go bucs

I WILL BE SENDING MY 100 BUCKS IN TO CASH IN FOR NEXT YEARS 100/1 CHECK WHEN I WIN!!! IM JUST SAYING!!

The Champs Said we were the toughest team they played last year also we have hell of alot of talent. so we'll see! and all i see now is big progress..

That's all you need to know about what to look forward too...I'm looking forward to this playing out, and then seeing who the next coach will be..

I wouldn't go quite that far 47, but me too, looking forward to see how the team progresses (or not) next season.

The football info between now and the draft\mini-camps is like watching paint dry.

How are they going to rank the seatlle seahawks above us?!?!? We beat them, and on top of that they are on the decline while we are on the incline.

Add a few top draft picks in the mix along with a better understanding of who we are as a team and we are going at LEAST 600 next year.

I dont see how you can base odds off of a year thats over. Other than those few promenent teams that are up there for a stretch of 3-5 years, the playoff teams change every year. Same goes with the bottom feeders. (See Miami, NYG, Pittsburg, Carolina, Atlanta, Tenessee of 08-09 season)

Let's face it, this year's draftees won't make much impact in their first year. I just hope the guys in last year's draft will start to be key contributors.

100/1 odds sound fair to me. Without any free agents, its difficult to make a lot of improvement in a single year. The easier schedule should get the Bucs an extra couple wins.

Rokkies make an impact every year. Its just a matter of which rookies you choose.

I know the superbowl is out of the question next year. But to say we are going to be the worst team again is preposterous.

or even among the worst.

Ironically,those are the same odds Heem has for keeping his job past this season...

Damn its a long time to the combine and the draft...Worst part is we have to wait 6 months for more football-and most likely BAD football...

tblockboi when and where did the saints say we were the toughest team they played all season? thanks, cause i have friends up here in Chicago who won't believe it with out proof.

This just in. Espn and mike and mike have the Bucs and only the Bucs as 150-1 at winning the Superbowl. Yet Dominic says were doing nothing in free agency... Huh??? How in the hell did this team get this bad this fast. Were considered as the worse in Vegas. How much do u think this would have been improved by just keeping a coach that is a zillion times better than the moron we have now. I know if I was interested in buying the bucs I would make an offer at the end of next season when are value will even be lower. How can the glazers allow this too happen. I thought the embarrassing years were behind us for good.

Continues to look like the old days.....

Why do some of you keep saying we're gonna do "nothing" in free agency? Can't you make your point without exaggeration? We've been told the Bucs won't be "big players" in FA, not that they will do "nothing". Get your story straight.

We can be small players in FA and still add a couple nice pieces of the puzzle. I expect us to do something similar to last year: maybe a trade, maybe a couple FA signings. Add to that 10 picks in the draft, 5 in the top 100, and we will definitely be getting quite a bit of help for next season. Expect to see at least 7 or 8 new starters when the season starts.

Can anyone honestly say that 7 or 8 new starters, with an upgrade in the talent department, won't help this team do much better than it did last year? Man...when people are biased they simply can't see the truth for what it is.

TampaBucks05 - Not sure it's preposterous at all. I can see this team, even with an easier schedule (on paper) doing about the same, or slightly better. 6-10 sounds very realistic to me, even with a good draft. I think that's very fair, and I also think that's not good enough to save Morris' job.

FLBoyInDallas - I can see 7-8 new starters helping this team long-term, and with the right combination of new players with the easier schedule, that should equate to more than 3 wins next season. How many wins? Time will tell. But I'd imagine when Vegas sets it's wins/losses for the NFL, Tampa will again be around 5.5 wins.

we have a chance, they compare freeman to rothilsberger and he won the superbowl in his 2nd year? also we did beat the superbowl winners! haha

I also heard 150:1 odds Bucs win SB. That is the highest odds on the board. For the most part, Vegas gets it right.

I couldn't agree with bucfan47 more. New starters will help long term. If the right players are chosen. If they are we are still looking at a 5 win team next year.

To say we beat a team (Seattle) therefore were better is laughable.

Some Bucs fans are overvalueing the talent on this team. KW2, and Joseph are good offensive players. Freeman looks like he will be. Other than that on offense there is not much difference between our guys and other teams talent. Sure Penn, Williams, and Faine are ok to have on your team but they are not irreplacable. Hopefully Stroughter works out and is productive but we are not near that yet.

T. Jackson, Talib are very solid D players. Ruud is ok. Miller, Black and Hayes hopefully will work out.

We really need an infusion of talent that I hope/expect this draft will bring. I just hope that Dominik/Morris pick the right guys.

Even though we beat the Saints does anyone really believe that we would win more than once out of every 10 times against them last year.

To come out already and say that we will not be big players in FA is disgraceful. I hope it is some twisted joke. When players, who are worth anything, look to sign with a team they also look at talent. Haynesworth was offered more money but did not like what he saw in Tampa. Makes you wonder why Dominik already came out and said that we will not be big players. He is trying to lower expectations from fans.

It is obvious to me were are looking long term and rebuilding a team which looks like a 4-5 year plan. That philosophy no longer works in todays NFL.

Actually most owners are coming back around to the "old school" philosophy of building through the draft and fostering stability in the coaching staff over long periods of time. The heavy FA signings and the "win now" philosophy is retreating and heading back out of favor again.

Just look at guys like Jerry Jones and Daniel Snyder. These are guys who previously had a "win now" philosophy and were heavy players in FA. Now they are changing their beliefs. Jones is sticking with Phillips to maintain stability and continuity. Snyder is bringing in Shanahan and giving him control that he's never given before. Look for Shanahan to be there for 5 years at the very least. Jones has even spoken about his changing philosophy (so has Snyder) and said he now sees that the way to win long-term is to keep the coaching staff stable and build through the draft.

Look at Jeff Fisher with the Titans. How many years has he been coach? Fifteen years? The Titans have had major struggles along the way, and some years have had very bad teams, but they have stayed the course with Fisher and most would agree that it has been a smart decision. Look for Jones and Snyder, along with more and more owners, to begin abandoning the "win now" and heavy FA involvement in favor of long-term building, coaching stability and focus on the draft.

Dominik is doing the right thing. He knows which way the wind is beginning to blow in the NFL and he's heading in that direction. I totally agree with his philosophy and I support the new paradigm that is forming in the league.

The days of treating the NFL like fantasy football (ala Daniel Snyder) are over with. Look for the average coaching tenure to dramatically increase, average payroll to remain steady and free agent signings to decrease. Welcome to the new NFL.

I slightly disagree. If there's no cap, the big players like Washington and Dallas will still outspend other franchises and hoard up much of the talent. It's along the same lines of Major League Baseball. The Yankees may not win the title every year, but playoffs are all but guaranteed. The same will be said for the Cowboys and Redskins in time. The only difference is the way each club is choosing to go about it. Snyder appears to be taking more of a backseat to player evaluation and day-to-day roster management, but he's still very capable and willing to cut the checks for players.

Jones on the other hand, is still very unwilling to allow anyone else the opportunity to run the ship. It's his way or the highway.

The Bucs are in trouble if you ask me. If there's no salary cap then I just don't see this team getting to the point in which it can compete year in and year out. They'll never outspend a large majority of the teams throughout the league with no cap. When you throw in the financial issues surrounding the Glazers, there's little doubt in my mind I'm correct.

The only way Tampa can benefit and remain competitive is to have a couple back-to-back years of outstanding selections in the draft. Statistically, the odds are not in their favor, but you never know.

The team has an average nucleus. There is nothing special right now about this roster. It's gotten younger, but many of the young faces I see are not going to be on the roster in 3-4 years. They desperately need help at about every position on the field.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/schein-9%3A-watch-out-for-falcons

There is absolutely NO way that a salary cap is not included in the next CBA. Mark my words...this will be the only year without a cap. With all the posturing aside, both sides know that the cap is a large part of the reason for the success of the NFL over and above all other sports leagues for the past decade. I'm sure Jones & Snyder would like to be the NFL's versions of Steinbrenner but it just isn't going to happen that way.

Dallas & Washington won't be huge spenders this season despite some predictions that say otherwise. The reason is that there is a 100% chance of a salary cap being included in the new CBA for the 2011 season (or 2012 if there is a lockout). This means that if certain teams overspend they will immediately have to start cutting players and salaries again to get back under the new cap. They don't want to put themselves in such a difficult position just for the opportunity to overspend for one single season. Can you imagine the overhaul that would have to take place just to get one huge spending year under their belts, after that year was complete? They'd have to drop players & salaries like hot potatoes.

What's more likely is that the Jones's and Snyders of the league will slightly overspend this year, allowing them to be more competitive than other teams while at the same time making it fairly easy to get back under the cap after the 2010 season is done. You will definitely NOT see any $200 million payrolls. More likely a couple teams might, and I emphasize might, be in the $150 million ballpark...max. That's about it.

Sorry, I meant $140 million max.

bucfan47....6 -10 is my greatest fear next year...because it shows a drop of improvement and the glazers can spin it that the next year we could go 8-8 or 9-7 with a little progress and with that record we are right in the mix for a playoff spot....if we goes 6-10 or 7-9 the bucs will keep morris around....you can bank on it....as they would say the pieces are in place and the rebuilding process is working and the next step is the players maturing and growing and making a playoff push....if you want morris out you need a 4-12 season or 5-11 at best.....

i actually think they will finish a deceptive 7-9....with an ultra weak schedule its possible...but if the schedule was like 2009 we would go about 4-12.....so with a soft schedule we will be a possible 7-9....borderline ok, and there will be no need to blow up the staff....then if there is a season in 2011 we will go about 5-11....and we will have wasted 3 years in limbo...just something to think about....

ps the only hope for next season going down the tubes, if thats what you want, is if the schedule makers schedule us in the cold weather cities towards the end of the year....i havent looked at the schedule lately but if im correct we could easily get screwed with about 2 games in cold weather cities...and technically we can get about 4 games in cold weather if the schedule makers want to cut our throats....
adam from ny

flboyindallas is correct. if this year is uncapped, it will be the only year uncapped. the following year any team that spent big will have to make cuts to get under the cap. problem is knowone knows what that cap will be. that along with players fa eligibility numbers increasing is why most think that this fa period will be bleak. basically players will need an extra two years to be eligible for fa, also teams will be granted three franchise tags, so this is going to drastically reduce the number of available fa's. i read an article by kirwan that says 2010 could be 170 less fa's in total. if we don't get a new cba, then technically 2010 and 2011 will be uncapped. however knowone believes it will last more than one year.

Adam from NY - It's too early for me to make any kind of predictions. Once the draft has been held, and we can begin to see the shape and direction of the roster, I'll feel more comfortable with predicting wins/losses. I'm also looking forward to seeing which players some of these other teams come away with....you know, the teams on the schedule next year that everyone is assuming we'll beat? lol...

One thing I feel confident in saying is that next year does stand a good chance of being around the 5 win mark. If you had to guesstimate right now, based on Tampa's current roster, that's about where you put them in my mind. What they do between now and August will go a long way in my mind of swaying that up or down. After I weigh all the changes I'm guessing I will still be around 5-6 wins. But we'll see.

FLBoyInDallas - Again, not sure I agree with you. No salary cap actually benefits some owners, and one can make a strong case for it benefitting the only owners who really matter. The owners are in agreement that players are receiving too much compensation. That's what this entire argument is about. I happen to agree with them. I think all athletes are overpaid, but that's just me.

Nobody bitches about Bill Gates earning $40+ million per day, or whatever the figure is...The employees of Microsoft are thankful they have a job, and many of them are highly compensated. If not for the league, and the owners, the players don't get paid, and that's what the players must understand. The Owners have already made loads and loads of money, and if the NFL ended tomorrow, all of them are still wealthy businessmen.

I'm not sure one gets done as you suggest. There are many other sports that have made the change and it continues to work out...Baseball's fanbase IMO has largely went down, but earnings for the owners have went up. They are making more money now than ever before.

So let's sit back and see how this plays out. I personally think Bruce Allen has got the best job in all of sports. Maybe not right this minute, but if it plays out the way I'm starting to think it will, he could very well have the best job going.

For the sake of being a fan of the Buccaneers, I'm hoping the cap sticks around. If it doesn't, I just don't see them competiting long-term. I don't see how they can. Even if they draft a solid player, those players won't stick around long-term, as they will leave just like every star player does in baseball to join the powerhouse teams that have the money to pay for the stars.

Personally, that's where this is headed.

cozart - In theory, that's correct. But the longer this drags out, the more and more likely this becomes something that favors the league's upper-echelon owners. The problem with the cap in general for owners surrounds them being able to make more money for themselves without one. Some owners will choose to hoard up the talent, all the while setting this ridiculous trend of over-paying athletes, just like you see in MLB, but the Oakland A's owner is still making a boatload of money, even though by-and-large they have virtually no shot at winning the championship each season.

The cap needs to stay in place and be expanded to have a rookie cap. Tampa is a small market team, and without a cap and\or revenue sharing to keep large market teams in check, many small markets are going to suffer, big.

The NFLPA has said once the cap is gone, they don't want it back, ever. Arrogant stance IMO. Sure the players can get paid, but many will suffer, the NFL will suffer.

Not sure if the majority requirement for owners voting on a CBA proposal is 2/3 or 3/4, but there's no way Jones & Snyder are able to get 1/3 or 1/4 of the other owners to side with them to remove a salary cap. There's only 4-5 teams with markets large enough to allow them to benefit from a capless CBA. How are they gonna get 8 or 10 owners total to vote their way? It's simply not gonna happen. There are far more small and mid market teams in the NFL than there are major market teams, at least enough to scuttle any potential CBA that doesn't include a salary cap.

Again FlyBoy, it's actually the exact opposite. Owners are not happy with the current structure that includes the salary cap..

Here's a good article from Peter King that's insightful. It's hard to ingest all of it, but it gives you a better idea of what's going on from the owners perspective.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/03/29/march30/index.html

The part you have backwards FlyBoy is that most ALL owners feel they will earn MORE money WITHOUT the cap. It's not the opposite of that. Most feel it's keeping them from earning the money they need to share cost, pay for stadiums, and continue growing their business.

You also must understand that even the smaller market teams, when compared to most businesses in America, are still earning HUGE profits. Winning in the NFL puts you over the top, but teams like Cleveland and Jacksonville are still earning loads of money. The big owners you refer too, like Snyder and Jones, will simply benefit from being able to have a much better shot at winning more titles. The profit standpoint is up to them, and that's what the owners are looking for here. They are sick and tired of having caps that says they have to spend no more than this on their team, or they must spend at least the league minimum. They don't want restrictions, and I can't blame them.

Here's you another article that shows just how small market teams are still turning in huge profits.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d81636c80&template=with-video-with-comments&confirm=true

In that article you referred to, King writes the following:

"The owners are going to have the attitude that they've got this huge debt service per year, and they're incurring this debt service to grow the game, and so this debt has to be taken into account when figuring the total salary cap and salary floor per year. I know it's complicated, but that's the nut issue here."

Doesn't sound like they want to get rid of the salary cap & floor at all, but rather to lower them.

The salary cap and how much to pay the players go hand-in-hand. They essentially want 60% of the revenue, and the cap to be adjusted accordingly.

The Owners don't necessarily hate the cap, they hate that the players want too much of the pie, and the salary cap is the foundation currently in place to make sure the players get paid according to the agreement.

If that agreement were to become void, the owners would then be allowed to pay the players what they want, thus setting a completely new market for ALL players and positions. This WILL NOT benefit the MAJORITY of the NFL players. It will hurt the MAJORITY. The SuperStars will become very wealthy, while most of the other players around the league, (the Torrie Cox's of the world) won't make any money compared to what they once did...like special team contributors.

If there is not a new CBA that's agreed upon, and next year goes uncapped, they will still in the end probably agree on a new deal. Eventually.

However, if there is no football, the players lose, because they don't get paid. The Owners still hold the cards, and if the stalemate leads to a lockout, the players will eventually come to grips with that and the players association will agree on a new deal, one in which will probably still involve a SALARY CAP, but nothing to the tune of how it's currently constructed. It will be one that more heavily favors the owners, and larger market teams will benefit more-so than they currently do now.

Yes, the owners want to cut the players' total piece of the pie to 41% from the current 59%, but I think in the end they'll meet roughly half way at about 48-50%.

The thing that's really bothering the players is that the owners want to exclude money they invest into stadiums, marketing, etc, from the "pie". Their argument is that this money has a return on it in the future and they shouldn't have to pay players a portion of that expense money. Basically they want to deduct all expenses before paying the players their portion, or pay them according to net income instead of gross income.
This will reduce the players' pool of available funds from which to be paid each year compared to the current CBA.

It will be interesting to see how this all unfolds.

It will get worked out in the end, but the Owners are certainly in no hurry to sign off on anything that's going to result in paying these guys more money, and I don't blame them. I happen to agree 100% will the exclusion of the portion ($1 Billion I believe) that's currently going towards some of the things you list above. The NFL also appears to have a long-term plan to broaden the game oversees, which generates more revenue for the players, which in turn, helps the players. It all boils down to them wanting more money now. It's no different than the player who wants the guaranteed contract.

Just like the GM who doesn't want to give any one player their entire contract "Guaranteed", the owners do not want to give up 60% of their revenues to pay these guys. I don't blame them. It's crazy. The players should be content with what they are currently being paid. It's already more than enough.

If this the case, why play during the season?