How to level the financial playing field in the NFL

[Sam Bam Cunningham]

1. Do not allow any contract restructures and kicking the can down the road with no end in site (like the Chiefs)
2. Adjust Salary Cap for each team based on their home State's Income tax; For example, FLA teams with 0% state tax would have a downward adjustment to their cap, High State Income Tax teams..like California, NY, MA would have higher salary cap relative to FLA and Texas

 

[TommyD4207]

1. Do not allow any contract restructures and kicking the can down the road with no end in site (like the Chiefs)
2. Adjust Salary Cap for each team based on their home State's Income tax; For example, FLA teams with 0% state tax would have a downward adjustment to their cap, High State Income Tax teams..like California, NY, MA would have higher salary cap relative to FLA and Texas

I'm fine with #1. #2 is a slippery slope. Are you going to adjust the cap down for warm weather teams too? If a state with income tax wants to be competitive, they can build the tax into their contracts and pay more. It's not that significant an amount in relation to the total cap.

 

[TheRainMaker]

The NFL needs to go to a hard cap like the NBA. You’d see less of these overpays for mediocre talent.

 

[mgteich]

If I understand correctly, some teams use the cap rules to better effect than others, using the 5 year forward window for deferring compensation.

Our team chooses not to use this tool.

CONCLUSION
Since my team won't use the tool, get rid of it.

 

[signbabybrady]

They need to raise the league minimum by a ton. Obviously the stars sell the game and therefore deserve more but they all risk a ton to get on that field and the discrepancy from 1 to 53 and beyond to the PS too is way to big.

Pretty sure this wasn't what you meant.

 

[Sam Bam Cunningham]

If I understand correctly, some teams use the cap rules to better effect than others, using the 5 year forward window for deferring compensation.

Our team chooses not to use this tool.

CONCLUSION
Since my team won't use the tool, get rid of it.

exactly.

but Nothing teams can do about their home state's income tax...so adjust the cap for that.

 

[FCB02062]

Cap is crap, period. It can be manipulated in many ways to sign pretty much whoever a team wants. Said team just has to WANT to do it. Unfortunately, we have a cheap AF owner who's spent at the bottom of the league cash-wise for awhile....bologna sandwiches for all

 

[XLIX]

I'm fine with #1. #2 is a slippery slope. Are you going to adjust the cap down for warm weather teams too? If a state with income tax wants to be competitive, they can build the tax into their contracts and pay more. It's not that significant an amount in relation to the total cap.

No, it really isn't a slippery slope. You adjust the cap for something major which directly impacts a players bottom line.

Some states play at a roughly 10% disadvantage compared to other states. You say it is not that significant but this year that's a $25 million salary cap advantage teams like Dallas, Tennessee and the FL teams have over New England, Minnesota and CA teams.

 

[XLIX]

They need to raise the league minimum by a ton. Obviously the stars sell the game and therefore deserve more but they all risk a ton to get on that field and the discrepancy from 1 to 53 and beyond to the PS too is way to big.

Pretty sure this wasn't what you meant.

This is a very tricky issue. What happens is it creates the problem where a player can't find a job because no one wants to pay him league minimum even though he would be willing to take less and would be happy taking less.

 

[XLIX]

If I understand correctly, some teams use the cap rules to better effect than others, using the 5 year forward window for deferring compensation.

Our team chooses not to use this tool.

CONCLUSION
Since my team won't use the tool, get rid of it.

They are not deferring compensation, they are converting a player's salary and/or roster bonus to signing bonuses so the player gets the compensation right away but the cap hit gets spread over the next 5 years.

I agree there should be limits. It is a little ridiculous to allow a team to restructure a contract annually the way KC does for Mahomes.

 

[jmt57]

exactly.

but Nothing teams can do about their home state's income tax...so adjust the cap for that.

I hear you, that does make logical sense.

But over the years I haven't seen free agents flocking to the Titans, Texans, Cowboys, Raiders, Jaguars, Bucs and Dolphins relative to other teams.

Nor have I seen free agents avoiding the Bills, Giants, Jets, 49ers, Rams, Chargers and Vikings.

 

[jmt57]

No, it really isn't a slippery slope. You adjust the cap for something major which directly impacts a players bottom line.

Some states play at a roughly 10% disadvantage compared to other states. You say it is not that significant but this year that's a $25 million salary cap advantage teams like Dallas, Tennessee and the FL teams have over New England, Minnesota and CA teams.

True, but players are taxed proporionally on where each game is played; 1/17 for each game. Therefore the tax is only about half for where the player's home field is - which makes the advaantage substantially less.

While it makes perfect sense for a player to take advaantage of the discrepancy to you and I, I just have not witnessed that actually being a deciding factor for free agents over the years.

 

[Steve102]

You know, for years we were the top of the heap and everyone else cried about leveling the field, changing the rules, doctoring up ******** scandals and all the other **** they whined about. Meanwhile, the Pats kicked names and took ass.

Stop whining about it.

 

[Nehalem]

1. Do not allow any contract restructures and kicking the can down the road with no end in site (like the Chiefs)
2. Adjust Salary Cap for each team based on their home State's Income tax; For example, FLA teams with 0% state tax would have a downward adjustment to their cap, High State Income Tax teams..like California, NY, MA would have higher salary cap relative to FLA and Texas

Funny how these only suddenly became an issue after Tom Brady left New England.

Logically the solutions are
(1) Require teams to share star Quarterbacks. It isn't fair that KC gets Mahomes for 17 games. Spread the love a round a little. Maybe he can start 5 games for KC and then rotate to other teams so they get a chance to have a competitive QB too?
(2) Invest in cloning technology so that each team can have their own Tom Brady or Pat Mahomes. As a bonus if a Tom or Pat suffers a major injury just throw him in the woodchipper and get a new one delivered fresh from the factory!

 

[Toofy]

They need to raise the league minimum by a ton. Obviously the stars sell the game and therefore deserve more but they all risk a ton to get on that field and the discrepancy from 1 to 53 and beyond to the PS too is way to big.

Pretty sure this wasn't what you meant.

AGREE.. Can't have one making 40-50 million while other 800k.

And considering the average tenure is 3-4 years , if the players are putting body on line increase the minimum . Should be 1.5 million at least for every player and it should be guaranteed if they play at least 8 games. That way you cannot keep kicking the can, you have 30 million dollars extra to spend on the rest of the team.

 

[IcyPatriot]

It is not that simple ...
Some players get taxed on how many days they work for their state's teams.
Then there is the 'jock tax' ... players pay that tax to the state of the away games.
The guaranteed money increases their liability where they reside.
The performance bonuses help that athlete to manipulate tax liability.
Also some states have a 183 day test to determine state tax liability.

I believe we have a CPA here in the forum ... I am sure he can make a great post in this thread.

This is a decent article to learn player taxation I wrote some of it above.

NFL Draft Picks’ Pay Hinges on Wildly Different State Tax Rates

The recent NFL draft saw some rookies score salary deals in the tens of millions of dollars, but what they get to keep will depend in part on the state where their team is based, says McGuireWoods’ Addison Fontein.

news.bloombergtax.com

 

[XLIX]

True, but players are taxed proporionally on where each game is played; 1/17 for each game. Therefore the tax is only about half for where the player's home field is - which makes the advaantage substantially less.

1. As discussed yesterday, a MA resident pays MA income tax on all his income, no matter where it is played.

2. The highest paid players are more and more getting payment in the form of bonuses, not game-by-game salary. So to say half of their pay takes place out of state is just not accurate.

Baker Mayfield is making $30 million this year, but only about $66,000 per game.

 

[JohnJH]

I'm not saying that the salary cap shouldn't be abolished (although I'm not a fan of it for overall). That being said, can't there be some adjustments made to it? For example: Each Team can have 7 players (or 3 and up to 7, whatever), that they can pay whatever amount of money that they want to, without it counting against the cap. This way, teams that draft well can retain those players and/or can accommodate FA's that just are tired of being stuck on teams that have consistently sucked (for whatever reasons) and they just want a chance to have a real shot at a SB Championship. Which means that you'll still have highly paid players under the cap AND a strong middle class. I expect a lot of flak for even suggesting this, but I believe it does have promise. Even if you can just pay 3 players (with one being if you have a true Franchise QB) whatever you want without it counting against the cap, teams could still keep good and even great players, while still giving players the freedom to go elsewhere. And, if the fans of whichever team hold the owner of their team's "feet to the fire" if they can't or won't spend the money, then have that owner give way to a new owner that will commit the money required. I expect to be roasted over a proverbial spit by many for even remotely suggesting such an idea, but there can be changes made that would benefit the fans, the players, and the NFL.

 

[Hyped]

It is not that simple ...
Some players get taxed on how many days they work for their state's teams.
Then there is the 'jock tax' ... players pay that tax to the state of the away games.
The guaranteed money increases their liability where they reside.
The performance bonuses help that athlete to manipulate tax liability.
Also some states have a 183 day test to determine state tax liability.

I believe we have a CPA here in the forum ... I am sure he can make a great post in this thread.

This is a decent article to learn player taxation I wrote some of it above.

NFL Draft Picks’ Pay Hinges on Wildly Different State Tax Rates

The recent NFL draft saw some rookies score salary deals in the tens of millions of dollars, but what they get to keep will depend in part on the state where their team is based, says McGuireWoods’ Addison Fontein.

news.bloombergtax.com

1.) 1/4 CPA here....only took one part of the test so far.

Nonetheless, this could be calculated in advance just before camps open (after players have earned their annual work out and roster bonuses)....and the debits/credits could then be assigned to the cap the FOLLOWING year. e.g. The Dolphins would get a debit vs. their cap for the 2025 season in July of 2024. And if a player is traded to a different team during the season or cut...then the Dolphins get credit vs. their cap in February of 2025 before free agency opens.

2.) Responding to the OP here: I am OK with void years on the back end of contracts. We ate Tom Brady's dead money hit in 2020. The bill will eventually come due. Even if Mahomes does an extension....the bonuses/restructures paid out in the past will be a factor. The thing the Chiefs are banking on is the cap rising...which has been true the last several years after Kraft predicted the cap not increasing much annually about 6-7 years ago. I think Kraft and the front office need to realize that the cap is just gonna go up every year as long as the NFL keeps figuring out increased revenue streams like TV streaming rights and expanding globally..... BUT Mark Cuban said a few years ago...the NFL is a greedy pig ripe for slaughter.... that point will be reached, IMO.

 

[raduray]

Cap is crap, period. It can be manipulated in many ways to sign pretty much whoever a team wants. Said team just has to WANT to do it. Unfortunately, we have a cheap AF owner who's spent at the bottom of the league cash-wise for awhile....bologna sandwiches for all

Key words: "for awhile". That "cheap" owner is going to have to spend big cash in out years. There's no "cheap" in the aggregate over a period of years. They all have to spend the same.