PDA

View Full Version : cap question


tmax63
02-28-2008, 08:27 AM
Now that several cuts/ not resigned have happened where does that put the Chiefs cap now? I remember it being said that they had around 20 mil room before all this but just curious where they're at now.

Phobia
02-28-2008, 09:30 AM
They dumped a lot of salary with overpriced vets, clearly. EK was probably 3-4. Bell, same. Law = 6-7. Dunn = 1.

ChiefGator
02-28-2008, 10:00 AM
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that I don't think the salary cap is going to be a real constraint this year.

BigChiefFan
02-28-2008, 10:02 AM
We should have even MORE cap room now.

Chief Chief
02-28-2008, 10:05 AM
If we don't sign many FAs this off-season, I'm inclined to think KC will try to trade down their #5 pick for more young players. I wouldn't mind seeing that at all. Why have $7M (or whatever a #5 pick would demand) invested in one player who could be the next Ryan Sims, get injured and miss games, hold out on signing and miss most/all of training camp, etc., when you can pay several young, slightly less talented players that same amount (or less). CP and Herm have already seen positive results of picking up some young talent last year in the middle rounds who have made impacts in their rookie year, and of course they've seen Ryan Sims.

Radar Chief
02-28-2008, 10:12 AM
If I understand the cap correctly, the guys that were under contract and released will have the rest of their signing bonus accelerated to this years cap number.
In other words, if Player X originally signs a 4 year deal the bonus is spread out over the length of the contract for cap accountability purposes. If he’s released with 2 years left, the rest of his bonus that is unaccounted for by the cap gets added to this years number. Correct?
If so, this could mean that releasing some of these guys cost us.
Not that I mind, just pointing out.

Mr. Kotter
02-28-2008, 10:14 AM
Yeah, I'm curious why they didn't wait until June 1st for a couple of the guys they cut....to ease the cap hit.

Unless they want to open up some room NEXT year for signing some selected and high priority FAs..... :hmmm:

Phobia
02-28-2008, 10:16 AM
If I understand the cap correctly, the guys that were under contract and released will have the rest of their signing bonus accelerated to this years cap number.
In other words, if Player X originally signs a 4 year deal the bonus is spread out over the length of the contract for cap accountability purposes. If he’s released with 2 years left, the rest of his bonus that is unaccounted for by the cap gets added to this years number. Correct?
If so, this could mean that releasing some of these guys cost us.
Not that I mind, just pointing out.

I think almost all these guys were in the last year or two of their deals so the bonus acceleration would have already been accounted for in our 2008 cap number.

cookster50
02-28-2008, 10:27 AM
If we don't sign many FAs this off-season, I'm inclined to think KC will try to trade down their #5 pick for more young players. I wouldn't mind seeing that at all. Why have $7M (or whatever a #5 pick would demand) invested in one player who could be the next Ryan Sims, get injured and miss games, hold out on signing and miss most/all of training camp, etc., when you can pay several young, slightly less talented players that same amount (or less). CP and Herm have already seen positive results of picking up some young talent last year in the middle rounds who have made impacts in their rookie year, and of course they've seen Ryan Sims.

Yeah, why take the chance of getting a Ryan Sims. Because all top 10 draft picks turn out to be busts. There are NEVER any good top 10 draft picks, especially top 5. So why bother?

:rolleyes:

Amnorix
02-28-2008, 10:30 AM
If I understand the cap correctly, the guys that were under contract and released will have the rest of their signing bonus accelerated to this years cap number.
In other words, if Player X originally signs a 4 year deal the bonus is spread out over the length of the contract for cap accountability purposes. If he’s released with 2 years left, the rest of his bonus that is unaccounted for by the cap gets added to this years number. Correct?
If so, this could mean that releasing some of these guys cost us.
Not that I mind, just pointing out.

Correct. Of course, if the guy was entering his final year of his deal, then there is nothing to accelerate.

What you save is any roster bonuses that might be payable, as well as this year's salary.

Amnorix
02-28-2008, 10:32 AM
Yeah, I'm curious why they didn't wait until June 1st for a couple of the guys they cut....to ease the cap hit.

Unless they want to open up some room NEXT year for signing some selected and high priority FAs..... :hmmm:

First, if the guy was only signed thorugh 2008, then there's no need to wait until June 1st.

Second, if you think you have alot of room in '08 -- more than you're likely to need, then it makes sense to use it up rather than spread it into 2009 when you might need it.

Third, some teams won't wait until June 1 regarding vets that they like as it somewhat screws the vets if they wait that long. Cutting them early gives them a better chance to catch on elsewhere.

Amnorix
02-28-2008, 10:33 AM
I think almost all these guys were in the last year or two of their deals so the bonus acceleration would have already been accounted for in our 2008 cap number.


Well, last YEAR, not last "year OR TWO". If there were 2 years left on the deal, then cutting after June 1 might be a touch better for purposes of this year's cap, and of course a touch worse for the 2009 cap.

Chief Chief
02-28-2008, 10:46 AM
Yeah, why take the chance of getting a Ryan Sims. Because all top 10 draft picks turn out to be busts. There are NEVER any good top 10 draft picks, especially top 5. So why bother?

:rolleyes:


My words exactly!

Happy to know you completely agree with me, but next time come up with an original thought, ya plagiarist!

:PPL:

blueballs
03-02-2008, 01:44 PM
Creative enterprise
Vikings, Eagles rule roost of salary-cap manipulation
Posted: Saturday March 1, 2008 2:09AM;
Updated: Saturday March 1, 2008 11:48PM
<To view links in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. Your post count is 0 momentarily.>

It's a regulation buried deep in the NFL's Collective Bargaining Agreement, a regulation so obscure it doesn't even have a name.

Other than Article XXIV, Section 7, section ii, paragraph c, part (iii).

Here's what it says:

At the end of a season, if performance bonuses previously included in a Team's Team Salary but not actually earned exceed performance bonuses actually earned but not previously included in Team Salary, an amount shall be added to the Team's Salary Cap for the next League Year equaling the amount, if any, by which such overage exceeds the Team's Room under the Salary Cap at the end of a season.

This dizzylingy obtuse regulation is unwittingly having a profound effect on the NFL's economic landscape.

The level playing field the NFL's salary cap supposedly created?

It's a myth.

Because of a variety of complicated tricks that savvy NFL team officials have figured out, teams can manipulate their salary cap to the point where their cap figure winds up millions of dollars higher than the teams they're competing with.

The Vikings and Lions are both in the NFC North. Both have unadjusted cap figures of $116,729,000, like all 32 NFL teams.

Yet the Vikings' 2008 cap figure exceeds $135 million, and the Lions' adjusted figure is more than $111 million.

So the Vikings this offseason will have $20 million more than one of their division rivals to pay free agents and re-sign their own players. That's an 18 percent difference, and it demonstrates just how much of a difference shrewd cap management can make.

The NFL salary cap is a fluid number. Although the unadjusted cap number for all 32 teams is identical, the real numbers actually vary greatly.

Here's why.

Teams need room to make room. The way the NFL's Collective Bargaining Agreement works, the more flexibility a team has, the easier it is to gain future flexibility. So teams that find themselves in cap trouble are often stuck there for years. And teams that stay out of cap trouble can tweak contracts in certain ways that generate huge cap advantages in later years.

That's where the above CBA trick comes into play.

Teams with significant cap space late in a season can manipulate the following year's cap by writing likely-to-be-earned incentive bonuses into contracts that, in reality, have zero chance of being earned.


Such incentives count against a team's cap the year they're written, but if they're not met -- and teams have ways of making sure they're not met -- the team is then credited the amount of the bonuses against the following year's cap.

According to figures distributed to each NFL team this week, 24 of the 32 NFL teams were given upward cap adjustments for 2008, six teams were given downward cap adjustments (thanks to conventional incentives that were met) and two teams had no adjustments.

Of the 24 teams that gained more room under the cap, seven tacked on at least $10 million, a group led by the Vikings ($18,432,577), Eagles ($14,087,449), Buccaneers ($13,306,634), Bills ($12,713,009) and Browns ($12,633,503).

Not coincidentally, the Eagles, Vikings, Bills and Browns all made a splash on the first day of free agency.

The Vikings signed safety Madieu Williams to a six-year, $33 million contract; the Eagles signed Asante Samuel to a six-year, $57 million deal, the Bills acquired linebacker Kawika Mitchell and signed him to a five-year, $17.5 million deal; and the Browns traded for defensive tackle Corey Williams and gave him a deal including nearly $20 in guaranteed components.

What team lost the most money via cap adjustments? The Lions. They have the lowest adjusted cap in the league in 2008 -- their $111,380,935 figure actually coming out $5,348,065 below the unadjusted cap figure.

Does that surprise anybody?

2008 Salary Cap Figures
Team Adjustments Adjusted Cap
Arizona Cardinals $0 $116,729,000
Atlanta Falcons ($350,574) $116,378,426
Baltimore Ravens $2,532,265 $119,261,265
Buffalo Bills $12,713,009 $129,442,009
Carolina Panthers $8,926,802 $125,655,802
Chicago Bears $726,231 $117,455,231
Cincinnati Bengals $0 $116,729,000
Cleveland Browns $12,633,503 $129,362,503
Dallas Cowboys $998,443 $117,727,443
Denver Broncos $660,000 $117,389,000
Detroit Lions ($5,348,065) $111,380,935
Green Bay Packers $9,430,581 $126,159,581
Houston Texans ($2,207,869) $114,521,131
Indianapolis Colts $6,501,115 $123,230,115
Jacksonville Jaguars $11,920,898 $128,649,898
Kansas City Chiefs $11,658,373 $128,387,373
Miami Dolphins $3,944,997 $120,673,997
Minnesota Vikings $18,432,577 $135,161,577
New England Patriots $2,596,078 $119,325,078
New Orleans Saints $8,017,003 $124,746,003
New York Giants ($3,096,512) $113,632,488
New York Jets $5,052,789 $121,781,789
Oakland Raiders $4,340,722 $121,069,722
Philadelphia Eagles $14,087,449 $130,816,449
Pittsburgh Steelers ($1,910,774) $114,818,226
San Diego Chargers ($597,647) $116,131,353
San Francisco 49ers $2,310,787 $119,039,787
Seattle Seahawks $7,386,108 $124,115,108
St. Louis Rams $632,320 $117,361,320
Tampa Bay Buccaneers $13,306,634 $130,035,634
Tennessee Titans $5,491,147 $122,220,147
Washington Redskins $1,821,260 $118,550,260


• 2008 unadjusted salary cap is $116,729,000
• Numbers in parentheses are negative cap adjustments

chop
03-02-2008, 03:18 PM
<to view="" links="" in="" this="" forum="" must="" be="" 10="" or="" greater.="" your="" post="" count="" is="" 0="" momentarily.="">
Kansas City Chiefs $11,658,373 $128,387,373


If I am reading this correctly, it looks like the Chiefs will have some of last years left over money to pay J. Allen.
</to>

blueballs
03-02-2008, 03:26 PM
According to figures distributed to each NFL team this week, 24 of the 32 NFL teams were given upward cap adjustments for 2008, six teams were given downward cap adjustments (thanks to conventional incentives that were met) and two teams had no adjustments.

They already knew this
now that they have it maybe they'll start talking

OnTheWarpath15
03-02-2008, 03:33 PM
The last confirmed number I've read, from NFL Network, was that we were $25.8M under the cap.

That was as of Thursday night before FA started.

B_Ambuehl
03-02-2008, 03:54 PM
The chiefs are actually going to have to spend money to get up to the spending minimum. I believe the minimum is 100 million.

OnTheWarpath15
03-02-2008, 03:59 PM
The chiefs are actually going to have to spend money to get up to the spending minimum. I believe the minimum is 100 million.

First, that won't be a problem considering we have to pay the 5th overall pick in the draft, plus potentially 9 others.

Second, IIRC, the salary floor is 90% of the cap. So just shy of $105M