Originally Posted by tony hipchest
thats fine. ive already stated that it all starts up front with tho-line.
a legitimate capology discussion simply cannot be summed up with or by a single comment.
it is too complex with WAY too many moving parts. its a zero sum game. if you give to the offense you take from the defense and vice versa.
dont get me wrong... pouncey is great. next in line to webster and dawson which probably means he will be paid like a top notch LT just like his draft position suggests he should.
he may even be as great to the steelers o-line as cortez kennedy was to seattles d-line. but from a capologists point of view, what exactly did that get seattle?
i understand why people reading this thread will think i am advocating letting pouncey go, when reality is i am certain he will be kept for the long haul and approve that move.
it will come at a cost though. if all the high picks we have spent on DL and mid round picks on CBs hold up, we should be fine.
the cap should go up but its been stagnant going on 4 years and we see how the league owners pinch pennies when it comes to the refs.
them damn 47%ers always looking for handouts
1. Of course, if money is given to one player, other players will need to be cut (or get less money). This is basic. I think that we all understand & agree with that.
2. I created a post, a few months ago, about focusing most of the money on the offensive players (BB, Wallace, AB, Pouncey, DD, Heath) and using the majority of the draft picks on defense. I won't go into details (again), but basically, the current talent resides mostly on the offense. Thus, I say: pay'em, keep'em, and flourish on offense (while filling holes on defense with young, cheap draftees).
3. Cortez Kennedy might have been overpaid... but, there are 21 other starters. Honestly, I don't think that his contract ate up money for the entire rest of the starters (i.e. all of the other 21 players). Truthfully, maybe he ate up the contracts for 2 other guys... leaving plenty of money for one or two other great players to be signed. Alas, for SEA, they had other problems.
For example, the Seahawks drafted around 16th for many, many years: not good enough to draft a difference maker, but not low enough to be a play-off team. It was a horrible, horrible place to be stuck: mediocrity.
4. Allow me to offer a couple of thoughts about the O-line... and I think that I am preaching to the choir, but just to be sure...
The DAL O-line from the early 90s. That was a bunch of brutes, who opened up huuuge holes for Emmit. That got them three SuperBowls.
Likewise, the Hogs (ie the WASH O-line) got them three SuperBowls.
Simply, I am advocating that the money be spent on O-line... as well as on other offensive players.
Q: At what cost?
A: Defensive players who are "avergae." Obviously, players of the ilk of Troy or Greg Lloyd would be retained (not all of the cap would go to offense), but players who are average (Keenan Lewis), would be shown the door, to be repalced by younger, cheaper draftees (Cortez Allen).
On final question...
Are we in the 53% or the 47%?