NFL
Rules:
-
No racism or bigotry.
-
Be civil: disagreements happen, but that doesn't provide the right to personally insult others.
-
No spam posting.
-
Shitposts and memes are allowed until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.
-
No trolling.
Instance-wide rules always apply. https://mastodon.world/about
NFL -
[email protected]
NFL Memes [email protected]
Arizona Cardinals [email protected]
Chicago Bears [email protected]
Cincinnati Bengals [email protected]
Cleveland Browns [email protected]
Dallas Cowboys [email protected]
Denver Broncos [email protected]
Detroit Lions [email protected]
Green Bay Packers [email protected]
Houston Texans [email protected]
Indianapolis Colts [email protected]
Kansas City Chiefs [email protected]
Jacksonville Jaguars [email protected]
Los Angeles Chargers [email protected]
Los Angeles Rams [email protected]
Miami Dolphins [email protected]
Minnesota Vikings [email protected]
New England Patriots [email protected]
New York Giants [email protected]
New York Jets [email protected]
Philadelphia Eagles [email protected] - [email protected]
Pittsburgh Steelers [email protected]
San Francisco 49ers [email protected]
Seattle Seahawks [email protected]
Washington Commanders [email protected]
view the rest of the comments
Cash spending is never, under any circumstance a meaningful metric. "Cash spending" is low because they structured past contracts to use future cap space and are not at the point where it can possibly be intelligent to borrow again.
They absolute have been borrowing future cap space for 2 decades. It's the entire reason they were able to stay at the top of the league. They did it intelligently by primarily borrowing with premier players like Brady, McCourty, etc, but they did it, and the bill is still due. The fact that the draft capital over the past 5-10 years that was invested to build the current roster is much lower because of their success is more of the same.
Anyone telling you a sustained contender was built in less than 5 years is lying to you, and leveraging premium assets that just weren't realized by the previous regime. The 2018 Rams Super Bowl losing team, in addition to the massive borrowing and future draft assets, had Donald (10) Gurley (10), Goff(1), Brockers (14) as top 15 picks they used to put together 2 seasons as a contender in a 5 year stretch. The sustained high capital in the draft is how "instant rebuilds" happen. There is no such thing as an actual instant rebuild resulting in sustained contention.
I agree that spend is make believe but kinda in the other direction since there’s always a way to structure a deal that fits into the cap. Either way, Kraft has said money spend is not an issue so unless you have a reference to the contrary, I can’t take that seriously.
It's complete noise.
Not spending more now is because spending more now is insanely bad strategy with no redeeming qualities for a rebuilding team in literally all scenarios. You don't spend future cap until you're already ready to contend and your borrowing is to get over the hump.
I think the redeeming quality is getting a known good player that can put points on the board. Again, it’s not “future cap”. We’re not strapped for cash by any measure unless you have something that says to contrary.
Literally everything you spend hits the cap. Every penny you spend* that doesn't hit this year's salary cap is future cap space, by definition.
Borrowing to win 10 games instead of 6 makes it literally impossible that you aren't a dogshit GM. Any sports personality who even uses the words "real cash spending" is telling you conclusively they know absolutely nothing about how building a team works. It's a nonsense imaginary number that doesn't mean anything (and doesn't include anything incentive based because of when it's calculated, making it even more idiotic to ever bring up in a discussion ever).
*except specific veteran minimum contracts, which count as a slightly lower number to keep the veteran minimum from costing guys jobs.
Not really. There are ways to wiggle around with bonuses and other financial tricks to sneak past cap. All that aside, you've said that we've cursed our future selves with past signings to which I literally cannot find on any cap statement anywhere. We've even had the coach saying we spend low and the owner explicitly stating that money is not a problem. Can you show me any source anywhere that indicates that the Pats are in a financial situation that makes them uncompetitive for offensive players in free agency? Are you perhaps just making a generic statement that we shouldn't be competitive in free agency because it costs money? If so, that's a weird one when it's been proven that we have $100m less on the books than the Ravens.
All of those tricks change timing. None of them prevent the money from hitting the salary cap eventually. Excluding the veteran exception I mentioned last post, everything you spend hits the cap at some point.
You’ve yet to point to anything that indicates we’re at risk of being non-compliant with the cap. I’ve never said “blow the whole cap” but have really just emphasized that we needed something, anything to act as a kickstart on offense. It’s just a flat out GM failure to build this team without a single pro bowler.
I never claimed anything about being non compliant with the cap. I said money you waste now is money you can't spend later.
The fact that you think the Pro Bowl means something is as damning as thinking cash spending means anything. You're not qualified to have the most casual discussion about football. You don't even have a surface level understanding of the basics of how the league works.
Okay, thanks for not making a meaningful point and just deciding to insult me. Turns out my POV is what the organization cares about, rather than accepting a mediocre team like you think we should.
You didn't make a meaningful point a single time at any point. You parroted radio idiots whose literal entire job is to prove how stupid they are to create drama.
The combination of "cash spending" and referencing the Pro Bowl, in and of itself, is proof that it is not possible to have even a surface level conversation about the sport. It's like debating science with a flat earther. It can't be done and it's a waste of everyone's time. There's no possibility of intelligence underneath.
They pulled the trigger to hire Mayo, because he's special, not fire Bill.
All I said was that we needed to be more aggressive and get some sort of good player to anchor a team around and you made up the rest, insinuating that we were strapped for cash or that a 2-year deal would somehow annihilate the far future. You’re out of your mind to somehow forgive the dogshit team building that has happened. Best of luck to you though since you wanna keep feeling really smart but making up shit.
We have several very good players. Spending meaningful future money this year is full on deranged dumpster fire horseshit that cannot be a valid approach for a team mid-rebuild.
"No pro bowlers" as an argument automatically disqualifies the possibility that you're capable of discussion. So does "cash spending". Each, individually, proves beyond the possibility of doubt that you have no idea how anything works. Together they're even worse.
You really don’t know how to read. Just quit if you really need to mischaracterize everything and can’t see the value of having any good players.
The pro bowl is not a way to evaluate if a team has good players.
Spending future money to have good players now is literally unconditionally not a legitimate approach to rebuilding.
It’s not perfect but when’s the last time a successful team in the postseason had ZERO pro bowl nominees. It’s just another indicator that this lineup has fallen into disrepair (and that’s not ‘cause of their historically frugal spending…)
I’ve literally never disagreed with you that wasteful spending is dumb but not every player is getting a 10-year Mahomes contract. You’re more likely to see a 2-3 year contract for a wideout that works perfectly with the ample cap during that window.
And to say pursuing a short-term veteran is never a solution to performance struggles is actually hilarious since it’s historically worked for a number of teams to get into the postseason and even win the Super Bowl.