Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

The following is the criteria for signing a free agent, There are the "contenders" (Pat's, Eagles, etc.) and the "pretenders" ( Bills , Bengals, etc.)

 

Order of Importance:

 

Contending teams:

 

1) Ability, regardless of age

 

2) Need by position

 

3) Salary Cap ROOM

 

4) Established Starters

 

All salaries paid by TV revenue per CBA

 

 

Pretenders:

 

1) Salary (not cap )

 

2) Need

 

3)Chemistry

 

4) prefer those hungry to start

 

All salaries paid by TV revenue per CBA

 

Do you see something wrong here?

Posted
The following is the criteria for signing a free agent, There are the "contenders" (Pat's, Eagles, etc.) and the "pretenders" ( Bills , Bengals, etc.)

 

Order of Importance:

 

Contending teams:

 

1) Ability, regardless of age

 

2) Need by position

 

3) Salary Cap ROOM

 

4) Established Starters

 

All salaries paid by TV revenue per CBA

 

 

Pretenders:

 

1) Salary (not cap )

 

2) Need

 

3)Chemistry

 

4) prefer those hungry to start

 

All salaries paid by TV revenue per CBA

 

Do you see something wrong here?

Yes. It's your attempt to divide all of free agency into two groups, based on four silly little rules that have no consistent application.

Posted
The following is the criteria for signing a free agent, There are the "contenders" (Pat's, Eagles, etc.) and the "pretenders" ( Bills , Bengals, etc.)

 

Order of Importance:

 

Contending teams:

 

1) Ability, regardless of age

 

2) Need by position

 

3) Salary Cap ROOM

 

4) Established Starters

 

All salaries paid by TV revenue per CBA

 

 

Pretenders:

 

1) Salary (not cap )

 

2) Need

 

3)Chemistry

 

4) prefer those hungry to start

 

All salaries paid by TV revenue per CBA

 

Do you see something wrong here?

 

No. Wait, Yes... I mean no.

 

I don't see your point. What the hell is the difference between need and need by position?

 

Maybe your point is that contending teams have deep enough rosters that they don't have a dire need for an influx of young talent and are more likely to take established talent to get them over the hump with the rest of the contenders. I would agree with that because it stands to reason that contending teams have deeper rosters than those that do not contend (or pretend, as you say). A team like the Pats* is more likely to get a Junior Seau than the Bills because he isn't the difference for us, whereas he certainly could be the missing bit-piece for them.

Posted
Yes. It's your attempt to divide all of free agency into two groups, based on four silly little rules that have no consistent application.

 

 

Sorry if it's too deep for you..

Posted
No. Wait, Yes... I mean no.

 

I don't see your point. What the hell is the difference between need and need by position?

 

Maybe your point is that contending teams have deep enough rosters that they don't have a dire need for an influx of young talent and are more likely to take established talent to get them over the hump with the rest of the contenders. I would agree with that because it stands to reason that contending teams have deeper rosters than those that do not contend (or pretend, as you say). A team like the Pats* is more likely to get a Junior Seau than the Bills because he isn't the difference for us, whereas he certainly could be the missing bit-piece for them.

 

 

NO! My point is that Wilson is driven by profit first..

×
×
  • Create New...