Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

salary cap situation for 2013
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Oakland Raiders
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
TiberiusRising


Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 9157
PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 12:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

macklemore wrote:
BlackPrestige92 wrote:
macklemore wrote:
holyghost wrote:
It's crazy that in 6 players who do next to nothing in making this team any better - Tyvon, Huff, McClain, Kelly, Brisiel, Bey, - we have about half of our cap paid out to them.


If I'm McKenzie I'm giving Brisiel and Branch another chance. Releasing Kelly, McClain and Bey. Try to get Palmer, McFadden and Huff to restructure. Re-sign Veldheer and Houston before their value raises, then go after the rest of the FA's we have and try to find some help on defensive line in FA.

This


I might keep McClain around if we go to a 3-4 defense though, but I don't know what his attitude is actually like at the facility. I just don't like the idea of giving up on a 40 million dollar investment without first putting him in a position to succeed, most of us knew McClain was too big and slow to play MLB in a 4-3. If I knew what actually went down with him at practice I would probably have a different opinion though.


Honestly I dont think they are going to part ways with McClain without trading him. He will not be cut outright. They would have already done that if that's the route they were going to take.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dante9876


Joined: 23 Dec 2008
Posts: 22276
PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 3:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BigMike1b wrote:
early43 wrote:
dante9876 wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
La_Vader wrote:
zone blocking is stpid


Marshawn lynch sure would disagree


Lynch dont play here.


Alfred Morris concurs with BP.


And Arian Foster


And none of those guys play here. And two of them play for guys who darn near invented the ZBS.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dante9876


Joined: 23 Dec 2008
Posts: 22276
PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 3:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BigMike1b wrote:
early43 wrote:
dante9876 wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
La_Vader wrote:
zone blocking is stpid


Marshawn lynch sure would disagree


Lynch dont play here.


Alfred Morris concurs with BP.


And Arian Foster


And none of those guys play here. And two of them play for guys who darn near invented the ZBS.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Raidin


Joined: 05 Mar 2007
Posts: 5630
Location: Dublin
PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 8:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

dante9876 wrote:
BigMike1b wrote:
early43 wrote:
dante9876 wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
La_Vader wrote:
zone blocking is stpid


Marshawn lynch sure would disagree


Lynch dont play here.


Alfred Morris concurs with BP.


And Arian Foster


And none of those guys play here. And two of them play for guys who darn near invented the ZBS.



What difference does that make?
_________________
raidr4life wrote:
Imagine if EricAllen21 posted better. Just imagine.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big_palooka


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 22834
Location: ATL
PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 8:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

dante9876 wrote:
BigMike1b wrote:
early43 wrote:
dante9876 wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
La_Vader wrote:
zone blocking is stpid


Marshawn lynch sure would disagree


Lynch dont play here.


Alfred Morris concurs with BP.


And Arian Foster


And none of those guys play here. And two of them play for guys who darn near invented the ZBS.


But the comment was ZBS is stupid. The ZBS is awesome and can make RBs look great. Just needs to execute correctly and that takes time.

Seattle was pretty poor on the Oline their first year running it, now Lynch is the #2 RB in football. Houston struggled with it early and then was able to plug and play RBs like Slaton and make him look good.

I don't think I have to point out what Shannahan has done with the scheme.

Point is, it works. It just takes time. It's far from stupid. It requires patience something most in this forum fail to exercise.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TiberiusRising


Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 9157
PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 12:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big_palooka wrote:
dante9876 wrote:
BigMike1b wrote:
early43 wrote:
dante9876 wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
La_Vader wrote:
zone blocking is stpid


Marshawn lynch sure would disagree


Lynch dont play here.


Alfred Morris concurs with BP.


And Arian Foster


And none of those guys play here. And two of them play for guys who darn near invented the ZBS.


But the comment was ZBS is stupid. The ZBS is awesome and can make RBs look great. Just needs to execute correctly and that takes time.

Seattle was pretty poor on the Oline their first year running it, now Lynch is the #2 RB in football. Houston struggled with it early and then was able to plug and play RBs like Slaton and make him look good.

I don't think I have to point out what Shannahan has done with the scheme.

Point is, it works. It just takes time. It's far from stupid. It requires patience something most in this forum fail to exercise.

I agree. Technically ZBS would be "smarter" than PBS.

mekrob is stupid.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dante9876


Joined: 23 Dec 2008
Posts: 22276
PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 12:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big_palooka wrote:
dante9876 wrote:
BigMike1b wrote:
early43 wrote:
dante9876 wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
La_Vader wrote:
zone blocking is stpid


Marshawn lynch sure would disagree


Lynch dont play here.


Alfred Morris concurs with BP.


And Arian Foster


And none of those guys play here. And two of them play for guys who darn near invented the ZBS.


But the comment was ZBS is stupid. The ZBS is awesome and can make RBs look great. Just needs to execute correctly and that takes time.

Seattle was pretty poor on the Oline their first year running it, now Lynch is the #2 RB in football. Houston struggled with it early and then was able to plug and play RBs like Slaton and make him look good.

I don't think I have to point out what Shannahan has done with the scheme.

Point is, it works. It just takes time. It's far from stupid. It requires patience something most in this forum fail to exercise.


I take comments as based on our team. So I read the ZBS is stupid for this team. I agree. Until there is a roster shift and coaching shift(already started) the ZBS is stupid. If the ZBS was something easy to do or easy the teach it would be way more teams doing it and doing it successfully. The two who run it the best are the two who basically invented. Seattle I believe has someone from that old staff to I believe. Im not sure though.

I have no problem with the ZBS if we can get somebody who actually know how to teach it and run it. Also a RB who has the vision and patience the run it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TiberiusRising


Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 9157
PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 1:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Honestly for us I think it was more the RB that caused problems than anything. There were injuries and there is a learning curve. However McFadden made it as hard as he could on the OL and we didnt get 1st downs. Less practice, less confidence, and less results.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
holyghost


Joined: 18 Jan 2007
Posts: 5774
PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

macklemore wrote:
holyghost wrote:
It's crazy that in 6 players who do next to nothing in making this team any better - Tyvon, Huff, McClain, Kelly, Brisiel, Bey, - we have about half of our cap paid out to them.


If I'm McKenzie I'm giving Brisiel and Branch another chance. Releasing Kelly, McClain and Bey. Try to get Palmer, McFadden and Huff to restructure. Re-sign Veldheer and Houston before their value raises, then go after the rest of the FA's we have and try to find some help on defensive line in FA.


Brisiel and Branch are just overpaid no matter how many chances they get. Honestly Mitchell looked to be just as good a player as Branch every chance he got. The defense did not skip one beat without Branch. I don't see it. Not at an absurd 11 mil cap number. He's a 4 mil player with triple that off the cap.

The problem with restructuring, as so many guys suggest so frequently, is that it doesn't tackle salary or cap issues really. It just delays cap issues until the next year, or year after, or so on. If Palmer or Huff aren't 10 or 15 mil against the cap this year, they will just be 12 or 18 mil on the cap the next year. There's no negotiable way to never suffer from a bad contract without outright release. And even then there is a cap hit for that.

Now I believe Palmer may be a temporary necessity. But I know Huff isn't. He didn't even play his position all year, and did it really matter. The D sucked anyway, and still improved late in the year without him at FS. Why anyone really wants him around escapes me.

Last part makes sense. Veldheer and Houston getting new deals is a move that makes sense, because they performed beyond their current contracts BEFORE new ones were hypothetically put forth. That's how you avoid bad deals - by paying guys who get it done, at the level of their performance and not well above in the hopes they ascend to it. Pay them after they get it done.

If it came down to having money for Houston and Veldheer, and that money came from dumping Branch and Huff, should anyone complain? Noone making sense...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dante9876


Joined: 23 Dec 2008
Posts: 22276
PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

holyghost wrote:
macklemore wrote:
holyghost wrote:
It's crazy that in 6 players who do next to nothing in making this team any better - Tyvon, Huff, McClain, Kelly, Brisiel, Bey, - we have about half of our cap paid out to them.


If I'm McKenzie I'm giving Brisiel and Branch another chance. Releasing Kelly, McClain and Bey. Try to get Palmer, McFadden and Huff to restructure. Re-sign Veldheer and Houston before their value raises, then go after the rest of the FA's we have and try to find some help on defensive line in FA.


Brisiel and Branch are just overpaid no matter how many chances they get. Honestly Mitchell looked to be just as good a player as Branch every chance he got. The defense did not skip one beat without Branch. I don't see it. Not at an absurd 11 mil cap number. He's a 4 mil player with triple that off the cap.

The problem with restructuring, as so many guys suggest so frequently, is that it doesn't tackle salary or cap issues really. It just delays cap issues until the next year, or year after, or so on. If Palmer or Huff aren't 10 or 15 mil against the cap this year, they will just be 12 or 18 mil on the cap the next year. There's no negotiable way to never suffer from a bad contract without outright release. And even then there is a cap hit for that.

Now I believe Palmer may be a temporary necessity. But I know Huff isn't. He didn't even play his position all year, and did it really matter. The D sucked anyway, and still improved late in the year without him at FS. Why anyone really wants him around escapes me.

Last part makes sense. Veldheer and Houston getting new deals is a move that makes sense, because they performed beyond their current contracts BEFORE new ones were hypothetically put forth. That's how you avoid bad deals - by paying guys who get it done, at the level of their performance and not well above in the hopes they ascend to it. Pay them after they get it done.

If it came down to having money for Houston and Veldheer, and that money came from dumping Branch and Huff, should anyone complain? Noone making sense...


I would keep Huff before Palmer. But they both should go. Also great post. People say restructure around here alot like the money just disappears. Overpaid contracts and restructures are why Reggie is in this mess. Its time to just cut the dead weight and move on. Its going to hurt for a while but we will be better of for it in the future. I know you cant cut everybody in one offseason but there are moves to be made.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TiberiusRising


Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 9157
PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree, especially on Branch. Wow did he disappoint.

Restructuring though is a good option for many reason's. One of which being the cap hit taken with release. You ease the pain and massage the cap while doing that slowly. Trim out the major fat first. The cap numbers will only be going up and not down. And I cant remember if it is this year or next year where other teams you see out there that are way under the cap will be no longer. They will have to be at a certain level at least that will leave most teams with about the same cap space left each season.

One issue that we have that other teams do not is we had consistantly picked in the top 15 for years before the low salaries in the draft. So the contracts that Russell, DHB, McFadden,McClain had all received were bad deals because of when they happened(pre_CBA) and not what we just decided to pay them. It was pretty much what the market dicatated. Had the current rules been in place we would have no cap issues right now because we have had to move some of these other contracts around to accomadate for this.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Silver&Black88


Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Posts: 34561
Location: Boston, MA
PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 3:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TiberiusRising wrote:
I agree, especially on Branch. Wow did he disappoint.

Restructuring though is a good option for many reason's. One of which being the cap hit taken with release. You ease the pain and massage the cap while doing that slowly. Trim out the major fat first. The cap numbers will only be going up and not down. And I cant remember if it is this year or next year where other teams you see out there that are way under the cap will be no longer. They will have to be at a certain level at least that will leave most teams with about the same cap space left each season.

One issue that we have that other teams do not is we had consistantly picked in the top 15 for years before the low salaries in the draft. So the contracts that Russell, DHB, McFadden,McClain had all received were bad deals because of when they happened(pre_CBA) and not what we just decided to pay them. It was pretty much what the market dicatated. Had the current rules been in place we would have no cap issues right now because we have had to move some of these other contracts around to accomadate for this.


Exactly like I was going to say. Restructuring can help find a way for us to opt out unscathed. Or rather, lessen the punch.

IMO, we should keep Huff and Palmer for one more year then cut our losses. Can't afford to have so many holes created by losing them. Please don't make this Palmer vs Pryor if this gets responded to. kthxbye
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dante9876


Joined: 23 Dec 2008
Posts: 22276
PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 4:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Silver&Black88 wrote:
TiberiusRising wrote:
I agree, especially on Branch. Wow did he disappoint.

Restructuring though is a good option for many reason's. One of which being the cap hit taken with release. You ease the pain and massage the cap while doing that slowly. Trim out the major fat first. The cap numbers will only be going up and not down. And I cant remember if it is this year or next year where other teams you see out there that are way under the cap will be no longer. They will have to be at a certain level at least that will leave most teams with about the same cap space left each season.

One issue that we have that other teams do not is we had consistantly picked in the top 15 for years before the low salaries in the draft. So the contracts that Russell, DHB, McFadden,McClain had all received were bad deals because of when they happened(pre_CBA) and not what we just decided to pay them. It was pretty much what the market dicatated. Had the current rules been in place we would have no cap issues right now because we have had to move some of these other contracts around to accomadate for this.


Exactly like I was going to say. Restructuring can help find a way for us to opt out unscathed. Or rather, lessen the punch.

IMO, we should keep Huff and Palmer for one more year then cut our losses. Can't afford to have so many holes created by losing them. Please don't make this Palmer vs Pryor if this gets responded to. kthxbye


IMO restructure is a tool use by a GM to get under the cap in a certain year. We need to starting getting rid of dead weight. I mean McClain, Kelly, Palmer, McFadden, Bey , and Huff all fit that bill. I would consider restructure of Palmer and Huff if we have to cut the other four and cant trade them. But with how much more Palmer and Huff have left their contracts, restructure contracts will hurt 2 years from now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
holyghost


Joined: 18 Jan 2007
Posts: 5774
PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 4:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I just don't agree with the easing out of the cap as has been suggested. It's a matter of preference for me. It sucks because with the limited draft and cap space last year this team was not able to even cut the fat properly and pull the band aid off so to speak. Even if they wanted, the proper resources were not in place to replace all the guys needing to be removed. So it's as if, even if we wanted to purge this year, it should have been last year. So 1 year of a severe purge became 2 years. Just because our draft was annihilated.

I think it's already been a year, and even if we cut to the bone this year it'll be 2 years like this then. But do we want it to be bled out for 3 or 4 years instead? In the hope and prayer that we somehow become a better team in the meantime?
My problem with bleeding it out is that right now we're a 4-12 team. On a 4-12 team, what fantasy world would the staff be living in if they decide to keep guys like Huff to "lessen the blow"? What blow? We're already the 3rd worst team in football. The absolute worst things that can happen are A. We cut to the bones and don't improve. B. We don't cut to the bone and still don't improve anyway. But because the cuts weren't deep enough, it becomes the same story the year after.

This is what GMs get paid for sometimes.Tough decisions. I really believe the team is not genuinely better with Huff, Branch, Brisiel, Bey, Kelly, nor do I believe it will get better because of them, nor do I believe losing them would make the team worse. So why bother keeping them? Cut em all I say, but I'm not paid to make that decision.

I'd imagine some of those personnel decisions depend on how effectively they can be replaced. Which means it will be gradual, one by one, as the offseason and camp progresses and talent emerges wherever signings or draftees step forward to contribute.
If a safety steps up from amongst our pickups, then a decision like dumping Huff or Branch becomes much easier. If Criner suddenly emerges, dumping Bey becomes a no-brainer. If a team comes knocking on McClain for a 6th rounder, the decision emerges. And so on for the others.. I've said it quite a few times and will repeat. GMing a team and it's personnel is in some ways a fluid process. One change emerges due to another. Navigating that defines how good of a GM you have.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Silver&Black88


Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Posts: 34561
Location: Boston, MA
PostPosted: Tue Jan 08, 2013 4:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dante9876 wrote:
Silver&Black88 wrote:
TiberiusRising wrote:
I agree, especially on Branch. Wow did he disappoint.

Restructuring though is a good option for many reason's. One of which being the cap hit taken with release. You ease the pain and massage the cap while doing that slowly. Trim out the major fat first. The cap numbers will only be going up and not down. And I cant remember if it is this year or next year where other teams you see out there that are way under the cap will be no longer. They will have to be at a certain level at least that will leave most teams with about the same cap space left each season.

One issue that we have that other teams do not is we had consistantly picked in the top 15 for years before the low salaries in the draft. So the contracts that Russell, DHB, McFadden,McClain had all received were bad deals because of when they happened(pre_CBA) and not what we just decided to pay them. It was pretty much what the market dicatated. Had the current rules been in place we would have no cap issues right now because we have had to move some of these other contracts around to accomadate for this.


Exactly like I was going to say. Restructuring can help find a way for us to opt out unscathed. Or rather, lessen the punch.

IMO, we should keep Huff and Palmer for one more year then cut our losses. Can't afford to have so many holes created by losing them. Please don't make this Palmer vs Pryor if this gets responded to. kthxbye


IMO restructure is a tool use by a GM to get under the cap in a certain year. We need to starting getting rid of dead weight. I mean McClain, Kelly, Palmer, McFadden, Bey , and Huff all fit that bill. I would consider restructure of Palmer and Huff if we have to cut the other four and cant trade them. But with how much more Palmer and Huff have left their contracts, restructure contracts will hurt 2 years from now.


Ideally, yes. I completely agree with you. But we are in a unique predicament. I think it's fairly obvious Al Davis did not care about the future and wanted to win before he died. So a lot of the contracts given were out of whack. How many other teams have had to deal with horrible mismanagement at a level this high? I think we're gonna have to do some unorthodox things to fix ourselves
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Oakland Raiders All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 5 of 7

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group