Seems to me that top of the market deals make sense when you have a truly dominant player. A Mahomes at QB. A Nick Bosa at defensive end. A Micah Parsons at linebacker. Where teams go wrong is in paying almost as much for those who fall into the next tier. If I were a GM, I'd look to trade guys like Kyler Murray before their rookie deals are up. Then go back to the draft and try again.
One has to accept that there's no way to build a dynasty anymore. The best one can hope is to piece together a team that quickly rises to grab the brass ring before falling back to earth. Ultimately that can best be accomplished by drafting wisely and spending one's salary cap judiciously. And then hoping all the pieces come together at the same time every now and again.
I'm not much on the Rams' model of mortgaging the future for today. They got lucky winning it all last year so maybe with hindsight one could say it was worth it. But that didn't need to happen and a decline soon after was inevitable. Now let's see how long they're stuck in mediocrity with all those highly paid aging stars.
Top of Market contracts are a necessity in some cases - so are rookie deals. Of the priority positions; QB, LT, WR (2x), Edge (2x), CB (2x), plus generational talents at any other position. Clearly, there are no teams that can have 8-10 Top of the Market contracts.
The best teams create a steady stream of approx. half of these premium positions on rookie deals. Trading out of some assets for worthy picks or simply letting some go to free agency, thus receiving some potential compensation from the league is what will need to be done.
As hard as it is to admit, keeping Russ on progressively larger contracts cost the team the ability to keep other stars. The Seahawks simply had to make room in their salary cap. I felt they kept the one player who cost the value of two to four star players. I said all along how mistaken I felt they were.
Having the right blend of rookie deals on these highest costing player positions is the way to thrive going forward. I suspect John Schneider will vividly remember how hand-cuffed this team was and will work to avoid a repeat.
Yesterday morning I was getting ready for work and thinking to myself that we've talked a lot more about our second through fifth round rookies than our number one dude, Mr. Cross (would be a fantastic name for a school Principal). My general thinking is that for a rookie left tackle no news is good news, but it'd still be nice to hear from people who appreciate offensive line play what they think of him so far.
I like the Mr Cross school principal idea...my son's 2nd grade teacher was Mrs. Meany - she was a sweetheart but has a name that conjured up imagination, for certain.
Playing general manager and running numbers can be an enjoyable exercise. I don't like salary caps, as it is to aide billionaires in not over spending. I am in favor of players getting paid what they can. During tomorrow's game there will be a point where all the commercials will drive me crazy. It would be good to be able to keep any player you want on your team. I do think it's fair to have a rookie wage scale but 4 and 5 years is to long considering the average career doesn't last that long. Maybe there is an NFL franchise that looses money, possibly the Commanders or Jags but I doubt it. Every franchise is an ascending assett, and that's where the big bucks lie. The owners deserve that. A tough question to solve.
How long will the incremental top-of-the market continue? They found a way to alter the formula with guaranteed money but the standard that requires a new contract to exceed the current highest isn't sustainable. Eventually they will have to introduce a max-contract concept like the NBA.
The rise of non-QB salaries has altered the rookie QB strategy because a top of market edge rusher or LT approaches the cost of a QB. If the salary cap increases enough then teams can maintain depth but if teams increasingly have to dedicate 40% of their cap to just five players (QB, LT, Edge, CB, WR) the quality of play will diminish. You also have to wonder what these salaries do to team chemistry.
Finally, when we moan about the Seahawks failure to sign a complimentary, high level LCB, we have to consider the implications of Woolen's extension in his fourth year. I guarantee the Seahawks already have Woolen, Cross and Lucas extensions penciled in and will make personel decisions accordingly.
Seems to me that top of the market deals make sense when you have a truly dominant player. A Mahomes at QB. A Nick Bosa at defensive end. A Micah Parsons at linebacker. Where teams go wrong is in paying almost as much for those who fall into the next tier. If I were a GM, I'd look to trade guys like Kyler Murray before their rookie deals are up. Then go back to the draft and try again.
One has to accept that there's no way to build a dynasty anymore. The best one can hope is to piece together a team that quickly rises to grab the brass ring before falling back to earth. Ultimately that can best be accomplished by drafting wisely and spending one's salary cap judiciously. And then hoping all the pieces come together at the same time every now and again.
I'm not much on the Rams' model of mortgaging the future for today. They got lucky winning it all last year so maybe with hindsight one could say it was worth it. But that didn't need to happen and a decline soon after was inevitable. Now let's see how long they're stuck in mediocrity with all those highly paid aging stars.
Top of Market contracts are a necessity in some cases - so are rookie deals. Of the priority positions; QB, LT, WR (2x), Edge (2x), CB (2x), plus generational talents at any other position. Clearly, there are no teams that can have 8-10 Top of the Market contracts.
The best teams create a steady stream of approx. half of these premium positions on rookie deals. Trading out of some assets for worthy picks or simply letting some go to free agency, thus receiving some potential compensation from the league is what will need to be done.
As hard as it is to admit, keeping Russ on progressively larger contracts cost the team the ability to keep other stars. The Seahawks simply had to make room in their salary cap. I felt they kept the one player who cost the value of two to four star players. I said all along how mistaken I felt they were.
Having the right blend of rookie deals on these highest costing player positions is the way to thrive going forward. I suspect John Schneider will vividly remember how hand-cuffed this team was and will work to avoid a repeat.
Yesterday morning I was getting ready for work and thinking to myself that we've talked a lot more about our second through fifth round rookies than our number one dude, Mr. Cross (would be a fantastic name for a school Principal). My general thinking is that for a rookie left tackle no news is good news, but it'd still be nice to hear from people who appreciate offensive line play what they think of him so far.
I like the Mr Cross school principal idea...my son's 2nd grade teacher was Mrs. Meany - she was a sweetheart but has a name that conjured up imagination, for certain.
Mr. Stern was my 5th grade teacher
Playing general manager and running numbers can be an enjoyable exercise. I don't like salary caps, as it is to aide billionaires in not over spending. I am in favor of players getting paid what they can. During tomorrow's game there will be a point where all the commercials will drive me crazy. It would be good to be able to keep any player you want on your team. I do think it's fair to have a rookie wage scale but 4 and 5 years is to long considering the average career doesn't last that long. Maybe there is an NFL franchise that looses money, possibly the Commanders or Jags but I doubt it. Every franchise is an ascending assett, and that's where the big bucks lie. The owners deserve that. A tough question to solve.
How long will the incremental top-of-the market continue? They found a way to alter the formula with guaranteed money but the standard that requires a new contract to exceed the current highest isn't sustainable. Eventually they will have to introduce a max-contract concept like the NBA.
The rise of non-QB salaries has altered the rookie QB strategy because a top of market edge rusher or LT approaches the cost of a QB. If the salary cap increases enough then teams can maintain depth but if teams increasingly have to dedicate 40% of their cap to just five players (QB, LT, Edge, CB, WR) the quality of play will diminish. You also have to wonder what these salaries do to team chemistry.
Finally, when we moan about the Seahawks failure to sign a complimentary, high level LCB, we have to consider the implications of Woolen's extension in his fourth year. I guarantee the Seahawks already have Woolen, Cross and Lucas extensions penciled in and will make personel decisions accordingly.