Jump to content



Recent headlines from The Baltimore Sun

Photo
- - - - -

How is it the Ravens are Always Cap Poor


  • Please log in to reply
79 replies to this topic

#1 Underseige

Underseige

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,988 posts

Posted 01 April 2012 - 07:27 AM

Every year you hear the Ravens have little to spend on FA's. Yet teams like the Redskins spend millions every year on Vets and loose. Every year you see the Skins dip into the market, sign 3 big money players and yet they can continue to do it. It is not only the skins but other teams as well. Is it because the Ravens pay their players, all of them fairly.

#2 AntiMoon

AntiMoon

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9,074 posts

Posted 01 April 2012 - 10:07 AM

It's because the Ravens draft well and have to spend big money to keep. Redskins draft poorly or trade their picks. Now with Orakpo and Kerrigan and RG3 and others soon they will be spending their cap space on their own players.
Only 48 days til hockey season.
Only 31 days til football season.

#3 AVATAR

AVATAR

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 746 posts

Posted 01 April 2012 - 10:25 AM

And it's also because there players become greedy self centered fan favorites. Ray Lewis in particular should have never be granted the leverage he now has. Reed's contract isn't as his is in it's last contract year. Ray should have been given an option to put on another uniform as opposed to holding the purse strings hostage. Aging players need a reality check instead of whopping one. Some of the best players had to be forced out for the sake of the team. Examples (Montana, Unitas). For this reason I'd give the Ravens FO a vote of no-confidence.
Sure they will find bargains in FA but they will always be an aging player away from the shoe dropping in a crucial game. Repeat performances wear thin quickly.
Rice wants big money. Give it to him with clauses that help the team in case of injury. Flacco's alittle different as they will continue to build around him. I'd sign him first and then Webb. Rice's replacement can be drafted this year. And if you want names I'd gladly state them.

#4 AntiMoon

AntiMoon

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9,074 posts

Posted 01 April 2012 - 10:30 AM

You call them greedy but when you play a brutal sport and you're the best at your position and in some cases the best player in the sport you get what you can. NFL contracts are full of out clauses. To rip any off these guys for getting paid is ludicrous.
Only 48 days til hockey season.
Only 31 days til football season.

#5 OriginalColtsFan

OriginalColtsFan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 18,390 posts

Posted 01 April 2012 - 10:58 AM

And it's also because there players become greedy self centered fan favorites. Ray Lewis in particular should have never be granted the leverage he now has. Reed's contract isn't as his is in it's last contract year. Ray should have been given an option to put on another uniform as opposed to holding the purse strings hostage. Aging players need a reality check instead of whopping one. Some of the best players had to be forced out for the sake of the team. Examples (Montana, Unitas). For this reason I'd give the Ravens FO a vote of no-confidence.
Sure they will find bargains in FA but they will always be an aging player away from the shoe dropping in a crucial game. Repeat performances wear thin quickly.
Rice wants big money. Give it to him with clauses that help the team in case of injury. Flacco's alittle different as they will continue to build around him. I'd sign him first and then Webb. Rice's replacement can be drafted this year. And if you want names I'd gladly state them.

Tough, gritty post. But pretty much on the mark. (Heck, even Preston said the Ravens should have pulled the contract for Lewis off the table after he tried the free agent market and got no takers. But the Ravens chose to keep that fat contract on the table, and now they're paying the price.)

And I'll add another log on the fire: Vonta Leach. For YEARS, the Ravens prided themselves on NOT overpaying FBs, proving, year after year, that blocking FBs were a dime a dozen. Then, all of a sudden, they change direction, and pay this guy $4M/year. That's critical money that should have been earmarked for the O-line, NOT a blocking FB. And the Texans running game certainly didn't skip a beat after losing the "ALL PRO FB VONTA LEACH". And I could not care less how popular he is, or how many pro bowls he goes to -- $4M/year for a blocking FB is a waste of precious cap space, especially when there are other much more pressing needs.

(My [strong] opinion, but still, only an opinion nonetheless).

Peace.

#6 AVATAR

AVATAR

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 746 posts

Posted 01 April 2012 - 01:26 PM

You call them greedy but when you play a brutal sport and you're the best at your position and in some cases the best player in the sport you get what you can. NFL contracts are full of out clauses. To rip any off these guys for getting paid is ludicrous.

Yep, Greedy. I don't suppose a gun was placed at their heads to play a kids game. I don't condone under paying them either. But I'd say a player that overly maximizes there worth for the sake of it would be called greedy. I never said to under pay a player but that's what health insurance is for dude. If the teams/nfl/players union got smart and added long term health insurance as partial payment for your beloved players would that also be ludicrous. I think not. Other professions as well. Just forward thinking at it's best. This is a choices that could work much better then having to pay for non-production for active roster players that have been injured on the job. Call it workman's comp for professional sports. It could work for all/any aspects of a sport. If you go by body part and temp total calculation or life long. All parties are sustained via loss. But the at-will clause would apply. The player plays at will the teams exercises that option for potential loss at will. Who loses ?

#7 classea5

classea5

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 366 posts

Posted 01 April 2012 - 01:28 PM

Texans running game didn't change but I will argue ours sure did. I think you are really going to see something special this season after Vonta and Rice gain more confidence and trust.

#8 AVATAR

AVATAR

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 746 posts

Posted 01 April 2012 - 01:36 PM

Tough, gritty post. But pretty much on the mark. (Heck, even Preston said the Ravens should have pulled the contract for Lewis off the table after he tried the free agent market and got no takers. But the Ravens chose to keep that fat contract on the table, and now they're paying the price.)

And I'll add another log on the fire: Vonta Leach. For YEARS, the Ravens prided themselves on NOT overpaying FBs, proving, year after year, that blocking FBs were a dime a dozen. Then, all of a sudden, they change direction, and pay this guy $4M/year. That's critical money that should have been earmarked for the O-line, NOT a blocking FB. And the Texans running game certainly didn't skip a beat after losing the "ALL PRO FB VONTA LEACH". And I could not care less how popular he is, or how many pro bowls he goes to -- $4M/year for a blocking FB is a waste of precious cap space, especially when there are other much more pressing needs.

(My [strong] opinion, but still, only an opinion nonetheless).

Peace.

Exactly. Overpaying has become the norm. (for Ravens MO)
Purple cool-aid was never my forte'. I see vast errors in there methods. Which cost down the home stretch. The media breaks the same storyline annually. "The Ravens need to address the Wide-receiver, KR, and Tackle/guard yearly". I hear an echo..............


Guess what? They don't have no gwope....................Money......
Cause they keep kissin old player asts...................lol

If you want to keep payin Reed and Ray make them coaches or move the hell on..........................:rolleyes:

Be real about it.

#9 AntiMoon

AntiMoon

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9,074 posts

Posted 01 April 2012 - 02:39 PM

Ravens have made the playoffs 4 years running. Only team in the entire league. Must be doing something right. Once you hit the playoffs it's a crap shoot. Every team in the league has holes due to the cap. Ravens will never have a team that doesn't have holes so get used to it. Only fair criticism of Ozzie is his poor drafting of WR's which with T Smith may be coming to an end.
Only 48 days til hockey season.
Only 31 days til football season.

#10 OriginalColtsFan

OriginalColtsFan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 18,390 posts

Posted 01 April 2012 - 02:47 PM

Ravens have made the playoffs 4 years running. Only team in the entire league. Must be doing something right. Once you hit the playoffs it's a crap shoot. Every team in the league has holes due to the cap. Ravens will never have a team that doesn't have holes so get used to it. Only fair criticism of Ozzie is his poor drafting of WR's which with T Smith may be coming to an end.

Hmmmm...4 years in the playoffs, vs. ZERO super bowls in over a decade, despite having some genuine talent...

Yeah...I can see your point. :rolleyes:

#11 AVATAR

AVATAR

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 746 posts

Posted 01 April 2012 - 05:29 PM

Ravens have made the playoffs 4 years running. Only team in the entire league. Must be doing something right. Once you hit the playoffs it's a crap shoot. Every team in the league has holes due to the cap. Ravens will never have a team that doesn't have holes so get used to it. Only fair criticism of Ozzie is his poor drafting of WR's which with T Smith may be coming to an end.

I think your glasses are just a tad bit cloudy on the subject. If Bisciotti has seen the need to promote the youngsters (see latest comments) then he too realizes that cap hell isn't the model to follow to obtain the superbowl win.
I'd love for Reed to get a ring but he has to want that more then me and more then money. Some of the best players/coaches/teams have come up short. The fans only get bragging rights but Reed and co. actually get the diamond jeweled ring, money and bragging rights.
And lastly they also are continuing do somethings wrong. JS:)

#12 Ravens2006

Ravens2006

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 14,389 posts

Posted 01 April 2012 - 07:53 PM

They avoid cap hell because they don't over-commit on future years to try to "win now". They don't have huge surpluses because they spend what it takes to keep their own elite players. That's why they contend every single year that they get even remotely decent / good QB play (2000, 2001, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011; 2003 they had a near record-setting running back picking up where their mediocre / poor QB play did not).

For the want of a select few plays, they very well could have won two Superbowls in the last few years. For the lack of a select few plays, they've fallen short. Using that as justification as to why the front office is somehow doing the wrong thing strikes me as silly. Maybe another "elite" WR would have helped them score a few more TDs. And maybe the lack of an Ed Reed or Ray Lewis or Terrell Suggs would have allowed more TDs on defense. Or maybe the lack of a Vonta Leach would have seen Flacco miss half a season with a torn ACL after getting smeared on a blitz, or maybe Rice only scores 8 TDs last year instead of 15.

It's easy to cherry pick certain players and contracts to make a point if you're going to stick to the mantra that everything short of a ring is a complete failure. Fine. That is the ultimate goal every year. And focusing on a 4 year window when each team basically has a 3% chance of winning it all is pretty safe bet to "being right". Every year there are probably 6 to 8 teams that are / were good enough to win it all... and a handful of key plays win up tipping the scales in January. There's no one magic formula... you just assemble the best overall cast of players you can... and ultimately they decide.
"Matt Wieters is sunshine, unicorns, puppy dogs and the baby Jesus all rolled into one"

#13 AVATAR

AVATAR

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 746 posts

Posted 01 April 2012 - 08:34 PM

They avoid cap hell because they don't over-commit on future years to try to "win now". They don't have huge surpluses because they spend what it takes to keep their own elite players. That's why they contend every single year that they get even remotely decent / good QB play (2000, 2001, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011; 2003 they had a near record-setting running back picking up where their mediocre / poor QB play did not).

For the want of a select few plays, they very well could have won two Superbowls in the last few years. For the lack of a select few plays, they've fallen short. Using that as justification as to why the front office is somehow doing the wrong thing strikes me as silly. Maybe another "elite" WR would have helped them score a few more TDs. And maybe the lack of an Ed Reed or Ray Lewis or Terrell Suggs would have allowed more TDs on defense. Or maybe the lack of a Vonta Leach would have seen Flacco miss half a season with a torn ACL after getting smeared on a blitz, or maybe Rice only scores 8 TDs last year instead of 15.

It's easy to cherry pick certain players and contracts to make a point if you're going to stick to the mantra that everything short of a ring is a complete failure. Fine. That is the ultimate goal every year. And focusing on a 4 year window when each team basically has a 3% chance of winning it all is pretty safe bet to "being right". Every year there are probably 6 to 8 teams that are / were good enough to win it all... and a handful of key plays win up tipping the scales in January. There's no one magic formula... you just assemble the best overall cast of players you can... and ultimately they decide.

Great observations on your part. We may have to agree to disagree. I value everyones opinion. Hindsight is 20/20. Linebacker university's acquisitions just ain't panning out (in key area's). No team is just a player and that's not being implied in my opinion. I have stated yearly that multiple players for suspect position would have benefited the club. You need skilled players to develop a core. Vets benefit the rookie's however you have to cut the cord sometimes. It's interesting that the Ravens don't get value from the loss of there players at the end of there contracts. Why ? Could it be the put themselves in cap hell or maybe they over leverage old folks ? Which one ?

#14 OriginalColtsFan

OriginalColtsFan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 18,390 posts

Posted 02 April 2012 - 06:49 AM

They avoid cap hell because they don't over-commit on future years to try to "win now". They don't have huge surpluses because they spend what it takes to keep their own elite players. That's why they contend every single year that they get even remotely decent / good QB play (2000, 2001, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011; 2003 they had a near record-setting running back picking up where their mediocre / poor QB play did not).

For the want of a select few plays, they very well could have won two Superbowls in the last few years. For the lack of a select few plays, they've fallen short. Using that as justification as to why the front office is somehow doing the wrong thing strikes me as silly. Maybe another "elite" WR would have helped them score a few more TDs. And maybe the lack of an Ed Reed or Ray Lewis or Terrell Suggs would have allowed more TDs on defense. Or maybe the lack of a Vonta Leach would have seen Flacco miss half a season with a torn ACL after getting smeared on a blitz, or maybe Rice only scores 8 TDs last year instead of 15.

It's easy to cherry pick certain players and contracts to make a point if you're going to stick to the mantra that everything short of a ring is a complete failure. Fine. That is the ultimate goal every year. And focusing on a 4 year window when each team basically has a 3% chance of winning it all is pretty safe bet to "being right". Every year there are probably 6 to 8 teams that are / were good enough to win it all... and a handful of key plays win up tipping the scales in January. There's no one magic formula... you just assemble the best overall cast of players you can... and ultimately they decide.

To my way of thinking, when it comes to the Ravens, it's not simply the fact that they fail to win it all, it's HOW they fail to win it all. To put it simply...they never seem to learn from past mistakes. And that's infuriating. So putting aside the issue of over paying some players/hanging on to old players for a moment, let's just look at the whole Cam Cameron issue. It was obvious that Cam Cameron and Joe Flacco did not get along, and that situation was a known factor. But instead of fully supporting their franchise QB, they decide to re-sign Cam Cameron, the constipated OC who's play calling is mired back in some bygone era. So it's yet at least another year of a dysfunctional relationship between the OC and the franchise QB. That's just unacceptable.

And there's also the matter of Rosburg being kept on despite horrible STs results for 4 years running.

#15 Rayvnlewis

Rayvnlewis

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,620 posts

Posted 02 April 2012 - 09:00 AM

I see the inane whine season has started in earnest..

looks to be an active season..

:)

#16 18-87-44-29

18-87-44-29

    Suspended

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,567 posts

Posted 02 April 2012 - 09:09 AM

I'll just be short and sweet. Look @ the 'deal' you gave Not-a. I'll just leave it at that.

#17 Rael

Rael

    Rational member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9,543 posts

Posted 02 April 2012 - 09:25 AM

Wow, you pulled off quite a comic coup there. You managed to make a disparaging version of Ngata's name. Your wit and wisdom know no bounds...
Pessimism is just an ugly word for 'pattern recognition'.

#18 18-87-44-29

18-87-44-29

    Suspended

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,567 posts

Posted 02 April 2012 - 09:32 AM

Wow, you pulled off quite a comic coup there. You managed to make a disparaging version of Ngata's name. Your wit and wisdom know no bounds...

And yet.....you cannot deny my meat of my post.

#19 Ravens2006

Ravens2006

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 14,389 posts

Posted 02 April 2012 - 10:01 AM

To my way of thinking, when it comes to the Ravens, it's not simply the fact that they fail to win it all, it's HOW they fail to win it all. To put it simply...they never seem to learn from past mistakes. And that's infuriating. So putting aside the issue of over paying some players/hanging on to old players for a moment, let's just look at the whole Cam Cameron issue. It was obvious that Cam Cameron and Joe Flacco did not get along, and that situation was a known factor. But instead of fully supporting their franchise QB, they decide to re-sign Cam Cameron, the constipated OC who's play calling is mired back in some bygone era. So it's yet at least another year of a dysfunctional relationship between the OC and the franchise QB. That's just unacceptable.

And there's also the matter of Rosburg being kept on despite horrible STs results for 4 years running.


Personally, I'd have been quite content if they had parted ways with both Rosburg and Cameron. But that's a different issue than the Ravens being "cap poor", not having money to spend on marquee FAs, or certain players being "greedy" and hurting the organization because they won't re-structure their deals.
"Matt Wieters is sunshine, unicorns, puppy dogs and the baby Jesus all rolled into one"

#20 bmore_ken

bmore_ken

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 53,834 posts

Posted 02 April 2012 - 10:20 AM

Every year you hear the Ravens have little to spend on FA's. Yet teams like the Redskins spend millions every year on Vets and loose. Every year you see the Skins dip into the market, sign 3 big money players and yet they can continue to do it. It is not only the skins but other teams as well. Is it because the Ravens pay their players, all of them fairly.


So do I have this right, you'd rather be the Redskins?
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. It has a nice sound to it

Suggs has signed. I've never been so happy to be wrong

Don't blame me, I voted Bob Barr:cool:




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users