PDA

View Full Version : Cassel Ruined payscale for QBs


Atlas
08-03-2009, 05:42 PM
Weren't sure about Orton

General manager Jerry Angelo raised a lot of eyebrows at the end of last season when he said, in effect, that the Bears didn't know exactly what they had in Kyle Orton. If Orton had remained with the Bears -- instead of being traded to the Broncos with two first-round picks for Cutler -- it's possible the team still might not have had a definitive judgment on him by the end of this upcoming season. Then what do you do? Let him go in a quarterback-challenged league or overpay him because there weren't a lot of options?

The Bears already have made the decision to give Cutler a big-money, long-term deal. You don't trade for a player such as Cutler -- and pay the price the Bears did -- unless you are going to keep him around for a long time.

Now the Broncos will have to figure out what they have in Orton and whether they want to keep him around.

The price for quarterbacks has risen dramatically in the last year, in large part because of the curious case of Matt Cassel. Cassel, a seventh-round draft pick of the New England Patriots in 2005, parlayed a single season as a starter into a franchise tag before being traded to the Kansas City Chiefs, who gave him a long-term deal. Cassel received a six-year, $63 million deal that included $28 million in guaranteed money.

Cassel, Stafford drive market

Cutler still might with the Broncos were it not for Cassel -- or, more specifically, new Broncos coach Josh McDaniels' pursuit of Cassel in free agency. The Patriots put a franchise tag worth $14.65 million on Cassel, a career backup before being pressed into service when Tom Brady was lost for virtually all last season with a knee injury. The Patriots weren't going to keep Cassel and Brady, but they wanted to ensure they got something in return for Cassel. They put the franchise tag on him, then talked with McDaniels, Cassel's former position coach with the Patriots who recently had replaced Mike Shanahan as the Broncos' coach.

The Broncos' pursuit of Cassel led to the disintegration of Cutler's relationship with McDaniels and, subsequently, his trade to the Bears. The massive deal Cassel signed with the Chiefs was fueled in part by the knowledge that if they didn't get him under contract, the Broncos would be among the top bidders for him next offseason.

Throw in the massive deal the Detroit Lions gave No. 1 overall pick Matthew Stafford -- reportedly $72 million over six years, including a record $41.7 million in guaranteed money -- and you begin to get the sense that Cutler is going to get a huge payday. Stafford never has played a down in the NFL, but his guaranteed money is more than double the $20 million Eli Manning received as the top overall selection five years ago.

Cutler clearly is headed to a monster deal with the Bears. For now, though, he might be the best value in football.

peacepipe
08-03-2009, 08:13 PM
I don't see a problem, Cassel made a name for himself & earned his payday.

cutthemdown
08-03-2009, 08:22 PM
I bet Cutler goes for highest paid qb ever.

cutthemdown
08-03-2009, 08:25 PM
no doubt in my mind they will ask for 40 million guaranteed. Has any ever got 80 million yet over 6 yrs? I could see Cutler wanting it.

In fact now that they traded so much for him Cutler and the agent will plan to absolutely put a gun to the Bears head.

What can they do? They have to sign him.

rastaman
08-03-2009, 08:27 PM
Cassel has really been so influential in the current of events that took place in 08 and 09. For starters he played so well after Brady went down with a season ending knee injury in game one of the 2008 season, there were rumors of NE considering going with Cassel and offering up to trade Brady. You add to the fact that Cassel OC then Josh McD becomes HC for the Denver Broncos, and the Broncos new HC was so enomored with Cassel that he entertained the possibility of trading for Cassel behind the back of the current Denver franchise QB. In the end Josh McD looses both Cassel and Jay Cutler and ends with a journeyman QB by the name Kyle Orton. Could things have gotten any weirder in 2009! I don't think so. Looks like in terms of paydays, both Cassell and Cutler will make out like FAT CATS and laughing all the way to the bank.

Atlas
08-03-2009, 08:45 PM
Cassel has really been so influential in the current of events that took place in 08 and 09. For starters he played so well after Brady went down with a season ending knee injury in game one of the 2008 season, there were rumors of NE considering going with Cassel and offering up to trade Brady. You add to the fact that Cassel OC then Josh McD becomes HC for the Denver Broncos, and the Broncos new HC was so enomored with Cassel that he entertained the possibility of trading for Cassel behind the back of the current Denver franchise QB. In the end Josh McD looses both Cassel and Jay Cutler and ends with a journeyman QB by the name Kyle Orton. Could things have gotten any weirder in 2009! I don't think so. Looks like in terms of paydays, both Cassell and Cutler will make out like FAT CATS and laughing all the way to the bank.


Well, Cutler was going to get paid either way. He'd still be looking for a huge payday if with Broncos', but since Chicago did give up so much for him they'll have to lock him down.

TonyR
08-03-2009, 08:52 PM
...They put the franchise tag on him, then talked with McDaniels, Cassel's former position coach with the Patriots who recently had replaced Mike Shanahan as the Broncos' coach.



They did? What's the source of this? If true, why isn't he a Denver Bronco right now?

And where is the link for this article?

Edit: never mind, found it myself.

http://www.post-trib.com/sports/1698072,fbn-mully-0802.article

rastaman
08-03-2009, 08:54 PM
They did? What's the source of this?

And where is the link for this article?

Edit: never mind, found it myself.

http://www.post-trib.com/sports/1698072,fbn-mully-0802.article

Its common knowledge.:wiggle:

lex
08-03-2009, 08:55 PM
They did? What's the source of this?

And where is the link for this article?

Edit: never mind, found it myself.

http://www.post-trib.com/sports/1698072,fbn-mully-0802.article


Cassel was tagged when the phone call with McDaniels took place. Thats not really in dispute.

TonyR
08-03-2009, 08:56 PM
Its common knowledge.:wiggle:

Assuming you're being serious, why is he a Chief right now? Did the Broncos offer less than a 2nd round pick?

TonyR
08-03-2009, 08:57 PM
Cassel was tagged when the phone call with McDaniels took place. Thats not really in dispute.

Where did you get this info? Regardless, he was tagged when traded to the Chiefs, too. What does this have to do with anything?

521 1N5
08-03-2009, 09:00 PM
I am sorry, but I think it is absolutely ridiculous that Stafford can come in and get that kinda money, or any rookie for that matter. It just blows my mind. Something is seriously wrong here. The players/agents have got this system by the balls!!

lex
08-03-2009, 09:05 PM
Where did you get this info? Regardless, he was tagged when traded to the Chiefs, too. What does this have to do with anything?


http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3809444

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4327067

Its not hard to find. The Patriots tagged him in January and he was to be paid over 14 mil until he reached a new deal with KC.

DenverBrit
08-03-2009, 09:10 PM
They put the franchise tag on him, then talked with McDaniels,

If that were the case, Cassell would be the Broncos QB.

TonyR
08-04-2009, 06:47 AM
Its not hard to find. The Patriots tagged him in January and he was to be paid over 14 mil until he reached a new deal with KC.

So how would that preclude them from trading him to Denver instead of KC? You're widely missing the point. Why was he traded to KC instead of Denver? Answer that question and stop obfuscating.

lex
08-04-2009, 07:10 AM
So how would that preclude them from trading him to Denver instead of KC? You're widely missing the point. Why was he traded to KC instead of Denver? Answer that question and stop obfuscating.

Quite honestly, I dont see why you have a problem with what was said. I dont really think Im the one who is "missing" something. You challenged Cassel being franchised by NE and when you found out that was true, youre moving on to something else in some weak attempt to save face.

Elway777
08-04-2009, 07:42 AM
I'm thinking the real reason the Broncos traded Cutler because they didn't want to pay Cutler that hugh contract.

TonyR
08-04-2009, 07:42 AM
You challenged Cassel being franchised by NE...

I never questioned this. Why would I since I know this to be true? You're the one who brought up the irrelevant tag issue. What I am questioning, and have been very clearly since my very first post in this thread, is this notion that McD talked to NE about trading for Cassel. This has never been substantiated and I don't recall a single concrete reporting of this.

Beantown Bronco
08-04-2009, 07:48 AM
What I am questioning, and have been very clearly since my very first post in this thread, is this notion that McD talked to NE about trading for Cassel. This has never been substantiated and I don't recall a single concrete reporting of this.

not to keep beating this dead horse, but McDaniels has gone on record several times as having said he "took the call." He has never denied this.

bronco militia
08-04-2009, 07:55 AM
NE screwed it up by using the franchise tag on 'Sand' Cassel

TonyR
08-04-2009, 07:56 AM
...McDaniels has gone on record several times as having said he "took the call."

From NE? I've never heard specifically that NE was the caller. And again, if NE called, and McD was interested, why didn't it happen?

Beantown Bronco
08-04-2009, 07:59 AM
From NE? I've never heard specifically that NE was the caller. And again, if NE called, and McD was interested, why didn't it happen?

Ah, now I see where you are going with this. I wasn't looking at it from that angle, and I believe you are right about that part. Unless I'm mistaken as well, the call in question was always reported as having originated from a third team, NOT the Pats.

TonyR
08-04-2009, 08:07 AM
Unless I'm mistaken as well, the call in question was always reported as having originated from a third team, NOT the Pats.

We agree. Yes, that's what I was questioning. The article in the OP specifically says they franchised Cassel and then talked to McD/Denver. I've never heard that before and the article stated it matter of factly.

DenverBrit
08-04-2009, 08:08 AM
Ah, now I see where you are going with this. I wasn't looking at it from that angle, and I believe you are right about that part. Unless I'm mistaken as well, the call in question was always reported as having originated from a third team, NOT the Pats.

Tampa was credited with the call. Not sure if that's accurate.

Jason in LA
08-04-2009, 08:19 AM
For starters he played so well after Brady went down with a season ending knee injury in game one of the 2008 season, there were rumors of NE considering going with Cassel and offering up to trade Brady.

Well those were just rumors. I bet that discussion never came up with the Pats front office.

Jason in LA
08-04-2009, 08:21 AM
I don't see a problem, Cassel made a name for himself & earned his payday.

Maybe he turns out to be the real deal, but I see Scott Mitchell and AJ Feeley written all over him, so I'm glad the Broncos didn't end up with him and that huge contract.

Jason in LA
08-04-2009, 08:24 AM
I'm thinking the real reason the Broncos traded Cutler because they didn't want to pay Cutler that hugh contract.

That wouldn't be shocking. If Bowlen can't afford to complete, sounds like he should sell the team. Trading away a potentially high first round pick for a second round pick is just to save money. He's probably hoping that the Bears are good this year so that pick won't be very high either.

Atlas
08-04-2009, 01:18 PM
That wouldn't be shocking. If Bowlen can't afford to complete, sounds like he should sell the team. Trading away a potentially high first round pick for a second round pick is just to save money. He's probably hoping that the Bears are good this year so that pick won't be very high either.

I agree, Bowlen needs to sell if his taxpayer stadium isn't enough to keep him competitive.

Sell the team Pat it was fun while it lasted.

lex
08-04-2009, 01:21 PM
I agree, Bowlen needs to sell if his taxpayer stadium isn't enough to keep him competitive.

Sell the team Pat it was fun while it lasted.

Ive been saying that for a while.

DeuceOfClub
08-04-2009, 01:49 PM
Cassel took a 16-0 team and made it an 11-5 team.
If the trend continues the Chiefs might lose 19 games next year.

gyldenlove
08-04-2009, 01:58 PM
I agree, Bowlen needs to sell if his taxpayer stadium isn't enough to keep him competitive.

Sell the team Pat it was fun while it lasted.

You all realize that if Bowlen sells we will end up with Ed Kaiser, do you dimwits really want that?

Beantown Bronco
08-04-2009, 02:01 PM
You all realize that if Bowlen sells we will end up with Ed Kaiser, do you dimwits really want that?

I don't think that's true. Kaiser may have a right of first refusal, but he would only exercise that option if he felt the sale was at a discount (as it most certainly was in the Elway situation) or at extremely favorable terms. If it is sold at or above market value, there is no way he'd trouble himself to get back into it because there would be no immediate profit for him.

TonyR
08-04-2009, 02:02 PM
Cassel took a 16-0 team and made it an 11-5 team.


I'm not a Cassel cheerleader by any stretch but I keep reading this and shake my head each time. This team had issues other than losing Brady. Some aging players (most notably on defense), some FA losses (most notably Asante Samuel), some injuries (most notably at the RB position). They weren't going 16-0, or even close to it, again even with Tom Terrific.

DeuceOfClub
08-04-2009, 02:07 PM
I'm not a Cassel cheerleader by any stretch but I keep reading this and shake my head each time. This team had issues other than losing Brady. Some aging players (most notably on defense), some FA losses (most notably Asante Samuel), some injuries (most notably at the RB position). They weren't going 16-0, or even close to it, again even with Tom Terrific.

I think it's safe to say the Patriots win 10 games last year with David-Booty or Tarvaris Jackson or Vince Young.
Signing Cassel to a multi-year, multi million dollars contract is one of the worst move the Chiefs have ever made (and it's a long list)

gyldenlove
08-04-2009, 02:08 PM
I don't think that's true. Kaiser may have a right of first refusal, but he would only exercise that option if he felt the sale was at a discount (as it most certainly was in the Elway situation) or at extremely favorable terms. If it is sold at or above market value, there is no way he'd trouble himself to get back into it because there would be no immediate profit for him.

There is no doubt Bowlen can sell that team at or above market value given that a lot of people are still reeling from the financial disaster, it is harder to sell out, nobody knows where the league is heading with a new CBA to be negotiated and a possible lockout looming and uncapped year in less than 12 months.

Who do you imagine would pay full price or more for a team given those facts? if Bowlen tried to sell, assuming he would get an offer it would be at a discount compared to the value of the franchise 2 years ago, and there is almost no doubt that Kaiser would try to get in and ride out the bad times and then make a profit by reselling the team after a few years of dumping salaries.

TonyR
08-04-2009, 02:11 PM
Signing Cassel to a multi-year, multi million dollars contract is one of the worst move the Chiefs have ever made (and it's a long list)

Now this I completely agree with.

lex
08-04-2009, 02:15 PM
I don't think that's true. Kaiser may have a right of first refusal, but he would only exercise that option if he felt the sale was at a discount (as it most certainly was in the Elway situation) or at extremely favorable terms. If it is sold at or above market value, there is no way he'd trouble himself to get back into it because there would be no immediate profit for him.


The other issue would be whether or not he can afford to buy back all of Bowlens portion of the team, even if its slightly undervalued. In Forbes the Broncos were valued at over a billion dollars. Lets call it an even billion just for the sake of discussion. So, lets say Pat offers to sell the 60% that he bought from Kaiser in 1984 not for 600 million but for 500 million. Can we know with cetainty that Kaiser can cough up the coin to accept a sale on those terms?

The offer to Elway was for, what 10 million? Thats a lot different than what we'd be talkign about if Bowlen sold all of his ownership.

gyldenlove
08-04-2009, 02:18 PM
I'm not a Cassel cheerleader by any stretch but I keep reading this and shake my head each time. This team had issues other than losing Brady. Some aging players (most notably on defense), some FA losses (most notably Asante Samuel), some injuries (most notably at the RB position). They weren't going 16-0, or even close to it, again even with Tom Terrific.

And they had healthy RBs during their 16-0 year? How about Seymour sitting out half of the season, they had aging players back then as well, Seau started a number of games after Colvin went down. I don't see how their 2008 team was significantly worse than their 2007 team.

gyldenlove
08-04-2009, 02:19 PM
The other issue would be whether or not he can afford to buy back all of Bowlens portion of the team, even if its slightly undervalued. In Forbes the Broncos were valued at over a billion dollars. Lets call it an even billion just for the sake of discussion. So, lets say Pat offers to sell the 60% that he bought from Kaiser in 1984 not for 600 million but for 500 million. Can we know with cetainty that Kaiser can cough up the coin to accept a sale on those terms?

The offer to Elway was for, what 10 million? Thats a lot different than what we'd be talkign about if Bowlen sold all of his ownership.

The same way people lent Bowlen money to buy the team, someone will lend Kaiser money to buy the team, especially at a discount.

lex
08-04-2009, 02:23 PM
The same way people lent Bowlen money to buy the team, someone will lend Kaiser money to buy the team, especially at a discount.

Meh. Your responses are full of conjecture. Its a legitimate question whether he can accept a sale on those terms. The law suit from a few years ago was for 10 million. Thats a lot different than the money youd be talking about now. I dont really think its safe to assume that he can come up with that kind of money. Perhaps he can but youre carrying on like its a certainty. The mere possibility isnt convincing though.

Beantown Bronco
08-04-2009, 02:23 PM
There is no doubt Bowlen can sell that team at or above market value given that a lot of people are still reeling from the financial disaster, it is harder to sell out, nobody knows where the league is heading with a new CBA to be negotiated and a possible lockout looming and uncapped year in less than 12 months.

Who do you imagine would pay full price or more for a team given those facts? if Bowlen tried to sell, assuming he would get an offer it would be at a discount compared to the value of the franchise 2 years ago, and there is almost no doubt that Kaiser would try to get in and ride out the bad times and then make a profit by reselling the team after a few years of dumping salaries.

[I see Lex beat me to it, but here's my response]

A few things on that:

1. A "market correction" discount is one thing, the "Elway discount" is completely another. The terms Elway was offered were ridiculously sweet and were made at a time when the franchise was not worth anything near what it is now or was 2 years ago. Kaiser could afford to get back into the game then under those terms and that purchase price. Which leads me to....

2. It's my understanding that Kaiser has taken quite a hit, as has basically everyone, the past 2 years or so and couldn't afford to buy the Broncos even if he wanted to at the likely discount (market value $1.1-1.2 billion from what I've seen...sale price at a discount would still be close to $1 billion I would think). Getting financing for that amount is hairy in any market, but this particular market? It's not worth the headache. You have to be a billionnaire or close to it right now to make this kind of move.

Hell, Bowlen couldn't even afford to buy the Broncos right now if he wanted to. He's in the classic position of a lot of homeowners 5 or so years ago. They could afford their houses when they bought them back in the 70s and 80s when they were cheap, but couldn't afford them if they wanted to buy the same house in the late 90s/early 2000s.

Beantown Bronco
08-04-2009, 02:27 PM
The same way people lent Bowlen money to buy the team, someone will lend Kaiser money to buy the team, especially at a discount.

Bowlen bought at a very different time under very different circumstances. Anyone buying today is trying to get a lender to fork out money to them when essentially every lender is denying applications to good candidates for places that are selling well under market value. It is quite simply not a valid comparison.

Atlas
08-04-2009, 02:28 PM
You all realize that if Bowlen sells we will end up with Ed Kaiser, do you dimwits really want that?

I'm sure Bowlen could sell the team and buy out Kaiser at the same time.

Beantown Bronco
08-04-2009, 02:30 PM
And they had healthy RBs during their 16-0 year? How about Seymour sitting out half of the season, they had aging players back then as well, Seau started a number of games after Colvin went down. I don't see how their 2008 team was significantly worse than their 2007 team.

You can say the same thing about a lot of teams. Just because teams return say 20 of 22 starters doesn't mean you're automatically going to have the same record as the year before. There are a TON of factors that can go into it: weather, difficulty of schedule, when you play certain teams and how healthy those opponents are when you play them, short weeks, bye weeks, fluke field goals and turnovers, etc. One player, even if a QB, is not the sole marker you can cite when you talk about a comparison of team's record from one year to the next.

Beantown Bronco
08-04-2009, 02:36 PM
I'm sure Bowlen could sell the team and buy out Kaiser at the same time.

Kaiser doesn't own any of the Broncos right now. What we're referring to is his right of first refusal that he holds in case Bowlen ever decides to sell. The terms of the agreement specify that if Bowlen has an agreement to sell to some 3rd party for say $1 billion, he has to first offer that same deal to Kaiser who can either agree to it himself or refuse (and allow the 3rd party to buy at that price).

TonyR
08-04-2009, 02:39 PM
Anyone buying today is trying to get a lender to fork out money to them when essentially every lender is denying applications to good candidates for places that are selling well under market value.

Not only that but doesn't the NFL have to approve new ownership, and aren't the requirements for this a lot tougher than they used to be?

Beantown Bronco
08-04-2009, 02:42 PM
Not only that but doesn't the NFL have to approve new ownership, and aren't the requirements for this a lot tougher than they used to be?

They do, but I was giving Kaiser the benefit of the doubt here since they approved him before.

I hadn't heard about the requirements getting any tougher. Sadly, it doesn't effect me personally (wish it did!) If so, then this is certainly a valid point to add to the pile.

Atlas
08-05-2009, 12:44 AM
Kaiser doesn't own any of the Broncos right now. What we're referring to is his right of first refusal that he holds in case Bowlen ever decides to sell. The terms of the agreement specify that if Bowlen has an agreement to sell to some 3rd party for say $1 billion, he has to first offer that same deal to Kaiser who can either agree to it himself or refuse (and allow the 3rd party to buy at that price).

Well, from what I hear Kaiser doesn't have that kind of money so it's rather a mute point.

kmartin575
08-05-2009, 01:56 AM
I bet Cutler goes for highest paid qb ever.

Not when both Manning and Rivers have contracts coming up.

kmartin575
08-05-2009, 02:10 AM
Cassel took a 16-0 team and made it an 11-5 team.
If the trend continues the Chiefs might lose 19 games next year.

So in his first year starting since high school he's supposed to equal the performance of future hall of famer Tom Brady? Yeah, nice logic there.

And I'm sure a drop from 4th in overall defense to 10th had nothing to do with the increase in losses either.

Do you really think it is out of the realm of possibility that even if his stats decrease this year (which they will) that he might actually improve due to more experience? In terms of playing time he was a rookie last year. Granted he had alot more time in the offense than a rookie but that doesn't mean jack **** until you actually play the game. I don't see why anybody should believe he has reached his peak performance already when he only has 15 starts under his belt.

kmartin575
08-05-2009, 02:12 AM
I think it's safe to say the Patriots win 10 games last year with David-Booty or Tarvaris Jackson or Vince Young.
Signing Cassel to a multi-year, multi million dollars contract is one of the worst move the Chiefs have ever made (and it's a long list)

That is complete bull****. But of course I'm sure you know more about Cassel than the GM who scouted him in college, drafted him, watched him in practice and games, and then traded for him based on what he saw over those years. Scott Pioli is an idiot after all.

kmartin575
08-05-2009, 02:16 AM
And they had healthy RBs during their 16-0 year? How about Seymour sitting out half of the season, they had aging players back then as well, Seau started a number of games after Colvin went down. I don't see how their 2008 team was significantly worse than their 2007 team.

It doesn't matter either way. Fact is, saying Cassel is a step down from Tom Brady is no insult to Cassel. You can still be a good quarterback in this league and not be on the level of Tom Brady. Expecting Cassel to perform at the same level as Brady in his first year starting since high school is ridiculous. Just as almost every other player tends to improve with more experience, why can't it be expected that Cassel will improve as well? And believe it or not, he can improve despite a likely drop in production this year.