PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs Chiefs have $57 million in cap room


Count Alex's Wins
02-26-2009, 09:00 PM
Holy shit!

http://blogs.nfl.com/2009/02/26/tampa-bay-working-with-most-salary-cap-space/

Tampa Bay working with most salary cap space (http://blogs.nfl.com/2009/02/26/tampa-bay-working-with-most-salary-cap-space/) <!-- p class="post-info-author">By Adam Schefter</p -->

Posted: Adam Schefter (http://blogs.nfl.com/category/adam-schefter/) | Adam Schefter | Tags: Free Agency 2009 (http://blogs.nfl.com/tag/free-agency-2009/)
On the eve of free agency, some teams are positioned too well, and others not so well. Based on numbers gathered Thursday and these are fluid, changing with each roster move that each team makes here are the teams with the most and least salary-cap room heading into the start of free agency.


MOST

Tampa Bay $61 million
Kansas City $57 million
Philadelphia $48 million
Denver $37 million
Green Bay $34 million


LEAST

Carolina $1.9 million
New England $3.2 million
Indianapolis $6.6 million
Pittsburgh $7.4 million
Washington $8.1 million

PS - Someone post this on the Mane. We're competing with them for defensive free agents.

the Talking Can
02-26-2009, 09:01 PM
repost

Mr. Laz
02-26-2009, 09:07 PM
i don't expect them to spend it all

they still don't really know who much suck was the players vs the coaches


i expect several middle range FA's

chiefbowe82
02-26-2009, 09:08 PM
how does tampa have more, i thought we had far and away the most

Mr. Laz
02-26-2009, 09:08 PM
how does tampa have more, i thought we had far and away the most
tampa just cut several players and jumped ahead of us i think

John_Wayne
02-26-2009, 09:10 PM
Holy shit!

http://blogs.nfl.com/2009/02/26/tampa-bay-working-with-most-salary-cap-space/

Tampa Bay working with most salary cap space (http://blogs.nfl.com/2009/02/26/tampa-bay-working-with-most-salary-cap-space/) <!-- p class="post-info-author">By Adam Schefter</p -->

Posted: Adam Schefter (http://blogs.nfl.com/category/adam-schefter/) | Adam Schefter | Tags: Free Agency 2009 (http://blogs.nfl.com/tag/free-agency-2009/)
On the eve of free agency, some teams are positioned too well, and others not so well. Based on numbers gathered Thursday and these are fluid, changing with each roster move that each team makes here are the teams with the most and least salary-cap room heading into the start of free agency.


MOST

Tampa Bay $61 million
Kansas City $57 million
Philadelphia $48 million
Denver $37 million
Green Bay $34 million


LEAST

Carolina $1.9 million
New England $3.2 million
Indianapolis $6.6 million
Pittsburgh $7.4 million
Washington $8.1 million

PS - Someone post this on the Mane. We're competing with them for defensive free agents.

......plus, we've got PIOLI !!!!

Chiefs_Mike_Topeka
02-26-2009, 09:13 PM
I think the Chiefs will still have 15+ going into the season. Setting up for the ability to make some noise the following season.

Mr. Laz
02-26-2009, 09:18 PM
they also don't know what's gonna happen in the draft at #3


sign a OT but then end up grabbing one at #3?
sign a couple linebackers but then grab Curry at #3?
sign a quarterback but then have Stafford fall into your laps at #3?


it effects their plans

Count Alex's Wins
02-26-2009, 09:20 PM
Man Clark is so fucking cheap /average Chiefsplanet dumbass last offseason

bowener
02-26-2009, 09:30 PM
Dont we have to spend close to $106 million this season or else we are penalized by the league?

FAX
02-26-2009, 09:32 PM
A cause for vigilance. How the Chiefs spend this money could well have repercussions for many, many years. For example, take LJ. Please.

FAX

Mr. Laz
02-26-2009, 09:34 PM
Dont we have to spend close to $106 million this season or else we are penalized by the league?
there is a minimum ..... it's 75% of the total salary Cap iirc correctly

BigRock
02-26-2009, 09:37 PM
http://imrichbiatchhonkhonk.ytmnd.com/



<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Z_R3yvJyEB4&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Z_R3yvJyEB4&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

wild1
02-26-2009, 09:55 PM
how will that number be affected if/when they cut Larry Johnson?

ChiefsCountry
02-26-2009, 09:56 PM
how will that number be affected if/when they cut Larry Johnson?

LJ is due 8.2 or 8.8 somewhere in that range. Nothing really.

OnTheWarpath58
02-26-2009, 09:57 PM
how will that number be affected if/when they cut Larry Johnson?

Blip on the radar.

There's only a 600K difference between keeping him and cutting him.

wild1
02-26-2009, 10:06 PM
good

this team needs an enema

CaliforniaChief
02-26-2009, 10:23 PM
How on earth do the Redskins still have 8.1 million under the cap?

OnTheWarpath58
02-26-2009, 10:26 PM
How on earth do the Redskins still have 8.1 million under the cap?

Well, they got an extra $4M along with every other team today when they readjusted the number.

BigChiefFan
02-26-2009, 10:31 PM
How on earth do the Redskins still have 8.1 million under the cap?
Big signing bonuses do wonders for the salary cap.

kcchiefsus
02-26-2009, 10:39 PM
From the article I just read that was linked off of the front page here from ESPN it said the minimum teams must spend is $107 million. With a $127 million cap we can be no more than $20 million under the cap. With $57 million in cap room that puts our current cap number for the 2009 season at approximately $70 million. Looks like we have to spend $37 million just to reach the minimum. I simply do not see how we spend that much without spending some big bucks on the free agent market.

Depending on how we structure the contract our #3 pick will barely take up a 4th of that spending, probably not even that. As everybody will remember there is a rookie spending pool so it's not like we can just put all of the guaranteed money in the form of a roster bonus paid out this year because it wouldn't be allowed.

Teams often convert roster bonuses to signing bonuses so that they can spread the money over the length of the contract and save money on that years cap. I'm not sure but I would think you could perhaps do the opposite to count more towards this years cap.

I would also say we could extend some young players to take up some cap space this year but the sad thing is I don't think we even have any young players with contracts coming up that would put a significant dent in this years cap. Unless we want to extend guys like Bowe or Albert with 3 or 4 years left on their deals their isn't much we can do in this regard.

Long story short, I simply do not see how we have any option but to go ahead and dish out some bucks this year unless we want to just be penalized.

blueballs
02-26-2009, 10:43 PM
WTF the Fins have already signed someone
DOOOOOOOOOOOMMM

kcchiefsus
02-26-2009, 10:48 PM
WTF the Fins have already signed someone
DOOOOOOOOOOOMMM

Who? Don't leave us hanging.

blueballs
02-26-2009, 10:49 PM
the safety from the Raidrrrs

kcchiefsus
02-26-2009, 10:50 PM
the safety from the Raidrrrs

That doesn't count, they signed him yesterday. He was cut before free agency began so he was free to sign at any time.

BigChiefFan
02-26-2009, 10:51 PM
Good info., Chiefsus.

blueballs
02-26-2009, 10:52 PM
Just 'cause they're and ex-Raider
doesn't mean they don't count
look at Randy Moss

kcchiefsus
02-26-2009, 10:52 PM
They must have agreed in principal. Teams can talk to the agents prior to FA.

Again, he was signed because he was released. The only reason other free agents have to wait is because this is the date when their contracts officially end. Wilson was released so he was free to sign at any time.

blueballs
02-26-2009, 10:53 PM
7 minutes till let down melt down
begins

kcchiefsus
02-26-2009, 10:53 PM
Just 'cause they're and ex-Raider
doesn't mean they don't count
look at Randy Moss

Huh? What are you talking about?

Look at Fred Taylor for example. He has already been taking visits because he was released by the Bills. Players that are released before free agency begins can sign at any point.

BigChiefFan
02-26-2009, 10:59 PM
Again, he was signed because he was released. The only reason other free agents have to wait is because this is the date when their contracts officially end. Wilson was released so he was free to sign at any time.
Agreed. I had forgotten that about Wilson and I'm the one that started that thread originally-it's been a long week.:doh!:

tk13
02-26-2009, 11:10 PM
I don't know if you could spend that much in one offseason even if you tried.

BigChiefFan
02-26-2009, 11:14 PM
I don't know if you could spend that much in one offseason even if you tried.Haynesworth would be a nice start...:D

FAX
02-26-2009, 11:15 PM
I just realized why, when you fail to meet the NFL's cap spending requirements, they call it, "getting screwed". You're penile - ized.

FAX

beavis
02-26-2009, 11:30 PM
I don't know if you could spend that much in one offseason even if you tried.

That #3 pick isn't going to be cheap.

I have been wondering, if we had a ton of cap room and didn't necessarily want to sign any big name FAs, if we could give our draft picks large first year salaries in lieu of signing bonuses, so they wouldn't prorate into future years caps.

kcchiefsus
02-26-2009, 11:34 PM
That #3 pick isn't going to be cheap.

I have been wondering, if we had a ton of cap room and didn't necessarily want to sign any big name FAs, if we could give our draft picks large first year salaries in lieu of signing bonuses, so they wouldn't prorate into future years caps.

I already covered that in my post back on page 2. As you all might remember each team is allotted a rookie pool. Ours will be one of the highest simply because of our high pick but there is only so much we can spend on all of our rookies. Heck, last year with 12 draft picks and the #5 overall pick our rookie pool was still only $8,221,790, the most in the NFL in 2008. That's not even a fourth of the $37 million it looks like we have to spend.

blueballs
02-26-2009, 11:36 PM
Huh? What are you talking about?

Look at Fred Taylor for example. He has already been taking visits because he was released by the Bills. Players that are released before free agency begins can sign at any point.

calm down Francis

beavis
02-26-2009, 11:42 PM
I already covered that in my post back on page 2. As you all might remember each team is allotted a rookie pool. Ours will be one of the highest simply because of our high pick but there is only so much we can spend on all of our rookies. Heck, last year with 12 draft picks and the #5 overall pick our rookie pool was still only $8,221,790, the most in the NFL in 2008. That's not even a fourth of the $37 million it looks like we have to spend.

Alright, well then say the same example for a free agent.

FAX
02-26-2009, 11:45 PM
It's a little sad to think about big, strong, proud guys like Haynesworth on their knees crying and begging Pioli to take them on.

FAX

FAX
02-26-2009, 11:47 PM
It kind of breaks your heart, to tell the truth. Then again, if you want to win a Super Bowl and make it to the Hall Of Fame, you have to go through Pioli. So, I guess it's understandable.

Still, when grown men crawl on their bellies and kiss another man's shoes, it can be kinda embarrassing for everybody.

FAX

FAX
02-26-2009, 11:49 PM
I hope Pioli is kind to these guys. There just isn't room on the team for everybody who wants to play for us. I know that they'll understand that, but I just want Pioli to break it to them easy and demonstrate a little empathy. There's no point in being cruel to a pro-bowler.

FAX