OT: From "the cap is crap" to "we are up against the cap, oh crap"

[PatsWickedPissah]

If the NFL had not created a rule after the fact that allowed them to not count the dead money they had on the books last year, they would have been in as bad or worse shape then too.


Its bad business, and it should have come home to roost a year ago, but the NFL put a rule in the CBA that allowed teams to waive dead money hits on players cut in a very small window, which basically, only the Jets did. That was an inexpicable 8 figure gift that won't be coming again.

I don't want to go all Tunescribe tinfoil hat here folks but this CBA insert confounds me. Yes, I understand the players union wanting stuff in the new CBA that allows teams to spend profligately. But what we got was a clause that had specific timing that explicitly bailed out the Jets and I think (from memory ) one or maybe 2 other teams, not the other 30 or so teams. Why only 2-3 if this was a sop to the union? This really smacks of favoritism. My one criticism of Bob Kraft is that with Spygate and apparently with stuff like this he takes it, bends over and says. "May I please have another?"

 

[Rob0729]

I don't want to go all Tunescribe tinfoil hat here folks but this CBA insert confounds me. Yes, I understand the players union wanting stuff in the new CBA that allows teams to spend profligately. But what we got was a clause that had specific timing that explicitly bailed out the Jets and I think (from memory ) one or maybe 2 other teams, not the other 30 or so teams. Why only 2-3 if this was a sop to the union? This really smacks of favoritism. My one criticism of Bob Kraft is that with Spygate and apparently with stuff like this he takes it, bends over and says. "May I please have another?"

Based on the fact that the Jets' version of Miguel was the first and, for the longest time, the only guy reporting that that clause was going to be in the CBA, it seems to me that it was the Jets who were championing this clause. Jason, the Jets' Miguel, has a lot of sources within the Jets' organization.

The Pats' did benefit from that clause too. Most teams did. The Jets were just bailed out by it.

 

[Deus Irae]

I'm not a cap guy by any means, but what is so bad about pushing money back for a guy you know you want on your team for years, especially with the cap jump expected in two years? I see no reason why the Jets won't keep on doing this forever and never truly finding themselves in the "cap hell" we think they will ultimately end up in.

There's nothing wrong with it, as long as you can keep pushing it forward. The Jets got lucky with the uncapped year and the "amnesty" aspects of the CBA work, because the big slowdown/drop of the cap would have killed them otherwise, but the slowdown in cap growth is going to last long enough that teams like the Jets will feel the pain of cap issues in a way that hasn't been happening for a long time in the NFL. As it is now, they pretty much have to push money forward in order to keep their core and best outliers on the team. Where this can bite them in the ass is in it keeping them from being very active in free agency. They'll likely be able to get to 2014, which will allow them to deal with contracts via the expected jump in the cap, but things will be tight until then.

Meanwhile, the team they are chasing in the division has the ability to open up between $30 million and $40 million in cap space.

 

[skinnydog]

There's nothing wrong with it, as long as you can keep pushing it forward. The Jets got lucky with the uncapped year and the "amnesty" aspects of the CBA work, because the big slowdown/drop of the cap would have killed them otherwise, but the slowdown in cap growth is going to last long enough that teams like the Jets will feel the pain of cap issues in a way that hasn't been happening for a long time in the NFL. As it is now, they pretty much have to push money forward in order to keep their core and best outliers on the team. Where this can bite them in the ass is in it keeping them from being very active in free agency. They'll likely be able to get to 2014, which will allow them to deal with contracts via the expected jump in the cap, but things will be tight until then.

Meanwhile, the team they are chasing in the division has the ability to open up between $30 million and $40 million in cap space.

Well, I hope it works out like this. The flip side is if you can go all out for 4-5 Years and then pay the price for 1-2 years, I'm not sure if that is so bad. Frankly, I don't think the Pats are a good yardstick. I think their success year in and year out is due to having a historically great coach and QB tandem.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Based on the fact that the Jets' version of Miguel was the first and, for the longest time, the only guy reporting that that clause was going to be in the CBA, it seems to me that it was the Jets who were championing this clause. Jason, the Jets' Miguel, has a lot of sources within the Jets' organization.

The Pats' did benefit from that clause too. Most teams did. The Jets were just bailed out by it.

Yes
and no

Agree with the cited premise. Excellent point about Jason (mask?) making me more tinfoil than ever.
But the specific after the fact dates inserted in the CBA benefited the Jets. NOT the Patriots.

Here's the big question. Why don't sports 'journalists' write about stuff like this? It's controversy.

Answer...there are no sports journalists today

 

[Ron Sellers]

Steelers just created $8,025,000 in cap room for 2012 by restructuring Roethlisberger's contract. Ben doesn't give up any money; Pittsburgh moves additional $2,675,000 on to each of their 2013, 2014 and 2015 seasons.

That makes five Steelers who have restructured their contracts; LaMarr Woodley, Lawrence Timmons, Willie Colon, and Ike Taylor have already reworked their contracts.

The one thing I do not understand is this: I was under the impression that a player could only restructure his contract once every twelve months, but the article says it was the second time Ben has done that in six months. Is that something different in the new CBA?

Ben Roethlisberger restructures deal for Pittsburgh Steelers - NFL - SI.com

 

[Jackson 2]

Steelers just created $8,025,000 in cap room for 2012 by restructuring Roethlisberger's contract. Ben doesn't give up any money; Pittsburgh moves additional $2,675,000 on to each of their 2013, 2014 and 2015 seasons.

That makes five Steelers who have restructured their contracts; LaMarr Woodley, Lawrence Timmons, Willie Colon, and Ike Taylor have already reworked their contracts.

The one thing I do not understand is this: I was under the impression that a player could only restructure his contract once every twelve months, but the article says it was the second time Ben has done that in six months. Is that something different in the new CBA?

Ben Roethlisberger restructures deal for Pittsburgh Steelers - NFL - SI.com

The more this stuff happens, the more I begin to fall into the camp of people who believe that it is, indeed, possible to maneuver around the cap and "beat it", so to speak. And for a very long time, I didn't believe that.

 

[Rob0729]

Steelers just created $8,025,000 in cap room for 2012 by restructuring Roethlisberger's contract. Ben doesn't give up any money; Pittsburgh moves additional $2,675,000 on to each of their 2013, 2014 and 2015 seasons.

That makes five Steelers who have restructured their contracts; LaMarr Woodley, Lawrence Timmons, Willie Colon, and Ike Taylor have already reworked their contracts.

The one thing I do not understand is this: I was under the impression that a player could only restructure his contract once every twelve months, but the article says it was the second time Ben has done that in six months. Is that something different in the new CBA?

Ben Roethlisberger restructures deal for Pittsburgh Steelers - NFL - SI.com

Even with all that restructuring, they still have a long way to go to get under the cap and they will have to do something next year too. There will be cuts.

 

[MP-Logick]

Even with all that restructuring, they still have a long way to go to get under the cap and they will have to do something next year too. There will be cuts.

Supposedly they are already there:

Ed Bouchette ‏ @EdBouchette
That $8 M in cap space saved by Ben's redone deal should put #steelers around the projected $120 M cap per team.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

What about the millions for Squealer draft picks?
No money of substance for FA

 

[The Scrizz]

. That was an inexpicable 8 figure gift that won't be coming again.

It's not inexplicable at all. I can explain it in 2 words. Roger F'in Goodell. They have the ******* Commissioner on their side and they still can't get over the hump.

Steal a first round pick from the best team for nothing? Sure why not. Ignore the precedent set when the Niners and Broncos gave up next to nothing for literally cheating the salary cap.

Then give them an 8 million dollar free ride that nobody else got. Are you telling me that the Jets just happened to cut those guys before they even knew what the CBA would be and how it would affect their cap? Bull****. That was a bag-job and you don't need a tinfoil hat to realize it.

 

[Joker]

I went nutso beserkaloid right when this happened last season...everyone said "awww Joe, you're over reacting again because it's the Jets.."...well....yes and no...I'm REACTING..and it was because it was for the Jets AGAIN....I know most people just really really want to believe that NFL football makes people DIFFERENT than any other profession or career..but the FACT of the matter is that there is easily as much and probably MORE abuse of power and privilege by NFL executives league wide that is all kept swept under the carpet by the legions of bought off "journalists" who try to pound "the league is lily white..pure as driven snow!!!!" mantra anytime one of these OBVIOUS actions is revealed.

Crooked cops, lawyers, judges, insiders,mortgage brokerages, real estate swindlers, Ponzi schemers,corporate CEO's...ad infinitum...all revealed to have feet of clay at one point or another...but oh God, NO!!!!!!!!...not our lily white NFL run by Roger "The Totally Honest Agendaless Choirboy Son OF New York Privilege" Goodell, who had his freaking Wiki entry EDITED to reflect that he was first an employee of the NFL and THEN an employee of the NY Jets as an intern and THEN, back to the NFL corporate ranks...not what was ORIGINALLY published...jeezus krist, not only is this clown dirty, he's SUPREMELY arrogant about it.

Just LOOK at what is soon coming to pass...a NEW YORK venue for the Super Bowl...yet no one wants to believe that a Roger Goodell wouldn't touch a DIME of the BILLIONS of ancillary revenue that would cascade like a waterfall of coinage if ,somehow, the New York Giants met the New York Jets...yet ,as this season sets up for the near future, the Jets are making all kinds of mystery "cap gains" by finagling contracts and by putting off costs until post 2014...yeah, and we all sit here thinking it's raining as Goodell pi$$es down our backs with impunity...

 

[cmasspatsfan]

The more this stuff happens, the more I begin to fall into the camp of people who believe that it is, indeed, possible to maneuver around the cap and "beat it", so to speak. And for a very long time, I didn't believe that.

Sure you can maneuver, some teams are forced to, but it does make your team weaker in the long run, either that or you have to take a step back for a couple years to cleanse the bad money. Where it doesnt show up is in the depth of your team. you can hope the high paid starters stay healthy when you make a run but in the NFL that doesnt happen too often.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Yes
and no

Agree with the cited premise. Excellent point about Jason (mask?) making me more tinfoil than ever.
But the specific after the fact dates inserted in the CBA benefited the Jets. NOT the Patriots.

Here's the big question. Why don't sports 'journalists' write about stuff like this? It's controversy.

Answer...there are no sports journalists today

Correct, the Pats didn't benefit from the amnesty at all, really. That was what bugged me most about it: if it was going to be implemented, every team should have had a chance to utilize it. Instead, in August, a new rule came in saying that players who had been cut half a year ago weren't going to count against the cap after all.

The Pats should have at least been given a chance to exploit the amnesty on Warren, Banta-Cain, and Bodden. Then they could have used that money to trade for and sign a Brandon Lloyd type, or even push forward into 2012... the possibilities would have been endless.

Instead, since it was unreasonably backdated, the Jets (and almost nobody else) benefited from it. Whatever though, that just makes it even funnier that, even with the rules being rigged in their favor, the Jets are still screwed.

 

[BradyFTW!]

The more this stuff happens, the more I begin to fall into the camp of people who believe that it is, indeed, possible to maneuver around the cap and "beat it", so to speak. And for a very long time, I didn't believe that.

You can beat it for as long as the cap continues to expand fairly rapidly. The bill always comes due eventually, though.

 

[Triumph]

I addressed Sanchez in my revised last post.

Some NY Jets capoligist beg to differ on Sanchez.

No way are they going to push more of Holmes' cap dollars in the future. They are worried as it is that they are going to have to cut him next year and he will already have over $11 million in dead money if they cut him in 2013 because since they were forced to guarantee his entire 2013 salary for having him on the roster a few weeks back. The Jets are not going to make it harder to cut Holmes next year if he is an underperforming, selfish lockerroom cancer again like last season. Holmes' contract is virtually untouchable this offseason.

What if Holmes has a lights out season? Then what? The Jets wont want to get rid of their most productive WR.

 

[Rob0729]

Some NY Jets capoligist beg to differ on Sanchez.

Everyone has opinions. Jason over at NYjetscap advocates the team forcing him to take a pay cut (not a restructure), but if I am Sanchez why would I agree to that knowing that I might be cut next year and the team has said they publicly supports him as the only starter? I know the Jets would love to make Sanchez take a pay cut, but it takes two to tango and Sanchez has the leverage unless the Jets acquire Manning or Matt Flynn.

What if Holmes has a lights out season? Then what? The Jets wont want to get rid of their most productive WR.

And what if he less productive and more of a cancer than he was last year? I'm not saying Holmes can't turn it around, but the Jets right now have to prepare for the very real possibility that Holmes has worn out his welcome on the Jets. If he is just as bad or worse in 2012 as he was in 2011, the Jets will have no choice but to cut him in 2013.

 

[Rob0729]

Yes
and no

Agree with the cited premise. Excellent point about Jason (mask?) making me more tinfoil than ever.
But the specific after the fact dates inserted in the CBA benefited the Jets. NOT the Patriots.

Here's the big question. Why don't sports 'journalists' write about stuff like this? It's controversy.

Answer...there are no sports journalists today

It did help the Pats, but not a whole heck of a lot. Certainly not to the extent it helped the Jet.

BTW, to fuel more fire to your conspiracy theory, the Jets cut three players with decent amount of dead money right before the lockout (Woody, Kris Jenkins, and another player I can't remember). It was those three dead money that actually were the largest amount of the dead money that the Jets got to wipe from their books. They seemed to know before they even negotiated the CBA that that provision was going to be in it. That is why I think they were pushing for that clause to be included.

 

[NEGoldenAge]

There were more teams than the Jets who benefited from that "feature" of the CBA. If I recall correctly, Denver befefited the most. I don't know if Goodell was involved, but there were a number of owners who figured they could easily work this into the CBA, and unfortunately, they were right. It was a great gamble... low risk, very high reward. I'd be curious as to whether that has happened in previous CBAs.

 

[Joker]

an interesting quote on a piece focusing on this Jet cap issue...

"While the lockout was on, there was only one fan base that seemed to be adamant that old dead cap money would not count against the new cap – even though that had never been the case since the salary cap began: the New York Jets. The reasoning behind this was allegedly some inside information on the wording of the new CBA. If this were true then where would a Jet fan most likely get that information; maybe from someone in the Jets organization? And if that were the case, where would the Jets have obtained that same information?

Perhaps from the offices of a former fan and former employee who now holds the title of league commissioner?

Dead cap money clause: Jets conspiracy or innocent oversight? :All Things Pats

of course there's the qualifier..."is this tin foil hat conspiracy stuff??"..the same qualifier that is Always brought up, time after time after time after time after time ,EVERY time it involves a decided advantage for the NY Jets....photographed profanity, uttered profanities at NFL fans, disgusting public degeneracy,allegations of statutory raping, serial dead beat fathering, organized tripping of opposing players during games...on and on and on and on...every single disgusting black eye to the league met with a slap on the hand...the Jets CHIEF rival and block to any success in the division??? MILLIONS in untold damage, forfeiture of a franchise BUILDING BLOCK #1 draft choice and rampant slander and libel STILL ONGOING...all over a camera placement argument????}??}

But, no, this is all tin foil hat conspiracy...nothing to see here....let's all do the Neville Chamberlain two step now, children.....(and a one and a two)...oh , the Nazis are a nice bunch of guys...doo dah doo dah...Japanese zeroes in Hawaiian skies...all dee doo dah day!!!!