PDA

View Full Version : New CBA Cap Trap?


Yankee_In_TX
03-14-2012, 11:40 AM
So based on what I have heard and pure speculation:

-Teams such as the Texans seemed to have been caught with their pants down expecting the cap to raise higher than it did. Was the cap increase unpredictable because it is every year or just because it was the first increase under the new CBA?


-Other teams such as Tampa Bay seem to have a tower full of gold coins under the cap. I know a floor is being implemented (next year?) under the CBA. Did these teams take advantage of the new CBA? Or was this always an option in the past and teams are spending their cap space before they floor takes effect?

ArlingtonTexan
03-14-2012, 11:59 AM
From what I understand the cap did not increase because the benefits portion (versus salary) of the employee costs increased way more than the NFL expected. Also, the cap could have went down, if not for the Redskins/Cowboys transgretions.

The teams spending bunches are teams who went cheap when there was no salary floor in anticipation that there will be a very narrow range inforced in the coming years.

Finally, Buffalo and Tampa etc. are spenidi9ng now because when the new television deal starts in 2014 (I believe) the salry cap is going to shot up some silly amount.

Dutchrudder
03-14-2012, 12:23 PM
So based on what I have heard and pure speculation:

-Teams such as the Texans seemed to have been caught with their pants down expecting the cap to raise higher than it did. Was the cap increase unpredictable because it is every year or just because it was the first increase under the new CBA?

It was not unpredictable, it was widely speculated that the portion of the cap that teams use to sign players would not have a significant increase. Rick had to know that the deals he made last year would put us in this position. Even if the cap went up 5 million, we would still be hurting for space. The 6.3 or whatever that is available is mostly going to rookies in the draft.

The thing that I see being a huge problem is that the Texans did not take advantage of the 2010 uncapped year. Looking at the 2010 cap hit numbers, the Texans spent only 123 million that year, which was middle of the pack (16th). That year they re-signed Demeco Ryans and extended AJ. Had they frontloaded either of those deals, they could have spent about 20 million that wouldn't be on the books today. If the Saints cap is the cutoff point to avoid penalty at 145 million, then the Texans missed out on using 22 million in phantom cap space, of which they get to reclaim 1.6 million. Unlike 2011, nobody got to rollover extra cap space from 2010, so it's lost space.

Source for numbers:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/09/19/team-by-team-salary-cap-numbers-if-there-were-a-salary-cap/


-Other teams such as Tampa Bay seem to have a tower full of gold coins under the cap. I know a floor is being implemented (next year?) under the CBA. Did these teams take advantage of the new CBA? Or was this always an option in the past and teams are spending their cap space before they floor takes effect?

Teams have always had a way to rollover cap space into the next year. Under the old CBA, teams could rollover any un-used capspace that was allocated through contracts. What they used to do was towards the end of the season, a team would restructure a player like the backup QB to get $XX bonus if he met some unlikely incentive, like throwing 10 TDs. That money wouldn't get paid out, but it was allocated so it could be rolled over to the next year. In the new CBA, they changed it to where any unused capspace can be rolled over into the next year's cap. No need for stupid gimmicky contracts that accomplish the same thing, but waste everyone's time. That cap can also snowball indefinitely, so if the Jags don't exceed 120m this year, they can rollover their excess 2011 and 2012 cap into 2013 and so forth.

Tampa, Jax, KC, Denver and others have been on the low end of spending the past few years. This year it paid off, and it looks like a good plan for the future. They will have TONS to spend for the next few years, and even more with the salary cap growth coming into play in the future. They are in very good position to be competitive in the future. The Bucs are doing the smart thing and spending that money now on FAs before the salary floor forces all the other low budget teams to overspend to meet the 90% mark next year. Good job on their part.

Yankee_In_TX
03-14-2012, 12:42 PM
Must spread rep. Thanks man, your post made me sad.

Ole Miss Texan
03-14-2012, 02:39 PM
Nice post Dutch, but a few things.

1. The Cowboys and Redskins didn't get in trouble for spending "too much" money that year. They got in trouble because teams were told not to use the uncapped year as a mechanism to dump money in order to make future years more cap-friendly. Like Miles Austin getting a $17M base salary. link (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/03/12/uncapped-year-could-be-coming-back-to-haunt-some-teams/)

2. Tampa Bay and Buffalo are in the position they are in not because they are incredibly cap-savy... it's because they (partly) don't have as many top quality players with signifcant salaries. It goes both ways, they just don't have the talent we do and they're not paying for it. Look at our the roster from top to bottom and what we're paying for guys like Schaub, AJ, Mario, Demeco, Daniels, etc. We've got some of the highest paid players at their respective positions.

3. You mention this... Tampa Bay and Buffalo (among other teams) are being FORCED to spend a lot of money because teams are required to spend at least 90% of the cap. That's roughly $108M that they HAVE to spend. You gotta start that now to get some of these players that are hitting the market (like Mario) b/c there's no telling who may or may not be available next year. Players re-sign or get franchised. They could be stuck next year grossly overpaying mediocre talent just because they have to spend it.

Dutchrudder
03-14-2012, 07:33 PM
1. The Cowboys and Redskins didn't get in trouble for spending "too much" money that year. They got in trouble because teams were told not to use the uncapped year as a mechanism to dump money in order to make future years more cap-friendly. Like Miles Austin getting a $17M base salary. link (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/03/12/uncapped-year-could-be-coming-back-to-haunt-some-teams/)

Yeah, it is more about the how they did it, rather than how much, but I think it's a combination of the two. If a team like the Bengals decided to restructure Palmer's deal to dump 20 million into that year, do you think they would get penalized like the Cowboys and Redskins? I don't believe so. They might not get that 1.6 mill in extra space, but I doubt they lose cap space. My point being that the Texans could have gotten away with 10 million dollar roster bonuses for Demeco's new contract and AJ's extension, using up 20 million in cap space. Even if they don't get that 1.6mill extra cap space, they save 18.4 million. Totally worth it. We missed out and now we are in cap hell.

Another thing about this issue though, the Cowboy and Redskins are not exactly being penalized here. They are being forced to count money against the cap that would have otherwise been there. They aren't losing draft picks, or being forced to give up contracts, they simply are counting money against the cap that they were going to count prior to 2010. If the Texans did the same and got hit for it, it's not that big of a deal. They would have had to account for the money regardless, so in this case it would have been well worth the risk.

badboy
03-14-2012, 11:28 PM
Nice post Dutch, but a few things.

1. The Cowboys and Redskins didn't get in trouble for spending "too much" money that year. They got in trouble because teams were told not to use the uncapped year as a mechanism to dump money in order to make future years more cap-friendly. Like Miles Austin getting a $17M base salary. link (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/03/12/uncapped-year-could-be-coming-back-to-haunt-some-teams/)

2. Tampa Bay and Buffalo are in the position they are in not because they are incredibly cap-savy... it's because they (partly) don't have as many top quality players with signifcant salaries. It goes both ways, they just don't have the talent we do and they're not paying for it. Look at our the roster from top to bottom and what we're paying for guys like Schaub, AJ, Mario, Demeco, Daniels, etc. We've got some of the highest paid players at their respective positions.

3. You mention this... Tampa Bay and Buffalo (among other teams) are being FORCED to spend a lot of money because teams are required to spend at least 90% of the cap. That's roughly $108M that they HAVE to spend. You gotta start that now to get some of these players that are hitting the market (like Mario) b/c there's no telling who may or may not be available next year. Players re-sign or get franchised. They could be stuck next year grossly overpaying mediocre talent just because they have to spend it.:goodpost: Beat me to it!