Thread: Are the Vikings trust worthy? Pat Williams...

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1090660

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1090617

Originally Posted by "Caine" #1090598

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1090583

Thanks for the read my friend.

...If I've learned one thing about the game, teams that are successful seem to have one thing in common.......Everyone is on the same page and have bought into what the staff is trying to do.

No way in heck the players are buying into the crap that is going on right now.

Tenders allow teams to allow Players to test free agency.

Jackson had a tender last season...no one even looked. That should have told him something. Do you think that without the tender Jackson would have signed a big money deal somewhere?

How about Ray Edwards? Same deal applied. No one came knocking...he signed. And, to validate our NOT giving him a big value deal, his production fell off.

Tenders don't mean a team doesn't want you, to me they simply mean that the team wants to be realistic about what they'll offer you. And, I'm sorry, if you're going to be Player Pissy Pants because a team RIGHTFULLY doesn't want to throw tons of money after your fluke ass and be on the hook when you tank, then go out and EARN a bigger pay day.

Edwards really didn't. Jackson certainly didn't. As for the rest, we'll see.

Caine

Are you going to keep using last year as the basis for what our players are worth cause no one came and tried to sign them.

In case you haven't heard, ......

NFL players’ union files collusion claim


.......of course none of the teams went after other teams players. It was something the owners agreed upon and because they didn't, it allowed them to bankroll 5 Billion dollars.

So to sit here and contend that your view point on what a tender means to a player is accurate, flies in the face of what the players actually think about them.

Heres something to chew on.......When a player decides to have a surgery late and won't play, or doesn't produce on the field cause he has a "Near High Ankle Sprain"......Don't get all PISSY PANTS with them cause they are basically producing at the reduced level that the teams have reduced level pay warrants.

He also neglected to mention the compensation that goes along with offering a tender to a player. Every team may want to sign a Ray Edwards but almost none will give up a 1st for him.

Almost none but for a team like the Saints (there was some noise that they were somewhat interested) the 32nd pick isn't that bad a deal, or if the Saints wanted as they did need a back up QB going into last season their 3rd round pick for an experience back up is pretty cheap (Vikes had to give up 2 3rd round picks to get Jackson and he had no experience) for some of the final 6 playoff teams it could generate some interest to look at a tendered player. Heck look at Peyton Manning if his Franchise tag wasn't an exclusive one wouldn't he be worth 2 first round picks

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1090665

Originally Posted by "Caine" #1090664

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1090617

Originally Posted by "Caine" #1090598

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1090583

Thanks for the read my friend.

...If I've learned one thing about the game, teams that are successful seem to have one thing in common.......Everyone is on the same page and have bought into what the staff is trying to do.

No way in heck the players are buying into the crap that is going on right now.

Tenders allow teams to allow Players to test free agency.

Jackson had a tender last season...no one even looked. That should have told him something. Do you think that without the tender Jackson would have signed a big money deal somewhere?

How about Ray Edwards? Same deal applied. No one came knocking...he signed. And, to validate our NOT giving him a big value deal, his production fell off.

Tenders don't mean a team doesn't want you, to me they simply mean that the team wants to be realistic about what they'll offer you. And, I'm sorry, if you're going to be Player Pissy Pants because a team RIGHTFULLY doesn't want to throw tons of money after your fluke ass and be on the hook when you tank, then go out and EARN a bigger pay day.

Edwards really didn't. Jackson certainly didn't. As for the rest, we'll see.

Caine

Are you going to keep using last year as the basis for what our players are worth cause no one came and tried to sign them.

In case you haven't heard, ......

NFL players’ union files collusion claim

No, Marr, I'm going to use their PRODUCTION as a basis for what they're worth, and THEN use the fact that no one even TRIED to sign them as validation.

See how that works? If not, I'll give you an example:

Thesis Statement: Tarvaris Jackson is not worth a big dollar contract.

Supporting Evidence: His stats and tapes of his performances.

As Evidenced By: No one trying to sign him with a lowly 3rd round tender on him.

Conclusion: Tarvaris Jackson is not in demand as a QB

See...not that hard. And, honestly, it's a lot simpler than the Marrdro way which seems to go a lot like this:

Thesis Statement: Sydney Rice was tanking for a contract.

Supporting Evidence: None.

As Evidenced By: None.

Conclusion: Because Rice didn't get surgery right away, he must have been mad about not being offered a huge contract after only 1 good season.

See the difference?

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1090617

.......of course none of the teams went after other teams players. It was something the owners agreed upon and because they didn't, it allowed them to bankroll 5 Billion dollars.

Well, the NFLPA alleges that...but I think it had a lot more to do with the idea that with a labor dispute looming, the teams elected not to over spend in Free Agency.

Now, just because it's alleged doesn't make it true. Remember,m the NFLPA has a vested interest in putting forth the notion that the owners are screwing the players and MINIMIZING the idea that the players are over compensated.

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1090617

So to sit here and contend that your view point on what a tender means to a player is accurate, flies in the face of what the players actually think about them.

OF COURSE they're mad. The expiration of the CBA means that teams can RFA tender players for SIX years instead of four. Guys like Ray Edwards have already spoken out about how pissed they are about it...

Tender rules explained: http://min.scout.com/2/951033.html

...but how did Ray demonstrate that he is WORTH a big contract? Which guys in 2010, on ANY team, grossly over played their 5th year contract?

See, the flip side of the tender - which gives the teams compensation for departing players - is the fact that it ALSO guarantees a certain level of pay for the player. Edwards, signing a 1st round tender, was given a HUGE raise....then wasn't worth it.

The point here is that just because the players think it, doesn't mean it's valid.

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1090617

Heres something to chew on.......When a player decides to have a surgery late and won't play, or doesn't produce on the field cause he has a "Near High Ankle Sprain"......Don't get all PISSY PANTS with them cause they are basically producing at the reduced level that the teams have reduced level pay warrants.

Any player who would INTENTIONALLY sand bag, or play to "protect himself", simply demonstrates WHY he isn't worth the money.

Players who want an increased level of pay need to produce an increased level of PLAY.

Rice didn't. Edwards didn't. IMHO, we can do without either or both of them.

I'm not saying this to reopen the Jackson or Edwards debates. Merely to point out that there are two sides to the Tender issue...and I'm sorry, Ray Edwards making 5 millions dollars last season doesn't impress me as being underpaid. What he's REALLY bitching about is not getting a LONG TERM deal with the front loaded bonus.

But then that opens the debate of the relative worth of long term deals...

Caine

Some of what you say makes sense but I disagree with a lot of what you say.

1) Most teams make a killing on production vs. price as it relates to rookie contracts. Lets ignore the first 20 picks of the draft. A lot of very talented players play their asses off without the pay for it.
Ray was a 4th round player. I'm too lazy to look up his first contract but I can assure you it was peanuts(compared to other athletes). The increase in pay from the tender is laughable to these guys. When faced with the possibility of getting 20 million guaranteed, do you really think most will settle for 4 million for a season. I know, I know, poor spoiled athlete wants more money....but in reality, if any of us were able to make that kinda of money for a career, we would want more. We would not be satisfied with 4 million and we would want to get as much as we could comfortably get. It's human nature. The team didn't do them a favor by tagging them. It's a business but it doesn't mean it doesn't rub a few the wrong way. For instance, I'm in school for nursing and it's accepted that your first 2 years out of school you may make 1 salary and then 2 years later you are bumped up to a higher salary. Do you think I would be happy that I signed a contract saying that I want out after 2 years so that I can see the increase in pay that i should get...only to be told that the Hospital is ignoring the contract I signed and is now requiring me to keep my lower salary for 4 years? I would be vexed.

1: Ray was tendered with a 1st round tender. That meant he received either $2.5 million or $2.7 million - depending upon whom you ask.

SOURCES: http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/giants/2011/02/bradshaw-will-probably-get-top-rfa-tender
and
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/03/03/ray-edwards-gets-first-round-tender/

That's a pretty fair jump from his salary of $1.01 million from'09.

Was it the $60 million over 6 years with $35 million guaranteed that he dreamed of? No. And, truthfully, I just made those numbers up. Fact is, it was a lot LESS than he hoped...

...but that's the way the rules were written. The CBA, which governed how contracts would be structured, was struck down. That meant that NO ONE was getting big money in year 5 or even in year 6. But mostly it affected 5th year players.

Marrdro suggests - often - that Ray's unhappiness with his tender caused him to play to protect himself. And, from OUR point of view, we saw a decline in Ray's production.

So, either Marrdro is right, and Ray - being a piece of shit - tanked his season, and the entire team along with it, because he wanted a bigger pay day,

or...Ray's production simply dropped off, and the Vikings were WISE not to sign him to a big money deal as his new value will be significantly lower.

Which do you choose to believe?

Further, while the 4th and 5th year players aren't happy about wait, this isn't a Vikings only issue. NO ONE is getting big deals unless they're superstars. Marrdro makes it sound like it's a Viking FO only issue, and that we're driving players away when the reality is that this is occurring league wide. Until a new CBA is agreed upon, this is the nature of the beast. And, honestly, do you really believe that a player will half-ass it and STILL get a big contract the next year? Marrdro apparently thinks that this is a viable strategy. I don't. In fact, while Ray will likely see an increase over his current contract, I'd bet that he will see a smaller one than he would have last season because of his lower production.

And talking about rookie value...you're right. There IS a disparity between what the average non-first rounder makes and your average veteran. But, again, they chose to sign that contract. No one voided their contracts, they simply changed the rules on how they could work them. In the end, Ray Edwards was paid everything he was promised. Further, even being a 4th round pick, he made more in 4 years than most of us will make in a lifetime...all because he "won the genetic lottery". I really have a hard time feeling sorry for Ray.

I appreciate what these athletes do on the field...but I think they're GROSSLY over paid.

On a personal note, how far along are you in Nursing? I'm an LPN now and will finish my RN in May.

Caine

Originally Posted by "Caine" #1090664

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1090617

Originally Posted by "Caine" #1090598

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1090583

Thanks for the read my friend.

...If I've learned one thing about the game, teams that are successful seem to have one thing in common.......Everyone is on the same page and have bought into what the staff is trying to do.

No way in heck the players are buying into the crap that is going on right now.

Tenders allow teams to allow Players to test free agency.

Jackson had a tender last season...no one even looked. That should have told him something. Do you think that without the tender Jackson would have signed a big money deal somewhere?

How about Ray Edwards? Same deal applied. No one came knocking...he signed. And, to validate our NOT giving him a big value deal, his production fell off.

Tenders don't mean a team doesn't want you, to me they simply mean that the team wants to be realistic about what they'll offer you. And, I'm sorry, if you're going to be Player Pissy Pants because a team RIGHTFULLY doesn't want to throw tons of money after your fluke ass and be on the hook when you tank, then go out and EARN a bigger pay day.

Edwards really didn't. Jackson certainly didn't. As for the rest, we'll see.

Caine

Are you going to keep using last year as the basis for what our players are worth cause no one came and tried to sign them.

In case you haven't heard, ......

NFL players’ union files collusion claim

No, Marr, I'm going to use their PRODUCTION as a basis for what they're worth, and THEN use the fact that no one even TRIED to sign them as validation.

See how that works? If not, I'll give you an example:

Thesis Statement: Tarvaris Jackson is not worth a big dollar contract.

Supporting Evidence: His stats and tapes of his performances.

As Evidenced By: No one trying to sign him with a lowly 3rd round tender on him.

Conclusion: Tarvaris Jackson is not in demand as a QB

See...not that hard. And, honestly, it's a lot simpler than the Marrdro way which seems to go a lot like this:

Thesis Statement: Sydney Rice was tanking for a contract.

Supporting Evidence: None.

As Evidenced By: None.

Conclusion: Because Rice didn't get surgery right away, he must have been mad about not being offered a huge contract after only 1 good season.

See the difference?

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1090617

.......of course none of the teams went after other teams players. It was something the owners agreed upon and because they didn't, it allowed them to bankroll 5 Billion dollars.

Well, the NFLPA alleges that...but I think it had a lot more to do with the idea that with a labor dispute looming, the teams elected not to over spend in Free Agency.

Now, just because it's alleged doesn't make it true. Remember,m the NFLPA has a vested interest in putting forth the notion that the owners are screwing the players and MINIMIZING the idea that the players are over compensated.

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1090617

So to sit here and contend that your view point on what a tender means to a player is accurate, flies in the face of what the players actually think about them.

OF COURSE they're mad. The expiration of the CBA means that teams can RFA tender players for SIX years instead of four. Guys like Ray Edwards have already spoken out about how pissed they are about it...

Tender rules explained: http://min.scout.com/2/951033.html

...but how did Ray demonstrate that he is WORTH a big contract? Which guys in 2010, on ANY team, grossly over played their 5th year contract?

See, the flip side of the tender - which gives the teams compensation for departing players - is the fact that it ALSO guarantees a certain level of pay for the player. Edwards, signing a 1st round tender, was given a HUGE raise....then wasn't worth it.

The point here is that just because the players think it, doesn't mean it's valid.

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1090617

Heres something to chew on.......When a player decides to have a surgery late and won't play, or doesn't produce on the field cause he has a "Near High Ankle Sprain"......Don't get all PISSY PANTS with them cause they are basically producing at the reduced level that the teams have reduced level pay warrants.

Any player who would INTENTIONALLY sand bag, or play to "protect himself", simply demonstrates WHY he isn't worth the money.

Players who want an increased level of pay need to produce an increased level of PLAY.

Rice didn't. Edwards didn't. IMHO, we can do without either or both of them.

I'm not saying this to reopen the Jackson or Edwards debates. Merely to point out that there are two sides to the Tender issue...and I'm sorry, Ray Edwards making 5 millions dollars last season doesn't impress me as being underpaid. What he's REALLY bitching about is not getting a LONG TERM deal with the front loaded bonus.

But then that opens the debate of the relative worth of long term deals...

Caine

I think you've missed were Ray has broke out over his career with respect to production.

In the end, does he have more sacks than Jared? Hell no, but he has more tackles, more pressures, more hits and doesn't get caught up field as much as Jared does rushing the passer when the team is running the ball.

You've also missed that Sidney is (after Jackson got tendered) the top FA WR on the streets prior to getting tendered.

Just because you THINK they haven't done anything doesn't make it so my friend. There are actually others out there that disagree with you.

So far, your only proof to support your theory is a season were no one went after the tendered players and that is flawed because the owners (allegedly) were in collusion that year.

Long story short, other teams are signing their players to long term contracts. Why aren't the Vikings?

Is Rob more deserving that Chad? How about Hussain? Doesn't he warrant a deal?

Time to face reality my friend. Our ownership group is trying to cut costs. We, the fans, are gonna see the production of the team CONTINUE to slip just like we did last year because of it and no matter how hard you try to say the players are getting "ENOUGH" money, the truth of the matter is, they aren't getting what the rest of the players are getting at their respective positions and are gonna walk because of it.

And they will walk my friend, but only after they play another year but in a limited role as they try to protect themselves for that long term deal they will get when they walk.

[quote="Caine" #1090687]

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1090665

1: Ray was tendered with a 1st round tender. That meant he received either $2.5 million or $2.7 million - depending upon whom you ask.

That's a pretty fair jump from his salary of $1.01 million from'09.

Was it the $60 million over 6 years with $35 million guaranteed that he dreamed of? No. And, truthfully, I just made those numbers up. Fact is, it was a lot LESS than he hoped...

Caine

A few contracts for players at the same position as Ray. By they way, using the only stat you seem to think DE's should be graded by, Ray has 29.5 over his first contract which got him a first-round tender ($2.736 million).

Justin Smith. 31 sacks over the same time period. 6 years, 49 Mil.
Robert Mathias 48.5 sacks over the same time period. 5 yeears, 30 Mil.

Yup, I can see that Ray is getting what he deserves.

...but that's the way the rules were written. The CBA, which governed how contracts would be structured, was struck down. That meant that NO ONE was getting big money in year 5 or even in year 6. But mostly it affected 5th year players.

You need to go back and revisit that.

There were several teams that signed players to contracts. What didn't happen was teams didn't pursue FA's that were tendered.

[quote="Marrdro" #1090706]

Originally Posted by "Caine" #1090687

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1090665

1: Ray was tendered with a 1st round tender. That meant he received either $2.5 million or $2.7 million - depending upon whom you ask.

That's a pretty fair jump from his salary of $1.01 million from'09.

Was it the $60 million over 6 years with $35 million guaranteed that he dreamed of? No. And, truthfully, I just made those numbers up. Fact is, it was a lot LESS than he hoped...

Caine

A few contracts for players at the same position as Ray. By they way, using the only stat you seem to think DE's should be graded by, Ray has 29.5 over his first contract which got him a first-round tender ($2.736 million).

Justin Smith. 31 sacks over the same time period. 6 years, 49 Mil.
Robert Mathias 48.5 sacks over the same time period. 5 yeears, 30 Mil.

Yup, I can see that Ray is getting what he deserves.

...but that's the way the rules were written. The CBA, which governed how contracts would be structured, was struck down. That meant that NO ONE was getting big money in year 5 or even in year 6. But mostly it affected 5th year players.

You need to go back and revisit that.

There were several teams that signed players to contracts. What didn't happen was teams didn't pursue FA's that were tendered.

Yeah the 9ers overpaid to get Smith from Cindy but as you can see his productivity didn't equal his paycheck. That is not much different than us Signing Berrian, Wade,Williams etc to higher than value FA contracts that tied up money we could have spent elsewhere. In the end if a team wants to sign RE to a higher than value contract then I say let them and we can look for a player that gives us value equal to their productivity.

[quote="Purple Floyd" #1090709]

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1090706

Originally Posted by "Caine" #1090687

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1090665

1: Ray was tendered with a 1st round tender. That meant he received either $2.5 million or $2.7 million - depending upon whom you ask.

That's a pretty fair jump from his salary of $1.01 million from'09.

Was it the $60 million over 6 years with $35 million guaranteed that he dreamed of? No. And, truthfully, I just made those numbers up. Fact is, it was a lot LESS than he hoped...

Caine

A few contracts for players at the same position as Ray. By they way, using the only stat you seem to think DE's should be graded by, Ray has 29.5 over his first contract which got him a first-round tender ($2.736 million).

Justin Smith. 31 sacks over the same time period. 6 years, 49 Mil.
Robert Mathias 48.5 sacks over the same time period. 5 yeears, 30 Mil.

Yup, I can see that Ray is getting what he deserves.

...but that's the way the rules were written. The CBA, which governed how contracts would be structured, was struck down. That meant that NO ONE was getting big money in year 5 or even in year 6. But mostly it affected 5th year players.

You need to go back and revisit that.

There were several teams that signed players to contracts. What didn't happen was teams didn't pursue FA's that were tendered.

Yeah the 9ers overpaid to get Smith from Cindy but as you can see his productivity didn't equal his paycheck. That is not much different than us Signing Berrian, Wade,Williams etc to higher than value FA contracts that tied up money we could have spent elsewhere. In the end if a team wants to sign RE to a higher than value contract then I say let them and we can look for a player that gives us value equal to their productivity.

Thats exactly why I picked Smith. I remember distinctly how many on here wanted him when he was a FA and got pissed when we didn't sign him.

I think the staffs decision was the right one.

Back to Ray. I can't get access to the best stat site out there anymore cause its now pay (to much for my blood) but it used to list all the other stats for DE's, pressures, knockdowns, etc. Ray, was second in the league in those catagories two years running leading into last season.

My guess, based on those stats, he will get (to use Caines opinion) "Overpaid" a bunch by a team. Truth of the matter is, I bet alot of teams will be willing to "Overpay" him.

[quote="Marrdro" #1090723]

Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1090709

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1090706

Originally Posted by "Caine" #1090687

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1090665

1: Ray was tendered with a 1st round tender. That meant he received either $2.5 million or $2.7 million - depending upon whom you ask.

That's a pretty fair jump from his salary of $1.01 million from'09.

Was it the $60 million over 6 years with $35 million guaranteed that he dreamed of? No. And, truthfully, I just made those numbers up. Fact is, it was a lot LESS than he hoped...

Caine

A few contracts for players at the same position as Ray. By they way, using the only stat you seem to think DE's should be graded by, Ray has 29.5 over his first contract which got him a first-round tender ($2.736 million).

Justin Smith. 31 sacks over the same time period. 6 years, 49 Mil.
Robert Mathias 48.5 sacks over the same time period. 5 yeears, 30 Mil.

Yup, I can see that Ray is getting what he deserves.

...but that's the way the rules were written. The CBA, which governed how contracts would be structured, was struck down. That meant that NO ONE was getting big money in year 5 or even in year 6. But mostly it affected 5th year players.

You need to go back and revisit that.

There were several teams that signed players to contracts. What didn't happen was teams didn't pursue FA's that were tendered.

Yeah the 9ers overpaid to get Smith from Cindy but as you can see his productivity didn't equal his paycheck. That is not much different than us Signing Berrian, Wade,Williams etc to higher than value FA contracts that tied up money we could have spent elsewhere. In the end if a team wants to sign RE to a higher than value contract then I say let them and we can look for a player that gives us value equal to their productivity.

Thats exactly why I picked Smith. I remember distinctly how many on here wanted him when he was a FA and got pissed when we didn't sign him.

I think the staffs decision was the right one.

Back to Ray. I can't get access to the best stat site out there anymore cause its now pay (to much for my blood) but it used to list all the other stats for DE's, pressures, knockdowns, etc. Ray, was second in the league in those catagories two years running leading into last season.

My guess, based on those stats, he will get (to use Caines opinion) "Overpaid" a bunch by a team. Truth of the matter is, I bet alot of teams will be willing to "Overpay" him.

And the Vikings, currently lead by the Guy who was Ray's D-Coordinator, don't share that opinion. They just signed Robison to a deal and not Ray...


...wonder why?

See, it's not so much that they aren't signing people...they are. They just aren't signing everyone. And, as I've said in many previous posts, most of the guys whose contracts are up are completely replaceable.

Would I like to see Peterson inked to a long term deal? Yes...and if the NFL has a season next year, I think we'll see that happen.

Would I like Greenway locked up? Yup...but a 1 year ride on the Franchise tag won't kill him.

As for the rest.....whatever. None of them, including Ray Edwards, has stood out this past season. Maybe Ray leaves and tears it up somewhere else...

..maybe he does a Hovan and quietly produces somewhere else, but never at an elite level.

Regardless, I don't really think our FO is screwing anything up just yet. We are REBUILDING...like it or not. As such, we have to look at guys who can have an impact for a LONG time. I'm not sure why Edwards was passed over, but he was.

And that tells me something.

Caine

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1090617

Originally Posted by "Caine" #1090598

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1090583

Thanks for the read my friend.

...If I've learned one thing about the game, teams that are successful seem to have one thing in common.......Everyone is on the same page and have bought into what the staff is trying to do.

No way in heck the players are buying into the crap that is going on right now.

Tenders allow teams to allow Players to test free agency.

Jackson had a tender last season...no one even looked. That should have told him something. Do you think that without the tender Jackson would have signed a big money deal somewhere?

How about Ray Edwards? Same deal applied. No one came knocking...he signed. And, to validate our NOT giving him a big value deal, his production fell off.

Tenders don't mean a team doesn't want you, to me they simply mean that the team wants to be realistic about what they'll offer you. And, I'm sorry, if you're going to be Player Pissy Pants because a team RIGHTFULLY doesn't want to throw tons of money after your fluke ass and be on the hook when you tank, then go out and EARN a bigger pay day.

Edwards really didn't. Jackson certainly didn't. As for the rest, we'll see.

Caine

Are you going to keep using last year as the basis for what our players are worth cause no one came and tried to sign them.

In case you haven't heard, ......

NFL players’ union files collusion claim

Why are agents allowed to have so many players under contract. Isn't that collusion by default?

[quote="Caine" #1090729]

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1090723

Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1090709

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1090706

Originally Posted by "Caine" #1090687

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1090665

1: Ray was tendered with a 1st round tender. That meant he received either $2.5 million or $2.7 million - depending upon whom you ask.

That's a pretty fair jump from his salary of $1.01 million from'09.

Was it the $60 million over 6 years with $35 million guaranteed that he dreamed of? No. And, truthfully, I just made those numbers up. Fact is, it was a lot LESS than he hoped...

Caine

A few contracts for players at the same position as Ray. By they way, using the only stat you seem to think DE's should be graded by, Ray has 29.5 over his first contract which got him a first-round tender ($2.736 million).

Justin Smith. 31 sacks over the same time period. 6 years, 49 Mil.
Robert Mathias 48.5 sacks over the same time period. 5 yeears, 30 Mil.

Yup, I can see that Ray is getting what he deserves.

...but that's the way the rules were written. The CBA, which governed how contracts would be structured, was struck down. That meant that NO ONE was getting big money in year 5 or even in year 6. But mostly it affected 5th year players.

You need to go back and revisit that.

There were several teams that signed players to contracts. What didn't happen was teams didn't pursue FA's that were tendered.

Yeah the 9ers overpaid to get Smith from Cindy but as you can see his productivity didn't equal his paycheck. That is not much different than us Signing Berrian, Wade,Williams etc to higher than value FA contracts that tied up money we could have spent elsewhere. In the end if a team wants to sign RE to a higher than value contract then I say let them and we can look for a player that gives us value equal to their productivity.

Thats exactly why I picked Smith. I remember distinctly how many on here wanted him when he was a FA and got pissed when we didn't sign him.

I think the staffs decision was the right one.

Back to Ray. I can't get access to the best stat site out there anymore cause its now pay (to much for my blood) but it used to list all the other stats for DE's, pressures, knockdowns, etc. Ray, was second in the league in those catagories two years running leading into last season.

My guess, based on those stats, he will get (to use Caines opinion) "Overpaid" a bunch by a team. Truth of the matter is, I bet alot of teams will be willing to "Overpay" him.

And the Vikings, currently lead by the Guy who was Ray's D-Coordinator, don't share that opinion. They just signed Robison to a deal and not Ray...


...wonder why?

See, it's not so much that they aren't signing people...they are. They just aren't signing everyone. And, as I've said in many previous posts, most of the guys whose contracts are up are completely replaceable.

Would I like to see Peterson inked to a long term deal? Yes...and if the NFL has a season next year, I think we'll see that happen.

Would I like Greenway locked up? Yup...but a 1 year ride on the Franchise tag won't kill him.

As for the rest.....whatever. None of them, including Ray Edwards, has stood out this past season. Maybe Ray leaves and tears it up somewhere else...

..maybe he does a Hovan and quietly produces somewhere else, but never at an elite level.

Regardless, I don't really think our FO is screwing anything up just yet. We are REBUILDING...like it or not. As such, we have to look at guys who can have an impact for a LONG time. I'm not sure why Edwards was passed over, but he was.

And that tells me something.

Caine

Caine,
You can't take BRobs signing as a declaration that they prefer him to Edwards. It's a business and sometimes a team has to go with a lessor talent because they must reduce overall cost. Edwards will demand a much bigger contract than Robison and the money saved can go else where like say......QB.

The only thing Edwards being passed over should tell you is that we have reached a point where we have a damn good Roster. In 2005 we could resign any of our DEs for peanuts. No we have some major talent on this teams and contracts/resignings have to be handled differently. The Eagles do it all the time. They let major stars walk to play less younger talent to save cost.

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1090824

The only thing Edwards being passed over should tell you is that we have reached a point where we have a damn good Roster.

Are you high?