No, I had pulled up his specific post and talked about it before.
I know what was in there.
Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍
Nick Caserio - New GM
- Thread starter gwallaia
- Start date
I know what was in there.
No , I'm just done arguing about it.
The exact percentage is irrelevant.
The absolute fact is that there is a point where too much is too much .... unless you think paying the QB 100% of the cap is gonna fly and everyone else plays for free..
You guys just don't like "how I arrived at the figure" and want to split hairs.
What you refuse to comprehend is I didn't arrive at the figure , I pointed out the highest figure in history - The Benchmark which stood for almost 3 decades.
It's not a small number.
One team spent less than 70% of its cap space on players (not counting the starting QB).
That team has a huge amount of cap space left.
I also touched on instances where a team may have a carry-over from the previous year.
The league cap space for the year might be 180M, but a few certain teams can have quite a bit more available.
Texansballer74
The Marine
There’s too many grey areas. Neither one of them are wrong. There’s so many variations and variables that needs to be factored into all of that.
Read the CBA.
Everybody knows that there's a certain point.
The thing is you brought up a number and said that's what it is, and we disagree with that number.
I never stated an opinion , I Stated the FACT that 13.1% was the highest figure in history.
I've also stated in this thread , put the number wherever you want .... so long as its below 20%
So you can't read either? Don't put words in my mouth because you can't.
To put it kindly... you're tenacious
I DON'T CARE
How much?
In 2011, for example, the cap was set at 120M.
The Jaguars were able to carry over 31M; that's more than 25% of unused cap space.
Salary Cap Numbers Updated Heading Into 2012 NFL Free Agency
A clause in the newly signed collective bargaining agreement allows teams the ability to roll over unused cap room from 2011 to this current season.
www.sbnation.com
A six-pack of something like Shiner Bock.
powda
The bridge between stupid and useless is short.
See. That's one of the points right there.
Normally, there have been very few QBs in a given year that occupied more than 13.2% of the cap space of the team; the odds doesn't favor them winning a SB.
powda
The bridge between stupid and useless is short.
FireBOB
Waterboy
| Matt Ryan | Falcons | 6,600 | 0.014925 |
| Aaron Rodgers | Packers | 1,200 | 0.076923 |
| Russell Wilson | Seahawks | 2,500 | 0.038462 |
| Kirk Cousins | Vikings | 5,500 | 0.017857 |
| Ryan Tannehill | Titans | 3,500 | 0.027778 |
| Tom Brady | Buccaneers | 600 | 0.142857 |
| Jared Goff | Lions | 15,000 | 0.006623 |
| Jimmy Garoppolo | 49ers | 1,500 | 0.0625 |
| Ben Roethlisberger | Steelers | 3,000 | 0.032258 |
| Carson Wentz | Colts | 2,800 | 0.034483 |
| Patrick Mahomes | Chiefs | 500 | 0.166667 |
0.621332 |
Above table is odds of the QBs > 13.2% this year. Last column is US bookie odds converted to probability. Final row is total for the 11 QBs.
Odds from: https://www.oddsshark.com/nfl/super-bowl/futures
According to bookmakers the probability of a QB > 13.2% winning the SB this coming season is 62% (or -163) which means for a fair bet you should have to invest $163 to make a profit of $100
The odds are now in my argument's favor.
powda
The bridge between stupid and useless is short.
That's not a summary. Judging by the responses your getting there appears to be a lot of miscommunication here.
We went through this before. We both know about that FACT.
And I had already said before that I do not argue that fact; just your opinion that such number prevented teams from fielding a true contender that can win a SB.
Post 1269 explains it a bit.
He pointed to the fact that past SB winning QBs occupied less than 13.2%, (which used to be a fact until Brady this past year) , in regards to Watson's contract, and claimed that a team cannot build a SB winner by paying a QB that much.
It's the part about building a SB winning club that some of us disagree with.
One of the SB winner that I found didn't pay the QB more than 13.2%, but they didn't use much cap space to fill out the roster either.
In another word, that team could have paid the QB some 18 or 20% if they had chosen to do so.
They did not need 86.7% of the cap space for the other positions (a SB winning roster).
The 11 QBs in that list all occupied more than 13.2% of their respective cap space in the upcoming season.
Normally, there might be just 2-5 QBs with that much cap space.
The odds are completely different this year based on sheer number alone , if those figures hold up ; ie., no more contract restructuring.
Texansballer74
The Marine
I have two 12 packs at my house as we speak. Can’t drink them because I’m on this rig a lot. Lol
maverick512000
Hall of Fame
Oh please God no.
We're on a trip to the Hill Country at the moment.
Drove by Shiner, but they had suspended all tours.
(There goes the three free beers.
)Hope to be able to do it in the fall when we plan to visit Lost Maples.
My god, he wants to be right so bad.
Dont make that bet, my experience says you wont get paid by people that think like that.
No , I did not say "That's what it is". I simply stated the historical facts without any opinion other than , there is a point of too much being too much..
But just for giggles ..... I'd say the figure is much lower than 13.2%
One guy in 28 years has bested that figure and he's the GOAT.
The other figure is 11% - Three QB's have done that two of them twice for a grand total of 5. (That's 17.8% of all superbowls in the salary cap era).
So here's where you draw the proverbial line in the sand .... Unless you have Steve Young , Tom Brady or Peyton Manning of your era , you don't pay them greater than 11% and expect to win it all.
Forget about all this unspent $$$ , its irrelevant. Its a feeble attempt to move the goalpost.
And CBA Rules dictate teams spend 90% (in a 4 year period , which is why we have cap rollover) .... so you using a 5 win Jags team as your shining example of a team not spending is just fail. 5 win teams are irrelevant to this conversation ....
Several weeks ago I mentioned the Seahawks were considering moving on from Russell Wilson because his contract is such a large percentage of the cap and reboot around a rookie scale QB ..... If a team would consider moving on from a player like Wilson what does that tell you ?
FireBOB
Waterboy
Since we're doing just for giggles...
A red headed QB will never win the SB.
A team with an X in its name will never win the SB.
A team with a QB born in Canada will never win the SB.
You can make these statements with some confidence that you're likely to be right for a while, because you know how few red-headed QBs there are, or how few teams with an X in their name there are or how few Canadian QBs there are. Yet we all know these attributes don't cause SB failure.
Historically only a few teams have paid QBs more than 13% of the cap, so of course it's unlikely that one will win the SB. This shouldn't be surprising. Evidence of 27 observations simply doesn't demonstrate causation when so few teams exhibit the attribute you're attempting to classify. These are well understood statistical principles falling in the fields of class-imbalance and classification-skew.
This coming season bucks the trend. Eleven QBs will earn more than 13%, and as pointed out earlier, the bookies think one of them winning the SB is an odds-on bet. I wouldn't take 76's bet.
Rich Schmidt
Myopicone
I leave for a day and a half and check in on what NC has been up to, I guess I will try a different thread as this one has taken a turn and the horse is dead on both sides. Can you all take this somewhere so we dont have to go through pages of math when we want to see if NC is a grown up
I've said the exact same thing .... in this conversation and before this conversation began.
With so many of the top QB's earning 13%+ , most of those being the elite QB's & better teams , the odds are that one of them does.
But I believe we can safely eliminate a few of those from the conversation.
We'll assume the unadjusted cap is 182.5 - this does not take into account rollover or dead money.
Here's the top 12
Matt Ryan - 40.9m - 22.4%
Aaron Rodgers - 37.2m - 20.38%
Russell Wilson - 32m - 17.5%
Kirk Cousins - 31m - 16.98%.
Ryan Tannehill - 29.5m - 16.16%
Tom Brady - 28.375m - 15.54%
Jared Goff - 28.15m - 15.42%
Jimmy G - 26.4m - 14.46%
Big Ben - 25.91m - 14.19%
Wentz - 25.4m - 13.9%
Pat Mahomes - 24.8m - 13.59%
Teddy Bridgewater - 22.95m - 12.57%
Even with those names in the top 10 , I'd take "the field" over the top 10. Wentz being the cut off point. Just to many good young QB's with better teams around them.
Now go compare that list to Vegas current odds .... Of the top 5 , only Rodgers makes their top 5 and I wouldn't make that bet with your money.
Here's the betting odds top 10:
| Kansas City Chiefs | +600 |
| Green Bay Packers | +900 |
| Tampa Bay Buccaneers | +1000 |
| Baltimore Ravens | +1200 |
| Buffalo Bills | +1200 |
| Los Angeles Rams | +1200 |
| San Francisco 49'ers | +1600 |
| New Orleans Saints | +1800 |
| Seattle Seahawks | +2200 |
| Cleveland Browns | +2500 |
OptimisticTexan
2024 / Rebuilding Block 4 After Playoffs / Texans
The NFL is a "Team Driven" league for those that desire to enjoy the ultimate success. The league has proven in several SB's that a "Game Manager QB" can enjoy the ultimate success far sooner than the "Franchise QB" who just doesn't have the rest of team around him. Some of the best "winning" "Franchise QB's"....Brady, Rothlisberger, Mahomes, and Rodgers were wit teams that were prepared for their arrival.
NFL Super Bowl winners have usually won with an amazing defensve game, running game, and an offense that didn't make mistakes.
NFL Super Bowl winners have usually won with an amazing defensve game, running game, and an offense that didn't make mistakes.
I had agreed with what you said, up to a point.
And that is up until now, the top QB cap space has yet to prevent teams from fielding a highly competitive team.
I also know about the 4 years, but we were (or I was) talking about one certain specific year.
I only use the Jags as an example because I don't know of an easy way to relocate that particular team I was talking about.
The team name (and a link) is in one of my previous posts, but I don't know of a way to find it either.
Forget the Seahawks; I have always agreed that a QB's salary can get too high.
On the other hand, the QB pay scale keeps increasing as seen in that list of the 11 top paid QBs currently, the situation may have turned.
Brady is an example of that, and it looks like there's a new trend going on.
Can you move this to a different thread?
I don't want to bother posters like RS in one of the post above.
FireBOB
Waterboy
I did this exact analysis in post 1266. The 11 QBs projected to make more than 13% have a combined probability of 62% to win the SB. According to the odds I used, referenced in that post, the top 11 are favorites over the field.
Because I'm a nerd, I'll run the math with the odds you provided in a little bit.
Edit: I don't have enough info, I need the odds for each team for the top earning 11 QBs. Can you provide the source please? If you're happy to go with the odds I found and posted yesterday, then to reiterate, the top 11 are favorites over the field.
Last edited:
Up to this point, I did not believe that you knew this based on your own words. Glad you could finally admit that you were incorrect.
That number is merely a historical statistic up to this point. Nobody made it up. The historical data produced the number. It is subject to change, but will ultimately not undermine the narrative at all. You just admitted it yourself.
Data - based on historical fact - reveals that you can't pay one position so much that the rest of the team suffers and still win a Super Bowl.
Some would rather argue their opinion against that data instead of just accepting the results as nothing more than what it is: data.
-------------------------------
As far as a Caserio the GM update, he's doing nothing but playing the waiting game with Watson (as he should in the franchise's best interests). I'm sure there will be a new thread for every time he even burps.
maverick512000
Hall of Fame
Mostly talking about how the burp was not good enough for a 30 million GM or how if he had eaten X instead of Y then he wouldn't have had to burp or how the burp is a sign of Easterby's control over the Texans and that Caserio is just a puppet that makes burping noises.
Just saw this interesting stat. A QB making more than 15% of his teams salary cap hasn’t won the Super Bowl in the last 27 years.
Figured that would make for good discussion.
Figured that would make for good discussion.
Mr teX
Hall of Fame
And round and round we go..thanks for that Tskyss
maverick512000
Hall of Fame
Has a mod ever been banned before?
Should have been a few times...
I'm saying the same thing you do in your responses to me.
That has never been the point of the argument.
Is it wrong to hold the GM accountable?
If we don't keep track of his moves, how do we "grade" him?
Throwing out opinions only?
badboy
Hall of Fame
Aren't opinions 90 percent of all posts lately? Not sure but that's my opinion. What's your opinion on it?
I'm not talking about anybody else, but I try to bring as many facts as possible.
And it's funny 'cause it seems a number of posters don't like it.
badboy
Hall of Fame
Wait...was I your source for that?
Let me take this to the extreme to try to make a point.
Sure, everybody knows that if a starting QB occupy 20% of the cap space in any given year, it's impossible to field a true SB contender.
Corrosion used the 13.2% as the cut off point (before Brady won the SB).
So, a team has 86.8% of the cap space left to build a team.
Corrosion implied that anything less than that, and you can't build a SB contending team.
But that wasn't the case.
1. There were at least one team that had spent much less than that (for the rest of the roster) to win a SB.
I had pulled up those numbers with links to prove it in one of my posts somewhere on the forum.
2. When Brady won it this last year, not only his cap space exceeded that percentage, but the Buccs still has $4.5M to roll over to 2021.
How much cap space can Bucs roll over from 2020 for next season?
The Tampa Bay Buccaneers will face some challenging financial decisions with their roster heading into the 2021 season, as they’re not likely to have much cap space to work with. Making matte…
bucswire.usatoday.com
3. There are other points I had made, but people just didn't take the time to read them.
Texian
Hall of Fame
You may find this interesting: (35) YouTube
The third point I've been trying to make can be better understood by looking at the current 11 top paid QB for 2021 here:
2021 Quarterback Contracts and Salaries | Over The Cap
Ranking the top NFL 2021 Quarterback contracts and salaries in the NFL
overthecap.com
The cutoff is Mahomes.
All these QBs will occupy more than 13.2% of the 2021 salary cap figure set at 182.5M at the moment.
The other 21 is called "the field".
Read post 1266 by FireBob and post 1280 by Corrosion to have a better idea of things.
My contention was that up until this year, the number of QBs with cap space over 13.2% each year is so small such that the odds are against them.
That changes dramatically at the moment.
So FireBob ran a mathematical model that predicts the odds of winning the SB of these top 11 QBs vs. the field is higher than 60%.
That odd used to overwhelmingly tilted toward the field; and I had proposed that as one of the reasons things happened the way it did.