Are Cards tanking?

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Murray
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
35,670
Reaction score
32,671
Location
Orange County, CA
Except they're only kinda halfheartedly trying to reset the roster.
Whether we like it or not, the Cardinals are going to build through the draft is what I'm seeing.

Reset the roster and cap this year.

Hopefully get a few big time contributors in the draft. What sucks now though is that the Cardinals hand is forced a bit. They pretty much have to draft a CB.

I also don't agree that Murphy and Allen aren't part of the solution going forward, but you have to think that maybe they didn't want to come back.
 

Stout

Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Posts
38,502
Reaction score
21,530
Location
Pittsburgh, PA--Enemy territory!
I never agreed that we were fully tanking. I think Bidwill wants to be competitive without truly doing the things that make us competitive. He's doing the 'field the best team that I can without spending 10s of millions of dollars doing so' dance.
I think you're right, and therein lies the problem. We have a plan, but it's a bad one. "Well, we don't want to invest this year BUT we want to be competitive, and we want to be financially stable for next season BUT well we can't ignore this season. Maybe if we do it halfway it'll all work out." And that is a terrible, losing strategy.

Now we learn that the Watt and Hudson hits are pushed off to next season. Dear Lord, WHY?
 
  • Like
Reactions: PJ1

Stout

Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Posts
38,502
Reaction score
21,530
Location
Pittsburgh, PA--Enemy territory!
Whether we like it or not, the Cardinals are going to build through the draft is what I'm seeing.

Reset the roster and cap this year.

Hopefully get a few big time contributors in the draft. What sucks now though is that the Cardinals hand is forced a bit. They pretty much have to draft a CB.

I also don't agree that Murphy and Allen aren't part of the solution going forward, but you have to think that maybe they didn't want to come back.
Except they clearly aren't doing that. Pushing Watt and Hudson money into next year is just SMFH dumb.
 

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Murray
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
35,670
Reaction score
32,671
Location
Orange County, CA
Except they're only kinda halfheartedly trying to reset the roster.
I agree, but they do have to field a team this year. And they have to have SOME players to market the team around.

Guys like Ertz and Conner are the guys they will market around even though they should be cut.
 

GatorAZ

feed hopkins
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Posts
24,578
Reaction score
16,904
Location
The Giant Toaster
The Cards are not Tanking. Tanking implies that you are not trying to win. I am and will always be against tanking. It's a total loser mentality that I want no part of.

What is going on now is a roster reset by the new administration.
Players and coaches don’t tank but ownership/management does. Get ready for 2-3 wins next year.
 

RON_IN_OC

https://www.ronevansrealty.com
Joined
Mar 10, 2004
Posts
25,966
Reaction score
32,975
Location
BirdGangThing
Guys, I finally figured out the plan!!!!!!!!!

Gannon is following the Eagles blueprint to success. No, not the 2022 Eagles...The 1976 Eagles!!!!!!

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
46,068
Reaction score
11,605
I think you're right, and therein lies the problem. We have a plan, but it's a bad one. "Well, we don't want to invest this year BUT we want to be competitive, and we want to be financially stable for next season BUT well we can't ignore this season. Maybe if we do it halfway it'll all work out." And that is a terrible, losing strategy.

Now we learn that the Watt and Hudson hits are pushed off to next season. Dear Lord, WHY?
The most logical answer is that we only have 5M in cap this season and multitudes of that more next season.
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
46,068
Reaction score
11,605
That’s just called being cheap.
That has also been the crux of my argument for a while. Bidwill shows us he's cheap and we get complaints that he is cheap, knowing that this franchise has been this way most of its existence.
 

football karma

Happy in the pretense of knowledge
Joined
Jul 22, 2002
Posts
14,956
Reaction score
13,391
fwiw: Gambo said something pretty odd yesterday in talking about the draft -- basically that the #3 draft slot is an expensive one..... given he works for the Cards flagship station, it caught my attention

a year ago i didnt think it possible: but i think the Cards have a cash crunch

its the combo of:

some lean covid years eating up cushion
buying out Kliff and Steve
Writing K1 a giant check (where a good % of future guarantees have to be put into escrow)

and

likely the Bidwil kids requiring that their annual 7 figure dividend check remain unaltered
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
46,068
Reaction score
11,605
fwiw: Gambo said something pretty odd yesterday in talking about the draft -- basically that the #3 draft slot is an expensive one..... given he works for the Cards flagship station, it caught my attention

a year ago i didnt think it possible: but i think the Cards have a cash crunch

its the combo of:

some lean covid years eating up cushion
buying out Kliff and Steve
Writing K1 a giant check (where a good % of future guarantees have to be put into escrow)

and

likely the Bidwil kids requiring that their annual 7 figure dividend check remain unaltered
One of the few times I agree with Gambo. Which is why I could still see this team trading down from 3 even if Anderson is on the board. I'm not totally against the idea either.
 

az jam

ASFN Icon
Joined
Mar 6, 2004
Posts
12,963
Reaction score
5,147
Location
Scottsdale, AZ
All we can do is speculate as they have said they have a plan that all agree on. None of us have any idea what it is except it certainly is not signing any highly rated free agents. Kind of depressing watching so many agents sign with teams other than the Cardinals. :bang:
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
46,068
Reaction score
11,605
This is utterly fake news.

We currently have over $23 million in cap space ($15 million in effective cap space) with 57 players under contract.
We have an estimated 18M in cap space with our current rookies expected to take up 13 of that. I could have that number wrong and the 13M is part of that total.
 

QuebecCard

ASFN Addict
Joined
Mar 12, 2021
Posts
5,246
Reaction score
7,482
Location
North of the 49th.
Then you need to let everyone know what it is. Why were the Watt and Hudson hits pushed to next year just for starters?

When Hudson reduced his 2023 salary from $8.25M to $2.05M, it was understood this was part of a post-June 1st release or retirement. Watt's original deal was $28m for two seasons. It was spread out to get Cap relief, leaving some accounting under the Cap. Watt is designated as a Post 6/1 release in 2023 for cap purposes, leaving behind a dead cap of $2.4M for 2023 and $4.8M for 2024. It was either that or an additional $4.8m charged now when we are relatively tight against the Cap.
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
89,206
Reaction score
62,575
I think you're right, and therein lies the problem. We have a plan, but it's a bad one. "Well, we don't want to invest this year BUT we want to be competitive, and we want to be financially stable for next season BUT well we can't ignore this season. Maybe if we do it halfway it'll all work out." And that is a terrible, losing strategy.

Now we learn that the Watt and Hudson hits are pushed off to next season. Dear Lord, WHY?
Seriously… can ANYONE answer this question?
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
46,068
Reaction score
11,605
We have an estimated 18M in cap space with our current rookies expected to take up 13 of that. I could have that number wrong and the 13M is part of that total.

2023 Projected Draft Pool Cap​


Estimated cap dollars necessary to sign upcoming draft picks (not included in the cap figure yet)

Round 1, Pick #3$705,000$6,197,336------$6,902,336$6,902,336
Round 2, Pick #34$705,000$1,064,723------$1,769,722$1,769,722
Round 3, Pick #66$705,000$322,834------$1,027,834$1,027,834
Round 3, Pick #96$705,000$235,049------$940,049$940,049
Round 4, Pick #105$705,000$225,752------$930,752$930,752
Round 5, Pick #168$705,000$74,461------$779,461$74,461
Round 6, Pick #180$705,000$57,181------$762,181$57,181
Round 6, Pick #213$705,000$36,548------$741,548$36,548
Projected Draft Pool:$13,853,883$11,738,883

So it doesn't look like utter fake news to me.
 

RON_IN_OC

https://www.ronevansrealty.com
Joined
Mar 10, 2004
Posts
25,966
Reaction score
32,975
Location
BirdGangThing
We have an estimated 18M in cap space with our current rookies expected to take up 13 of that. I could have that number wrong and the 13M is part of that total.
I think you only count the top 51 contracts, which leaves the Cards with $23 million and that's consistent to what I saw on a twitter account today.
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
46,068
Reaction score
11,605
I think you only count the top 51 contracts, which leaves the Cards with $23 million and that's consistent to what I saw on a twitter account today.
Then the effect number is 9 vs 5, and not the 23 number.
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
89,206
Reaction score
62,575
Quebec answered Watt in the last sentence of his paragraph.
No he didn’t. His reason makes no sense. There’s no reason to keep hurting their cap NEXT year to make space this year. Who are they going to sign with that space? You all keep advocating that this is the young players time to rise… but also we need to make more cap room to sign guys as well?

Makes no sense.
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
46,068
Reaction score
11,605
No he didn’t. His reason makes no sense. There’s no reason to keep hurting their cap NEXT year to make space this year. Who are they going to sign with that space? You all keep advocating that this is the young players time to rise… but also we need to make more cap room to sign guys as well?

Makes no sense.
We have an effective cap number of 9M right now unless we do more deals. (with Robbie Anderson being the most obvious) Should we spend half of that right now on Watt so we don't push it to further years, AND sign quality free agents at the same time?

It is almost like people aren't looking at how bad our situation is right now. We are having to choose between two bad decisions.
 

PJ1

ASFN Icon
Joined
Sep 21, 2002
Posts
11,970
Reaction score
4,862
Location
Nashville TN.
When Hudson reduced his 2023 salary from $8.25M to $2.05M, it was understood this was part of a post-June 1st release or retirement. Watt's original deal was $28m for two seasons. It was spread out to get Cap relief, leaving some accounting under the Cap. Watt is designated as a Post 6/1 release in 2023 for cap purposes, leaving behind a dead cap of $2.4M for 2023 and $4.8M for 2024. It was either that or an additional $4.8m charged now when we are relatively tight against the Cap.
Cap space now for what? Why would a hit be pushed to the future for a team rebuilding?
 
Top