Bucs Owners Feel Great About Their Situation..

[cyberdude557]

It doesnt change the fact that the Bucs have no signing bonus money.

[PewterG@tor]

We traded our premium pick for a YOUNG player. What's the difference?

The reason the Buccaneers are in the situation they are in is BECAUSE they drafted poorly. If you read Joel's comments, he said multiple times that "we must draft well", ergo the previous regime failed in that aspect and it was one of the factors that cost them their jobs.

While there have been quite a few hits and misses over the last few years, the Bucs have nothing on the Vikings.  Adrian Peterson ended a horrible string of 1st round misses for them.  Chad Greenway, Troy Williamson, and Kenechi Udeze make our picks look like All Pros.  I just saw this while watching NFLN the other day and I was shocked how terrible their drafts had been.

[Booker Reese]

Snoop, the good teams do operate on this model - they end up at the cap because they re-sign their players.

The Bucs have chosen a model that's right, but they just don't have the "future" players - or rather, they only have a few future players. That's why the draft matters so much.

Payrolls come in waves in this league unless you are the Redskins (and that hasn't been a winning strategy). Teams that draft well end up with high payrolls for a time when these players get ready to hit free agency, and then the payrolls collapse when these players get old and are cut in favor of young players.

The Bucs are at a stage where their older players had hit the back-end of deals or were cut but their promising players - Ruud, Joseph, Gaines, Tanard Jackson - are still on relatively modest rookie salaries. Plus, nothing helps a payroll stay low like the lack of a proven veteran at QB.

[The Q]

I will be happy when Joel and his family SELL THE BUCS....

...but on the other hand, there is no reason for money to sit unused.

It is this type of thinking that has the entire country in an economic mess. ....snip

If a player is available that can upgrade the team, you try to get him. But if your coaching staff/FO thinks none of the available players are really upgrades, then you don't just spend money to spend money.

First, are you inferring the current economic situation being analogous to a football team spending alloted cap room? Maybe someone should have Bruce Allen give Timothy Geithner a call!

Second,  there is no reason to waste money, I think we can agree. Where I do not agree, is that having a large amount of extra cash (more than anyone else in the NFL) for a future which we cannot predict, makes this team better. What if we NEVER draft guys who make the pro bowl? Do we just continue to spend as little as possible over the next 5 years and continue to say there is no reason to sign free agents as it could jeopardize the signing of someone in the future? From what I understand the scouting department has remained untouched, so this is a distinct possibility.

I think we need to balance this thinking. We have a TON of holes on this team and there is no explanation as why we should spend less than most other teams year after year without addressing those holes with money which we have available.

[John Galt?]

...but on the other hand, there is no reason for money to sit unused.

It is this type of thinking that has the entire country in an economic mess. ....snip

If a player is available that can upgrade the team, you try to get him. But if your coaching staff/FO thinks none of the available players are really upgrades, then you don't just spend money to spend money.

First, are you inferring the current economic situation being analogous to a football team spending alloted cap room? Maybe someone should have Bruce Allen give Timothy Geithner a call!

Yes. Just because you have equity in your house that you can borrow against doesn't mean you should just for frivolous purchases.

It is "a penny saved is a penny earned" not "a penny borrowed and spent is a penny earned".

Second,� there is no reason to waste money, I think we can agree. Where I do not agree, is that having a large amount of extra cash (more than anyone else in the NFL) for a future which we cannot predict, makes this team better. What if we NEVER draft guys who make the pro bowl? Do we just continue to spend as little as possible over the next 5 years and continue to say there is no reason to sign free agents as it could jeopardize the signing of someone in the future? From what I understand the scouting department has remained untouched, so this is a distinct possibility.

I don't see the connection between drafting well and FA spending. Who is saying " there is no reason to sign free agents as it could jeopardize the signing of someone in the future"?  All I've heard is "we need to draft better" which is true. I've not heard anyone say that FA deals jeopardize drafting.  You spend on FA to improve the team. If no one is available that can improve the team, no need to spend.

I think we need to balance this thinking. We have a TON of holes on this team and there is no explanation as why we should spend less than most other teams year after year without addressing those holes with money which we have available.

You make a false assumption. We started FA with OVER $65 million in cap space, we now have over $30 million in cap space, that means we added $35 million in new contracts which is no where near "less than most teams". If anything we have been one of the busier teams this FA. We added the best available RB, the best available kicker, re-signed the best available safety, and traded for the best TE under 30, added a decent LB, re-signed our QB, tendered our LT, and re-signed the best available WR before FA started. Pretty sure more than 16 teams did less.

We started with needs at DT, CB, QB, DE, RB, WR, and LB.  We addressed RB, WR (to some extent), LB, maybe QB. We took a shot at DT and missed. The available FAs at DE, WR, and QB were pathetic and not upgrades over what we currently have, and the available talent at CB, DT was mediocre or overpriced.

Last year we had a HUGE need at WR and we had lots of cap room. Does that mean we should have signed Javon Walker for $55 million or Donte Stallworth for $35 million? How would they have upgraded the team?

Who did we not try to get that would have improved the team? A middle aged TJ Houshmanzadeh? A Tank Johnson that has been let go by 2 teams and can't even sniff the starting lineup at Dallas? A bunch of 3rd string WRs that are closer to 4th stringers in talent?

If you are out of bread and you have the money to buy bread but all the store has is moldy week old bread, do you buy it anyway? Or do you wait until more fresh bread
comes in?

[DailyRich68]

Last year we had a HUGE need at WR and we had lots of cap room. Does that mean we should have signed Javon Walker for $55 million or Donte Stallworth for $35 million? How would they have upgraded the team?

Because I've heard of them! 

[mjs020294]

Yep they feel that good about their sitaution they have been courting possible bidders for the franchsie.

[ufojoe]

If you are out of bread and you have the money to buy bread but all the store has is moldy week old bread, do you buy it anyway? Or do you wait until more fresh bread
comes in?

Depends on how hungry I am.

[king_frog]

If you are out of bread and you have the money to buy bread but all the store has is moldy week old bread, do you buy it anyway? Or do you wait until more fresh bread
comes in?

Depends on how hungry I am.

Now that is funny !!

[bradentonian]

If you are out of bread and you have the money to buy bread but all the store has is moldy week old bread, do you buy it anyway? Or do you wait until more fresh bread
comes in?

Depends on how hungry I am.

Well-played

Yes. Just because you have equity in your house that you can borrow against doesn't mean you should just for frivolous purchases.

It is "a penny saved is a penny earned" not "a penny borrowed and spent is a penny earned".

I was jesting about your analogy, but I will say drawing correlations between the NFL salary cap and the collapse of the world economy is a stretch, i guess we disagree on this.

I don't see the connection between drafting well and FA spending. Who is saying " there is no reason to sign free agents as it could jeopardize the signing of someone in the future"?  All I've heard is "we need to draft better" which is true. I've not heard anyone say that FA deals jeopardize drafting.  You spend on FA to improve the team. If no one is available that can improve the team, no need to spend.

The only reason to not be at the cap is to keep your teams ability to sign players when needed. IE, McKown becomes a stud next year, and demands a big contract, we are at the cap floor so its no problem for us to pay him. My issue is that we shouldn't be at the cap floor. Yes, its possible that through the draft and with our current players we are developing we will need all the extra money to resign them but its also just as likely this will not happen. Then basically, we have been sitting on XY million dollars (the distance between the cap floor and the cap) every year that could have gone to Free Agents that would help our team each of these years.

You make a false assumption. We started FA with OVER $65 million in cap space, we now have over $30 million in cap space, that means we added $35 million in new contracts which is no where near "less than most teams". If anything we have been one of the busier teams this FA. We added the best available RB, the best available kicker, re-signed the best available safety, and traded for the best TE under 30, added a decent LB, re-signed our QB, tendered our LT, and re-signed the best available WR before FA started. Pretty sure more than 16 teams did less.

Yes we have picked up some free agents and resigned some people this year, but I would argue we had  to make the salary cap floor the NFL has mandated. Are we above the salary cap floor? Is there a team in the NFL with a lower payroll?

[John Galt?]

Yes we have picked up some free agents and resigned some people this year, but I would argue we had  to make the salary cap floor the NFL has mandated. Are we above the salary cap floor? Is there a team in the NFL with a lower payroll?

They don't have to hit the cap floor until the start of the season. And even if they don't the penalty is that the difference between the cap floor and their cap number is divided by 52 and a check given to the players on the roster. (e.g. if a team is $10 million under the cap minimum, that team has to give every player on the roster $192,000 bonus.)

They have 4 months to hit the cap floor (which they have already hit BTW) so your theory that they signed the Best available RB, best available K, best available WR, etc. just to hit the floor doesn't hold water. They only needed to spend about $18 mill to hit the floor so just resigning Bryant, McCown, Tendering Penn and the draftees would have done it.

Why did they spend $35 million if they only needed to spend $18 mill??

Yes we have picked up some free agents and resigned some people this year, but I would argue we had� to make the salary cap floor the NFL has mandated. Are we above the salary cap floor? Is there a team in the NFL with a lower payroll?

Why did they spend $35 million if they only needed to spend $18 mill??

Per March 13 PR report article: ( I would be happy if I am wrong but I do not know where your getting your numbers)
The Bucs reached the salary cap floor with the signings of Jeremy Stevens and Jermaine Phillips. Edit, and signed Crowell, so thats another reported 3 mill.
http://pewterreport.com/articles/view/5309