02-14-2024, 05:53 PM
(02-14-2024, 04:46 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: The Colts in 2006 had a rookie Addai on a $2.1m/yr deal, and Dominic Rhodes on a $2.75m/yr deal. They weren't spending some magically large amount on a RB, they actually had to let their Hall of Fame RB walk that previous offseason.
10% of the cap is a huge difference, even more so when you're talking 20% to 30%.
Think of it this way... you're trying to say a ~50% increase is negligible.
Saying the 2006 Colts and the 2025 Bengals in this situation would be the same would be like saying Joe Burrow ($55m/yr) and Derek Carr ($37.5m/yr) are being paid basically the same.
The Rams won the SB in 2021. They were 5-12 in 2022. Allen Robinson was on the Bears when the Rams won the SB.
Cash spend is pointless to compare because you're not forced to be limited in cash spend and it's always going to be a matter of "who signed a contract or extension this year" will be at the top because of signing bonuses. You are forced to be limited in cap.
The accounting is more important than the real money because the accounting is what determines if you're penalized or not.
I am not trying to say anything of the sort.
You guys are spiraling down into obtuse findings, like player stats and other absolutely non relevant items.
I was not referring to the Colts paying a RB, but AT THAT TIME, RBs were receiving much more then than they are today and the opposite is true of WRs.
I NEVER said 50% was the same as anything. I posted the numbers exactly as Perotta stated them, as they are relatively close.
These weird attempts of taking the basic premise of the debate out of context is absurd and not necessary.
This started as a simple question: Has a very expensive QB and two WRs ever won a SB?
The answer is yes, multiple times. Colts, Rams, Bucs
