What would a future be without Kyler?

Chris_Sanders

Super Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
32,339
Reaction score
16,123
Location
Scottsdale, Az
No, you've harped that they can't spend money like the big boys because they don't have the cash. That isn't this. This is them not even deigning to spend to the mean, to compete with mid-level teams. This is bottom of the barrel bush league lack of effort or expenditure. This is amateur hour.

Sort of but more of a mixture of both things. Everything about this off season seems to indicate a lack of liquidity and on hand cash.

There were plenty of ways they could have made a lot of cap space and then strengthened the team but they just didn't do it. It would have been expensive but that's how other teams manage the cap.

They could have signed Kyler early and had everyone fired up for the off season but they didn't do it. Instead they are waiting as late as possible to extend him.

Those two things say Michael doesn't have the cash.

Now sprinkle in a healthy dose of "10 wins is good enough" and now you have an owner who can spend as little as possible to get the base result he wants.
 

Stout

Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Posts
30,910
Reaction score
8,664
Location
Pittsburgh, PA--Enemy territory!
Sort of but more of a mixture of both things. Everything about this off season seems to indicate a lack of liquidity and on hand cash.

There were plenty of ways they could have made a lot of cap space and then strengthened the team but they just didn't do it. It would have been expensive but that's how other teams manage the cap.

They could have signed Kyler early and had everyone fired up for the off season but they didn't do it. Instead they are waiting as late as possible to extend him.

Those two things say Michael doesn't have the cash.

Now sprinkle in a healthy dose of "10 wins is good enough" and now you have an owner who can spend as little as possible to get the base result he wants.
If this is true, if we can't even break past the top THIRTY of spending in the league, the Bidwills need to be gone yesterday. Unacceptable.
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
41,249
Reaction score
4,155
Sort of but more of a mixture of both things. Everything about this off season seems to indicate a lack of liquidity and on hand cash.

There were plenty of ways they could have made a lot of cap space and then strengthened the team but they just didn't do it. It would have been expensive but that's how other teams manage the cap.

They could have signed Kyler early and had everyone fired up for the off season but they didn't do it. Instead they are waiting as late as possible to extend him.

Those two things say Michael doesn't have the cash.

Now sprinkle in a healthy dose of "10 wins is good enough" and now you have an owner who can spend as little as possible to get the base result he wants.

If this is true, if we can't even break past the top THIRTY of spending in the league, the Bidwills need to be gone yesterday. Unacceptable.
It would make sense as to why so many teams wait until August/Sept. They need the TV money in hand first.
 

Chris_Sanders

Super Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2002
Posts
32,339
Reaction score
16,123
Location
Scottsdale, Az
This last weekend I was in OC and we got on a plane and Derrick Hall and his family was there. He was very nice but it struck me that:

#1 the CEO of the Dbacks just decided that he would fly his family on a discount airline and not pay the $40 a person to get on first.

#2 in the first third of the season he was like "vacation time".

We care way more than they do...
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
41,249
Reaction score
4,155
The ironic part about all of this, there is a pretty direct correlation between how much you spend, and how many fans your team has. The more you spend, the more fans are drawn to your team, the more fans spend, etc. ultimately making your franchise more valuable and able to spend more...
 

Syracusecards

DA's pass went that way
Joined
Oct 27, 2004
Posts
3,208
Reaction score
2,117
The ironic part about all of this, there is a pretty direct correlation between how much you spend, and how many fans your team has. The more you spend, the more fans are drawn to your team, the more fans spend, etc. ultimately making your franchise more valuable and able to spend more...
Absolutely. This happens from grade school on. The rich kid has all the “friends”. People are drawn to people who have everything.
 

daves

Keepin' it real!
Supporting Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2003
Posts
2,650
Reaction score
4,155
Location
Orange County, CA
SAME. OLD. CARDS.

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

"But Michael is different!!"

Pathetic.

If you can’t compete with the money in the NFL, get out of the game.

Guys like Bidwill and Kendrick are an absolute curse to a town. They don't even try to compete.
Last season the Cardinals were 19th in Active Cash Spending, while the Rams were 26th. :shrug:

With the cap rules, a team can spend way over the cap one year via bonuses, but then must spend under the cap in future seasons since bonuses already paid out are counting against the cap. In the long run, it all evens out, unless a team actually pockets money rather than spending up to the cap maximum - which the Cardinals have not done.

Assuming the Cardinals give Murray a new contract with a huge bonus this offseason, they'll probably jump to at least in the top 10, and possibly top 5 in Active Cash Spending for this season.

...dave
 
Last edited:

Stout

Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Posts
30,910
Reaction score
8,664
Location
Pittsburgh, PA--Enemy territory!
Last season the Cardinals were 19th in Active Cash Spending, while the Rams were 26th. :shrug:

With the cap rules, a team can spend way over the cap one year via bonuses, but then must spend under the cap in future seasons since bonuses already paid out are counting against the cap. In the long run, it all evens out, unless a team actually pockets money rather than spending up to the cap maximum - which the Cardinals have not done.

Assuming the Cardinals give Murray a new contract with a huge bonus this offseason, they'll probably jump to at least in the top 10, and possibly top 5 in Active Cash Spending for this season.

...dave
Absolutely incorrect. Teams consistently are in cap hell, then kick the can down the road for years and years through cunning contract re-structures. In the long run, it very much doesn't even out. Reference this years Saints.

Granted, the KM contract will change things a bit for our spending this season. Problem is, we're trying to bolster the team around him, and not spending in crucial areas is going to cost us more than actually spending the cash would've.
 

daves

Keepin' it real!
Supporting Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2003
Posts
2,650
Reaction score
4,155
Location
Orange County, CA
Last season the Cardinals were 19th in Active Cash Spending, while the Rams were 26th. :shrug:

With the cap rules, a team can spend way over the cap one year via bonuses, but then must spend under the cap in future seasons since bonuses already paid out are counting against the cap. In the long run, it all evens out, unless a team actually pockets money rather than spending up to the cap maximum - which the Cardinals have not done.

Assuming the Cardinals give Murray a new contract with a huge bonus this offseason, they'll probably jump to at least in the top 10, and possibly top 5 in Active Cash Spending for this season.

Absolutely incorrect. Teams consistently are in cap hell, then kick the can down the road for years and years through cunning contract re-structures. In the long run, it very much doesn't even out. Reference this years Saints.
I shouldn't have said that a team could spend way over the cap "one year", meant to say "for a short time". But the point remains... over the long run, it has to balance out. There's no way to perpetually spend over the cap.

Over the last 10 years, the Saints were ranked 19th, 20th, 20th, 14th, 24th, 21st, 7th, 5th, 15th, and 4th in Active Cash Spending. Average? 14.9 - barely above the middle of the pack.

Over the same period, the Cardinals were ranked 24th, 8th, 22nd, 21st, 15th, 30th, 5th, 21st, 19th, and 28th. Average: 19.3, barely below the middle of the pack.

Add in Murray's upcoming contract with, say, $60M paid out this season, and they'll be 8th instead of 28th, bringing their 10-year average ranking to 17.3.
Granted, the KM contract will change things a bit for our spending this season. Problem is, we're trying to bolster the team around him, and not spending in crucial areas is going to cost us more than actually spending the cash would've.
Yep, would be nice to load up and fill the remaining holes to make a run for a couple years while many of the pieces are in place including a young QB. Somehow the Rams loaded up last year while being 26th in Active Cash Spending at the beginning of the season. :shrug:

...dave
 

Brian in Mesa

I Want To Believe
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
63,569
Reaction score
10,016
Location
The Dark Side
Our best seasons in AZ were with guys who were nothing like Kyler (tall, could stand in the pocket...) so I think we'd be just fine. Always thought this team was built more for just plugging in the next journeyman QB rather than trying to find the next young flashy guy.
 

Latest posts

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
473,678
Posts
4,761,314
Members
6,150
Latest member
Caseyslayer
Top