Expect a busy offseason.....

[rcsodak]

Does make you wonder who, if anybody, McD tries to pull from the Pats.


Pat Kirwin
http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d80e9c6f7&template=without-video-with-comments&confirm=true


With the games out of the way, it's time to examine the business end of football.

The term "offseason" no longer applies in the NFL. Teams are torn down and rebuilt from February through June, and this year has all the earmarks of being volatile.

Eleven new head coaches will lead their teams toward free agency and the draft one year before a potentially uncapped season. Also, there's still a vacancy for NFL Players Association executive director, unprecedented economic pressures on every team, league-wide layoffs and no excuses for not building a winning team after the once-woeful Cardinals made the Super Bowl. This looks to be a tough year. Some franchises will figure out how to excel, some will survive and others will fail.

When considering how the offseason will play out, keep these 10 guidelines in mind:

Offseason schedule
Feb. 18-24 -- NFL Scouting Combine.

Feb. 19 -- Deadline for teams to designate franchise and transition players.

Feb. 26 -- Deadline for submission of qualifying offers by clubs to their restricted free agents whose contracts have expired and to whom they desire to retain a right of first refusal/compensation.

Feb. 26 -- Deadline for clubs to submit offer of minimum salary to retain exclusive negotiating rights to their players with fewer than three seasons of free-agency credit whose contracts have expired.

Feb. 27 -- Free agency begins. Trading period begins.

March 22-25 -- NFL Annual Meeting.

April 17 -- Signing period ends for restricted free agents.

April 24 -- Deadline for old club to exercise right of first refusal to restricted free agents.

April 25-26 -- NFL Draft.

May 18-20 -- NFL Spring Meeting.

June 1 -- Deadline for old clubs to send tender to unsigned unrestricted free agents to receive exclusive negotiating rights for rest of season if player is not signed by another club by July 22. Deadline for old clubs to send tender to unsigned restricted free agents or to extend qualifying offer to retain exclusive negotiating rights.

June 15 -- Deadline for old clubs to withdraw original qualifying offer to unsigned restricted free agents and still retain exclusive negotiating rights by substituting tender of 110 percent of previous year’s salary.

June 28-July 1 -- NFL Rookie Symposium.

June 22 -- Signing period for unrestricted free agents who received June 1 tender ends at 4 p.m. ET.
Coaching changes

1. New coaches = player movement
My experience tells me that because there are 11 new head coaches, player movement will be fast and furious. In working with four different head coaches in a five-year period, I came away realizing that each wanted different players. Expect the new head coaches to reach back to the rosters with which they just worked to grab players who "know the system," can bring the right message to the locker room and provide the sense of security that all leaders want. Look at how many players Bill Parcells and Tony Sparano brought from the Cowboys to the Dolphins last year.

Whether it will be Rex Ryan trying to add some Ravens to the Jets' roster or Josh McDaniels hoping to bring a few Patriots to the Broncos, many players will be paid -- or, in some cases, overpaid -- to join a coach they already know.

2. Free-agent talent will fluctuate
The talent level of the free-agent pool will radically change when franchise and transition tags are placed on top players. Some will re-sign with their old team before free agency begins. For example, the Patriots already have impacted the top 10 by putting the franchise tag on QB Matt Cassel. Of the 10 best potential free agents, expect half of these guys to sign contracts that make them the highest-paid players at their respective positions:

DT Albert Haynesworth, Titans
QB Kurt Warner, Cardinals
RB Brandon Jacobs, Giants
DE Julius Peppers, Panthers
OT Jordan Gross, Panthers
CB Nnamdi Asomugha, Raiders
LB Terrell Suggs, Ravens
CB Dunta Robinson, Texans
LB Bart Scott, Ravens
LB Ray Lewis, Ravens

If any of these players sign with their current teams before free agency begins, the next wave of players includes WR T.J. Houshmandzadeh, TE Bo Scaife, K Rob Bironas, DE Antonio Smith, G Harvey Dahl and RB Darren Sproles.

3. Stockpile draft picks
As one general manager told me at the Super Bowl, "I'm trying to get as many draft picks as I can right now." Why is that? With the probable uncapped season just one year away, the volatility of contracts and player movement will make for an unstable environment -- so getting young players is the way to go.

Recent drafts have shown that second-, third- and fourth-round draft picks are inexpensive players with as good of a chance as any to become stars. Look for smart teams to hold onto their draft picks and parlay them into extra selections.

4. Try a rookie coach and QB
Don't be surprised if owners around the league believe they can replicate what the Falcons and Ravens did when they put inexperienced head coaches in charge of their teams, drafted a quarterback in the first round and went to the playoffs.

The prime candidates looking to repeat that feat are the Jets (with new head coach Ryan), Buccaneers (Raheem Morris), Lions (Jim Schwartz) and Chiefs (Todd Haley). In this year's draft, just two quarterbacks come even remotely close to the potential of Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco -- Mark Sanchez of USC and Matthew Stafford of Georgia. The difference is Sanchez and Stafford left school early and don't come with the same level of experience as Ryan and Flacco.

5. Let the marquee names go
Smart teams will let the first wave of players sign before jumping into the free-agency fray. Letting the buying frenzy simmer down is a good way to do business because there will be talent in the second wave of free agents:

CB Jabari Greer, Bills
S Jim Leonhard, Ravens
C Jason Brown, Ravens
DL Demetric Evans, Redskins
S Jermaine Phillips, Buccaneers
RB Derrick Ward, Giants
DB Joselio Hanson, Eagles
WR Shaun McDonald, Lions

6. Watch restricted free agents
Several restricted free agents weren't drafted coming out of college, meaning that unless their teams put a high tender on them, no compensation will due to the team if the player signs elsewhere. Most of these guys should receive a high tender, but if any of them don't, they will make attractive targets.

These players include:

WR Lance Moore, Saints
OT Donald Penn, Buccaneers
OT Tyson Clabo, Falcons
WR Miles Austin, Cowboys
C Rudy Niswanger, Chiefs
LB John DiGiorgio, Bills
WR Hank Baskett, Eagles



Brett Favre's decision to return for another season will impact the Jets on the field and in their cap space.

7. Clear some salary-cap space
Not every team has enough salary-cap space to operate. Smart pro personnel directors are studying the rosters of teams projected to be over the $123 million cap for 2009 to see which veteran players have a good chance of being released. Look for the Colts, Saints, Jets, Redskins and maybe the Raiders to do some trimming in the next few weeks.

If Brett Favre retires, the Jets' cap problem most likely will be fixed. Deuce McAllister's contract would solve the Saints' issue. However, some of the other teams have multiple decisions to make.

The Panthers are in decent shape right now, but trying to re-sign Peppers and Gross might force them to cut a player or two.

8. Marry the draft to free agency
Don't let anyone fool you: The draft and free agency are two independent issues. Teams must compare each talent pool in order to spend money wisely.

How much is a team willing to spend on a premier veteran cornerback such as Asomugha or Robinson if their grades on rookies Malcolm Jenkins (Ohio State) or Vontae Davis (Illinois) suggest they are stars in waiting? Why would a team drop big money on a center such as Matt Birk or Jeff Saturday if Alex Mack (California) or Jonathan Luigs (Arkansas) is on the board? Team officials are trying to decide where to spend their money and must consider both talent pools.

9. Go young at running back
The 2008 season put a big hit on the market value of free-agent running backs for 2009. For years, GMs were reluctant to pay big money to any running back close to his 30th birthday. After the 2008 rookie class did so well, most front-office executives now don't want to pay a veteran runner who is over 26.

Steve Slaton (Texans), Matt Forte (Bears) and Chris Johnson (Titans) all were top 10 rushers as rookies. Darren McFadden (Raiders) and Jonathan Stewart (Panthers) also are rising stars, and Tashard Choice (Cowboys) and Ray Rice (Ravens) contributed for their teams.

There will be 20 to 30 veteran running backs on the open market this year, but look for most teams to skip signing them, with a bigger eye on a 2009 draft class that should include seven to nine players with a grade worthy of the first three rounds.

10. Duplicate these three packages
The rise of the "Wildcat" formation and the Ravens' "Heavy" package will be the impetus for other teams to comb the free-agent market and the draft for players who can help them incorporate those looks on offense. A hybrid quarterback such as Pat White (West Virginia) gives a team an instant "Wildcat" scheme, and a big, bruising back such as Tony Fiammetta (Syracuse) helps an offense load up a backfield.

On defense, the Cardinals proved that a team full of "jokers" can pressure a quarterback without giving clues as to the blitz's origin. Teams will look for players with pass-rush experience but who also can drop into pass coverage and line up anywhere in the front seven.

[Superchop 7]

Sounds like a good year to sign a 1 year contract for veteran RB.(or 2) then ....next year.....draft a stud in round 2.

Good value and hungry to prove people wrong. (veteran RB's)

Buyers market.......picks this year need to go towards DEFENSE !

[56crash]

no talk of Hillis in that well you can't have it all

[WARHORSE]

Broncos Inbox -- Feb. 11

Welcome, the Broncos Inbox is open and the impending roster upheaval that's expected when free agency opens Feb. 27 led a light week. So, off we go . . .
Clay asked
Q: Any chance you can give the names and figures for any large bonuses due in March?
And Jimmy Moore in Windsor, Ontario,
Q: Assuming Coach Josh McDaniels and his staff have completed their evaluations of the talent on the roster, who are some of the players that might be cut because of their performance on the field last season or because they just don't fit the new offensive/defensive systems that will be installed?

And Matthew Sewell . . .
Q: What are the chances and what would it take for the Broncos to sign a high profile free agent like Ray Lewis or Terrell Suggs?
A: When you talk about free agency, it's really a two-tiered question. The first is salary cap space.
And with the cap scheduled to be $123 million per team, it shouldn't be that big an issue for any team in the league, except perhaps the Jets, who have $130 million committed for salaries in 2009 at the moment - that can be adjusted some with some cuts and re-negotiations -- and are leveraged pretty badly in the coming seasons with their spending spree last March.
The Colts also currently have just over $130 million committed to contracts in 2009. On Feb. 27, however, when free agency opens teams only have to count their top 51 salaries to be under the cap so most teams won't have any problem.
The Broncos currently have $114,630,341 committed for contracts in 2009, but have more than 51 players under contract.
That, though, brings us to the second tier. And that's cash. It takes cash for the up-front signing bonuses, it takes cash to lure top-tier free agents and the Broncos don't have piles of cash at the moment.
And judging from the conversations I've had with plenty of general managers and personnel executives around the league, a lot of teams are saying they're feeling the cash pinch right now. Baseball free agency has been slow all winter because of it and other than the elite, top free agents, it looks like it will be slowed than usual in the NFL as well.
Teams have said this before, though, and run out in the first 48 hours of free agency and spent like crazy. But this year does have a different vibe, especially with teams having laid off office personnel over the past month.
So the Broncos will likely participate in free agency, but they'll likely look for players who fit the cost structure they want and they may wait a little bit until after the initial rush dies down to get a productive player who may not have gotten the action he expected when he hit the market.
Players like Albert Haynesworth, who has already said he wants to be the most highly paid defensive player in the league, and even Suggs may not fit the financial structure the Broncos are staring at right now.
Also Mike Shanahan is still on the books for $7 million this season and defensive coordinator Bob Slowik is on for over $1 million as well. When the Broncos fired Shanahan and his staff they not only made a commitment to change, but a commitment to pay the financial price of that as well since all of Shanahan's assistants had at least one year left on their deals.
The Broncos are responsible for that amount even if the coach gets another job, but his new contract doesn't equal what the Broncos were paying him. So the Broncos would have to pay the difference. The Broncos, for example, are still scheduled to pay part of Scott O'Brien's salary even though he took a job as the Patriots special teams coach.
The two teams can argue about the difference, and even go as far as getting an arbitrator to decide, but the Broncos will be paying some of O'Brien's salary no matter what.
There are also other former Broncos assistants who did not yet get jobs so the Broncos will have to pay as well. So that's a lot of salary out the door before you even start talking about players.
They do have some roster bonuses due in March to players like Dewayne Robertson ($4 million), Niko Koutouvides ($1.78 million) and Champ Bailey (just over $2 million), but it looks like Bailey would be the only one in that group assured of receiving the bonus. With a cap figure of $13.688 million for '09 the Broncos could try to re-negotiate something with Bailey, but he will be around.
Robertson and Koutouvides, as well as safety Marquand Manuel, are all in that group of defensive veterans (Marlon McCree, Karl Paymah, and Kenny Peterson are all unrestricted free ahents) that could find themselves out when the team does start formally trimming its roster to get ready for free agency and the offseason program.
The Broncos had negotiated some clauses in Robertson's contract that would have guaranteed part of a roster bonus if he reached certain playing time marks. The guaranteed part of the roster bonus would have maxed out at $10 million if he had played 80 percent of the team's snaps and it would have been $8 million guaranteed for 75 percent of the snaps, $7 million guaranteed for 70 percent, $5 million guaranteed for 65 percent.
That's just the guaranteed part, but none of it is now a concern for the Broncos since Robertson didn't play enough snaps to engage any of the guarantees. He also didn't play enough for the Broncos to have to surrender a draft pick in the trade that brought him to Denver.
The Broncos will have some dead money against the salary cap - cap charges for players no longer on the roster -- to deal with if they release some veteran players. A player like Koutouvides, for example, got a $2 million signing bonus, so he would count after he is gone if he is released.
It will be intriguing to see how the Broncos handle linebacker Jamie Winborn as well. Winborn and new defensive coordinator Mike Nolan did not see eye to eye when Winborn was with the 49ers and Nolan was the team's head coach.
Nolan actually kicked Winborn out of the team's practice complex just before trading him to Jacksonville in 2005. Winborn has always said it took him years to rebuild his reputation and contends he was never given a clear answer as to what he did wrong with the 49ers.
Winborn has one year left on a two-year contract he signed before last season.
But, in short, any Broncos defensive player not named Champ Bailey or D.J. Williams is up for debate at this point. The turnover on defense is also still expected to be far higher than on offense.
In terms of offensive players, certainly center Casey Wiegmann, who started every game and does not have a contract for 2009, needs some attention. The team will have to get him in with a new deal if he wants to play - he has told teammates he does - and the Broncos will also have to decide if wide receiver Brandon Marshall has shown enough maturity to get the new long-term deal he covets.
Marshall is set to head into the last year of his original deal.
Also, because of the Broncos were facing a bit of a cash crunch in other years when they spent big in free agency, they do also have some players set to receive some deferred money in March.
Dre' Bly is due a $3 million deferred payment March 31 and Daniel Graham is due a $2 million deferred payment on that same date. That's more cash already accounted for when the Broncos start looking for the bottom line in all of this.
One contract that won't need much attention this time around is Cutler's. He did earn some performance bonuses this past season -- he has a $100,000 Pro Bowl bonus in each year of the contract he signed in 2006 so earned that this year and he also had a $1.95 million bonus in each of the first five years of the deal for a top-five finish in any major passing category and he was third in passing yards. He also had a $3 million bonus for any two years in which he has 60 percent playing time - he cleared that in 2007 and 2008.
But Cutler isn't due a big roster bonus the team would have to look at until 2010 -- $4 million - and 2011 -- $12 million. But 2011 is the last year of the deal and it's unlikely the Broncos would let him get into that season without doing some kind of extension.

[SoCalImport]

[QUOTE=WARHORSE;551033]Broncos Inbox -- Feb. 11


That's just the guaranteed part, but none of it is now a concern for the Broncos since Robertson didn't play enough snaps to engage any of the guarantees. He also didn't play enough for the Broncos to have to surrender a draft pick in the trade that brought him to Denver.]

It would've been a travesty if McDaniels had to start off by sending a valuable pick to NY. We need every selection we have this year.

[Dirk]

***drool*** Nnamdi Asomugha

Would I love it if the Broncos could land this kid...

[claymore]

***drool*** Nnamdi Asomugha

Would I love it if the Broncos could land this kid...

We already have one great CB we cant use.

[Dirk]

We already have one great CB we cant use.

:lol::lol:

Could you imagine an actual healthy Champ on one side and Nnamdi on the other? Wow!

[omac]

:lol::lol:

Could you imagine an actual healthy Champ on one side and Nnamdi on the other? Wow!

And without getting adequate pressure on the QB, they'll both look terrible. :D

Btw, if Doogie uses the Patriots model, they'll eventually just let Champ go. They'll only keep a few very key people; everyone else will be expendable.

[Dirk]

And without getting adequate pressure on the QB, they'll both look terrible. :D


Amen to that! But I'm assuming they will take care of that issue too. At least that is what I am thinking... :confused:

[WARHORSE]

:lol::lol:

Could you imagine an actual healthy Champ on one side and Nnamdi on the other? Wow!


Yes, I could imagine that.


Even more than that I can imagine the flexibility the secondary would have with a tandem like that along with Bly. You could disguise coverages like no other defense.

While I agree we need pressure on the QB, players like these make a tremendous impact. Asomugha could rove around the entire field, and so could Champ. In zone coverages, we could have blitzes coming from all over the place. Corner blitzes. What QB would want to throw a hot read into Champ or Asomugha? lol..............


Asomugha is the safest big money FA out there.

[silkamilkamonico]

If Denver were to sign Nnamdi, I would seriously question the decision making ability of the new front office. That would be a terrible signing considering the state of the organization.

[56crash]

If Denver were to sign Nnamdi, I would seriously question the decision making ability of the new front office. That would be a terrible signing considering the state of the organization.

well yes and no it would depend on the draft and other FA's signed but you are right that would be a head scrather all by it's self .

[CoachChaz]

And without getting adequate pressure on the QB, they'll both look terrible. :D

Btw, if Doogie uses the Patriots model, they'll eventually just let Champ go. They'll only keep a few very key people; everyone else will be expendable.

And it would make total sense to me. Champ suffers injuries a little more frequently and he'll be 31 once the season starts. By the time this team gets rebuilt into serious contention...he'll be well past his prime

[Lonestar]

My my I take it no one noticed these comments

"And judging from the conversations I've had with plenty of general managers and personnel executives around the league, a lot of teams are saying they're feeling the cash pinch right now. Baseball free agency has been slow all winter because of it and other than the elite, top free agents, it looks like it will be slowed than usual in the NFL as well.
Teams have said this before, though, and run out in the first 48 hours of free agency and spent like crazy. But this year does have a different vibe, especially with teams having laid off office personnel over the past month.
So the Broncos will likely participate in free agency, but they'll likely look for players who fit the cost structure they want and they may wait a little bit until after the initial rush dies down to get a productive player who may not have gotten the action he expected when he hit the market."

let repeat this portion so Y'all get it..


So the Broncos will likely participate in free agency, but they'll likely look for players who fit the cost structure they want and they may wait a little bit until after the initial rush dies down to get a productive player who may not have gotten the action he expected when he hit the market




and then it this that was probably overlooked also..


Also Mike Shanahan is still on the books for $7 million this season and defensive coordinator Bob Slowik is on for over $1 million as well. When the Broncos fired Shanahan and his staff they not only made a commitment to change, but a commitment to pay the financial price of that as well since all of Shanahan's assistants had at least one year left on their deals.The Broncos are responsible for that amount even if the coach gets another job, but his new contract doesn't equal what the Broncos were paying him. So the Broncos would have to pay the difference. The Broncos, for example, are still scheduled to pay part of Scott O'Brien's salary even though he took a job as the Patriots special teams coach.
The two teams can argue about the difference, and even go as far as getting an arbitrator to decide, but the Broncos will be paying some of O'Brien's salary no matter what.
There are also other former Broncos assistants who did not yet get jobs so the Broncos will have to pay as well. So that's a lot of salary out the door before you even start talking about players.

time to stop dreaming of elite FA's cause as I have said on MANY occasions Pat wants to build via th draft that has MUCH cheaper contracts..

Not sure If Y'all will get it but this article lays it out pretty strong..

[CoachChaz]

Ive always been a bigger fan of mid-level FA's anyway. You always get a much better value.

[TXBRONC]

Amen to that! But I'm assuming they will take care of that issue too. At least that is what I am thinking... :confused:

I don't think will overlook the issue of getting pressure up front.

[fcspikeit]

My my I take it no one noticed these comments

"And judging from the conversations I've had with plenty of general managers and personnel executives around the league, a lot of teams are saying they're feeling the cash pinch right now. Baseball free agency has been slow all winter because of it and other than the elite, top free agents, it looks like it will be slowed than usual in the NFL as well.
Teams have said this before, though, and run out in the first 48 hours of free agency and spent like crazy. But this year does have a different vibe, especially with teams having laid off office personnel over the past month.
So the Broncos will likely participate in free agency, but they'll likely look for players who fit the cost structure they want and they may wait a little bit until after the initial rush dies down to get a productive player who may not have gotten the action he expected when he hit the market."

let repeat this portion so Y'all get it..


So the Broncos will likely participate in free agency, but they'll likely look for players who fit the cost structure they want and they may wait a little bit until after the initial rush dies down to get a productive player who may not have gotten the action he expected when he hit the market




and then it this that was probably overlooked also..


Also Mike Shanahan is still on the books for $7 million this season and defensive coordinator Bob Slowik is on for over $1 million as well. When the Broncos fired Shanahan and his staff they not only made a commitment to change, but a commitment to pay the financial price of that as well since all of Shanahan's assistants had at least one year left on their deals.The Broncos are responsible for that amount even if the coach gets another job, but his new contract doesn't equal what the Broncos were paying him. So the Broncos would have to pay the difference. The Broncos, for example, are still scheduled to pay part of Scott O'Brien's salary even though he took a job as the Patriots special teams coach.
The two teams can argue about the difference, and even go as far as getting an arbitrator to decide, but the Broncos will be paying some of O'Brien's salary no matter what.
There are also other former Broncos assistants who did not yet get jobs so the Broncos will have to pay as well. So that's a lot of salary out the door before you even start talking about players.

time to stop dreaming of elite FA's cause as I have said on MANY occasions Pat wants to build via th draft that has MUCH cheaper contracts..

Not sure If Y'all will get it but this article lays it out pretty strong..

I don't see how not spending the needed money to build a contender fits with giving the coach the best chance to win?

You can't make dumb mistakes in FA as was sometimes the case in the past, but you have to spend money if your going to have anyone worth a damn on the D-line.. Even if we draft heavy on the D-line, it won't show up on the field for a couple years. That is if it even does.

McDaniels will need a couple key players to build his team around. The draft can be used to fill in the other holes but we need impact players to come in and amediatly help this team...

I believe we will make more of a splash in FA this year then we did last year.

[silkamilkamonico]

well yes and no it would depend on the draft and other FA's signed but you are right that would be a head scrather all by it's self .

It would be absolutely terrible. Not only would we be spending roughly 15-20% of our entire salary cap on one unit(Nnamdi, Champ, Bly), but it would be at a position completely contingent on the play of the front 4.

You wanna spend 15%-20% on 1 unti? Do it along the front 4.

NFL 101.

[Fan in Exile]

My my I take it no one noticed these comments

"And judging from the conversations I've had with plenty of general managers and personnel executives around the league, a lot of teams are saying they're feeling the cash pinch right now. Baseball free agency has been slow all winter because of it and other than the elite, top free agents, it looks like it will be slowed than usual in the NFL as well.
Teams have said this before, though, and run out in the first 48 hours of free agency and spent like crazy. But this year does have a different vibe, especially with teams having laid off office personnel over the past month.
So the Broncos will likely participate in free agency, but they'll likely look for players who fit the cost structure they want and they may wait a little bit until after the initial rush dies down to get a productive player who may not have gotten the action he expected when he hit the market."

let repeat this portion so Y'all get it..


So the Broncos will likely participate in free agency, but they'll likely look for players who fit the cost structure they want and they may wait a little bit until after the initial rush dies down to get a productive player who may not have gotten the action he expected when he hit the market




and then it this that was probably overlooked also..


Also Mike Shanahan is still on the books for $7 million this season and defensive coordinator Bob Slowik is on for over $1 million as well. When the Broncos fired Shanahan and his staff they not only made a commitment to change, but a commitment to pay the financial price of that as well since all of Shanahan's assistants had at least one year left on their deals.The Broncos are responsible for that amount even if the coach gets another job, but his new contract doesn't equal what the Broncos were paying him. So the Broncos would have to pay the difference. The Broncos, for example, are still scheduled to pay part of Scott O'Brien's salary even though he took a job as the Patriots special teams coach.
The two teams can argue about the difference, and even go as far as getting an arbitrator to decide, but the Broncos will be paying some of O'Brien's salary no matter what.
There are also other former Broncos assistants who did not yet get jobs so the Broncos will have to pay as well. So that's a lot of salary out the door before you even start talking about players.

time to stop dreaming of elite FA's cause as I have said on MANY occasions Pat wants to build via th draft that has MUCH cheaper contracts..

Not sure If Y'all will get it but this article lays it out pretty strong..

I've seen you say this on many occasions Jr and it always seemed to me that you're building a lot on one comment that Pat made before the beginning of last season. I also wouldn't put too much into the speculation of one reporter.

Pat understands that you've got to spend money to make money, but at the same time he isn't going to be reckless. Let's just wait and see what actually happens.

[silkamilkamonico]

I for one don't think it's going to be an exciting offseason as far as free agency goes, and that's a good thing.

1)Bowlen's spending an awful lot of money on coaches, and even though it isn't correlated to the salary cap, the money still has to be budgeted from somewhere.

2)Denver spent $20 mill on players last year, who weren't even with the team (dead money). That is absolutely horrendous decision making by the personnel department the last few years. Absolutely terrible. I hope Bowlen straps the organization right now, and forces them to build the right way. Through the draft.

3)Free agency = overpaying. Even for mid level guys. It's an excuse for the scout and development teams to not have to make their job a priority in terms of the draft.

4)The Patriots have arguably been the best team in the NFL this decade at scouting, drafting, and developing. Not only do they continue to pump out great player after great player from the draft, but they go and turn some of those great players into first day draft picks while managing the cap. Absolutely brilliant work. Hopefully McDaniels was an instrument in that, and carries some of the success here.

[tomjonesrocks]

I'd assume the chance of Asomugha in Denver is zero. The Pats didn't commit a lot of cash to their corners so why McDaniels would start now I have no idea. He also wouldn't get the team any closer to. 3-4. Makes no sense at all IMO.

[WARHORSE]

My my I take it no one noticed these comments

"And judging from the conversations I've had with plenty of general managers and personnel executives around the league, a lot of teams are saying they're feeling the cash pinch right now. Baseball free agency has been slow all winter because of it and other than the elite, top free agents, it looks like it will be slowed than usual in the NFL as well.
Teams have said this before, though, and run out in the first 48 hours of free agency and spent like crazy. But this year does have a different vibe, especially with teams having laid off office personnel over the past month.
So the Broncos will likely participate in free agency, but they'll likely look for players who fit the cost structure they want and they may wait a little bit until after the initial rush dies down to get a productive player who may not have gotten the action he expected when he hit the market."

let repeat this portion so Y'all get it..


So the Broncos will likely participate in free agency, but they'll likely look for players who fit the cost structure they want and they may wait a little bit until after the initial rush dies down to get a productive player who may not have gotten the action he expected when he hit the market




and then it this that was probably overlooked also..


Also Mike Shanahan is still on the books for $7 million this season and defensive coordinator Bob Slowik is on for over $1 million as well. When the Broncos fired Shanahan and his staff they not only made a commitment to change, but a commitment to pay the financial price of that as well since all of Shanahan's assistants had at least one year left on their deals.The Broncos are responsible for that amount even if the coach gets another job, but his new contract doesn't equal what the Broncos were paying him. So the Broncos would have to pay the difference. The Broncos, for example, are still scheduled to pay part of Scott O'Brien's salary even though he took a job as the Patriots special teams coach.
The two teams can argue about the difference, and even go as far as getting an arbitrator to decide, but the Broncos will be paying some of O'Brien's salary no matter what.
There are also other former Broncos assistants who did not yet get jobs so the Broncos will have to pay as well. So that's a lot of salary out the door before you even start talking about players.

time to stop dreaming of elite FA's cause as I have said on MANY occasions Pat wants to build via th draft that has MUCH cheaper contracts..

Not sure If Y'all will get it but this article lays it out pretty strong..

Im pretty sure everyone saw the quote JR.......we can all read afterall. lol.......


For everyone who mentions Asomugha, or any other elite FA possibly coming to Denver, Im pretty sure we all recognize the chances of that happening are not likely.

But dont think Bowlen wont spend the money. Afterall, this is the same guy who paid Graham and Henry while trying to sign Kerney as well.

To me, it boils down to what is Josh McDaniels telling Bowlen and the F.O. that he needs to turn this team around.


THAT, is what is going to determine what Bowlen does.

Bowlen just fired a man he owed a ton of money to......along with his entire staff.

Think he did that handcuffing himself in free agency?

The man is too smart for that, and while Im SURE he has a desired budget, dont think he cant generate the cash to do what he wants.

He can.


Personally, I think the Broncos have a ceiling they would be willing to go to in order to aquire the specifically targeted Free Agents they think can help. Beyond that, they will not go there.

So, I look for Denver to hit the mid-level Free Agents as well.

Bowlen does not want to field a competitor. He wants to field a winner.

That will cost money.

And Im sure hes being very smart with his choices.......but dont count out the fact that sometimes men just go with their guts in making decisions.

Even big wigs like Bowlen.:coffee:

[Denver Native (Carol)]

I was not quite sure where to post these articles.

http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=334&storyID=8834

2009 Free Agency Preview: Quarterbacks

In the weeks leading up to the start of free agency on February 27, DenverBroncos.com will take a look at the 2009 free agent class by position. First up: quarterbacks.

ENGLEWOOD, Colo. -- Take a look around the league and you can pick out a number of teams that have unsettled situations at the quarterback position.

From Chicago to Tampa to San Francisco to Kansas City, teams don't know which direction they're heading with regards to the quarterback. The Lions, Titans and Vikings all have some lingering questions as well.

Whatever these teams decide to do, they have a number of solid options before them in the form of saavy veterans who have learned it all and young up-and-comers that have yet to make their mark.

Here's a look at a few of the more intriguing free agents.

Matt Cassel, New England Patriots, Unrestricted

The NFL was stunned as Tom Brady went down in Week 1 of the 2008 season, but Cassel stepped in and admirably led the Patriots to an 11-5 record. They may have missed the playoffs, but that certainly was no fault of the 26-year-old quarterback.

Cassel had been a career backup to Brady in New England and a backup to Matt Leinart and Carson Palmer at the University of Southern California. He hadn't started a game since high school. Yet he started 15 games in 2008, throwing for 3,693 yards, 21 touchdowns and 11 interceptions. Clearly this guy can be a starter in the NFL.

The only problem is that the Patriots elected to use the non-exclusive franchise tag on Cassel, and he has signed it. With that franchise tag around his neck, any team that wants the fourth-year quarterback will have to pay a high price -- the Patriots can match any offer made by another team or allow him to sign with that team in exchange for two first-round draft picks.

If the Patriots do not think Brady's injury has fully healed by the time the 2009 season comes around, they could hold onto Cassel and let him lead the team for another year as well.

Kerry Collins, Tennessee Titans, Unrestricted

Week 1 may be mostly remembered for the fall of Brady, but it was also when Vince Young went down with an injury and lost his job for emotional reasons as well. Collins, a 14-year-veteran, took the reins and led the Titans to an NFL-best 13-3 record in 2008.

He put up solid numbers with a team known for it's running game and strong defense, throwing for 2,676 yards, 12 touchdowns and just seven interceptions. He went to the Pro Bowl as an alternate, just the second trip of his career.

But now that his contract is up, Collins and the Titans are at a crossroads. While in Hawaii, the 36-year-old quarterback told NFL.com "I feel like I'm a starter in this league."

At the same time, he knows he only has a couple more years left if he wants to continue playing. And the Titans still have Young, the 2006 No.3 overall draft pick, waiting in the wings. The question is, will the Titans give Young another shot at redeeming himself and leading the team or will Collins stay at the helm?

Collins has said that he'd like to remain in Tennessee, but if that can't happen, he'd try to land as a starter somewhere else. And if that doesn't work, he has said he'd consider retirement.

Kurt Warner, Arizona Cardinals, Unrestricted

Perhaps no situation is more intriguing than this one. It's similar to what's going on in Tennessee. 37-year-old Warner won the starting job before the season began, and like in Tennessee, he beat out a 2006 first-rounder in Leinart.

Warner put up huge numbers, throwing for 4,583 yards, 30 touchdowns and 14 interceptions, all while completing 67.1 percent of his passes, leading the Cardinals to Super Bowl XLIII.

Things got more interesting when the Chiefs hired Arizona offensive coordinator Todd Haley to be their next head coach. It's yet to be seen if that will effect Warner's decision on whether or not he returns, but according to the Arizona Republic, he does not want to play with another team.

In the end, it looks like returning to the Cardinals as the starter or retirement are his two options.

OTHER NOTABLE FREE AGENT QUARTERBACKS:

*
Jeff Garcia, Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Unrestricted
*
David Garrard, Jacksonville Jaguars, Unrestricted
*
Rex Grossman, Chicago Bears, Unrestricted
*
Byron Leftwich, Pittsburgh Steelers, Unrestricted
*
J.T. O'Sullivan, San Francisco 49ers, Unrestricted
*
Dan Orlovsky, Detroit Lions, Unrestricted

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Next - Running Backs:

http://www.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=334&storyID=8837

2009 Free Agency Preview: Running Backs/Fullbacks

In the weeks leading up to the start of free agency on February 27, DenverBroncos.com will take a look at the 2009 free agent class by position. Next up: running backs and fullbacks.

ENGLEWOOD, Colo. -- One position at which teams always look to improve is the running back position. Whether they have a perennial Pro Bowler in the backfield or not, NFL franchises know that ball-carriers only last so long with all the pounding they take.

This year, the 2009 free agent class a number of qualified backs that can fill a team's needs. There are guys who have been around for a while but can still provide veteran leadership. There are young backups that haven't carried a full load yet but have shown potential.

Whatever the case may be and whatever needs a team is looking to fulfill, these next three backs will be highly sought after.

Brandon Jacobs, New York Giants, Unrestricted

No one in the NFL in 2008 had a better ground attack than the Giants. Many teams boast a dynamic duo at running back, but the G-men had a three-headed monster with Ahmad Bradshaw, Jacobs and Derrick Ward.

Of the three, Jacobs is the work horse. At 6-foot-4, 264 pounds, he's without a doubt the biggest back in New York. He's extremely hard to tackle and punishes defenders that try. In 2008, he started 13 games and despite missing three games due to injury, Jacobs still rushed for 1,089 yards and 15 touchdowns. Yet he only carried the ball 219 times, giving him a solid five yard-per-carry average.

In 2007, his first year as the lead back after Tiki Barber retired, he only played in 11 games and he started just nine. But again with limited action, he still gained over 1,000 yards, scoring four times.

At age 26, he still has a lot of years left as a productive back. He has only been the lead back these past two seasons, but even then, he had two more than capable backups to spell him when needed. As a result, he doesn't have as many carries as many running backs would after four years.

He might not ever make the open market, however. The Giants still have 15 days to sign Jacobs to a new longterm deal, and Jacobs told the New York Daily News that he believes he will sign a new contract before the start of free agency but that he would be upset if he were slapped with the franchise tag.

Darren Sproles, San Diego Chargers, Unrestricted

Here's the guy that Broncos fans are most familiar with. At 5-foot-6, 181 pounds, Sproles might be smaller than your average running back, but by watching him play on Sundays, it's obvious he sees himself as much bigger.

With LaDainian Tomlinson in front of him on the depth chart, Sproles doesn't get many carries, but whenever he touches the ball, he always makes something happen. In 2008, he rushed just 61 times, but they went for 330 yards and a touchdown, giving him a 5.4-yard average. He was more dangerous as a pass catcher in 2008, hauling in 29 for 342 and five scores.

And he's also a more than capable return man. He took back 53 kicks for 1,376 yards, including a 103-yard return for a touchdown. That 26-yard average-per-return was good for third in the league among players with at least 40 returns.

The last backup to L.T. in San Diego, Michael Turner, made it to free agency in 2008 and was an immediate hit for the Falcons, ranking second in the league with 1,699 rushing yards.

So the question is, will the Chargers use the franchise tag on Sproles to keep him around in 2009 as an insurance policy for the 29-year-old Tomlinson, who appeared to lose a step in 2008? Or will they watch him leave to make a big impact elsewhere like Turner?

ESPN has been reporting that it looks more and more like they will franchise Sproles if a longterm deal can't be reached by the February 19 franchise tag deadline.

Derrick Ward, New York Giants, Unrestricted

Ward was the primary backup to Jacobs in 2008, though by watching him play, sometimes he looked like the feature back.

Ward played in all 16 games in 2008 and started three, racking up 182 carries that he took for 1,025 yards and two touchdowns, averaging 5.6 yards-per-carry. He also caught 41 passes for 384 yards. Like Jacobs, Ward also wrapped up just his fourth year in the league in 2008, and he has even fewer carries on his legs than Jacobs.

It will all come down to what the Giants want to do in terms of negotiating with their two running backs. Both have proven they can be productive, as they both rushed for over 1,000 yards in 2008, becoming just the fourth pair of running backs to accomplish that feat.

OTHER NOTABLE FREE AGENT RUNNING BACKS/FULLBACKS:

*
Shaun Alexander, Unrestricted
*
J.J. Arrington, Arizona Cardinals, Unrestricted
*
Cedric Benson, Cincinnati Bengals, Unrestricted
*
Correll Buckhalter, Philadelphia Eagles, Unrestricted
*
Heath Evans (FB), New England Patriots, Unrestricted
*
Ahman Green, Unrestricted
*
Fred Jackson, Buffalo Bills, Restricted
*
Rudi Johnson, Detroit Lions, Unrestricted
*
Kevin Jones, Chicago Bears, Unrestricted
*
LaMont Jordan, New England Patriots, Unrestricted
*
Maurice Morris, Seattle Seahawks, Unrestricted
*
Lorenzo Neal (FB), Baltimore Ravens, Unrestricted
*
Aaron Stecker, New Orleans Saints, Unrestricted

[Lonestar]

Ive always been a bigger fan of mid-level FA's anyway. You always get a much better value.

As long as mikey is not choosing them.. I shudder when I think of last years FA FUBARs.. Niko, both moron safeties and Robertson.. with Niko and Robertson having huge current upside that ALL were epic fails..

cut them all, eat the signing bonuses and move on....
the sooner the better..

[TXBRONC]

I for one don't think it's going to be an exciting offseason as far as free agency goes, and that's a good thing.

1)Bowlen's spending an awful lot of money on coaches, and even though it isn't correlated to the salary cap, the money still has to be budgeted from somewhere.

2)Denver spent $20 mill on players last year, who weren't even with the team (dead money). That is absolutely horrendous decision making by the personnel department the last few years. Absolutely terrible. I hope Bowlen straps the organization right now, and forces them to build the right way. Through the draft.

3)Free agency = overpaying. Even for mid level guys. It's an excuse for the scout and development teams to not have to make their job a priority in terms of the draft.

4)The Patriots have arguably been the best team in the NFL this decade at scouting, drafting, and developing. Not only do they continue to pump out great player after great player from the draft, but they go and turn some of those great players into first day draft picks while managing the cap. Absolutely brilliant work. Hopefully McDaniels was an instrument in that, and carries some of the success here.

Yeah the Patriots have over the years done a very good job of drafting. However, they also go out and sign free agents as well.

[Lonestar]

I don't see how not spending the needed money to build a contender fits with giving the coach the best chance to win?

You can't make dumb mistakes in FA as was sometimes the case in the past, but you have to spend money if your going to have anyone worth a damn on the D-line.. Even if we draft heavy on the D-line, it won't show up on the field for a couple years. That is if it even does.

McDaniels will need a couple key players to build his team around. The draft can be used to fill in the other holes but we need impact players to come in and amediatly help this team...

I believe we will make more of a splash in FA this year then we did last year.


spike read it again if the CASH is not there what is Pat going to do hand out I.O.U.s.. that was a huge reason lots of folks were cut from the payroll last year from the FO.. and AS I understood it why we were so modest in the FA market years year.. and remember Robertson was more of t Trade than a FA.. and it came in very late.. Had it not been for the FUBAR You have to admit Pats austerity program would have very bare bones..

We got second maybe even 3rd or 4th tier FA last year.. and frankly it showed in their performance on the field.. some will say that just proves we should go after a marquee player.. but all of the owners are cash strapped in the current economy..

Is winning important to DEN/PAT of course but he is realistic to know that building via the draft is going to allow for less wins and frankly I think the fans will give them the benefit of the doubt as long as they have made the right moves in the coaching area, (looks good so far) and in the draft.. and if the past 2-3 years is any clue that seems to be the ace in the hole..

Folks Pat was clear last year


in building via the draft..

cutting FO jobs

firing mikey and most of the coaches

bringing in younger Coaching staff

not hiring a top notch expensive GM..


Not sure how many clues Y'all need..


If you do not have the money to spend at home how do you handle it.. You cut back on luxuries first and buy the basics only.. that is what Pat is doing.. IMHO

[SmilinAssasSin27]

Yeah the Patriots have over the years done a very good job of drafting. However, they also go out and sign free agents as well.

But they go for low risk guys who are cheap, whichis the basic point. I don't mind signing a few FAs to contribute, but the draft builds winning franchises. Granted, they got Adalius, but otherwise they got Harrison at a reasonable deal. They basically STOLE both starting WRs. Dillon was cheap cuz noone wanted him. Who else have they signed as a FA who is noteqworthy?

Pats are smart. They don't spend unnecessary money. They let their best Safety go after their first SB win. Then Samuel was allowed to go to Philly. They didn't keep Stallworth around once they were done with him. Graha wanted paid so now he's not in NE. They play OLBs at FB and WRs at CB. They make due...and win while doing so.

[SmilinAssasSin27]

I personally don't need a winner thi year. I enjoy seeing a quality team being built as I enjoy the playoff runs. I don't want to see us buy up all the FAs only to hurtthe financial future ofthe team. I'd offer up just about anyone over 28 years old (including Champ) for draft picks. We hae enough young talent on offense to be exciting and no matter what we do/try w/ the D, it CANNOT get worse than it has been.

[Lonestar]

But they go for low risk guys who are cheap, whichis the basic point. I don't mind signing a few FAs to contribute, but the draft builds winning franchises. Granted, they got Adalius, but otherwise they got Harrison at a reasonable deal. They basically STOLE both starting WRs. Dillon was cheap cuz noone wanted him. Who else have they signed as a FA who is noteqworthy?

Pats are smart. They don't spend unnecessary money. They let their best Safety go after their first SB win. Then Samuel was allowed to go to Philly. They didn't keep Stallworth around once they were done with him. Graha wanted paid so now he's not in NE. They play OLBs at FB and WRs at CB. They make due...and win while doing so.

they are the energizer bunny in the NFL have had some phenomenal seasons since Craft bought the team.. and for a few years they did not do well but since they started to win they have been very consistent..

I'll bet NO ONE on this forum expected them to go 11-5 with a rookie QB.. Yes I know he is not a true rookie but the guy has not been a starting QB since he was in HS.. I'd guess if we had taken a poll most folks would have thought it would be more like 4-12.. and only because MIA was in their conference..


Not a bad model to emulate..

Glad we got someone that grew up in their system..

[rcsodak]

I don't see how not spending the needed money to build a contender fits with giving the coach the best chance to win?

You can't make dumb mistakes in FA as was sometimes the case in the past, but you have to spend money if your going to have anyone worth a damn on the D-line.. Even if we draft heavy on the D-line, it won't show up on the field for a couple years. That is if it even does.

McDaniels will need a couple key players to build his team around. The draft can be used to fill in the other holes but we need impact players to come in and amediatly help this team...

I believe we will make more of a splash in FA this year then we did last year.

Did you NOT read what JR posted and reposted? MONEY!!!!!!!!
Ex-coach salaries.....current player salaries.....current FA's like Weigeman.....THE ECONOMY......notice the cuts in the administration end of the business last year????

Baby steps is what we're going to see, imo. Added to a very important draft, McD's idea is to start gearing the team TOWARD the playoffs....I'm thinking he'd rather take out a 5% 30yr mortgage, and have the team build toward the ultimate goal, versus doing a 3% 2yr A.R.M. now, and then get stuck later on down the road.

Plus, who knows what's going to happen with the cap in 2010!?!

Pat's a business man, before he's an owner. He knows his limitations, and how much he can divest into the team.

[fcspikeit]

Did you NOT read what JR posted and reposted? MONEY!!!!!!!!
Ex-coach salaries.....current player salaries.....current FA's like Weigeman.....THE ECONOMY......notice the cuts in the administration end of the business last year????

Baby steps is what we're going to see, imo. Added to a very important draft, McD's idea is to start gearing the team TOWARD the playoffs....I'm thinking he'd rather take out a 5% 30yr mortgage, and have the team build toward the ultimate goal, versus doing a 3% 2yr A.R.M. now, and then get stuck later on down the road.

Plus, who knows what's going to happen with the cap in 2010!?!

Pat's a business man, before he's an owner. He knows his limitations, and how much he can divest into the team.

Even with all that being true, why then is Pat firing coaches and FO people he has to pay anyways to hire other guys who he will also have to pay?

All this moving and shaking in the FO is costing him money. If it was more about the money and less about winning it would have made more since for him to keep the guys on staff..

Do you believe he fired Shanahan and com. to save money? If he is a good business man he knows, the best way to make money in this league is to win!

[rcsodak]

Even with all that being true, why then is Pat firing coaches and FO people he has to pay anyways to hire other guys who he will also have to pay?

All this moving and shaking in the FO is costing him money. If it was more about the money and less about winning it would have made more since for him to keep the guys on staff..

Do you believe he fired Shanahan and com. to save money? If he is a good business man he knows, the best way to make money in this league is to win!

FC, how, exactly, does Pat make more money by winning?

And I'm not sure FO people get paid after being fired, like coaches did. Depends, I guess, whether there was "cause"? But really...how much were they making? PJ Pope money?

[Lonestar]

Even with all that being true, why then is Pat firing coaches and FO people he has to pay anyways to hire other guys who he will also have to pay?

All this moving and shaking in the FO is costing him money. If it was more about the money and less about winning it would have made more since for him to keep the guys on staff..

Do you believe he fired Shanahan and com. to save money? If he is a good business man he knows, the best way to make money in this league is to win!


he fired them because in the words of some of the Jake haters he came to th conclusion they could not lead them back to a super bowl..
He lost confidence in his friend.. who had a strangle hold on the franchise.. and it was my way but the hi way for mikey..

Pat simply had enough of he ego and decided that is was time to make a change.. All the while knowing how bad the defense was and the reason for it.. Bad drafting in the past and almost a complete and through building up the O to mask how bad it was.. Mikey was a one dimensional HC O O O O d ..

Which really surprises me as in order to beat a defense with your Offense you have to understand how it works.. and mikey had beat alot of defenses over the years.. he simply got stale his players were not listening to him.. and his total disdain for defense and love affair on O did him in..

PAt wanted control back and now has it.. plain and simple and it will be run on HIS budget from here on in..

LET me state this again the Den fans are some of the best in the world .. IF they see positive changes they will give the Broncos grace time to fix it.. and frankly how can they not be better next year than last year.. EVEN playing a tougher schedule..

there is not a real fan out there that knew that something has been really wrong for the past few years.. and in most cases believed the tripe that we were a couple of players away speech each year.. it was apparent last year they were more like 10 players away and a few coaches..

My God all the have to do is show up and play inspired ball for 60 minutes unlike last year.. Whether they win or lose at least they should not be blown out in trap games ..

[fcspikeit]

FC, how, exactly, does Pat make more money by winning?

And I'm not sure FO people get paid after being fired, like coaches did. Depends, I guess, whether there was "cause"? But really...how much were they making? PJ Pope money?

Well for starters, You see, you get paid for prime time games, no one wants to show a losing team on prime time. Winners also sell more merchandise and attract more fans.

Each team gets paid for being broadcast on TV. That includes each playoff game that is broadcast.

The networks pay a lot to air the games, the teams get a cut of the check from the NFL. ;)

Among other things, winning teams are far more likely to receive endorsement deals.

[Lonestar]

Well for starters, You see, you get paid for prime time games, no one wants to show a losing team on prime time. Winners also sell more merchandise and attract more fans.

Each team gets paid for being broadcast on TV. That includes each playoff game that is broadcast.

The networks pay a lot to air the games, the teams get a cut of the check from the NFL. ;)

Among other things, winning teams are far more likely to receive endorsement deals.

the teams ALL share in the TV revenue the only thing the Pat gets to keep is the Bigger part of the share of ticket sales if they play a home game and whatever else he got in his lease deal.. But then you have to pay for the players and staff .. They make their big money on the SHARED revenue for the TV deals..

Sales of merchandise are pretty much the same in DEN the fans are pretty loyal.. sure somewhat higher but not enough to keep things samey samey..

[Max Power]

***drool*** Nnamdi Asomugha

Would I love it if the Broncos could land this kid...

The Raiders are franchising him.

[TXBRONC]

The Raiders are franchising him.

Has that actually been reported or is just a rumor at this point? Because it would not surprise me in the least of the Raiders did that.

[broncosinindy]

I aggree with JRWIZ that some of the players didnt respond to Shanny. and i think it showed down the stretch. 3 games up with 3 to go.

I am gonna miss the big money in FA but i really believe that we wont go there. But what distresses me is who are our talent evaluators. can we depend on them to get the picks right?

[Lonestar]

I aggree with JRWIZ that some of the players didnt respond to Shanny. and i think it showed down the stretch. 3 games up with 3 to go.

I am gonna miss the big money in FA but i really believe that we wont go there. But what distresses me is who are our talent evaluators. can we depend on them to get the picks right?


guessing you have not heard the goodmans are gone..:salute:

last of mikeys croonies..

[fcspikeit]

the teams ALL share in the TV revenue the only thing the Pat gets to keep is the Bigger part of the share of ticket sales if they play a home game and whatever else he got in his lease deal.. But then you have to pay for the players and staff .. They make their big money on the SHARED revenue for the TV deals..

Sales of merchandise are pretty much the same in DEN the fans are pretty loyal.. sure somewhat higher but not enough to keep things samey samey..

From my understanding the revenue is shared, but it's not an even split. How could the Lions make just as much money off the success of Pitt and Ari as they do?

I have read some things on the revenue structure in the NFL and how it is dispersed through out the league, I remember the winners making more then the losers, but I'm not going to take the needed time to research it..

Because frankly, it isn't even that important. The goal is to win! Winning is enough of a reason in itself. Teams like the Cardinals never won anything until they decided they better open up the pocketbook and pay for talent to come to their team.

[Fan in Exile]

IIRC and that's a big if. There was a study done on the effects of winning and it's financial benefit to a football team. The result of the study was that winning makes a team more money. It attracts more fairweather fans as well build younger fans. That is up until a team wins the superbowl, and then the added cost of salaries because of the win makes the team less profitable.

Yes the TV revenues are shared however the merchandise and naming rights and seat licenses aren't and there is substantial amount of money to be made there.

It's a really good study if anyone knows where to find it that would be good. I've looked but no dice, and I really could be off on this one but I seem to remember being very intrigued that winning the super bowl wasn't a financial benefit when all the other winning was.

[Lonestar]

From my understanding the revenue is shared, but it's not an even split. How could the Lions make just as much money off the success of Pitt and Ari as they do?

I have read some things on the revenue structure in the NFL and how it is dispersed through out the league, I remember the winners making more then the losers, but I'm not going to take the needed time to research it..

Because frankly, it isn't even that important. The goal is to win! Winning is enough of a reason in itself. Teams like the Cardinals never won anything until they decided they better open up the pocketbook and pay for talent to come to their team.


Yes the cards did but they have been notorious for being cheap stakes like the bungals have been..

SO they were not hit with an extra amount of revenue they just decided to spend it.. instead of putting it in their pockets..

I could be wrong on TV revenues. But as I understand it the contract is divided by 32 and given out in the manner..

tier May be other revenue in play but ticket sales are also split between the home team and visitor.. Thought I heard like a 70-30 split but could be wrong..

I'll bet someone will come up with the actually info..

[Bronco9798]

Basically the NFL shares virtually all revenues equally among the teams. The $2.2 billion the league gets from broadcast contracts is split equally among the teams. So too are national sponsorships and licensing fees.

The league also shares gate receipts among the teams. Currently 40 percent of the gate receipts from NFL games go into a pool that is eventually divided equally among the teams. This took effect in 2002. Previously the league had earmarked the 40 percent of gate revenues for the visiting team.

Revenue sharing in the NFL is nothing new. It's been around for more than 40 years. In the early 1960's then NFL commissioner Pete Rozelle suggested that all television revenues ($320 million back in those days) be shared equally among the teams and the owners at the time improved.

Over time the policy has developed into what it is today. The goal is to promote parity and stability. The sharing of the league's massive broadcast revenue is the key element.

"No other league distributes revenues across its entire membership in a manner that comes close to giving each team an equal and solid television revenue base. This policy is a major underpinning for team stability," NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue once said in a speech to the Economic Club of Washington.

To some the revenue sharing in the NFL equals some kind of welfare state. Socialism is moniker some might prefer. But the league sees it another way. The product is the NFL and the teams are partners in promoting and selling that product.

Sure, the teams compete on the field, but as a group they compete with other entities for the entertainment dollars of the public.

Tagliabue summed it up this way in remarks to the Senate Judiciary Committee back in 1999:

"Approximately 60 percent of the revenues of the average NFL club today come from the joint presentation of NFL games on national television networks. These revenues are shared equally among all clubs without regard to any club’s market size or revenue potential.

"As a result of the sharing of these and other revenues, the economic advantages of the clubs in the better-situated markets are balanced, albeit not always fully offset, by revenue sharing with the clubs in smaller, less well situated communities, such as Buffalo, Cincinnati, Green Bay, Indianapolis, Kansas City, or New Orleans.

"We have also instituted supplemental revenue sharing policies to give additional direct financial support to clubs whose revenues may otherwise be insufficient to field a competitive team.

"This kind of revenue sharing is inconsistent with the manner in which independent economic competitors conduct themselves. It is the way business partners conduct themselves, seeking to compete not with each other, but with other outside independent competitors in the marketplace, including other sports leagues and other sports and non-sports entertainment."

Of course, the NFL has a big advantage. It's revenue base is huge. The $2.2 billion in gets from its TV deals annually is more than all NHL yearly revenues combined.

All NFL games are broadcast on a network, eliminating the problem of a huge disparity in local television broadcast rights among different size markets. The NHL's presence on national networks pales in comparison.

It also helps that the NFL has had revenue sharing for four decades. It's ingrained into the league. That's a tradition the NHL doesn't have.

The NHLPA, for its part, has no problem with revenue sharing. It has even proposed some revenue sharing ideas for the league. But Bettman says revenue sharing doesn't work without cost certainty.

And what Bettman means that what players get in compensation should be tied to how much the league brings in in revenues. The NFL does that through the salary cap.

[Lonestar]

IIRC and that's a big if. There was a study done on the effects of winning and it's financial benefit to a football team. The result of the study was that winning makes a team more money. It attracts more fairweather fans as well build younger fans. That is up until a team wins the superbowl, and then the added cost of salaries because of the win makes the team less profitable.

Yes the TV revenues are shared however the merchandise and naming rights and seat licenses aren't and there is substantial amount of money to be made there.

It's a really good study if anyone knows where to find it that would be good. I've looked but no dice, and I really could be off on this one but I seem to remember being very intrigued that winning the super bowl wasn't a financial benefit when all the other winning was.

I think what you have stated is pretty close to the mark.. , parking concession, seat license all stay at home depending on the Agreement the team has with the city.. In Jerry Jones case he owns it all as IIRC he paid for the new stadium without public financing..

Ticket sales I do believe are split with the other team. Or they used to be..

As for winning the big one it is the ego in all of us that want to be numero uno..

But as we have all seen most SB winners dissolve rather quickly as the players are mercenaries and looking only for a bigger paycheck..

[Lonestar]

Basically the NFL shares virtually all revenues equally among the teams. The $2.2 billion the league gets from broadcast contracts is split equally among the teams. So too are national sponsorships and licensing fees.

The league also shares gate receipts among the teams. Currently 40 percent of the gate receipts from NFL games go into a pool that is eventually divided equally among the teams. This took effect in 2002. Previously the league had earmarked the 40 percent of gate revenues for the visiting team.

Revenue sharing in the NFL is nothing new. It's been around for more than 40 years. In the early 1960's then NFL commissioner Pete Rozelle suggested that all television revenues ($320 million back in those days) be shared equally among the teams and the owners at the time improved.

Over time the policy has developed into what it is today. The goal is to promote parity and stability. The sharing of the league's massive broadcast revenue is the key element.

"No other league distributes revenues across its entire membership in a manner that comes close to giving each team an equal and solid television revenue base. This policy is a major underpinning for team stability," NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue once said in a speech to the Economic Club of Washington.

To some the revenue sharing in the NFL equals some kind of welfare state. Socialism is moniker some might prefer. But the league sees it another way. The product is the NFL and the teams are partners in promoting and selling that product.

Sure, the teams compete on the field, but as a group they compete with other entities for the entertainment dollars of the public.

Tagliabue summed it up this way in remarks to the Senate Judiciary Committee back in 1999:

"Approximately 60 percent of the revenues of the average NFL club today come from the joint presentation of NFL games on national television networks. These revenues are shared equally among all clubs without regard to any club’s market size or revenue potential.

"As a result of the sharing of these and other revenues, the economic advantages of the clubs in the better-situated markets are balanced, albeit not always fully offset, by revenue sharing with the clubs in smaller, less well situated communities, such as Buffalo, Cincinnati, Green Bay, Indianapolis, Kansas City, or New Orleans.

"We have also instituted supplemental revenue sharing policies to give additional direct financial support to clubs whose revenues may otherwise be insufficient to field a competitive team.

"This kind of revenue sharing is inconsistent with the manner in which independent economic competitors conduct themselves. It is the way business partners conduct themselves, seeking to compete not with each other, but with other outside independent competitors in the marketplace, including other sports leagues and other sports and non-sports entertainment."

Of course, the NFL has a big advantage. It's revenue base is huge. The $2.2 billion in gets from its TV deals annually is more than all NHL yearly revenues combined.

All NFL games are broadcast on a network, eliminating the problem of a huge disparity in local television broadcast rights among different size markets. The NHL's presence on national networks pales in comparison.

It also helps that the NFL has had revenue sharing for four decades. It's ingrained into the league. That's a tradition the NHL doesn't have.

The NHLPA, for its part, has no problem with revenue sharing. It has even proposed some revenue sharing ideas for the league. But Bettman says revenue sharing doesn't work without cost certainty.

And what Bettman means that what players get in compensation should be tied to how much the league brings in in revenues. The NFL does that through the salary cap.


outstanding find thanks for sharing..

[fcspikeit]

Basically the NFL shares virtually all revenues equally among the teams. The $2.2 billion the league gets from broadcast contracts is split equally among the teams. So too are national sponsorships and licensing fees.

The league also shares gate receipts among the teams. Currently 40 percent of the gate receipts from NFL games go into a pool that is eventually divided equally among the teams. This took effect in 2002. Previously the league had earmarked the 40 percent of gate revenues for the visiting team.

Revenue sharing in the NFL is nothing new. It's been around for more than 40 years. In the early 1960's then NFL commissioner Pete Rozelle suggested that all television revenues ($320 million back in those days) be shared equally among the teams and the owners at the time improved.

Over time the policy has developed into what it is today. The goal is to promote parity and stability. The sharing of the league's massive broadcast revenue is the key element.

"No other league distributes revenues across its entire membership in a manner that comes close to giving each team an equal and solid television revenue base. This policy is a major underpinning for team stability," NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue once said in a speech to the Economic Club of Washington.

To some the revenue sharing in the NFL equals some kind of welfare state. Socialism is moniker some might prefer. But the league sees it another way. The product is the NFL and the teams are partners in promoting and selling that product.

Sure, the teams compete on the field, but as a group they compete with other entities for the entertainment dollars of the public.

Tagliabue summed it up this way in remarks to the Senate Judiciary Committee back in 1999:

"Approximately 60 percent of the revenues of the average NFL club today come from the joint presentation of NFL games on national television networks. These revenues are shared equally among all clubs without regard to any club’s market size or revenue potential.

"As a result of the sharing of these and other revenues, the economic advantages of the clubs in the better-situated markets are balanced, albeit not always fully offset, by revenue sharing with the clubs in smaller, less well situated communities, such as Buffalo, Cincinnati, Green Bay, Indianapolis, Kansas City, or New Orleans.

"We have also instituted supplemental revenue sharing policies to give additional direct financial support to clubs whose revenues may otherwise be insufficient to field a competitive team.

"This kind of revenue sharing is inconsistent with the manner in which independent economic competitors conduct themselves. It is the way business partners conduct themselves, seeking to compete not with each other, but with other outside independent competitors in the marketplace, including other sports leagues and other sports and non-sports entertainment."

Of course, the NFL has a big advantage. It's revenue base is huge. The $2.2 billion in gets from its TV deals annually is more than all NHL yearly revenues combined.

All NFL games are broadcast on a network, eliminating the problem of a huge disparity in local television broadcast rights among different size markets. The NHL's presence on national networks pales in comparison.

It also helps that the NFL has had revenue sharing for four decades. It's ingrained into the league. That's a tradition the NHL doesn't have.

The NHLPA, for its part, has no problem with revenue sharing. It has even proposed some revenue sharing ideas for the league. But Bettman says revenue sharing doesn't work without cost certainty.

And what Bettman means that what players get in compensation should be tied to how much the league brings in in revenues. The NFL does that through the salary cap.

Thanks for posting :salute:

What about merchandise sales? Is the revenue split from that also?

Also, how about merchandise like the cheerleaders calendar and team posters and such?

If I by Broncos Bumper sticker, is Al Davis getting a share of that?

[Lonestar]

Thanks for posting :salute:

What about merchandise sales? Is the revenue split from that also?

Also, how about merchandise like the cheerleaders calendar and team posters and such?

If I by Broncos Bumper sticker, is Al Davis getting a share of that?

as I understand it the team gets all but the trademark part as a franchise fee to the NFL so to speak.. (NFL logo)

that is why the cowgirls ad redskins are such rich teams.. they get almost all of it as do the raiders.. they are a top 5 teams in team sales.. IIRC ..

Mostly because they are favored gang colors..

[Fan in Exile]

There was a rumor going around that we should all buy directly from the team store, because the Bronco's keep all that money. But they split in some way the revenue on merchandise that gets sold at other places. They still get a licensing fee but not all the profit.

[rcsodak]

From my understanding the revenue is shared, but it's not an even split. How could the Lions make just as much money off the success of Pitt and Ari as they do?

I have read some things on the revenue structure in the NFL and how it is dispersed through out the league, I remember the winners making more then the losers, but I'm not going to take the needed time to research it..

Because frankly, it isn't even that important. The goal is to win! Winning is enough of a reason in itself. Teams like the Cardinals never won anything until they decided they better open up the pocketbook and pay for talent to come to their team.

So you just answer a question with an answer that you pull from your azz?

If you're not going to put any time into an INFORMED answer, fc, then don't spend the time typing it.

Simple really.


Truth be known, I kinda set you up to fail, because of your reply to me.

:D

[MOtorboat]

Not 100 percent accurate, but based on a chart I just put together.

Denver was 7th in the league in 2008 with $111,229,091.40 of revenue through ticket sales and TV Revenue.

New England was No. 1 with $122,302,077.49. Note their average ticket price is $117.84, much higher than any of their competition. (Next highest is Tampa Bay at just over $90 per ticket - Denver's is $76.75)

A.) Based off of actual attendance, not ticket sales. (Attendance figures per ESPN)
B.) Based on Average Ticket Price. http://www.teammarketing.com/

(Too hard to put into code...sorry...if anyone wants the spreadsheet, MHS me or PM me and I'll send it to you.)

[fcspikeit]

So you just answer a question with an answer that you pull from your azz?

If you're not going to put any time into an INFORMED answer, fc, then don't spend the time typing it.

Simple really.


Truth be known, I kinda set you up to fail, because of your reply to me.

:D

No, I said I have read articles in the bast that show winners make more money then losers. I then said I ain't going to go digging for them because it isn't that important.

Truth be known, I thought it was a dumb question to begin with. Everyone knows winners make more money then losers. That's why they play the game!

It's simple really, the more air time you get, the more money you make. Jerry Jones puts up with guys like T.O because they make him money. The common denominator is T.O gets the Cowboys on TV and helps sell the team..

Why do you think both Pitt and Dallas are so big over seas? Pitt gets on TV because they win and Dallas gets on TV because of guys like T.O. How much more do you suppose the Cowboys make in over seas sells then that of the Lions or Cardinals?

[fcspikeit]

as I understand it the team gets all but the trademark part as a franchise fee to the NFL so to speak.. (NFL logo)

that is why the cowgirls ad redskins are such rich teams.. they get almost all of it as do the raiders.. they are a top 5 teams in team sales.. IIRC ..

Mostly because they are favored gang colors..

The Lions have the same colors as the Cowboys, I don't see to many gang members wearing Lions gear. :lol:

There is slightly more to it then that..

[Lonestar]

The Lions have the same colors as the Cowboys, I don't see to many gang members wearing Lions gear. :lol:

There is slightly more to it then that..

I was referring to the raiders with their silver and BLACK and the skull and crossbones..

not the cowgirls..

Why they are Americas Team did you not know that? .. A brilliant marketing move way back.. at the time they were great players squeaky clean and had a respected Head coach in Landry.. always had a suit, tie and hat on the sidelines.. Class......

Then the mongrel bought the team.. and they won a bunch more super bowls and even more folks flocked to the team as fans.. folks from cities and town that did not have a team of their own..

[WARHORSE]

As long as mikey is not choosing them.. I shudder when I think of last years FA FUBARs.. Niko, both moron safeties and Robertson.. with Niko and Robertson having huge current upside that ALL were epic fails..

cut them all, eat the signing bonuses and move on....
the sooner the better..


Everyone knows how much these guys helped us last year.

But if you want to take a look at it from an NFL franchises point of view, go look at what was available and tell us who we should have signed that would have made a difference.


Not as easy as it looks.

Pat Bowlen see this coming? Yeah, he sure as heck did.

Fact is, NFL salaries were huge last year because of the jump in cap space and fools like the Gayturds running up the salaries for no name players.

There were no players out there that were going to change this past year.

We really had no choice in signing duds like those guys.


And Bowlen elected to spend more than they were worth to chase the guys they wanted.

I agree...............Cut em as soon as you can.

[Lonestar]

Everyone knows how much these guys helped us last year.

But if you want to take a look at it from an NFL franchises point of view, go look at what was available and tell us who we should have signed that would have made a difference.


Not as easy as it looks.

Pat Bowlen see this coming? Yeah, he sure as heck did.

Fact is, NFL salaries were huge last year because of the jump in cap space and fools like the Gayturds running up the salaries for no name players.

There were no players out there that were going to change this past year.

We really had no choice in signing duds like those guys.


And Bowlen elected to spend more than they were worth to chase the guys they wanted.

I agree...............Cut em as soon as you can.

You have a valid point not much out there to choose from.. but his HC told him they would fit in and work.. Instead of drafting..

who we did they chose to go offense and while it made the O much better the D was once again almost totally overlooked..


They took Larsen for example and instead of allowing him to play LB they had fiddle fart around and convert him to FB..

Instead of allowing Barret to get playing time they played twiddle de and twiddle dum.. just a case of trying to justify making bad choices with FA and CYA to try and use them instead of doing what EVERYONE not on the sidelines was screaming for them to do.. Play the rookie as it could nto get worse..

[WARHORSE]

You have a valid point not much out there to choose from.. but his HC told him they would fit in and work.. Instead of drafting..

who we did they chose to go offense and while it made the O much better the D was once again almost totally overlooked..


They took Larsen for example and instead of allowing him to play LB they had fiddle fart around and convert him to FB..

Instead of allowing Barret to get playing time they played twiddle de and twiddle dum.. just a case of trying to justify making bad choices with FA and CYA to try and use them instead of doing what EVERYONE not on the sidelines was screaming for them to do.. Play the rookie as it could nto get worse..


LOL!!!


Your insight into the team workings are amazing to say the least.:D