ckparrothead
Premium Member
I still say it was an educated guess. You kept insisting that cutting Daryl Gardener would make us lose money on the 2002 cap and therefore its a ridiculous notion. To back up your assertion you used completely unreliable and incomplete data. I pointed this out and said that a simple assumption that we will probably save money on the 2002 cap should we release Daryl, based on the recurring rumors about the very real possibility of Daryl's release, would probably be more accurate than any calculations you could come up with based on unreliable and incomplete data.
And, which "guess" turned out to be more accurate? Thats right your calculations were easily as much of a "guess" as my deduction because they were based on unreliable and incomplete numbers. What I did or did not know about how June 1st affects the cap is really a completely unrelated issue. I based my guess that we'd probably save money, on the fact that we were hearing repeatedly about Daryl Gardener's possible release from many different sources.
But anywho, dajesus you can keep beating the dead horse because he's still alive...you're the one that explained to ME how June 1st affects the cap precisely, and if I'm to remember correctly, if we waited til after June 1st of 2003 then we would have almost $2 million in deadweight on the 2003 salary cap. Sure its not the $6 million in deadweight we'll have now, but its also not the "nothing" that you proclaim it to be. And it should be noted, and this most definitely IS beating a dead horse, that when 2004 rolls around and we're dealing with a lot of high salaries from our star players, not having that $4 or $5 million in deadweight on the 2004 salary cap could go a pretty long way in helping us to stay competitive. I know you want to say that we're just completely screwed so we might as well have a firesale and become the Bengals for a few years but thats why I'm also glad you're not our GM because thats really not very realistic. A lot can happen in a couple of years and when 2004 rolls around I'm willing to bet the team is quite happy that we don't have $5 million deadweight as payment for Daryl Gardener's 2002 campaign as a run stuffing LDE who plays DT on SOME passing downs.
They did the right thing fiscally, talent-wise, and chemistry-wise. We are a better team and will be a better team for years to come because of this move. We're not $6 million in the hole for 2003, we're $2 million in the clear as far as I'm concerned.
And, which "guess" turned out to be more accurate? Thats right your calculations were easily as much of a "guess" as my deduction because they were based on unreliable and incomplete numbers. What I did or did not know about how June 1st affects the cap is really a completely unrelated issue. I based my guess that we'd probably save money, on the fact that we were hearing repeatedly about Daryl Gardener's possible release from many different sources.
But anywho, dajesus you can keep beating the dead horse because he's still alive...you're the one that explained to ME how June 1st affects the cap precisely, and if I'm to remember correctly, if we waited til after June 1st of 2003 then we would have almost $2 million in deadweight on the 2003 salary cap. Sure its not the $6 million in deadweight we'll have now, but its also not the "nothing" that you proclaim it to be. And it should be noted, and this most definitely IS beating a dead horse, that when 2004 rolls around and we're dealing with a lot of high salaries from our star players, not having that $4 or $5 million in deadweight on the 2004 salary cap could go a pretty long way in helping us to stay competitive. I know you want to say that we're just completely screwed so we might as well have a firesale and become the Bengals for a few years but thats why I'm also glad you're not our GM because thats really not very realistic. A lot can happen in a couple of years and when 2004 rolls around I'm willing to bet the team is quite happy that we don't have $5 million deadweight as payment for Daryl Gardener's 2002 campaign as a run stuffing LDE who plays DT on SOME passing downs.
They did the right thing fiscally, talent-wise, and chemistry-wise. We are a better team and will be a better team for years to come because of this move. We're not $6 million in the hole for 2003, we're $2 million in the clear as far as I'm concerned.
