INDIANAPOLIS -- A dateline on a mailbag. Whoda thunk it. But here we are for the Scouting Combine -- my 25th -- and there will be a bunch of stuff again this week, including Monti Ossenfort and Mike LaFleur at the podium on Tuesday. With that, we push the mailbag out on a Monday, so we can all take in the entertainment that is the 'bag and leave breathing room for everything else.
From Joey Cammiso:
"Darren, now that the dust has settled on a disappointing but entertaining season of close games, I'm curious about the evolution of training camp. Having covered the team through different eras, how would you contrast the current CBA-regulated camp with the Denny Green years in Flagstaff? Between the loss of two-a-days and the stricter practice limits, does it still feel like the same 'grind' it used to be? I'm especially curious about the player perspective -- with the move from those shared dorms at NAU to the more modern setup in Glendale, do you think the sense of 'enjoyment' and camaraderie has changed?"
Well, I'm not sure a guy like Larry Fitzgerald ever would say they "enjoyed" training camp -- whether it was 2005 or 2015. No, it isn't the grind it used to be. That's the whole point of many of the changes, to lessen the wear and tear on bodies that already endure so much. Here's the thing: One of the reasons training camp was once what it was was because these players had offseason jobs and needed six weeks to actually get into shape. But there was also no offseason program; now most of these guys take part in an offseason program that lasts two months. And all of them train year-round. No second jobs needed.
Have teams lost the camaraderie a bit? I don't know. The Cardinals all still have to stay at a hotel, and while it's not a dorm, it's the same concept. I do think some things have been lost, such as tackling and some physical play. But that's pretty much league-wide.
I miss hanging out in Flagstaff in the heat of the summer, though.
From Sander Propitius:
"Hey Darren, thank you for the weekly mailbag and for Cardinals Underground. On the podcast this week, you talked about money in the NFL and corrected yourself by changing it to 'cap space.' You mentioned that teams don't worry about money because they have plenty of it, but only worry about the cap. As a European who grew up watching soccer, that raised some questions. Over the last 20 years, several big European soccer clubs have gone bankrupt. How big is the chance for an NFL team to go bankrupt? Have there been any teams that went under in the past (I haven't heard of any)?
"Also, why is it that NFL teams don't 'worry' about money (taking the word 'worry' loosely, of course, as they are businesses that manage money responsibly)? Is it because they generate that much revenue, or is it because the owners have deep enough pockets to fill any holes in the budget?"
It's the beauty of what the NFL does to pool its money. I get the complaints from some that teams don't have enough incentive to win because of all the money each team gets regardless of record, but a long time ago, the NFL came to the realization the health of the league would be best achieved by pooling revenue -- especially TV revenue. And there is no sport that does better TV-wise than football. So right now, each team gets $312 million every year from the broadcast package. That's before one dime is counted from tickets, concessions, or any other streams of income. That's a heck of a starting point.
(Speculation has that number growing to more than $600 million each when the NFL re-does its broadcast/streaming deals soon.)
So no, teams aren't going to go bankrupt unless they are really doing things wrong. It's bulletproof at this point. Plus you have the cap, which European soccer clubs don't really have. It can't turn into a pure arms race like soccer (or Major League Baseball for that matter.) That's why working the cap becomes a bigger issue -- but even that isn't as difficult as it used to be. Every team can if they want.
From Robert B:
"With the previous two NFLPA report cards that were made public it was clear players didn't feel the current training facilities were up to NFL player standards. My question is about the new training facility being built and what was/is the Cardinals process for that? Did they just go to a Rossetti and say we need a new training facility or was there any communication with what players were looking for?"
The Cardinals have been considering a new facility for a long time and part of it had to do with finding the right spot. I don't know the exact process, but I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't ask players about some things. Still, it's not rocket science to know what the football team needs. It's about making those things the best possible. Believe that it's not like the Cards just bought the land and then jumped up and said "it's coming." There has been a ton of prep work, and a lot of work left to go.
From Raymond A:
"With all the changes and consistent injuries, are the Cardinals going to keep the same training staff? It seems every year it's the same injuries bicep tears, chest tears, Achilles tears. Physique-wise the players look more like contenders for Mr. Olympia then football players."
Well, the same injuries happen every year not just to the Cardinals but every NFL team because it's a violent, unforgiving sport. I don't know what the strength and conditioning staff is going to look like. Those hires should be made sooner rather than later, and I wouldn't be surprised if there are some holdovers with change mixed in. As for the physiques, they look like football players to me. Not much different than 20 years ago.
From Jake Samson:
"You've been hearing too much from the Brissettlievers, Darren, so much that I question if people actually watch the games or just check the box score after we lose. I was unimpressed with Jacoby's performances in close games, and my question is, how can we possibly retain a guy as a starter who didn't come through?"
Feels like we should have a happy medium here. This idea that Brissett should be disregarded after playing for a team that was virtually unable to run the ball at all in those close games you mentioned doesn't make sense to me. I'm not saying Brissett is the ultimate answer, but wiping that out as an option without knowing all the potential choices or how he and other QBs fit into the new offense doesn't make sense to me.
From Travis K:
"Hey Darren, we enjoy the content! How does restructuring a contract work to free up cap space? Kicks the can down the road, right? Seems like eventually it will blow up financially for the team. Just not sure exactly how that works. Also, does the player have a say in the restructure? Do they sign off on it?"
Let's start with a couple of basics. Restructuring a contract essentially means moving money that was not guaranteed and paying it now to adjust the cap numbers. It always is a benefit to the player, so no, they don't sign off on it -- contracts have language allowing teams to restructure at their own discretion. Yes, there is a kick-the-can aspect to it, but these days, teams seem to be smarter about it.
For a more specific example: A player originally signs a 4-year, 80-million contract with a $30 million signing bonus. The non-guaranteed salaries are $5M, $10M, $12M, $23M. The bonus is paid at once, but is split equally ($7.5M for each year) for cap purposes. The cap numbers would be $12.5M, $17.5M, $19.5M, $30.5M.
In the second year, a team wants to lower that $17.5M cap number. They can turn $9M of that $10M salary into a signing bonus, so the player would still get his $10M that year, but it would change the equation. That $9M would be split over the last three seasons of the contract for the cap, making the new cap numbers on the end of the contract $11.5M, $22.5M, $33.5M.
Thanks for coming to my TED talk.
From Ron Matt:
"Hi Darren, I hope you are doing well. I love reading your mailbags. Recently, I went on a State Farm Stadium tour. It was great! One thing we saw was the press box/section area where the NFL reporters and NFL replay officials are during gamedays. On gamedays, are you also in this press box area? If not, where do you watch the games from? We didn't go inside the home team locker room and they said that access to it is very restricted. Do you ever get to go inside the home team locker room? Do you interview players inside the locker room? Thanks again!"
I do indeed spend my games in the press box, where I have sat in various stadiums since I started covering the Cardinals in 2000. As for the locker room, yes, I have been there many, many times, both postgame for interviews and a few other times depending on the situation.
