Enough With The “Cheap” Business
August 4th, 2010
Jeff Faine is an example of why Team Glazer isn't cheap.
Joe read the following sentence virtually each day in the offseason if not every day last season.
“The Glazers are cheap.’
Joe didn’t totally buy into this. Was Team Glazer being more frugal? Sure. There’s a difference.
Lost in Jeff Faine’s comments about Barrett Ruud’s pouting over not getting a new contract in a FanHouse.com story, typed by Chris Harry, was Faine’s contention that this notion many fans have that Team Glazer is cheap is nonsense.
“I’ve never thought this organization was cheap. I’ve been at other [NFL] facilities that couldn’t hold a candle to this,” Bucs veteran center Jeff Faine told FanHouse following Sunday’s practice at the club’s palatial $35 million complex. “I think they’re just trying to make right decisions and evaluating things.”
Faine can shine a little different perspective on this issue. That’s because the Notre Dame graduate and former first-round pick is also a successful entrepreneur with various businesses scattered across the country. The eighth-year pro has made more money off the field than on it — for example, the Texas oil field he bought on spec last year became a gusher — and has been the guy behind the big desk hiring and firing.
“For me, as a business owner, I would say that we did not produce the way we should have last year,” Faine said. “As a business owner, my heart wouldn’t have been open to giving out a lot of money, especially to guys who had been here and were part of that 3-13 team. So, it’s a tough situation, but I’m not ever going to say that ownership here is cheap.”
Faine is Exhibit-A why Joe never believed Team Glazer was cheap. Other examples were Chucky (who basically got a two-year paid vacation from Team Glazer), Bruce Almighty, Kellen Winslow, Mike Nugent and Luke McCown.
After shelling out $110 million in a handful of hours last weekend on two players (Gerald McCoy and Donald Penn) can you honestly say Team Glazer is cheap?
Joe can’t.
August 4th, 2010 at 9:05 am
I’ve never said they were cheap. I don’t get caught up in that bs.
August 4th, 2010 at 9:17 am
It’s always been obvious the Glazers aren’t being cheap, and are not broke. Doesn’t mean you won’t get the same morons screaming that they are everyday. 3-10 breeds fustration, and frustration breeds desperate rumors and gossip.
August 4th, 2010 at 9:22 am
They paid their top draft pick what he was slotted to get and made Penn a top 15 paid OL (based on last year’s salaries). Outside of that, not much else. They could be locking up more of those players who will become free agents, but they aren’t. Don’t they believe in their own plan?
August 4th, 2010 at 9:23 am
Never thought they were cheap either Faine at the time he signed a few years back was the highest paid center We have Winslow before Antiono Gates deal was the highest paid TE , lets not even bring up The Clayton deal. But can say I live in Ohio and I am hearing AB’s knee is causing him alot of problems so is his attitude so starting to see why they did not bring him back lastly they are still paying two coaches Raheem and Gruden who a year before he got fired got a extension so did Buce allen
August 4th, 2010 at 9:29 am
Here we go……Now all the jackasses who were crying Cheapness and threatening a walkout of the stadium and all that other stuff are on here claiming, I never said that. Joe has archives. Eric will be next.
August 4th, 2010 at 9:34 am
I don’t believe the Glazer’s are cheap, it’s just that now, more than usual, they feel it’s important to not be wrong on their investments (given the CBA situation and the economy). Obviously no one can guarantee that any player signed to a long term deal will live up to that deal, but you can minimize risk, which usually means minimize spending.
Granted this theory in no way accounts for the Clayton re-signing last year.
August 4th, 2010 at 9:36 am
Having the lowest or one of the lowest payrolls since 2004 has given a lot of people the impression that the Glazers are being cheap (me included!). If they can win with a low payroll, then fine, but that hasn’t been the case. It’s encouraging that they spent some money on Penn. Let’s hope the trend continues as the Bucs have a boat-load of free agents to sign after the upcoming season.
August 4th, 2010 at 9:48 am
Rememebr that they were in salary cap hell as well, so the low spending had to take place to right the ship. The next few years will show you guys, that they are not cheap and want to field a winning team.
Nick, This is the one thing people have been consistant on on this site. I have always said that they are not cheap, but the guys that do say they are cheap stand by that no matter what Joe writes. If Joe can convince them by making valid points, than I am all for them switching sides on this point. There is nothing wrong with people changing their stance on a subject once they have been eduacted on the matter at hand. That being said, I doubt you will ever get Eric to agree that they are not cheap.
August 4th, 2010 at 9:56 am
I have said the Glazers are cheap, in relation to other NFL teams, and will continue to do so until I see differently. The Penn contract is a step in the right direction. I guess “cheap” maybe is the wrong word to use when talking about a payroll of around $90 million, but when I say they’re cheap I mean in relation to other clubs. Joe, you always bring up Nugent, McCown, Winslow, etc who got nice contracts as proof the Glazers aren’t cheap, but all teams have players with big contracts, with most teams having more than the present Buccaneers, which is obvious from them being consistently at the bottom in total payroll. You can’t point to just 5 or 6 contracts as proof they are trying to do the same things as other owners/GMs. It’s what is done with your middle tier players that gives a team depth and playoff viability.
August 4th, 2010 at 10:08 am
“There is nothing wrong with people changing their stance on a subject once they have been eduacted on the matter at hand.”
McBuc, people shouldn’t take a stance on a subject of which they are not educated. The only reason people said they were cheap was because they didn’t sign any big name FA’s. Now an Albert Haynesworth failed conditioning test has people thanking God we didn’t sign him
August 4th, 2010 at 10:09 am
I have been following the NFL for about 35 years. I”m one to sit back and observe the actions of others. Good ownership knows not only who to spend money on, but also when to spend it. Spending money on free agents who won’t make a difference is a waste of money. Talented draft picks and proven veterans give you the most bang for your buck (or Buc if you like).
August 4th, 2010 at 10:18 am
@Nick: “The only reason people said they were cheap was because they didn’t sign any big name FA’s.”
The “only” reason???!!! Hardly.
August 4th, 2010 at 10:40 am
I guess we can look at the Redskins and Raiders if we want to see why signing high priced free agents is a bad idea. The best players are usually aquired through trade and draft picks. Very few teams let their star players leave via free agency unless there’s a problem. (Antonio Bryant)
August 4th, 2010 at 10:44 am
JOE
“Joe read the following sentence virtually each day in the offseason if not every day last season.
“The Glazers are cheap.’
Joe didn’t totally buy into this”
You know thats BS, I know thats BS, and every other regular visitor knows thats BS.
August 4th, 2010 at 10:51 am
Cheap? No. Bad decisions with said money(contracts/signings)? Oh, HELL YES!
August 4th, 2010 at 10:58 am
MVPFreeman:
So paying Chucky $5 million a year to fish and golf is cheap?
So paying Bruce Almighty $5 million a year to golf is cheap?
So giving Faine and Winslow (who can’t even practice fulltime) the highest contracts for their respective positions is cheap?
If the Glazers were really cheap, Chucky would still be here.
“Cheap” owners don’t throw away cash like that.
Is Team Glazer frugal… tight? I’ll buy that. Not cheap.
August 4th, 2010 at 11:11 am
Cheap?
Id have to see the payroll comparisons after these signings. They had a lot of room to work with. If you suck you pretty much have to pay some high rookie money, or disband. Even Hugh did that. One core player gets a contract after holding out and we are supposed to break into celebration?
Id venture to say they have one of the lowest paid coaching staffs in the league.
No FA signings of any note the entire offseason? Several years of one of the lowest payrolls?
Wasn’t the land for the fancy training facility part of the stadium deal?
I still maintain the “plan” is substantially based upon money. Although it could just be stupidity.
Now if BM was running around the fancy practice facility getting ready for another 100 catch season, I might feel differently.
I think you are hasty in your conclusions Mr. Joe. The jury is very much out of this issue.
August 4th, 2010 at 11:18 am
Joe,
I realize you’re the journalist, but below comes from thesaurus.com:
Main Entry: cheap
Part of Speech: adjective
Definition: concerned with saving money
Synonyms: mean, mingy, miserly, penny-pinching, stingy, thrifty, tight*, tight-wad
August 4th, 2010 at 11:49 am
Nick…
You and I agree. Unfortunatly I see people on these sites take a stance without even reading the article. I do not think they are cheap. If a high payrole won championships, one would think the Red Skins would be a shoe in every year.
August 4th, 2010 at 12:26 pm
Lowest paid coaches? I’m pretty sure when you add the salary that Gruden is still getting to Raheem’s salary, we are probably top 5 in the amount we are spending on a HC.
August 4th, 2010 at 12:47 pm
The Glazers are smart businessmen! There is no debating that. They spend when it’s the right time. A complete rebuilding process is not the time to throw money at aging vets! Without a solid core of talent on both sides of the ball, signing a couple of high priced FAs doesn’t do you any good. You build through the draft until you have that solid core, then sign some FAs to fill a couple holes. All the great teams follow this plan. If Gruden and Allen would have drafted better, we wouldn’t have needed this massive overhaul!
August 4th, 2010 at 12:50 pm
“Joel” jersey, or “Bryan” jersey on Sundays?
August 4th, 2010 at 1:07 pm
JOE
That isnt what I was getting at.
You have been moaning and groaning about how cheap the Glazers all freaking off-season until they signed McCoy and Penn and now, all of the sudden, you are acting like they are ‘tight’-at-worst.
That is understanable too, they made practically no moves in FA. But don’t act like that has been your point of view all off season.
BTW- Im sure you can now see that predicting 80%of major sports issues(Penn’s signing/1st & 2nd round draft order/major FA-aquisitions) is damn near impossible. (You once told me that a sports analyst would be ‘out on there ass’ and without a job if they predicted any less than 70% of ‘major sports issues’ correctly, and that 80% would be ideal; in refrence to PewterReport’s quality.)
August 4th, 2010 at 1:10 pm
“This” Joe never wrote the Glazers are cheap.
August 4th, 2010 at 1:12 pm
….And of course Eric and co. had to chime in right after you without knowing what-the-buc they are talking about, just as they have today.
August 4th, 2010 at 1:12 pm
Of course!
August 4th, 2010 at 1:17 pm
LOL If ANYONE has a photo of someone on gamedays at the CITS wearing a Glazer jersey, Joe will purchase said photo from you!
August 4th, 2010 at 1:23 pm
Or maybe go with “BJ” to cover both names!
August 4th, 2010 at 2:14 pm
The Gruden salary is fixed and unrelated to the Rah salary.
August 5th, 2010 at 5:42 am
Fun to watch the slow squad have public meetings. You guys trying to rewrite your posting history, so that you don’t continue to look uninformed and rediculious? Good luck! But we remember!
August 5th, 2010 at 5:44 am
Handy having multiple joes!