Are Teams Overextending Themselves?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from vertigho. Show vertigho's posts

    Are Teams Overextending Themselves?

    Nearly every time I've gone to espn.com today, I've seen, ".... now becomes highest paid player at their position".

    My question is this:

    Are teams overextending themselves by signing players (who they have no idea if they'll work in their system) to massive contracts? Antrel Rolle - average, at best, signed to 5 year 37 mil contract (15 mil gtd). Karlos Dansby. Good LB? Sure, but worth 43 mil in 5 years, with 22 mil gtd? I think not. I'm nearly positive that a lot of teams will be regretting these moves. I realize it's an uncapped year, but if these players don't work out in there new teams system, that team is going to end up paying a lot of money, even if they decide to cut that player.

    I'm fine with what New England did. Vince had proven that he fits their system and he deserved what he got. Look, I'm not saying that we shouldn't sign a few FA's. We need them, but I do think that we shouldn't put "all of our eggs in one basket". To me it makes much more sense to resign those who have played in your system, and then pick up a few FA's. But by investing so much into one player, who isn't proven in your system - IMO, that's quite risky.

    For those reasons exactly is why I support BB and RK. Lets resign Bodden, pick up a FA or two, and get some quality players in the draft, and we're contenders again.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from rpn123321. Show rpn123321's posts

    Re: Are Teams Overextending Themselves?

       Well, since their is no salary cap this year and in any unforseeable future. If a player is cut, that's it as far as money they receive. The only money guaranteed to these players is the guaranteed money, the rest of their salary is earned from game to game. 

     With a salary cap, cutting a player with a contract would cost the team money to spend against the salary cap. With no salary cap, cutting a player with millions left on the contract won't cost the team another nickel. In the NBA, and MLB it's different, they have to buy out players from a contract.

      On a side note, where did you read that antrelle rolle signed with someone? I haven't seen that anywhere.

     On another side note, a lot of teams are planning for the stoppage next season in play, so they might even spend more money just to rent a premier player for this season, just to cut him when the strike goes into effect.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from artielang. Show artielang's posts

    Re: Are Teams Overextending Themselves?

    i totally agree. dansby is a good player but is he the best LB in the league? i dont think so, but thats how he is being paid. and i have a feeling that chicago made the classic mistake of outbidding themselves, so to speak. peppers was said to be seeking $12 mil a year. the pats and eagles probably bid something under that, maybe with lots of incentives. but the bears were so desperate to land him that they threw more money at him than he was even asking for. they needed to sign him regardless of what he does on the field. luckily, the pats dont work that way. they showed that they pay a premium for players who have proven themselves but wont go crazy and mortgage their future. i'm not surprised that the bad teams like the bears and lions are making these mistakes, but i am surprised by the miami parcells and the giants. those contracts are nuts and they will be regretting them for years. 

    look around the league: teams with players signed to mega contracts that are for players not named brady, manning, or brees are not good teams. raiders and redskins and seahawks and carolina (until now) are prime examples of this.

    the pats need to continue to resign there own guys, look for character vets that may get cut in the coming weeks, and most important is to reload with another solid draft. i'm excited about most of last years draft class, including the 2 players we havent really gotten to see yet (tate and mckenzie). 

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from rpn123321. Show rpn123321's posts

    Re: Are Teams Overextending Themselves?

    Another thing to point out about becoming contendars again is this...

     Their are quite a bit of NFL teams that can't afford to carry the 110 million forced payroll they've had to carry from prior years. Some NFL teams have already said they will impose their own budget, and can only afford 70-80 mill per year so they can have a financially positive season for once. So at some point, your going to see some crazy things this off season, with high priced under acheiving first rounders being let go, and high priced vets being let go, and maybe a suprise or two. That is going to narrow the competitiveness of the league.
     
     With the Final 8 rule, that is going to limit zona, saints, cards, vikings, colts, diego, ravens, jets all do this off season. They can't sign any talent that becomes available unless they release a player that has a contract of equal or greater value. These 8 teams can only improve through trades, and the draft.
     
     That again closes the margin. I think this leaves the Pats, who will spend money, on not just planning on this season, but banking on the slim chances that their will be no work stoppage, and really get reloaded for the present day, and the future of the franchise.

     I think were in for some blowouts like no other season has provided next year, and people will recognize the competitiveness has been lowered because of no CBA.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from artielang. Show artielang's posts

    Re: Are Teams Overextending Themselves?

    good point rpn, i think we will continue to see some good players cut, especially because there will be no salary cap hit this year for players who had big signing bonuses. that is why we will be able to cut AD. and your point about some teams spending well below the previous basement was a good one. oh and your spelling makes your posts funny to read, too.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from apdynasty23. Show apdynasty23's posts

    Re: Are Teams Overextending Themselves?

    Teams are overpaying, no doubt, but that's what happens when you're the first mover on any player. The value of each player is ultimately dictated by the potential suitors but by jumping right into contracts hours after (or before by some accounts) free agency begins, you're going through uncharted waters.

    The Bears' signings were out of sheer desperation. The head coach and GM are on the hot seat because they've underperformed for years now and raised ticket prices simultaneously. This was an attempt to cover their ass*es moreso than actual football moves. Sure, they're better but at what cost? Also, remember, the coach/GM can get any players knowing they could very well be out of their jobs next year. It wouldn't be their problem anymore anyway!

    I'm glad the Patriots take their time. The great teams do.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from EASON11. Show EASON11's posts

    Re: Are Teams Overextending Themselves?

    yes they are over extending themselves......when and if they ever come to an agreement again on the CBA and have a cap again ............which is going to happen its only a matter of time........3/4 of these guys that got these big deals will be cut and let go. They won't see any where near all there " contract " money......
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Anarchy99. Show Anarchy99's posts

    Re: Are Teams Overextending Themselves?

    Last year, collectively teams were $200-$250 million UNDER the salary cap.  So to answer the quesion, NO.

    I doubt the NFL overall will spend much more than they did last year (and in some cases probably less).  Older, more expensive players that would not have been cut for salary cap reasons will get cut (and we've already seen some of that).

    So while a handful of guys will get decent paydays, overall I doubt teams will splurge.  Remember, the owners are claiming poverty and are asking the players to play for a smaller piece of the pie.  They would not have much of a case if they all went on big spending sprees.
     

Share