PDA

View Full Version : Football Is there an NFL Owner with the balls to be this cheap


Okie_Apparition
02-12-2012, 10:26 AM
New CBA gives teams the right to carry over cap space automatically

Posted by Mike Florio on February 12, 2012, 9:10 AM EST

As the NFL readjusts to the problems that arise from spending that once again will be approaching the annual salary cap, there’s an important provision of the new Collective Bargaining Agreement that needs to be highlighted.

Under Article 13, Section 6(b)(v) of the CBA, each team may carry over any remaining cap room from one year to the next by submitting written notice, signed by the owner of the team, to the league office no later than 14 days before the start of the next league year. The written notice must indicate the maximum amount of cap room that the team wishes to shift from one cap year to the next.

This relatively simple device replaces past tools for carrying over cap space, which included (for example) loading up a renegotiated player contract with a phony “likely to be earned” incentive that would chew up space in one year and then trigger a refund to the cap in the next year.

What’s odd about the new procedure is that teams must affirmatively choose to carry over the cap space. If a team wishes to be competitive, why wouldn’t all remaining cap space be carried over in any and every given year?

The last time we updated the 2011 cap dollars, the Jaguars had $32.9 million in space. The Chiefs had $27.4 million, the Broncos had $25.6 million, the Bucs had $25.1 million, the Seahawks had $21.7 million, and the Bills had $20.9 million.

The fans in each city should be clamoring for the maximum remaining cap room to be carried over, and the media in each city should be poised to get a full explanation if the full amount isn’t carried over.

Meanwhile, we’ll try to think of a plausible explanation for not carrying over the cap space. If nothing else, the excess cap space from 2011 will create excess cap space in 2012 that can be carried into 2013, and so on, until the need arises to use it.

With the new league year beginning on March 13, the notices must be submitted by February 28.

tk13
02-12-2012, 10:38 AM
That's interesting. There's something he doesn't really explain though. Is that extra cap space permanent? Say you add $30 million extra to your cap space for the next year... then spend up to the cap so you have no extra space. What happens the following year? Do you still have that extra space, or are you suddenly $30 million over what the standard cap is?

Okie_Apparition
02-12-2012, 10:42 AM
It's going to force teams to spend it eventually or have to explain themselves
Bidwell must be turning over in his grave(I think he's still alive)

J Diddy
02-12-2012, 11:01 AM
That's interesting. There's something he doesn't really explain though. Is that extra cap space permanent? Say you add $30 million extra to your cap space for the next year... then spend up to the cap so you have no extra space. What happens the following year? Do you still have that extra space, or are you suddenly $30 million over what the standard cap is?

I sincerely doubt that being a cheapo and rolling over $30 million to the next year equates into buying an extra $30 mill in cap space for life.

tk13
02-12-2012, 11:10 AM
I sincerely doubt that being a cheapo and rolling over $30 million to the next year equates into buying an extra $30 mill in cap space for life.

Exactly, which is why this article isn't forward thinking at all. Say the cap is $120 million, and you spend $150 million next year. Then what do you do the following year? You're $30 million over the cap.

jspchief
02-12-2012, 11:11 AM
That's interesting. There's something he doesn't really explain though. Is that extra cap space permanent? Say you add $30 million extra to your cap space for the next year... then spend up to the cap so you have no extra space. What happens the following year? Do you still have that extra space, or are you suddenly $30 million over what the standard cap is?

I suspect its a one year thing, and teams would take advantage of it with front loaded contracts.

It allows teams to spend big without paying for it with later cap hell.

Ideally a team could play it cheap for a single year and set themselves up for years to come.

tk13
02-12-2012, 11:16 AM
Actually what it would do is allow you to cut a player with a huge contract and take the hit. That's probably a huge part of it. Although teams are always manipulating the cap anyway.

cdcox
02-12-2012, 11:17 AM
Exactly, which is why this article isn't forward thinking at all. Say the cap is $120 million, and you spend $150 million next year. Then what do you do the following year? You're $30 million over the cap.

I know you know this, but the cap situation is rolling and has to be managed over a multi year period. Contracts can be front loaded to take advantage of a favorable cap situation in a given year. Every NFL team pays someone about a gabillion dollars to manage this situation.

I don't think spending an extra $30 M in any given year will be a problem. Or spend $140 this year and $130 the next then back to $120 the next (this example ignores the fact that the cap goes up every year).

Not carrying it over would be criminal.

Baconeater
02-12-2012, 11:20 AM
I know you know this, but the cap situation is rolling and has to be managed over a multi year period. Contracts can be front loaded to take advantage of a favorable cap situation in a given year. Every NFL team pays someone about a gabillion dollars to manage this situation.

I don't think spending an extra $30 M in any given year will be a problem. Or spend $140 this year and $130 the next then back to $120 the next (this example ignores the fact that the cap goes up every year).

Not carrying it over would be criminal.
Cool, I can't wait to see the outrage when the Chiefs don't carry theirs over.

BossChief
02-12-2012, 11:23 AM
It could be very advantageous if you don't view the available free agents of a class as worthy of big coin, but have some of your own really good players with expiring contracts that you want to ensure don't have to walk because you don't have the room...or they don't want to re-sign till their contract is up because they feel they can play themselves into a bigger deal than would be presently on the table.

Let's say the cap is 120 million and you have only spent 90 and the free agent class loos very weak and you know that you have a quarterback, wideout, corner and left tackle that will want big extensions the following year...well, you could chose to push some or all of that remaining 30 million forward so you don't lose your own players to the market.

I wonder how this works in relation to the cap floor that will be in place after next year.

tk13
02-12-2012, 11:27 AM
I was under the impression the cap was not going to go up significantly next year... but I could be wrong.

I would bet the Chiefs do this. People forget that Carl was actually pretty good at manipulating the cap in this manner with the "not likely to be earned" bonuses and whatnot. There were years people bashed the Chiefs for having cap space when they actually had the 2nd or 3rd highest cap allowance, allowing them to spend more money than some teams who spent near the standard cap number.

BossChief
02-12-2012, 11:29 AM
This is gonna makE coaching and player development a premium in today's NFL because rules like this make it less likely for good players to ever hit the open market.

If you let a player walk with these rules in place, it's because you view him as a guy you can move on from and upgrade your team.

The flip side is if we let either Bowe or Carr walk, it will be truly criminal.

kysirsoze
02-12-2012, 11:30 AM
I've read all of the posts, but didn't catch where anyone explained how NOT rolling over the cap could possibly benefit you. Am I missing something?

jd1020
02-12-2012, 11:34 AM
I've read all of the posts, but didn't catch where anyone explained how NOT rolling over the cap could possibly benefit you. Am I missing something?

Hunt could take the money he didn't roll over and spend it on repainting the yellow seats red, so it doesn't look as empty on gameday.

kysirsoze
02-12-2012, 11:37 AM
Hunt could take the money he didn't roll over and spend it on repainting the yellow seats red, so it doesn't look as empty on gameday.

Obviously you're (kinda) joking, but does rolling over the cap raise the salary floor so that rolling over the cap actually costs owners money? That would explain it although it would still piss me the fuck off.

ChiefsandO'sfan
02-12-2012, 11:43 AM
Cool, I can't wait to see the outrage when the Chiefs don't carry theirs over.

According to an interview given by Clark Hunt the week of the Super Bowl, the Kansas City Chiefs finished the season about $20 million under the salary cap. There had been reports of the team being as much as $27 million under the cap, however Hunt indicated that those estimates were a bit high. Under the new rules of the updated CBA, teams can carry over unused cap dollars from one year to the next.

This makes sense. Teams should have that flexibility with their money. For instance, if a team has a number of key players set to hit free agency they may want to save some extra cap space to re-sign those guys rather than blow that money on guys like Shabby Piscitelli.

With the extra $20 million, the Chiefs could outbid just about any other team NFL team for any free agent they might deem worth the money.

Per the terms of the new CBA, the extra money doesn’t just automatically carry over from one year to the next. The team must actually choose to carry the cap room over by submitting a written notice to the league before the start of the new league year. The teams don’t have to carry over all the money. The Chiefs could decide to carry over any portion of their extra $20 million.

According to Hunt, the team has already decided to carry over their space.



“The reason we chose to carry it over is because we anticipate needing it in 2012 and 2013. Both to continue signing our own fee agents as well as being able to go out and sign some free agents from outside,” Hunt told 810 Sports just days before the Super Bowl.

I did not hear this Hunt quote until today and so it makes me cautiously optimistic. I say cautiously because simply carrying over the money does not necessarily mean the Chiefs will spend it.

Still, Hunt said that re-signing the teams own players is a priority for the Chiefs.

“It’s been a big priority when the team headed in a young direction back starting in 2008. One of the things we had in the back of our mind was when those guys got to the end of their first contract we wanted to be in a position to be able to retain them if they were the type of players that we wanted for the future. We’ve obviously done that with a number of guys over the years. We’ve got a couple of key guys this year, we’ll have a couple of key guys next year and that’s just going to be part of the philosophy. We want guys that start their careers with the Chiefs to play for us as long as possible.”

Carrying over an extra $20 million in cap space only gives the Chiefs more flexibility in 2012. They don’t have to use the money if they don’t want to or if it doesn’t make sense.

As we’ve been saying for a while now, the next few weeks will tell us an awful lot about how the Chiefs will run their franchise. Because they’ve been near the bottom of the league in spending for a while now, many fans have taken to calling them the Kansas City Cheaps.

Those accusations might not necessarily be fair. The Chiefs are a very young team and quite frankly, they haven’t had many big stars worth spending money on since Scott Pioli came to town. Of the stars they do have, the Chiefs have re-signed most of them including Brandon Flowers, Tamba Hali, Jamaal Charles and Derrick Johnson. I’ve been saying for a while that we wouldn’t really be able to find out if the Chiefs were cheap or not until the time came to retain their starts and pay them big contracts. A young team will only be young and cheap for so long. Eventually, the Chiefs will have to pay or cut players lose. According to Hunt, the Chiefs are very aware that the time to spend if coming.

“When the team went young in 2008, with Herm Edwards as the coach, we ended up with a very young football team which put us way under the salary cap, that was sot of one of the byproducts of that,” Hunt said. “And when Scott came in, he inherited that situation. He’s gone out and added some key free agents as we’ve gone along. But we’ve also signed a lot of very expensive number one draft choices, particularly under the old CBA. A lot of time the way those contracts are structured, they create significant challenges for you from a cap standpoint as you go forward. Last year when I was speaking with some of the media about our salary cap situation, I told them that this situations going to change dramatically as we go forward. As we go into 2012 and 2013, we care going to utilize that cap space. Thank goodness we’ve been able to carry over the space that we had in 11′ to 12′ and 13′ because it’s really going to help us, it’s going to give us an advantage against some other teams that will have to let guys go.”

There you have it right from the horse’s mouth. Hunt says the Chiefs are going to change their spending and ch



Hunt has already said he is gonna carry it over

milkman
02-12-2012, 11:44 AM
It could be very advantageous if you don't view the available free agents of a class as worthy of big coin, but have some of your own really good players with expiring contracts that you want to ensure don't have to walk because you don't have the room...or they don't want to re-sign till their contract is up because they feel they can play themselves into a bigger deal than would be presently on the table.

Let's say the cap is 120 million and you have only spent 90 and the free agent class loos very weak and you know that you have a quarterback, wideout, corner and left tackle that will want big extensions the following year...well, you could chose to push some or all of that remaining 30 million forward so you don't lose your own players to the market.

I wonder how this works in relation to the cap floor that will be in place after next year.

Once the floor kicks in, teams won't have more than a couple of mil to roll over from year to year.

jspchief
02-12-2012, 11:47 AM
I've read all of the posts, but didn't catch where anyone explained how NOT rolling over the cap could possibly benefit you. Am I missing something?

The only advantage would be an owner sticking to a budget he's set for himself. Basically having no desire to ever exceed the predetermined cap.

DenverDanChiefsFan
02-12-2012, 12:02 PM
According to an interview given by Clark Hunt the week of the Super Bowl, the Kansas City Chiefs finished the season about $20 million under the salary cap. There had been reports of the team being as much as $27 million under the cap, however Hunt indicated that those estimates were a bit high. Under the new rules of the updated CBA, teams can carry over unused cap dollars from one year to the next.

This makes sense. Teams should have that flexibility with their money. For instance, if a team has a number of key players set to hit free agency they may want to save some extra cap space to re-sign those guys rather than blow that money on guys like Shabby Piscitelli.

With the extra $20 million, the Chiefs could outbid just about any other team NFL team for any free agent they might deem worth the money.

Per the terms of the new CBA, the extra money doesn’t just automatically carry over from one year to the next. The team must actually choose to carry the cap room over by submitting a written notice to the league before the start of the new league year. The teams don’t have to carry over all the money. The Chiefs could decide to carry over any portion of their extra $20 million.

According to Hunt, the team has already decided to carry over their space.



“The reason we chose to carry it over is because we anticipate needing it in 2012 and 2013. Both to continue signing our own fee agents as well as being able to go out and sign some free agents from outside,” Hunt told 810 Sports just days before the Super Bowl.

I did not hear this Hunt quote until today and so it makes me cautiously optimistic. I say cautiously because simply carrying over the money does not necessarily mean the Chiefs will spend it.

Still, Hunt said that re-signing the teams own players is a priority for the Chiefs.

“It’s been a big priority when the team headed in a young direction back starting in 2008. One of the things we had in the back of our mind was when those guys got to the end of their first contract we wanted to be in a position to be able to retain them if they were the type of players that we wanted for the future. We’ve obviously done that with a number of guys over the years. We’ve got a couple of key guys this year, we’ll have a couple of key guys next year and that’s just going to be part of the philosophy. We want guys that start their careers with the Chiefs to play for us as long as possible.”

Carrying over an extra $20 million in cap space only gives the Chiefs more flexibility in 2012. They don’t have to use the money if they don’t want to or if it doesn’t make sense.

As we’ve been saying for a while now, the next few weeks will tell us an awful lot about how the Chiefs will run their franchise. Because they’ve been near the bottom of the league in spending for a while now, many fans have taken to calling them the Kansas City Cheaps.

Those accusations might not necessarily be fair. The Chiefs are a very young team and quite frankly, they haven’t had many big stars worth spending money on since Scott Pioli came to town. Of the stars they do have, the Chiefs have re-signed most of them including Brandon Flowers, Tamba Hali, Jamaal Charles and Derrick Johnson. I’ve been saying for a while that we wouldn’t really be able to find out if the Chiefs were cheap or not until the time came to retain their starts and pay them big contracts. A young team will only be young and cheap for so long. Eventually, the Chiefs will have to pay or cut players lose. According to Hunt, the Chiefs are very aware that the time to spend if coming.

“When the team went young in 2008, with Herm Edwards as the coach, we ended up with a very young football team which put us way under the salary cap, that was sot of one of the byproducts of that,” Hunt said. “And when Scott came in, he inherited that situation. He’s gone out and added some key free agents as we’ve gone along. But we’ve also signed a lot of very expensive number one draft choices, particularly under the old CBA. A lot of time the way those contracts are structured, they create significant challenges for you from a cap standpoint as you go forward. Last year when I was speaking with some of the media about our salary cap situation, I told them that this situations going to change dramatically as we go forward. As we go into 2012 and 2013, we care going to utilize that cap space. Thank goodness we’ve been able to carry over the space that we had in 11′ to 12′ and 13′ because it’s really going to help us, it’s going to give us an advantage against some other teams that will have to let guys go.”

There you have it right from the horse’s mouth. Hunt says the Chiefs are going to change their spending and ch



Hunt has already said he is gonna carry it over
Love it if true. Actions will speak volumes more than words.

Wilson8
02-12-2012, 01:40 PM
Minimum cash spend will be based on unadjusted cap numbers

In response to our item from earlier today regarding the ability of teams to carry over cap space from year to year simply by submitting a piece of paper signed by the owner indicating a desire to do so, some of you have suggested that teams will refrain from doing so because it would drive up their minimum cash spending requirement.

Per a league source with knowledge of the dynamics of the CBA, it won’t.

When the 89-percent per-team spending minimum kicks in next year, the threshold will be based on the unadjusted cap number. And so no amount of carried-over cap space will increase the amount each team must spend on a rolling three-year average, as of 2013.

As a result, there’s no reason for any team to avoid carrying over the full amount of any excess cap space. Unless, of course, the team is cheap.

Here’s the full list of remaining cap space, by team. Five teams have more than $20 million: the Jaguars ($31.66 million); the Broncos ($27.88 million); the Buccaneers ($25.05 million); the Chiefs ($24.01 million); and the Seahawks ($21.27 million).

The five teams with the least remaining 2011 cap space are the Lions ($1.47 million); the Texans ($1.08 million); the Giants ($1.06 million); the Falcons ($747,000); and the Steelers ($506,000).

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/category/rumor-mill/

whoman69
02-12-2012, 02:14 PM
Even a cheap team shouldn't hesitate to roll that unused cap over. They may need that cap to cut their most expensive players. It might be interesting to see if Buffalo would use it to cut Fitzpatrick or use it as leverage to restructure. I don't think the players union really thought that through. They only have promises the league will spend more money on vets since they are paying so little for rookies.

Chiefaholic
02-12-2012, 02:20 PM
Exactly, which is why this article isn't forward thinking at all. Say the cap is $120 million, and you spend $150 million next year. Then what do you do the following year? You're $30 million over the cap.

Not if contracts are front loaded allowing base salaries to be more cap friendly the later part of the contract.

whoman69
02-12-2012, 04:35 PM
So the unused cap can be used by owners to increase the cap for one year to sign players and frontload those contracts or take the cap hit to cut players that are too expensive.

Mr. Flopnuts
02-12-2012, 04:45 PM
I have no reason to think Clark Hunt is a liar. I'm thrilled to hear it.

Mr. Laz
02-12-2012, 04:45 PM
Just a way to for teams to message the cap for years with a big roster hit.

BossChief
02-12-2012, 05:03 PM
“The reason we chose to carry it over is because we anticipate needing it in 2012 and 2013. Both to continue signing our own fee agents as well as being able to go out and sign some free agents from outside,” Hunt told 810 Sports just days before the Super Bowl.



WOW

Ive been saying this is the case, but I am shocked to hear it straight from Hunt.

stonedstooge
02-12-2012, 05:16 PM
I'll just have somebody tweet that the Chiefs have reached the cap and you dumb shits will believe it/Clark

Chiefaholic
02-12-2012, 06:48 PM
I'll just have somebody tweet that the Chiefs have reached the cap and you dumb shits will believe it/Clark

" Pioli is too ignorant to wipe his own ass w/o assistance. He'll likely use all the extra cap money to give Cassel and McGraw long term contracts exceeding $100 million. Then he'll have to cut Berry, Charles, and hali to make space to sign Barry Richardson long term." [/stonedstooge]

I swear... Some of you people must be some miserable motherf***ers to live with. I feel sorry for your better halves.

Mr. Laz
02-12-2012, 07:03 PM
" Pioli is too ignorant to wipe his own ass w/o assistance. He'll likely use all the extra cap money to give Cassel and McGraw long term contracts exceeding $100 million. Then he'll have to cut Berry, Charles, and hali to make space to sign Barry Richardson long term." [/stonedstooge]

I swear... Some of you people must be some miserable motherf***ers to live with. I feel sorry for your better halves.
They have gone nuts

I don't know whether Pioli will ultimately succeed or fail in KC but he hasn't done anything to cause this kind of freak out(yet). :shrug:

all the little sheep around here just followed along with all the batshit crazy bullshit. Even the Tyson Jackson pick turns out to be better than all the ****ubators kept bitching about to anyone who would listen.

For all anyone knows the Chiefs decide that Stanzi needed time and so they went with Cassel, then Orton, and it's only a matter of time. Nobody knows and yet they keep freaking out.

EVEN IF WE STICK WITH Cassel this year the team will be solid if we draft well and make some decent moves in FA.

Is 'solid' good enough? No. Does everyone want to go 8-8 each year? No.

but still ... it's like Pioli killed somebody's momma instead of just bringing the Chiefs to respectability again.

We have a decent mixture of young and old players. We have potential ... 3 or 4 decent addition, Stanzi stepping up and we go from all this bitching to a legit super bowl challenger.

stonedstooge
02-12-2012, 07:08 PM
" Pioli is too ignorant to wipe his own ass w/o assistance. He'll likely use all the extra cap money to give Cassel and McGraw long term contracts exceeding $100 million. Then he'll have to cut Berry, Charles, and hali to make space to sign Barry Richardson long term." [/stonedstooge]

I swear... Some of you people must be some miserable motherf***ers to live with. I feel sorry for your better halves.

Using my quote and then referring to me after that other quote might be borderline copywrite infringement. Let me consult my lawyer

Chiefaholic
02-12-2012, 07:42 PM
They have gone nuts

I don't know whether Pioli will ultimately succeed or fail in KC but he hasn't done anything to cause this kind of freak out(yet). :shrug:

all the little sheep around here just followed along with all the batshit crazy bullshit. Even the Tyson Jackson pick turns out to be better than all the ****ubators kept bitching about to anyone who would listen.

For all anyone knows the Chiefs decide that Stanzi needed time and so they went with Cassel, then Orton, and it's only a matter of time. Nobody knows and yet they keep freaking out.

EVEN IF WE STICK WITH Cassel this year the team will be solid if we draft well and make some decent moves in FA.

Is 'solid' good enough? No. Does everyone want to go 8-8 each year? No.

but still ... it's like Pioli killed somebody's momma instead of just bringing the Chiefs to respectability again.

We have a decent mixture of young and old players. We have potential ... 3 or 4 decent addition, Stanzi stepping up and we go from all this bitching to a legit super bowl challenger.

I don't have any faith in Cassel to win a a game with his arm. It's time to cut the cord and move on. We have loads of cash to make a splash in the FA market, while signing our own that need re-signed. Orton is an option, but not my preference. I'm in the minority that wants Manning, OR risk a blockbuster trade scenario to get Luck. All this team needs is a legit QB with all the offensive weapons we have at his disposal. The defense and special teams are playoff caliber already.