Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍
I believe they have always had their eye on Lamont Jordan. My guess is they like his style, character and work ethic, although I don't know much about Jordan.aj. said:... expect them to make a run at a guys like Lamont Jordan instead of guys like Shaun Alexander and Edgerrin James...
I generally disagree with this sentiment.aj. said:The "we're still a young team" excuse is no longer valid entering next season...
aj. said:I'm in the process of updating my worksheet and don't have the exact numbers but in mid-July, ESPN was reporting a figure around 3.3 million under. That was back when they were only counting the top 51 salaries.
This is a bit of guesswork mixed in with real numbers but since then, they have added salary 52 and 53 to the cap number in addition to 6 guys on IR (Anderson, Bell x 2, Joppru, Symons, Walker) and 8 practice squad players. And on the positive side there was the Coleman restructure. And this doesn't factor in any higher priced guys who didn't make the final cutdowns in late August who were replaced by lower priced guys.
The IR guys cap hits are around 2.51 million by my calculations. so if you figure salary 52 and 53 were rookie minimums (230k each), and the practice squad total is about 570k, then you have an additional 3.54 million burden on the cap. Factor in the Coleman restructure which saved about 500k and they are probably just barely under the cap now - probably between 250k and a half-mill.
Around the end of February the TV gross revenues will be annnounced and the current cap number of $80,582,000 will go up by 4 or 5 mill giving everyone a little breathing room.
But then, all of the veteran contracts will continue to excalate and eat away at next year's cap room. Plus, the Texans have some challenges next year. Carr has a big option due next March; Payne, Bradford (he's a goner - that's a $2.2 mil savings), DeLoach, Sears (probably will keep only 1 of those two) and a bunch of others are either RFAs or UFAs.
The days of double digit cap room are over and they won't spend in free agency like they did last year because they won't have the room. In other words, expect them to make a run at a guys like Lamont Jordan instead of guys like Shaun Alexander and Edgerrin James. This team will be pretty much built after the 2005 draft and FA period. What they will augment with next year will be more young players to fill in depth on what will be veteran units on both sides of the ball.
The "we're still a young team" excuse is no longer valid entering next season. I could argue that's the case already for our defense but I'll cut them a little (very little) slack because of three rookie starters and three others in new positions or new systems. A lot of teams do very well with young players and players in new systems so that's often an overused excuse for bad play. Got off on a tangent there - that's an entirely different theme - but it's a natural sidebar on any cap discussion.
Had we known we were going to sigh R.Smith and that Seth Payne would recover from his knee injury, we may not have resigned Walker, atleast not at the price we agreed to. But I think we were desparate for down linemanbckey said:Walker should never have been signed through 2009. He will be 32 in February. I never understood why teams sign older players to big long term contracts. Walker will never be worth what the Texans are paying him.
Originally Posted by aj.
The "we're still a young team" excuse is no longer valid entering next season...
Mistril: I generally disagree with this sentiment.
I see a guy with 10 years in the league and I see a guy who's near the end of his career. In two years, more than half of our defensive starters will have 9-13 years of experience and if the salary cap hasn't gotten us by then, wear and tear will.At the time i thought the defense is a year or two away from being old.
There will be more and more issues from this point forward. Carr has a big option bonus due in March. Walker, Wade, and Smith's contracts run through '09. How many years do you think Walker has left? If the Texans prorated their bonuses equally over the life of the contracts, they have a lot of signing bonus (30 million just for those three guys) prorated out to future years so it will be important for those guys to fulfill as many years of their contracts as they can.aj, when do you expect the salary cap to take an issue with the team? With the huge signing contracts of Walker, Smith, and Wade on top of Carr, Johnson's, Glenn's and others
I'd be curious how many winning teams (which is what we want to be) have a unit (offense or defense - and not because of injuries (I don't think Earl is starting because of injuries)) starting 3 rookies, like we do on defense (only one unit is on the field at a time). I'd be surprised if it's "Lots."aj. said:A lot of teams start rookies. We start three. Big deal. Produce...
I agree, but in fairness I think the Texans have generally really only had 1 draft for defense (and 2 for offense). After next year's draft (4 first day picks), you might feel they have a better balance of young and old on defense.aj. said:I'll take it one step further. Our defense is getting pretty damm old...
Having 3, 4 and 5 year players is different than, 2 yr (Johnson, Davis, Wand) and 3 yr (Carr Gaffney, Pitts) players, particularly at QB and particularly when part of the QBs development was with 'part of a team' (Drew Brees had LT from day 1).aj. said:The offense is obviously younger than the defense. There is actually a nice mix of young and old on the offense... Look at New England's offensive front entering next year:
Graham 4th year
Ashworth 4th year
Neal 4th year
Koppen 3rd year
Hochstein 5th year
Light 5th year.
...
Graham 4th year
Ashworth 4th year
Neal 4th year
Koppen 3rd year
Hochstein 5th year
Light 5th year.
...
Having 3, 4 and 5 year players is different than, 2 yr (Johnson, Davis, Wand) and 3 yr (Carr Gaffney, Pitts) players, particularly at QB and particularly when part of the QBs development was with 'part of a team' (Drew Brees had LT from day 1).
What I said was a lot of teams start rookies - I didn't say a "lot" of teams start 3 rookies. I'm sure not many (if any) do. That still doesn't make us a young team. It's a veteran unit with three rookie starters (two until the Denver game). If a rookie outplays the vet - as is the case with Earl over Brown - I think that says more about the lack of talent we've had over the first three years.I'd be surprised if it's "Lots."
Dime said:AJ
Please enlighten me, I dont know this.
If we trade a player to another team. We eat the bonus right, but the rest is passed to the other team? right?
Yeah, I get that I messed things up by talking about this year while you were talking next.aj. said:Those are next year's service numbers for New England. This year they are in their 3rd, 3rd, 3rd, 2nd, 4th and 4th years.
Clearly. I didn't mean to imply you said lots of teams start 3 rookies. I was just pointing out that it's different 'starting rookies' and 'starting 3 rookies on 1 unit,' which is what we have to do to develop.aj. said:What I said was a lot of teams start rookies - I didn't say a "lot" of teams start 3 rookies. I'm sure that not many do. I know the Vikings start 2 rooks on defense -- Thomas and Udeze.
Hey, you managed to scare the jeebees out of me, and nothing scares ..'aj. said:Not trying to be an alarmist...
aj. said:Any prorated signing bonus accelerates to the trading teams cap for that year. The new team picks up the rest of the contract - base salary only and none of the prorated signing bonus. There still may be roster bonuses, workout bonuses, etc, in the contract that the new team has to pay.
It's customary and it's almost become a defacto requirement. Signing bonuses are the only way a player can get any guaranteed money so it's the only way you're going to sign most draft choices and free agents to a contract. NFL contracts are not guaranteed so a team can cut a player at any time and not owe him any remaining of the base salary remaining on his contract.Why oh why would you ever give someone a signing bonus?
It's really not that bad. It's just not as good as its been.Hey, you managed to scare the jeebees out of me, and nothing scares ..' Now I understand why Capers & Cass are trying to win the SB this year,
'cause there's no tomorrow for us.
aj. said:I'll take it one step further. Our defense is getting pretty damm old. I'd venture the guess that we have one of the more veteran units in the league. Time in position for guys like Wong and Coleman is nothing but an excuse. I'll cut Robaire a little slack this year but not next. A lot of teams start rookies. We start three. Big deal. Produce. With all the vets around them, they are in a great environment to succeed. All three of them are doing pretty good already if you ask me. Earl took Eric Brown's job away from him in two starts.
Entering 2005:
Glenn 12th season
Walker 11th season
Coleman 10th season
Payne 9th season
Sharper 9th season
Wong 8th season
Foreman - if he's still here - 7th season
Smith 6th season
That's 8 of 11 defensive starters with 6 or more years of exp and 5 of those with 9 or more. Seven of the defensive starters have been here since the start. It's pretty easy to see that the core of this group doesn't have much time left together.
The offense is obviously younger than the defense. There is actually a nice mix of young and old on the offense. We are young at WR and RB and LT but again, I will be relentless in my debate against the "we are still a young team" excuse after the Cleveland game on January 2. Carr, Pitts, and Gaffney are all entering their primes next year (4th year starters) and then there's veterans like McKinney (8 yrs), Wiegert (11 yrs), Bruener (11 yrs), Wade (6 yrs), Norris (5 yrs). Yes, it takes an OL more time to gel than almost any unit on the field so I think we can expect improvement in that area next year.
Drew Brees has as many NFL starts as David Carr. He might be headed to a Pro Bowl if he keeps it up (sure, we don't have a LT but they don't have an AJ either). It's time to take off the baby booties and stop coddling these guys as if we're going to be an expansion team forever. Four or five years is a career for a lot of guys and we're entering our 4th year next year. The new Browns made it to the playoffs in 4 years so that's the benchmark as far as I'm concerned.
Look at New England's offensive front entering next year:
Graham 4th year
Ashworth 4th year
Neal 4th year
Koppen 3rd year
Hochstein 5th year
Light 5th year.
They are a younger unit than the Texans if you look at total experience. I'm sure they aren't using the "well we're still young" excuse up there today much less next year.
Mistril48 said:Yeah, I get that I messed things up by talking about this year while you were talking next.
Let me clarify (this year ie Carr is in his 3rd yr) ...
Pats drafted players. . - 1 with 2 yrs; 3 with 3 yrs and 2 with 4 yrs
Texans drafted player - 3 with 2 yrs; 3 with 3 yrs and 0 with 4 yrs
I would say we are somewhat younger and that having your QB younger is somewhat of a factor. Clearly, however, I agree that while we will have somewhat less experienced guys (the Pats young guys have playoff experience, while some of our guys were on a truly expansion team in 2002), we are arriving.
The last 3 years on Walker's contract total $19 million. Walker & the Texans knew that those years would never be honored when they signed the contract. In essence, Walker has a 3 year $18 million contract. Had the Texans not re-signed Gary, he would have received a similar contract from another team such as the Raiders or Skins. That was the price of doing business. And every team in the league signs players to extra years in order to minimize the salary cap hits.bckey said:I still don't understand why we signed Walker to such a long contract.
If you look at many of the contracts around the league you will notice that many are backloaded with ridiculous figures the last year or two of a contract. The Teams don't expect the players to reach those last years in most cases. Those years are empty numbers for the most part but help them spread out the bonus.bckey said:I still don't understand why we signed Walker to such a long contract. Just because he fill a big need at the time doesn't mean you sign him to a contract beyond what he can produce. Surely Casserly and Capers didn't think Walker would still be producing in 2008 and 2009. His contract gets huge by the last 2 years.
The last 3 years on Walker's contract total $19 million. Walker & the Texans knew that those years would never be honored when they signed the contract. In essence, Walker has a 3 year $18 million contract.
If you look at many of the contracts around the league you will notice that many are backloaded with ridiculous figures the last year or two of a contract. The Teams don't expect the players to reach those last years in most cases. Those years are empty numbers for the most part but help them spread out the bonus.
From what I have gathered, Brown's number next year is ~$1.71 mil. If they cut him, they will realize three years of signing bonus acceleration @ 290k per year (dead money) because he's under contract through '07. 1.71 - (3 x 0.29) = $840k savings if they cut him - which is likely IMO.Releasing Eric Brown would save about $500K against the cap. So would cutting Jay Foreman.
Pretty glaring stats there. Especially since football players playing lives are akin to dog years for the most part. Getting all the pieces in place for a big run is quite the challenge.aj. said:Entering 2005:
Glenn 12th season
Walker 11th season
Coleman 10th season
Payne 9th season
Sharper 9th season
Wong 8th season
Foreman - if he's still here - 7th season
Smith 6th season
Look at New England's offensive front entering next year:
Graham 4th year
Ashworth 4th year
Neal 4th year
Koppen 3rd year
Hochstein 5th year
Light 5th year.
aj. said:From what I have gathered, Brown's number next year is ~$1.71 mil. If they cut him, they will realize three years of signing bonus acceleration @ 290k per year (dead money) because he's under contract through '07. 1.71 - (3 x 0.29) = $840k savings if they cut him - which is likely IMO.
As far as Foreman, I have his number at $2.21 next year. If they cut him, they will also have three years of s/b acceleration @ 440k per year. 2.21 - (3 x 0.44) = $890k savings if they cut him - which is less likely than them cutting Brown but still a possibility.
Or you can draft a young ILB, which the Texans would likely do anyway. And I'm not convinced that replacing Foreman's impact on the team would be so difficult. And besides, that's just the savings from the '05 cap. Foreman's cap hit goes up over $3 mil in '06. He'd have to be replaced by then.markbeth said:i guess you could get a young lb for around $500k but he probaly wouldnt be as good as foreman. so you get a little weaker at that position and really dont save much money.
Lucky said:Or you can draft a young ILB, which the Texans would likely do anyway. And I'm not convinced that replacing Foreman's impact on the team would be so difficult. And besides, that's just the savings from the '05 cap. Foreman's cap hit goes up over $3 mil in '06. He'd have to be replaced by then.
hetero doxy said:mcnair chooses to pocket money he could spend. the texans are likely as well-off as any team in the league, if the full implications are worked out. owners who try to do everything to win incorporate rising revenues in their contracts, paying guys much more money down the line since the caps will be higher then. as one glaring example, steve mcnair is due $50 million, i believe, after either 2005 or 2006. yup- $50 million or so.