View Single Post
Old 03-13-2014   #873
Marshall 
Subscribed Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,691
Rep Power: 51147 Marshall is a quality contributor and well respectedMarshall is a quality contributor and well respectedMarshall is a quality contributor and well respectedMarshall is a quality contributor and well respectedMarshall is a quality contributor and well respectedMarshall is a quality contributor and well respectedMarshall is a quality contributor and well respectedMarshall is a quality contributor and well respectedMarshall is a quality contributor and well respectedMarshall is a quality contributor and well respectedMarshall is a quality contributor and well respected
Default Re: So .... Who's your QB in 2014 ?! - [edit] Mallett?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blake View Post
Starting to feel more and more like Schaub is staying for 1 more season. Cut or traded after this season. Depending on who the rookie QB is, Schaub might not make it past 6-8 games as the starter.


Edit: Schaub will be 7 million in dead money 2015. Roughly 3.5 million less than what his dead money will be for 2014. Essentially what we are paying him to play this season.
The dead money ($10.5M) is the same whether we spread it out over one, two or three years. Not cutting Schaub or at least renegotiating his contract means we spend an additional $10,937,500 in base and roster bonus money. People are getting confused.

The options in dealing with the dead money ($10.5M in all scenarios) are:
1. regular cut - $10.5M cap hit in 2014
2. June 1 cut - $3.5M cap hit in 2014, $7M cap hit in 2015.
3. leave in place, extend or renegotiate for a contract through the 2016 season - $3.5M cap hit in 2014, $3.5M cap hit in 2015 and $3.5M cap hit in 2016

The benefits of cutting are in money that is not dead like base and roster bonuses which also count against caps in those years. A separate accounting of such is:
1. 2014 - $10M Base, $937,500 Roster Bonus
2. 2015 - $12.5M Base, $1M Roster Bonus
3. 2016 - $14.5M Base, $1M Roster bonus

Now this will be repeated as this is a repeat of essentially the same information which has been given before but has not sunk in. Since both count against the Cap, they are often lumped together at some times and not at others which is the source of the confusion. Bringing up cap savings only compounds the problems. Then allocation of the same among multiple years makes following it impossible for some.
Marshall is offline   Reply With Quote