no cap- why care what's spent?

[dmek25]

i see over and over again how people are glad the redskins aren't over- spending for free agents. my question is, without a cap, why does it matter how much is spent?

[SirClintonPortis]

I can think of two reasons.

1. The laborers are given a disincentive to put in the maximum amount of effort. According to the consumption-leisure model, when wages get REALLY HIGH, laborers will choose to work less and spend more time with leisure.

2. Risk of getting burned if the cap comes back

[freddyg12]

In short, this team is undergoing a culture change & big spending isn't part of it. my take:

1) I don't believe that the danny has bottomless pockets & the franchise is likely in need of some fiscal discipline given the tough economy, poor attendance (= less revenue) at games in 09. A lockout in 2011 will hit everybody hard so it's imperative that owners have their $ in order.

2) history shows that for the most part big spending hasn't worked well. I think it could be argued, however, that Gibbs' fa class of 04 performed above expectations. Otherwise, the big spending has resulted in mediocrity at best.

3) Big $ fa's affect team chemistry & the new regime needs to start on a clean slate & establish a team identity, discipline, trust,etc.

4) It's unknown how spending now might impact a future cap.

5) This fa class is poor.

[freddyg12]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

I can think of two reasons.

1. The laborers are given a disincentive to put in the maximum amount of effort. According to the consumption-leisure model, when wages get REALLY HIGH, laborers will choose to work less and spend more time with leisure.

2. Risk of getting burned if the cap comes back

good point on #1, one of the reasons big contract players often don't live up to what their teams & fans hope.

[Lotus]

There are several good answers above. I would add that the team needs to get younger and the FA's available so far this year generally have been older guys.

[Mechanix544]

Originally Posted by Lotus

There are several good answers above. I would add that the team needs to get younger and the FA's available so far this year generally have been older guys.

Good point, the team NEEDS to get younger. Hopefully it will.

[SkinsfanNTX]

The cap is returning and no cap this year allowed the Redskins to shed some old players who big, fat contracts.

[SFREDSKIN]

Why over spend on average talent? They have done the right thing so far.

[53Fan]

For too long Washington has been a place to come and get paid for what you've done in the past. Many players came here, not so much to win, but to get paid as much as they could. Once they got their contract...mission accomplished and performance sufferered. Especially older guys who may have already seen their best days. This place has been thought of as Club Med too long and it's time to show those days are gone. I think the FO is doing that. I like that there seems to be more incentive laden contracts geared toward rewarding a player for what he does NOW.....with US. The opportunity is still there for big money, but only if you perform. That's how it should be IMO.

[ethat001]

Originally Posted by freddyg12

In short, this team is undergoing a culture change & big spending isn't part of it. my take:

1) I don't believe that the danny has bottomless pockets & the franchise is likely in need of some fiscal discipline given the tough economy, poor attendance (= less revenue) at games in 09. A lockout in 2011 will hit everybody hard so it's imperative that owners have their $ in order.

2) history shows that for the most part big spending hasn't worked well. I think it could be argued, however, that Gibbs' fa class of 04 performed above expectations. Otherwise, the big spending has resulted in mediocrity at best.

3) Big $ fa's affect team chemistry & the new regime needs to start on a clean slate & establish a team identity, discipline, trust,etc.

4) It's unknown how spending now might impact a future cap.

5) This fa class is poor.

Great post and I agree completely with it. Basically, Peppers was one of the best FAs - and he was 30 years old. Since everyone's a restricted free agent this year, the FA pool is slim. Some say this year there may be more trades, not FA deals.

Also, keep bringing in FAs, and (1) nothing's changed, and (2) other teammates get jealous of the $$ the new FA is making, and (3) the new FA doesn't work hard because he has tons of $$ in his new deal. Totally disrupts the team.

In general, I like the new attitude and strategy. Pick useful FAs that will help the team but are good deals laden with incentives. I wonder about Larry Johnson, but I'm hopeful he'll clean up his act and have something left. BUT my main hope is that we start signing O-linemen at one point. I can't bear to watch freaking Heyer as he watches his QB trashed on the ground by the guy that beat him.

[Lotus]

^ We've signed Hicks and Sims is currently mulling an offer, so there's a start. Trying to read Shanahanian tea leaves, we may be looking to really boost the OL in the draft. If we were going to sign a couple of FA's for depth and then draft some potential starters, this is how it would look.

Besides, we might expect that there will be more cuts and signings over the next few months.

[GTripp0012]

Does anyone want to make the argument for over-spending? Is there one?

As it stands right now, the Redskins are spending a lot, but they are not paying any premiums to below average players. They could probably increase everyone's salary 15-20% and not kill their budget for this season, but paying to performance has never been the M.O. of our front office, nor really anyone elses ('cept perhaps, Philly).

[GusFrerotte]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

I can think of two reasons.

1. The laborers are given a disincentive to put in the maximum amount of effort. According to the consumption-leisure model, when wages get REALLY HIGH, laborers will choose to work less and spend more time with leisure.

2. Risk of getting burned if the cap comes back

Exactly. Both are probably the major reason why we haven't, but I think the others are also correct. The FA pool this year are mostly 30 year olds or higher. The change in direction and putting more emphasis on the draft will yield nice results. I just hope our scouts step up there game and we do draft to cover needs.

[Defensewins]

Originally Posted by GusFrerotte

Exactly. Both are probably the major reason why we haven't, but I think the others are also correct. The FA pool this year are mostly 30 year olds or higher. The change in direction and putting more emphasis on the draft will yield nice results. I just hope our scouts step up there game and we do draft to cover needs.

This is the most important point. As long as we maximize every draft pick, that is all I ask. If every player we draft becomes a good pro that will go along way to getting us back to the playoffs. Not drafting well top to bottom in the draft is what has hurt us most since Snyder took over and is a big reason why he gets bashed.

If you look at the top five winning teams in the NFL from 2000-2008
1) New England
2) Philadelphia
3) Pittsburgh
4) Green Bay
5) Colts

Besides being very good at drafting players, they are not the consistent/usual big spenders in the FA market. I am not saying they do not spend in FA. New England has spent big here and there. But overall they are not the big spenders like the Redskins.
What really impresses me about these 5 teams is every two to three years they make the very difficult decision to not re-sign some of their own very expensive FA. Some of them pro bowl level players. They just let them go and replace them with recently drafted rookies.
This keeps them young and keeps their payroll in better shape. They keep winning.

[backrow]

Originally Posted by Defensewins

This is the most important point. As long as we maximize every draft pick, that is all I ask. If every player we draft becomes a good pro that will go along way to getting us back to the playoffs. Not drafting well top to bottom in the draft is what has hurt us most since Snyder took over and is a big reason why he gets bashed.

If you look at the top five winning teams in the NFL from 2000-2008
1) New England
2) Philadelphia
3) Pittsburgh
4) Green Bay
5) Colts

Besides being very good at drafting players, they are not the consistent/usual big spenders in the FA market. I am not saying they do not spend in FA. New England has spent big here and there. But overall they are not the big spenders like the Redskins.
What really impresses me about these 5 teams is every two to three years they make the very difficult decision to not re-sign some of their own very expensive FA. Some of them pro bowl level players. They just let them go and replace them with recently drafted rookies.
This keeps them young and keeps their payroll in better shape. They keep winning.

NE
Pit
Indy
Phil
GB

Are all the models to follow. You sir are the Avatar to follow!