View Full Version : Talk about sweet Cap Management

Mile High Mania
05-11-2001, 07:44 AM

The top 3 teams in the NFL concerning the Salary Cap "Dead Pool" are...

49ers with roughly $22M accounting for players no longer on their roster, followed by Dallas with a whopping $20M and then in third place... it's the Chiefs with a touch over $18M!!

I didn't realize that number would be so high for KC. This isn't being posted for smack purposes, but it did make me chuckle since a lot of Raider and KC fans are saying that Denver will be in this scenario a year or two down the road.

KC's already there....

05-11-2001, 07:48 AM
Chester accounts for about $6 million of that, so I'm not really worried about it...

05-11-2001, 07:51 AM
Well, duh!! The Chiefs had to cut loose some veterans who were being paid a lot of money to underperform or who were injured all the time. Say, didn't your Broncos sign one of those guys?......lol.

05-11-2001, 07:52 AM
Very interesing MH. I'd be very curious how that breaks down.

Chestor, Hasty, Dishman(maybe), Grbac, Saurbrun, Anders, Bennett are a few guys who may still count against our cap.

Anybody got some numbers?


Mile High Mania
05-11-2001, 07:55 AM
I didn't see a breakdown of player numbers, and yes Denver did sign one of those guys... but, the cap number is small.

05-11-2001, 07:59 AM
Cap management [i.e.: legalistic and contractual avoidance of the letter of the law] may be the single most important skill for a GM.

What is that going to do to football? How many of the GMs will be revealed as dinosaurs when the cap hammer hits?

Likes parity, but thinks the cap concept needs some tweaking.

05-11-2001, 08:24 AM
Mile High...I too find that very intresting to see KC grouped with Dallas and SF. There is however one hugh difference. KC is a lot better team than Dallas and SF. We still have questions of defense but this team cut the fat, and upgraded at QB, RB and special teams. The rest of the west better be worried next year when the Chiefs have a ton of cap room.

I think this is good news...for next year

Mile High Mania
05-11-2001, 08:38 AM
KC should have some cap room next year... how much goes to Gonzo and Green? What is Green's cap number? When will KC have to resign him to a "starters salary"?

05-11-2001, 08:46 AM
Green will have another year on his deal at @ 3 million. But even if we have to do his deal and Tony G. I think it can de done. Tony will have a tag on him, so it will be hard for him to seek a bigger deal, and if someone wants him bad enough I sure we will take two #1's. I'm not worried. To me it looks like the Chiefs are building a young team, and the Bronco's are signing anyone with any gas in the tank.


05-11-2001, 08:47 AM
Green is under contract through the 02-03 season. Cap hit is roughly 3M for that season.

Gonzo will be UFA next year, but Im sure that KC will get him under contract.

05-11-2001, 09:04 AM

As soon as he proves worthy of NFL starting QB status. If he performs well this year, he'll get his payday before his contract expires following 2002.

Gonzo will cost a pretty penny. Forget about elite TE $$, he'll be looking for elite WR $$, perhaps Keyshawn level. Don't know if he'll get it, but I suspect that's where they'll start.

hoping CP has been learning lessons from the dead pool leftover signing bonus $$

Mile High Mania
05-11-2001, 09:12 AM
Hoover, I don't know that I would say Denver is signing anyone with gas in their tank. Denver has a pretty young team across the board.

Denver is not building a team in the "SuperBowl or bust in 2001" mentality. Denver has resigned all of their great young talent and they've signed up some nice veterans as well. Not sure if all of them will pan out, no NFL team will ever hit 100% accuracy in the FA market. But, you have to take a chance... some of the signings that most people question have reasonable cap numbers.

Denver is building a nucleus of good, young players that will create a very competitive team for the next 3-4 years.

05-11-2001, 10:54 AM
WOW! The Donx are AWESOME!
Will they beat the Chiefs this year?

Mile High Mania
05-11-2001, 12:22 PM
Yes, the Broncos will beat KC this year... 2001 is the year that things start to even up. I really believe that Denver will split with KC and Oakland this year, it pains me to say that about Oakland, but I'm being realistic.

Sweeps don't last forever, especially in this division...

05-11-2001, 12:26 PM
I can deal with spliting with Denver if we can sweep Oakland.

The Bad Guy
05-11-2001, 12:26 PM

I don't understand your point.

This will be the only season that KC eats that much cap money.

Next year, we won't have cap problems.

Vermeil stated that he would swallow the pill now on the cap, rather than have it be a continuing problem.

Well, we took the cap problem and brought in a starting QB, RB, KR/WR, CB, C, and resigned our all-pro guard, and starting defensive end.

All in all, I never expected KC to make this many moves with the way their cap situation was back in February.

I consider this off-season to be a major success for the Chiefs.

But, if we already took the hit, we can prepare for clearer skies next offseason.

Milehigh, I know your excited about the moves you've made now, but by backloading all these deals, your preparing for cap problems in the future. Plus, you brought in some questionable players. Chester, and Leon Lett aren't players I would jeopardize the future of my salary cap on.

Signing Griese, Mobley, Neil and Lepsis to long term backloaded deals will only cause problems in 3-4 years.

I like the Denard Walker, Kennison and Keith Washington signings though.

Don't worry, in 3-4 years, I will make a post similar to the one you made on the Broncos board and laugh at your cap situation as well.

In terms of having money to sign both Gonzo and Green, it's simple. The dead cap money we are losing now, we can use to sign both of them, and still have room to add two big free agents. 18 million dollars is a boat load of money on the cap.

I think Green is making starters money right now. He signed a 4-year, 16 million dollar deal back in 1999. For the time being, that's plenty.

If he proves he's a top-flight QB this year, then you reward him with a long term deal.

I really think the Chiefs know of the salaries they have counting toward next year, and will make damn sure that they have enough dough to pay Tony.

Either that, or we tag him.

Not the best option, but how much bread could the top 5 TE's average in salary? I imagine it's well well below TG's market value.

Mile High Mania
05-11-2001, 12:36 PM
That's cool with me. I fully understand what's going on with both teams... I was merely pointing out that for 2001, I didn't realize KC was #3 in the dead pool. I knew they were taking a hit, but not like that one.

As well, comparing Denver to SanFran and Dallas is not exactly telling the whole story. For the most part, SanFran and Dallas are hurting now for paying lots of money to older players. Denver has only signed 2, maybe 3 players to long term, big money deals that are over the age of 31.

Most of their deals have gone to young players that *should* play well for the next five years. There aren't any Deion or Bruce Smith signings in there anywhere, so they're not paying big bucks and long term deals for guys that are only going to realistically be here for 2 more years at a productive level.

Does that make more sense? I agree that KC will be in a good spot next year, and they have had a pretty good off season during the last month.

This post was not intended as a "hahaha KC sucks" type of post. Yes, there might have been a sprinkling of smack, but that should be expected.

EVERY NFL team that plans on competing at a high level during this era of free agency will have to "play with contracts and signing bonuses", so in essence at some point most teams will have to pay the piper. It just depends on how good the capologist is for your team. I personally think that Denver has a pretty good braintrust (granted they lost their key guy this year to the Vikings, who were in the top 5 of the dead pool this year) when it involves their salary cap. They have been very active in this arena over the last 4 years and they're still in a financially strong position, so I tend to believe that will remain the same.

05-11-2001, 01:10 PM
I would laugh off this "Dead Pool" issue if I had multiple Superbowl victory celebrations. As it is, it represents poor cap managment versus results. I like the moves made this off-season but I like the moves made most off-seasons. I hope to see some positive results soon. For example... a playoff victory.

Chief Henry
05-11-2001, 01:17 PM
One thing that stinks if your a KC fan and being lumped in with those other teams. Those other teams have recent super bowl wins!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What do we have to show for it?

Mile High Mania
05-11-2001, 01:30 PM
Well, at least you know that KC appears to be on the right track moving forward...

05-11-2001, 01:34 PM
Mile High,

I know you're not the "haha KC Sucks" crowd. But I just wanted to give my take on the cap issue for the Chiefs. I'm very happy with what the Chiefs have done this off season. One thing that I have noticed about the Broncos is that they have signed/resigned 27 players this off season, that's a lot. Some of those are Gresie, Mobley, Lespis, Neil, and others but I think a lot of them are training camp or special team players. The only big change that I see for the Broncos next year is their front four on defense. Walker in the secondary was a goop pick up as well. I don't see a big change in my opinion. So I question why they didn't make the play for Wiley the DE from the Bills. Now that would have been an upgrade. I guess that I see a lot of cap dollars spent from the Broncos for depth, and thats fine, but if I were a fan I would have wanted them to sign someone like Wiley.


Mile High Mania
05-11-2001, 01:53 PM
That's a solid perspective about Denver's signings... however, if they had signed Wiley for that kinda cash, they wouldn't have enough depth if he went down for any period of time.

So, I'm happy with the direction they are going. I'm really happy about all of the resignings they have done. The defense was 24th overall last year, the DL should be bigger and hopefully Rhodes can make these guys gel and perform better than last year.

I mean, let's be serious... couldn't be anything but better than last year's DL - they were murdered by opposing RBs. Can't get worse than in 2000, in my eyes. Initially, it looks like the starters will be Pittman, Lett, McGlocton and Pryce... but there's a lot of rotational depth there behind those guys. Rhodes will try hard to duplicate the methodology used by the Ravens last year. And, no ... I'm not expeting Raven 2000 results from Denver's defense.

I really think Walker upgrades the CB position, and hopefully O'Neal with a dash of Middlebrooks will prove positive.

At LB, they were already stacked and now they're deeper with Crocket, Woodall and Gold.

So, overall I'm really optimistic about the defense.

My only concern with Denver, other than Griese's shoulder and the RBs knees is the OL. I don't see a lot of depth there.

keg in kc
05-11-2001, 02:01 PM
Talk about sweet Cap Management

Wasn't that a quote from Daniel Snyder? ;)

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Yes, the amount of dead money KC has is just mind-boggling.

MHM, though, I just don't see the Denver "D" as being that improved, and I'm not looking at it through red and gold goggles when I say this. I think the potential is there, but I think it will be seriously hampered by the negative personalities of a couple of players brought in to anchor the line...

We'll see what happens, I've been wrong before.


05-11-2001, 02:41 PM
I think credit must go to the Broncos for being able to hang on to their key players (Griese, Lepsis, Neil, Mobley). That, in and of itself, is hard to do in with the current cap situation (see the Steelers/Jags etc.). The signings that they have made outside of that this offseason fail to impress me.

IMO, the biggest improvement they have made this season is the hiring of Ray Rhodes. The defensive player personnel (outside of Denard Walker) don't look much better than they have been. Depth is there, but it could prove to be the depth of egos that hurts them.

I agree with Hoover that most of what they have accomplished is to keep a decent team together. They probably would have been better served to take a chance on 1 or 2 other high risk-high return FAs like Wiley to really impact their performance. I just doubt that after the season we'll be saying that it was Woodall, Crockett, McGlockton and Lett that beat us (if they beat us at all!). For a team like Denver which is probably not far from another SB run, quality not quantity of questionable performers/aging vets would have been a better way to go IMO.