Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: QB Cap hit and FA

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,337

    Default QB Cap hit and FA

    To understand why the Cards are handcuffed by the salary cap when it comes to FA, one need not look any further than their QB room.

    Cards have $28, 740, 000 tied up in our 3 QBs (CP at 24 mil, Stanton at 4 mil, Dysert at 615,000).
    http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/rankings/quarterback/

    CP is the third highest paid QB behind Romo and Flaco---a heavy price for a QB at his stage of his career and his performance level. The 4 mil to Stanton---he was going to be our starting QB before CP became available but has he really justified that salary amount? Dancing along the sidelines is only worth so much. Dysert is a wash at the minimum.

    As mentioned by others on this forum, CP should have renegotiated his deal to free up some cash. Cards should have looked for a Stanton replacement at a cheaper price---he knows the playbook, but given his performance when in the game, did it really matter? Some of CP's cap hit relief combined with Stanton's 4 mil could have brought in a young replacement QB.

    For example, would the Cards be better off now and going forward with a CP-Hoyer combination than a CP-Stanton combination? CP-Glennon?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Tempe
    Posts
    7,161

    Default

    Fitz being the #2 cap hit WR is another arguement. But this is a snapshot in time resulting from CP and Fitz agreeing to contracts in previous years that allowed for more flexability early and kicked the can down the road to...2017. I love Fitz but his contract precedes BASK and we are just finally digging out from under.

    Next year things are so different.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    South Wales, U.K.
    Posts
    3,927

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Canyonram View Post
    For example, would the Cards be better off now and going forward with a CP-Hoyer combination than a CP-Stanton combination? CP-Glennon?
    Hoyer is on about 6 million per year, and Glennon is reportedly earning anything between 15 and 19 million this year. So 4 million for Stanton, while too much, is less of a problem when it comes to your arguement that the Cards are already paying too much for its QBs.
    Logan Woodside is not a day three pick, he is the best QB in college.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Montreal, QC - Canada
    Posts
    7,775

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Canyonram View Post
    To understand why the Cards are handcuffed by the salary cap when it comes to FA, one need not look any further than their QB room.

    Cards have $28, 740, 000 tied up in our 3 QBs (CP at 24 mil, Stanton at 4 mil, Dysert at 615,000).
    http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/rankings/quarterback/

    CP is the third highest paid QB behind Romo and Flaco---a heavy price for a QB at his stage of his career and his performance level. The 4 mil to Stanton---he was going to be our starting QB before CP became available but has he really justified that salary amount? Dancing along the sidelines is only worth so much. Dysert is a wash at the minimum.

    As mentioned by others on this forum, CP should have renegotiated his deal to free up some cash. Cards should have looked for a Stanton replacement at a cheaper price---he knows the playbook, but given his performance when in the game, did it really matter? Some of CP's cap hit relief combined with Stanton's 4 mil could have brought in a young replacement QB.

    For example, would the Cards be better off now and going forward with a CP-Hoyer combination than a CP-Stanton combination? CP-Glennon?
    CP CAP hit is distorted by the restructuring the Cards asked for a few years back. In other words, a renegotiation. Stanton's salary is within the range of experienced backups in the league.

    There is dollars and cents and then there's dollars and common sense.

    CP gives us the best chance to win and Stanton is, other than CP, the one who knows Arians' complicated playbook.

    To your final question. My answer is no, we wouldn't be better off.

    There are more than a few who are hoping that Matt Stafford will test the market after the upcoming season and we can be sure that he'll cost a lot more than CP to sign long term.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •