Why we'll keep Mario...

[barrett]

Originally Posted by WMH

Man....I hope your right, but unfortunately, I just don't see it. You can't disregard the dollars associated with Mario's contract. The Texans are/will be cap strapped for the next 2 years. By not signing Mario, it gives them the ability to extend several other key contributors that are expiring in '13 (Schaub, Barwin, Brown come to mind) + bring back Foster, Myers, and Briesel this year.

Don't see a trade being able to work out. We re-sign or he walks.

Not saying that is what I would do, or what I would like to see done, but it sure seems it makes too much sense NOT to re-sign him.

Where are you getting the idea the Texans are cap strapped if they resign Mario?

His cap number will go significantly down with any long term deal. Maybe as much as $5-10 million less than the $18 million this year.

And the salary cap explodes next year based on increased TV revenue. Meaning even if we were tight this year we would have money next year before we needed to worry about any 2013 guys.

[Joshua]

Originally Posted by barrett

Where are you getting the idea the Texans are cap strapped if they resign Mario?

His cap number will go significantly down with any long term deal. Maybe as much as $5-10 million less than the $18 million this year.

And the salary cap explodes next year based on increased TV revenue. Meaning even if we were tight this year we would have money next year before we needed to worry about any 2013 guys.

Agree with all of this with one exception/question. I read somewhere that it's 2014, not 2013, when the cap will take off because of the new TV deal. Not sure it changes the calculus much, but if anyone knows the answer I would appreciate it.

[nunusguy]

I've heard the new TV deal will be fed into the cap incrementally instead of in the form of a big pop the first year the cash-flow from the networks become effective. And regardless I think it's a bad deal if we have to give Mario a contract that includes from 35 to as much as 50 M guaranteed money. I don't think he's worth that kind of money and wonder if he's really more valuable to the team than other players who become FAs in '13 like Duane Brown and
Connor Barwin, not to mention Schaub ?

[barrett]

You're not sure if Mario is more valuable than Barwin?

[nunusguy]

Originally Posted by barrett

You're not sure if Mario is more valuable than Barwin?

I think Mario is perhaps only marginally better than Barwin as a 3-4 OLB, but the really significant consideration is value and since we can likely resign Barwin in the 2012-13 free agency for only half the monetary consideration that Mario will command this year, and that's also assuming that Connor has his second consecutive double-digit sack season, it seems foolish to me to pull out all of the stops to retain Mario.

[cadams]

if barwin has another double-digit sack season he will probably get less than mario will, but i don't think it will be as low as half of what mario will command.

i will say this, i would love to see what wade could cook up on long passing downs that would have mario, barwin and reed in the game at the same time.

[barrett]

Originally Posted by nunusguy

I think Mario is perhaps only marginally better than Barwin as a 3-4 OLB, but the really significant consideration is value and since we can likely resign Barwin in the 2012-13 free agency for only half the monetary consideration that Mario will command this year, and that's also assuming that Connor has his second consecutive double-digit sack season, it seems foolish to me to pull out all of the stops to retain Mario.

Jason Babin got $30 million after 5 years of nothing and one year with 13 sacks on a losing team. If Barwin puts up a 2nd consecutive double digit sack season, on a winning team (superbowl), just as salaries are increasing, he will see at least $50 million. And if he doesn't put up double digit sacks it is not a marginal difference between Mario and him.

But I don't see why it is one or the other. In no way does resigning Mario mean Barwin walks down the road. Like I said, the Giants prove a defense does not have two pass rushers. They have 4+ and it works. The Ravens don't have 4 and the Patriots OL swallowed up Suggs. The AFC Championship runs through New England almost every year, and their is a blueprint to beating them. Kill the QB. There is no way cutting Walter and JJ (nearly $5 million combined), or extending someone else to defer big salaries until 2014 (they could do this easily with Mario) is not a better idea than giving up our best pass rusher.

[Arky]

From what I gather, Wade is really high on Mario - likes him a lot.... So, it will be interesting so see which way they go with #90....

[nunusguy]

Originally Posted by barrett

Jason Babin got $30 million after 5 years of nothing and one year with 13 sacks on a losing team. If Barwin puts up a 2nd consecutive double digit sack season, on a winning team (superbowl), just as salaries are increasing, he will see at least $50 million. And if he doesn't put up double digit sacks it is not a marginal difference between Mario and him.

Babin gets a five-year deal that will pay $28 million with around $5-6 million guaranteed.
http://phillysportscentral.com/eagle...-contract.html
***********************
Babin only got 5-6 M guaranteed money last summer when he signed with Philly, but I would expect Barwin to get 3 times that if he has another good season this Fall which will as I said and expect be only 'bout half of the guaranteed money Mario might expect soon.
C'mon man, I think you know the guaranteed coin is what everybody pays attention to, that other stuff is all basically "funny money".

[HPF Bob]

In the games after Mario went down, were there any where we were dominated by the other team's offense? Really, the Carolina game was all I could think of and that, I think, was just a flat performance all around.

Granted, we didn't really play many great offenses either but I thought the defense did very well with Mario on the sidelines. I don't want to see him leave and get nothing in return nor do I want him to leave if contracts can be arranged where he stays without costing us other key players but I think we can survive without him if it came to that. I think we already have.

[barrett]

Originally Posted by HPF Bob

In the games after Mario went down, were there any where we were dominated by the other team's offense? Really, the Carolina game was all I could think of and that, I think, was just a flat performance all around.

Granted, we didn't really play many great offenses either but I thought the defense did very well with Mario on the sidelines. I don't want to see him leave and get nothing in return nor do I want him to leave if contracts can be arranged where he stays without costing us other key players but I think we can survive without him if it came to that. I think we already have.

If your argument is we never got dominated without him, I don't know what to say. I am pretty sure not getting dominated doesn't get anyone superbowl trophies.

The NY Giants just beat Tom Brady for the 2nd time in 5 years and they did it with pure pass rush both times. Nobody in NY was saying lets get rid of Osi or Tuck since we have Kiwanuka and JPP. They said lets rotate them when necessary and play all four when possible. And they rode that plan all the way to a superbowl despite a terrible secondary and no running game.

New England has an even easier schedule next year and there is probably little chance we get to a superbowl without beating Brady. The only way to do that is to hit him over and over, and letting Mario go or trading him is the opposite of that. And if we reach the superbowl we are likely to find Rodgers or Brees waiting for us.

The NFL is a QB league. And the only way around having one of the 3-4 elite guys is to have a QB killing team.

[nunusguy]

Originally Posted by barrett

The NY Giants just beat Tom Brady for the 2nd time in 5 years and they did it with pure pass rush both times.

They did it because the Pats couldn't catch the ball in a clutch situation.

[dalemurphy]

Originally Posted by barrett

If your argument is we never got dominated without him, I don't know what to say. I am pretty sure not getting dominated doesn't get anyone superbowl trophies.

The NY Giants just beat Tom Brady for the 2nd time in 5 years and they did it with pure pass rush both times. Nobody in NY was saying lets get rid of Osi or Tuck since we have Kiwanuka and JPP. They said lets rotate them when necessary and play all four when possible. And they rode that plan all the way to a superbowl despite a terrible secondary and no running game.

New England has an even easier schedule next year and there is probably little chance we get to a superbowl without beating Brady. The only way to do that is to hit him over and over, and letting Mario go or trading him is the opposite of that. And if we reach the superbowl we are likely to find Rodgers or Brees waiting for us.

The NFL is a QB league. And the only way around having one of the 3-4 elite guys is to have a QB killing team.

In the 4 games with Mario: 325 yards per game.
In the 14 games without: 255 yards per game.

Yes, Mario played against New Orleans. However, also included in those four games are games against an awful Indy offense and a really bad Miami offense. The defense was better without him. Now, there are other factors than just his absence that affected those numbers. Still, 14 games without him and the defense was great in almost everyone (except the first game after his injury and the two games without Wade Phillips).

[NBT]

According to Lance Z with the chronic, Foster is not averse to the franchise tag.

[WMH]

Originally Posted by barrett

Where are you getting the idea the Texans are cap strapped if they resign Mario?

His cap number will go significantly down with any long term deal. Maybe as much as $5-10 million less than the $18 million this year.

And the salary cap explodes next year based on increased TV revenue. Meaning even if we were tight this year we would have money next year before we needed to worry about any 2013 guys.

IIRC - Cap grows by leaps and bounds in '14, not '13.

It is being reported that we have ~$3-$4MM in cap room, that is with Mario at ~$18. Say Mario gets.........$12MM/yr (-$6MM). Arian gets......$6MM/yr (+$5MM). Myers gets......$4MM/yr (+$1MM). The cap "savings" you get from a long term Mario contract is eaten up by Arian and Myers deals, plus we still have to resign Briesel. Dressen might have to walk as well.

I'll be the first to admit, I haven't a clue what I am talking about when it comes to the cap, but in just looking at the raw numbers, it seems to me that the above example will likely hold fairly true. This puts us in the exact same spot next year when they go to re-up Brown, Barwin, and Schaub (might be others as well....Antonio Smith? Wade Smith?). Another year in Wade's system, and Barwin is going to command top dollar as well.

That's just the way I see it. Hope I am wrong, but that sure makes sense to me.

[barrett]

Originally Posted by WMH

IIRC - Cap grows by leaps and bounds in '14, not '13.

It is being reported that we have ~$3-$4MM in cap room, that is with Mario at ~$18. Say Mario gets.........$12MM/yr (-$6MM). Arian gets......$6MM/yr (+$5MM). Myers gets......$4MM/yr (+$1MM). The cap "savings" you get from a long term Mario contract is eaten up by Arian and Myers deals, plus we still have to resign Briesel. Dressen might have to walk as well.

I'll be the first to admit, I haven't a clue what I am talking about when it comes to the cap, but in just looking at the raw numbers, it seems to me that the above example will likely hold fairly true. This puts us in the exact same spot next year when they go to re-up Brown, Barwin, and Schaub (might be others as well....Antonio Smith? Wade Smith?). Another year in Wade's system, and Barwin is going to command top dollar as well.

That's just the way I see it. Hope I am wrong, but that sure makes sense to me.

I doubt Mario's cap number would be as high as 12 million. If he signs a 6 year $72 million deal (a huge one), it is not spread equally over 6 years. It is hugely back loaded. This is why he got $18 million in the last year of this past deal. That was a 6 year $54 million dollar deal and a full ONE THIRD of it was in the last year. I would bet a long term deal for Mario puts him under $10 million for cap purposes next year.

[WMH]

Originally Posted by barrett

I doubt Mario's cap number would be as high as 12 million. If he signs a 6 year $72 million deal (a huge one), it is not spread equally over 6 years. It is hugely back loaded. This is why he got $18 million in the last year of this past deal. That was a 6 year $54 million dollar deal and a full ONE THIRD of it was in the last year. I would bet a long term deal for Mario puts him under $10 million for cap purposes next year.

I hear ya, but I'm thinking that his numbers are going to be quite a bit bigger than that. IIRC, Peppers got a 6 yr, $80ishMM ($40ish guarranteed) contract two years ago....that was before teams had to start inching towards a salary floor. Charles Johnson (yeah, who?) 6 yrs, $76MM ($32MM gtd.). It is quite possible that if he hits the market, it would/could be the biggest FA deal for a DE ever.....not good for the hometeam