted this year will cost about 4M, and will probably displace about 2M worth of players, for a net effect of 2M to the cap.

5M remaining.

Leftovers looking at new deals in the near future (within a year) are Kampman, Pickett, Spitz, Blackmon, Driver, Clifton, Jolly, Chillar, Williams (he's an ERFA so forced to play at 400K if he signs the tender, but I can see a Grant situation where the ERFA tender is far less than he is worth). Of those Spitz, Blackmon, Jolly, and Williams will be high net players (the rest already make a lot of money, a new contract doesn't have a huge effect on the cap). If we stay put at #9, our first round pick is going to cost 5M to the cap next year (because of the rookie salary cap, first round rookies don't count much toward the cap until their second year).

Our cap space isn't nearly as good as it looks.

You're also going out a limb assuming TT actually does anything with them. At the present, of all the guys you listed, none of them our FA right now. Meaning? TT isn't going to touch them. When they do become FA he'll talk to them, sure, but they all come due around the same time and let facts be what facts are: They will all want big contracts and we can't afford to pay them.

Except TT has extended people BEFORE they hit FA as well. Driver and Rodgers to name two. You can't assume he will wiat until then becuase there is precedence that he does extend players early.

[Gunakor]

36M is 9M over the actual cap. That is a one year block of cash, not permanent cap space. If the cap is reinstated in '10 and the same amount as '09, spending that 9M makes you 9M over the cap in '10 if you pay as you go.

We don't have 36M in cap space any more.

Bigby = 1.5M
Hunter = 1M
Martin = 1M
Kuhn = 1M
Bush = 1M

They displace 5x300K

We currently have 32M in cap space.

9M is the carry forward I doubt TT spends using pay-as-you-go rules. That is money for frontloading (which has the effect of converting carry forward into long term cap space), and the yearly injury contingency (team has to carry at least 2-3M in cap space in case guys get hurt, guys on IR count towards the cap, as do the replacements brought in).

23M is the usable cap space.

Jennings is looking at Berrian money. Roughly 8M. He makes 800K. 7.2M net effect to the cap.

15.8M remaining

Colledge is looking at Scott money. His time at T is concerning, he could push for more. Roughly 5M. He makes 800K. 4.2M net effect to the cap.

11.6M remaining

Collins just went to the pro bowl, and was an all-pro. None of the S's on the market are his caliber, but they set the market. His agent should push for 6M/yr, but TT will try to keep it to 5M/yr. Lets say they split at 5.5M/yr. He makes 900K. 4.6M net effect to the cap.

7M remaining.

The rookies drafted this year will cost about 4M, and will probably displace about 2M worth of players, for a net effect of 2M to the cap.

5M remaining.

Leftovers looking at new deals in the near future (within a year) are Kampman, Pickett, Spitz, Blackmon, Driver, Clifton, Jolly, Chillar, Williams (he's an ERFA so forced to play at 400K if he signs the tender, but I can see a Grant situation where the ERFA tender is far less than he is worth). Of those Spitz, Blackmon, Jolly, and Williams will be high net players (the rest already make a lot of money, a new contract doesn't have a huge effect on the cap). If we stay put at #9, our first round pick is going to cost 5M to the cap next year (because of the rookie salary cap, first round rookies don't count much toward the cap until their second year).

Our cap space isn't nearly as good as it looks.

You're also going out a limb assuming TT actually does anything with them. At the present, of all the guys you listed, none of them our FA right now. Meaning? TT isn't going to touch them. When they do become FA he'll talk to them, sure, but they all come due around the same time and let facts be what facts are: They will all want big contracts and we can't afford to pay them.

You know, the less money we spend today on FA's, the more likely it is we'll be able to afford to resign them tomorrow. The guys in FA today might not want to be here, but the guys on our roster do. Those guys are the ones who are top priority. If we don't spend the money today, it will be there tomorrow where we can spend it on players who actually deserve the money. I don't think overpaying for a run stuffing 3-4 DE is money well spent, especially when it could take away from available cap space to resign some of the guys Waldo mentioned. Again, those guys are top priority, not the ones in the FA market right now.

For shits and giggles, I'd like to know how anyone could question TT's desire to resign good players on our roster. While he hasn't been very active in FA, he's resigned Al Harris, Donald Driver, Aaron Rodgers, Ryan Grant and Nick Barnett - all before hitting the FA market. You can't make a case against Thompson that he doesn't take care of his own. If a guy is a Packer today and TT wants him to be a Packer tomorrow, something will get done in a timely manner. Just like always. So relax.

[Patler]

Except TT has extended people BEFORE they hit FA as well. Driver and Rodgers to name two. You can't assume he will wiat until then becuase there is precedence that he does extend players early.

You can also throw Wells and Lee in the "extended early group". They were extended during the seasons before reaching free agency. Harris got an extension along with pay enhancements before his existing deal expired too.

TT has been more proactive than he gets credit for

[Packnut]

Favre

The only reason we even were close 2 years ago was because #4 came through in tight game after tight game. The defense wasn't very good that year save our two CB's, and yeah ryan grant was a surprise only after we had been an all passing team half the season.

We must have watched a different season...I do recall the season opener when BF almost threw the game away with an ugly pick (no offensive TD's in that game).

I recall San Diego where Barnett iced the game with a late pick. the 2008 D would have given up a TD and lost it. Barnett was the D player of the week.

I remember the first Bears game where BF tossed 2 picks to tie Blanda for the career best...er worst mark.

The next week we came back and BF tossed 2 more picks against washington in leading us to 10 offensive points, but chuck woodson picked up a fumble and went 50+ for a TD to save us.

After the bye week BF led us to 13 total points (a TD on a blown coverage was the first score) in regulation and the Defense made a great last second stand to get us to OT. Pretty sure BF's awesome pass in OT wouldn't have happened with the 2008 Defense on the field.

Ah then came the chiefs where BF tossed a pre halftime Pick with a 6-0 lead...ooops, we ended up going in down 7-6. I do admit that the second half of that game was BF at his best though.

Week 10 was the breakout of Grant, and the defense threw a shutout...all BF's inspiration no doubt.

week 11 we beat a 44 year old QB while getting a punt return TD from TWill and Cory Williams was Def. player of the week.

We then beat the powerhouse Lions...something happened the next week in Dallas, but I have blocked it out for some reason...no doubt it was one of those great BF perfomances you speak of so I have selectively deleted it from my memory.

Weeks 14,15 and 17 we dominated powerhouse teams....Rams, Raiders and Lions again. Our defense gave up 34 total points in those games....and again I'll block out week 16, but I'm quite sure BF didn't play too well (or anyone else).

And Mad, before you break out the quarter please consider that I wasn't inflamatory, I'm merely refuting (quite well) a stupid statement of:

The only reason we even were close 2 years ago was because #4 came through in tight game after tight game. The defense wasn't very good that year.....

If people make foolish statements like this they deserve to see the truth.

The only problem is it's YOUR truth, not THE truth. In fact, your opinion is full of holes not to mention hypocritical garbage.

You blame Favre when many instances that you cited involved other players screwing up. Then when Favre did do well, you credit other people for it.

The bottom line is this and it is a FACT. It cannot be disputed. You can make all the excuses you want and twist it to suit your purpose.

13-3 with Brett Favre
6-10 without him.

It was basically the same team. Now, when you take into effect the luck, schedule or bounce of the ball, no two seasons should be exactly alike.

However, the HUGE difference in the records would support the logical conclusion to any REASONABLE person that #04 had a very real impact on how good that 13-3 team was.

[HarveyWallbangers]

The performance by the defense in those two years had the biggest impact. QB play in both seasons was at least good.

[RashanGary]

The performance by the defense in those two years had the biggest impact. QB play in both seasons was at least good.

9th ranked defense to 22nd ranked defense
tied for 7th in ST's to 26th ranked ST's

ST's and Defense were huge factors. Rodgers being a first year starter also played a part (IMO), but not nearly as big as the defense and ST's.

[Gunakor]

Re: Favre

The only reason we even were close 2 years ago was because #4 came through in tight game after tight game. The defense wasn't very good that year save our two CB's, and yeah ryan grant was a surprise only after we had been an all passing team half the season.

We must have watched a different season...I do recall the season opener when BF almost threw the game away with an ugly pick (no offensive TD's in that game).

I recall San Diego where Barnett iced the game with a late pick. the 2008 D would have given up a TD and lost it. Barnett was the D player of the week.

I remember the first Bears game where BF tossed 2 picks to tie Blanda for the career best...er worst mark.

The next week we came back and BF tossed 2 more picks against washington in leading us to 10 offensive points, but chuck woodson picked up a fumble and went 50+ for a TD to save us.

After the bye week BF led us to 13 total points (a TD on a blown coverage was the first score) in regulation and the Defense made a great last second stand to get us to OT. Pretty sure BF's awesome pass in OT wouldn't have happened with the 2008 Defense on the field.

Ah then came the chiefs where BF tossed a pre halftime Pick with a 6-0 lead...ooops, we ended up going in down 7-6. I do admit that the second half of that game was BF at his best though.

Week 10 was the breakout of Grant, and the defense threw a shutout...all BF's inspiration no doubt.

week 11 we beat a 44 year old QB while getting a punt return TD from TWill and Cory Williams was Def. player of the week.

We then beat the powerhouse Lions...something happened the next week in Dallas, but I have blocked it out for some reason...no doubt it was one of those great BF perfomances you speak of so I have selectively deleted it from my memory.

Weeks 14,15 and 17 we dominated powerhouse teams....Rams, Raiders and Lions again. Our defense gave up 34 total points in those games....and again I'll block out week 16, but I'm quite sure BF didn't play too well (or anyone else).

And Mad, before you break out the quarter please consider that I wasn't inflamatory, I'm merely refuting (quite well) a stupid statement of:

The only reason we even were close 2 years ago was because #4 came through in tight game after tight game. The defense wasn't very good that year.....

If people make foolish statements like this they deserve to see the truth.

The only problem is it's YOUR truth, not THE truth. In fact, your opinion is full of holes not to mention hypocritical garbage.

You blame Favre when many instances that you cited involved other players screwing up. Then when Favre did do well, you credit other people for it.

The bottom line is this and it is a FACT. It cannot be disputed. You can make all the excuses you want and twist it to suit your purpose.

13-3 with Brett Favre
6-10 without him.

It was basically the same team. Now, when you take into effect the luck, schedule or bounce of the ball, no two seasons should be exactly alike.

However, the HUGE difference in the records would support the logical conclusion to any REASONABLE person that #04 had a very real impact on how good that 13-3 team was.

How good was the '08 offense vs. the '07 offense? Really, compare the two. If the difference was all Favre, it would have been the offense that came crashing down to earth in '08. Yet the offense was about as productive as they were a year earlier. It was the defense that was underperforming.

Did #4 have such a profound impact on the defensive side of the ball in that 13-3 season? Was the defense able to stay extremely healthy in that 13-3 season because of #4, only to suffer injury after injury in 6-10 because of the switch to #12?

I guess I'm just trying to judge where you are coming from in implying that losing Favre was somehow the reason for the DEFENSIVE collapse in '08...

P.S. Because of the litany of injuries sustained in 2008, it really wasn't the same team as in '07. Charlie Peprah and Charles Woodson never had to start a game at SS in 2007. Tony Moll never had to start a game at RT. AJ Hawk never had to start a game at MLB. Spitz never had to start a game at C. T-Will never had to start a game at CB. See where I'm going with this? They were similar rosters, but once on the field, it was a very different team.

[Packnut]

FA's

I fail to understand the argument that signing anyone now impacts keeping the current players who will become free agents. Why is it a sure thing that any of those players mentioned will warrant a huge increase?

We don't know how well Kampman will adjust to playing OLB in a 3-4 so how can a value be put on him?

Yes, Collins improved his play. However, he was so awful the season before, how much did he really improve? He did have a ton of picks, but I also remember him dropping a few right in his hands. He also was responsible for some terrible plays. Also, again, what will be his value in a 3-4? I think it will not be easy for him. He's not an in the box saftey and he's not that good in one on one coverage (his problems covering TE's is well documentated.

Colledge? By Thompson's own admission and track record, he does not believe in breaking the bank for ANY offensive lineman.

Bigby? C'mon seriously! The guy had a great 1/3 of the last part of the 2007 season. Don't see huge money going there.

The Giants made some real good free agent moves and I'm sure they have good players with expiring contracts coming up too.

I guess the difference in opinions is some would rather settle for just being competitive for an extended period of time, and others (myself included) would like to make a SERIOUS run at at SB.

Is'nt that the whole purpose to all this? You do what it takes (spending money) and assemble the best team you can. Yes, it's inevitable that you can't sign everyone and you will lose good players at some point. Again though, you at least take your best shot at a championship. If you sign the right guys and have developed some form of depth and IF things go your way, you win a SB. Then, you re-tool-re-build or whatever and make another run a few years down the line. THAT is the NFL cycle.

This slow "turtle" like way (no pun intended) will not work for 3 specific reasons:

1- Contracts will always be expiring. It's life in the NFL. That is why the window to make a run is so short.

2-While your using the "turtle" approach, the other teams are using all the available tools at their disposal to also improve.

3-You must almost be perfect in drafting. For those of us who choose to live in reality, deal with facts and hold the GM to a high standard, Teddy is far from it. In 4 years, to date, he has drafted ONE IMPACT player. Jennings is the ONLY blue chip he has taken. THAT will not get it done.

Much to our dismay, the depth that we all believed Thompson had built, when put to the test failed miserably to wit 6-10.

[cpk1994]

The performance by the defense in those two years had the biggest impact. QB play in both seasons was at least good.

9th ranked defense to 22nd ranked defense
tied for 7th in ST's to 26th ranked ST's

ST's and Defense were huge factors. Rodgers being a first year starter also played a part (IMO), but not nearly as big as the defense and ST's.

Hey, he's alive!

[cpk1994]

Re: FA's

I fail to understand the argument that signing anyone now impacts keeping the current players who will become free agents. Why is it a sure thing that any of those players mentioned will warrant a huge increase?

We don't know how well Kampman will adjust to playing OLB in a 3-4 so how can a value be put on him?

Yes, Collins improved his play. However, he was so awful the season before, how much did he really improve? He did have a ton of picks, but I also remember him dropping a few right in his hands. He also was responsible for some terrible plays. Also, again, what will be his value in a 3-4? I think it will not be easy for him. He's not an in the box saftey and he's not that good in one on one coverage (his problems covering TE's is well documentated.

Colledge? By Thompson's own admission and track record, he does not believe in breaking the bank for ANY offensive lineman.

Bigby? C'mon seriously! The guy had a great 1/3 of the last part of the 2007 season. Don't see huge money going there.

The Giants made some real good free agent moves and I'm sure they have good players with expiring contracts coming up too.

I guess the difference in opinions is some would rather settle for just being competitive for an extended period of time, and others (myself included) would like to make a SERIOUS run at at SB.

Is'nt that the whole purpose to all this? You do what it takes (spending money) and assemble the best team you can. Yes, it's inevitable that you can't sign everyone and you will lose good players at some point. Again though, you at least take your best shot at a championship. If you sign the right guys and have developed some form of depth and IF things go your way, you win a SB. Then, you re-tool-re-build or whatever and make another run a few years down the line. THAT is the NFL cycle.

This slow "turtle" like way (no pun intended) will not work for 3 specific reasons:

1- Contracts will always be expiring. It's life in the NFL. That is why the window to make a run is so short.

2-While your using the "turtle" approach, the other teams are using all the available tools at their disposal to also improve.

3-You must almost be perfect in drafting. For those of us who choose to live in reality, deal with facts and hold the GM to a high standard, Teddy is far from it. In 4 years, to date, he has drafted ONE IMPACT player. Jennings is the ONLY blue chip he has taken. THAT will not get it done.

Much to our dismay, the depth that we all believed Thompson had built, when put to the test failed miserably to wit 6-10.

How many playoff games has Dan Snyder won with his free spending?

How about Zigi Wilf?

When was the last time Jerry Jones won a playoff game because of his free spending?

Same tired crap from the "FA is a cure all" crowd.