What would a future be without Kyler?

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
45,659
Reaction score
10,853
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
4,175
Reaction score
4,180
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
3,308
Reaction score
6,383
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
37,902
Reaction score
20,494
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
3,308
Reaction score
6,383
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

Advocatus Diaboli
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
70,443
Reaction score
20,923
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.
 

DVontel

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 28, 2015
Posts
12,358
Reaction score
21,037
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.
What does this even mean?
 

Brian in Mesa

Advocatus Diaboli
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
70,443
Reaction score
20,923
Location
The Dark Side
What does this even mean?
A. We have a long history of sucking at finding good young QB talent in the draft
B. Our best years were with older journeyman type QB's (Warner, Palmer)
C. No going through the struggling early development years. You get a more finished product with a vet.
D. You can get to and win a Super Bowl with a journeyman QB (Example: Trent Dilfer)
 

kerouac9

Klowned by Keim
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Posts
36,521
Reaction score
25,968
Location
Gilbert, AZ
A. We have a long history of sucking at finding good young QB talent in the draft
B. Our best years were with older journeyman type QB's (Warner, Palmer)
C. No going through the struggling early development years. You get a more finished product with a vet.
D. You can get to and win a Super Bowl with a journeyman QB (Example: Trent Dilfer)
Fun fact: that was 25 years ago.

I think it’s time to update your example or question your premise.

Calling two-time MVP Kurt Warner and former #1 overall pick and 2x Pro Bowler Carson Palmer journeymen is also pretty rich.
 

DVontel

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 28, 2015
Posts
12,358
Reaction score
21,037
A. We have a long history of sucking at finding good young QB talent in the draft
Right, so this means this franchise should never draft a potential franchise QB that could provide us 10+ years of good play instead of just 3.
B. Our best years were with older journeyman type QB's (Warner, Palmer)
Two time MVP Kurt Warner and #1 overall pick, All Pro, and 3x Pro Bowler Carson Palmer are "journeyman". Your definition of journeyman is a unique one, I'll say that.
C. No going through the struggling early development years. You get a more finished product with a vet.
I'm pretty sure both Kurt and Carson struggled early on here. Also, why wasn't this the case for Sam Bradford?
D. You can get to and win a Super Bowl with a journeyman QB (Example: Trent Dilfer)
Right, because what happened 22 years ago in a completely different era of football should be the rule, not the exception. Lets also construct one of the best defenses of all time cause I know you're confident in Steve Keim drafting good talent to do it.




Good Lord.
 

Brian in Mesa

Advocatus Diaboli
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
70,443
Reaction score
20,923
Location
The Dark Side
Fun fact: that was 25 years ago.

I think it’s time to update your example or question your premise.

Calling two-time MVP Kurt Warner and former #1 overall pick and 2x Pro Bowler Carson Palmer journeymen is also pretty rich.
By definition, a journeyman is a trained worker who goes on to work for someone else. In QB speak it is a player who plays for multiple teams.

Warner:
You must be registered for see images attach

Palmer:
You must be registered for see images attach


BTW: Who won the last couple of Super Bowls?

Teams with older QB's playing for different teams than they were drafted by? Tom Brady, Matt Stafford...
 

kerouac9

Klowned by Keim
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Posts
36,521
Reaction score
25,968
Location
Gilbert, AZ
By definition, a journeyman is a trained worker who goes on to work for someone else. In QB speak it is a player who plays for multiple teams.

Warner:
You must be registered for see images attach

Palmer:
You must be registered for see images attach


BTW: Who won the last couple of Super Bowls?

Teams with older QB's playing for different teams than they were drafted by? Tom Brady, Matt Stafford...
If Tom Brady and Matt Stafford are your definition of Journeyman QBs we have no common ground to land on.

The term journeyman replies to a level of skill in traditional trades or guilds. Apprentice, journeyman, master.

Cmon bro.
 

dreamcastrocks

Chopped Liver Moderator
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2005
Posts
45,659
Reaction score
10,853
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.
Um, our worst seasons were just like that too. We have had way more bad seasons, than good.

What a weird take. It was another lazy attempt to throw his height into the mix though...
 

Brian in Mesa

Advocatus Diaboli
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
70,443
Reaction score
20,923
Location
The Dark Side
If Tom Brady and Matt Stafford are your definition of Journeyman QBs we have no common ground to land on.

The term journeyman replies to a level of skill in traditional trades or guilds. Apprentice, journeyman, master.

Cmon bro.
I would not call either of them journeymen since they are only with their second teams, but they do fit the argument of going and grabbing an established vet rather than grooming some flashy young QB and going through the growing pains each time you try that route.
 

Brian in Mesa

Advocatus Diaboli
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
70,443
Reaction score
20,923
Location
The Dark Side
Um, our worst seasons were just like that too. We have had way more bad seasons, than good.

What a weird take. It was another lazy attempt to throw his height into the mix though...
When short QBs start piling up championships height will no longer matter.
 

kerouac9

Klowned by Keim
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Posts
36,521
Reaction score
25,968
Location
Gilbert, AZ
I would not call either of them journeymen since they are only with their second teams, but they do fit the argument of going and grabbing an established vet rather than grooming some flashy young QB and going through the growing pains each time you try that route.
We should have a moratorium on comparing anything to the Tom Brady Experience. Extending your logic you could say the cards should just start stsrting 5th round QBs and we’ll win 8 Super Bowls.

I don’t even like looking at Super Bowl Champs because that’s too narrow a definition of success. Expand it to Conference Championship game participants and it becomes really clear in recent history that you want to draft and develop your guy.
 

Chopper0080

2021 - Prove It
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
26,629
Reaction score
34,716
Location
Colorado
If Tom Brady and Matt Stafford are your definition of Journeyman QBs we have no common ground to land on.

The term journeyman replies to a level of skill in traditional trades or guilds. Apprentice, journeyman, master.

Cmon bro.
If the premise is that our franchise is better suited for a veteran QB in his 30s who knows how to be a pro vs a rookie QB who has to learn those things, I can get that.

I agree with your interpretation of the term journeyman.
 

kerouac9

Klowned by Keim
Joined
Feb 14, 2003
Posts
36,521
Reaction score
25,968
Location
Gilbert, AZ
If the premise is that our franchise is better suited for a veteran QB in his 30s who knows how to be a pro vs a rookie QB who has to learn those things, I can get that.

I agree with your interpretation of the term journeyman.
Preferring veteran quarterbacks is where I’ve landed for a long time, but you can’t just be like “Go get Tom Brady.” The movement we saw at the QB position this season is fairly unprecedented. I would’ve loved to get Ryan Tannehill from Miami and be in Tennessees position, but his ceiling is not as high as Kyler’s (obviously).

I love what Indy is doing, but they probably aren’t competing for a Super Bowl until they are.

Any veteran available on the open market is there for a reason. You just have to accept a higher floor but potentially a lower ceiling, too.

As frustrating as the past three years of the Kyler Murray experience have been, I’d that have that than be a Vikings fan with Cousins, TBH.
 
Top