rivshark86
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2011
- Messages
- 1,884
- Reaction score
- 1,059
- Points
- 113
I just wanted to make this point, and this is a big reason I'm a pats fan. Living in VA we don't have a team. I was listening to Steven A the other day (and I'm not gonna lie, for espn radio I like him a lot more than lebatard, or any of the others) and he was venting about how Mack and Donald havnt been signed to quarterback money for five year deal, and they are top players and absolutely deserve it. It made me wonder, but at what expense? What mid level players have to eat a shit deal so they can get QB money? The raiders def sucked last year. So is Making Mack a top five paid defensive player worth gutting future of that side of the ball? Then I started wondering to myself...... what was the last team that won a super bowl that had a top five paid WR? Was it Denver with Thomas? Not even sure about that. Other than that I can't think of one. Then I thought about other positions, and the big contracts handed out over the years. Then reading another thread here today, someone was wondering where the Rams were coming up with all this money... it just made me feel happy to be cheering for a team that knows that football isn't basketball. It takes a full roster, and guys you dont hear about on espn to constantly win. It's why teams who pick at the end of the draft have a leg up. Cause your not overpaying for one year of production for one top end player. Better to have a roster of B- guys than a roster of A guys and D guys. But what super bowl winning team has had a guy on it making top five cash for his position? It doesn't happen. It's made me question Steven A. The way he says it's a problem that Mack isn't getting paid, I hate saying this but the way he speaks of gruden, it almost makes me wonder if he doesn't there is a deeper negative reason he's not getting paid.. Maybe I'm looking to deep into it. But if they gave Mack that money it would come at the expense of someone else. I think if Mack sits out that def still has a chance to improve. So I guess what I'm trying to say is just that I think NFL players on the top end relative to the salary cap get paid to much, and it hurts the depth of the team, and also hurts the income of quality mid level players. It's a big reason I cheer for New England. Because they keep guys like James White at reasonable contracts vs overpaying one guy when it take 50 plus guys to build quality team. This is probably an unnecessary rant, but even though B.B. does stuff like bench butler when the def is getting torched, he has a good general philosophy that is absolutely right when it comes to paying people. I gues what I'm saying is I don't think any team paying anyone top three money willwill consistently win in this league. A prime example is the Vikings with cousins. They have a one year window to win the super bowl. Afterwards that def can't be held together. Or the Bree's contracts a few years ago. What have Wilson, Rodgers, or Flaco done since their big deals? Jeez I'm rambling