Pasquarelli: Pats in cap trouble

[solman]

Did not the Colts find themselves in the same situation last year??? Did they not win the Super Bowl???

Will the Pats starting off the 2008 season with 5 to 10% talent injured because Brady will have 16.96 million in unamortized signing bonus money AND Adalius Thomas will have 17.6 million in unamortized signing bonus money proration??

The Colts did NOT find themselves in this position at the start of 2006, nor will they find themselves in this position at the start of 2007. Thanks to back loaded contracts, and yet another restructuring, I don't see them finding themselves in this position until the start of 2008. I think they are more likely to make the playoffs this year than not.

As I mentioned in the previous post, since AD just signed his contract we can reasonably assume that his remaining bonus is roughly offset by his remaining salary discounts. (I think most people would argue that the discounts exceed the value of the bonus, but its a reasonable approximation that is slightly purturbed by AD's preference for winning East Coast teams)

Tom Brady (even after the restructuring) is scheduled to make $22.5M over the last three years of his contract. This is a BIG discount to his fair market value. I would reckon this discount to be smaller than $16.96M, but only by a few million (I wouldn't argue with somebody who said that the two were in balance).

 

[Miguel]

Over the course of 2008-2009 Manning and Harrison are scheduled to take home a total of $42.1M (actual take home pay). I am saying that this amount is roughly equal to the duo's fair market value over the course of those two seasons. Therefore, I reguard the entire $24M in prorated bonus attributable to those seasons as dead money.

But that $24 million helped the Colts be one of the NFL's top teams in 2004/2005/2006 and will presumably help them remain one of the NFL's top teams.

 

[Miguel]

The Colts did NOT find themselves in this position at the start of 2006, nor will they find themselves in this position at the start of 2007. Thanks to back loaded contracts, and yet another restructuring, I don't see them finding themselves in this position until the start of 2008. I think they are more likely to make the playoffs this year than not.

As I mentioned in the previous post, since AD just signed his contract we can reasonably assume that his remaining bonus is roughly offset by his remaining salary discounts. (I think most people would argue that the discounts exceed the value of the bonus, but its a reasonable approximation that is slightly purturbed by AD's preference for winning East Coast teams)

Tom Brady (even after the restructuring) is scheduled to make $22.5M over the last three years of his contract. This is a BIG discount to his fair market value. I would reckon this discount to be smaller than $16.96M, but only by a few million (I wouldn't argue with somebody who said that the two were in balance).

In 2008 Brady will have $6.62 million of signing bonus proration hitting the cap. In 2008 Manning will have $7.2 of signing bonus proration hitting the cap. Yet none of Brady's proration is not dead money but all of Manning's is even though the $580,000 difference is less than half of one percent of the $116,134,000 cap. OK, that looks like to me that a different standard is being applied to me.

 

[Miguel]

The Colts did NOT find themselves in this position at the start of 2006, nor will they find themselves in this position at the start of 2007. Thanks to back loaded contracts, and yet another restructuring, I don't see them finding themselves in this position until the start of 2008. .

Before the 2006 season there was a total of $19.6 million of unamortized signing bonus proration left on Harrison's contract and close to $28 million left on Manning's contract. Before the 2007 season there was a total of 15.2 million of unamortized signing bonus proration left on Harrison's contract and $28.4 million of unamortized signing bonus proration. If I am understanding you right, the money paid to the duo in 2004/2005/2006/2007 but not yet amortized was not dead money in 2006/2007 but will be in 2008. That just does not seem right to me.

I do not know how many injured players could help his team come back from a 21-6 deficit as did Manning.

 

[Miguel]

If all 4 players were to suffer career-ending injuries in 2007 and decided to retire in 2008, the Colts would have less dead money hitting the 2008/2009 cap years than would the Pats.

 

[spacecrime]

Did not the Colts find themselves in the same situation last year??? Did they not win the Super Bowl????

Yes and yes

 

[spacecrime]

BTW if anyone accuses Miguel of being a Colts lover, I will personally insert your head into that cavity in your lower region. This man knows football.

You are a nincompoop, sir. Miguel knows football, and more about the cap than most professional football analysts, but he is still a fan of the Colts.

Evidently you have mistaken inserted your own head into the large cavity in your own lower region. Remove it and go brush your teeth.

 

[Miguel]

You are a nincompoop, sir. Miguel knows football, and more about the cap than most professional football analysts, but he is still a fan of the Colts.

Whatever. I just love how people on the Internet think that they can know a person's heart/fandom.

I am not a fan of double standards and wishful thinking. It just seems odd to me that Manning's signing bonus proration is projected to hurt the Colts' chances of fielding a playoff team in 2008 when Brady's is not when there is just a $580,000 difference. It just seems odd to me that Harrison's signing bonus proration is projected to hurt the Colts' chances of fielding a playoff team in 2008 when Thomas' is not when there is no difference between the two.

 

[patchick]

I guess I don't understand many of the positions here. No matter, I will simply state mine.

The patriots and the colts are the best in the league at managing the cap. Both use the spreading of bonuses to manage the cap. Both occasionally use fake years (that is, contracts with end-year amounts that will never be paid). I do not think that either pays over market prices for their talent. Both have been lucky and unlucky with both draft pick and with free agents.

The colt cap hell is discussed each year, and is simply bunk. They have not been, are not, and are unlikely to be in cap hell under current management. Ditto for the patriots. Either could project to be $20M over to start free agency, and I would still believe that they could rise to the occasion and produce a playoff quality team.

Certainly neither is any cap trouble at all this year, and both are top 6 SB contenders. My list is NE, Chicago, Indy, NO, SD, and Balt.

Thanks, mgteich. That's the best summary of the situation I can imagine. This isn't a zero-sum game; Indy management doesn't have to be stupid for NE management to be smart. (Miguel consistently demonstrates this, but in a manner that -- presumably unintentionally -- comes off as a kind of provocation/challenge to the "true believer.")

 

[Brarrell]

Thanks, mgteich. That's the best summary of the situation I can imagine. This isn't a zero-sum game; Indy management doesn't have to be stupid for NE management to be smart. (Miguel consistently demonstrates this, but in a manner that -- presumably unintentionally -- comes off as a kind of provocation/challenge to the "true believer.")

Ditto. Does Pasquarelli knowing what he knows about the Pats since 2000 really believe the Pats are in cap trouble or was this just to soothe the minds of the Pats enemies?

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Megadittoes, as the oxy crowd says. It's pretty hard to get away from the fact that perenniel contenders like the Colts and Pats are, well, perenniel contenders.

We all remember the San Francisco "house of cards" coming down, but the bloody thing stood for a couple of decades, as I recall... I think we just run around wishing the same will happen to the enemy du jour, which for the last 5 years or so has been the Colts.

The Pats "paying a big group of middle-class players but not spending on big stars" is no longer true, at least not right now. Granted. They're still big on the solid middle class, moreso even than in the past, to judge by cap hit alone. But if we're going by a "Patriot Way" being superior, it can only be boiled down to "being smart with money" or "the value approach" at this point.

No, everything's not on the credit card, nor is it for Indy. We've all grown up some since the SF debacle. "Cap trouble" for the smart teams is handled a little at a time, not with a fire sale.

PFnV

 

[solman]

But that $24 million helped the Colts be one of the NFL's top teams in 2004/2005/2006 and will presumably help them remain one of the NFL's top teams.

It is undeniable that the $24M DID help the Colts become one of the NFL's top teams in 2004-2006. It is still helping them in 2007.

But it is also undeniable that the $24M will hurt them badly in 2008-2009.

If you deny that a two year $24M charge against the cap will hurt the Colts badly over the course of 2008-2009, you might as well deny the relevance of the salary cap to running a successful franchise.

The Colts spent more on players than the other teams, got more talent, and won a superbowl. Now the salary cap requires that they spend LESS than the other teams to make up for previously spending more.

 

[solman]

In 2008 Brady will have $6.62 million of signing bonus proration hitting the cap. In 2008 Manning will have $7.2 of signing bonus proration hitting the cap. Yet none of Brady's proration is not dead money but all of Manning's is even though the $580,000 difference is less than half of one percent of the $116,134,000 cap. OK, that looks like to me that a different standard is being applied to me.

Over the remainder of his contract, Tom Brady is scheduled to make $7.5M/year. This is an enormous DISCOUNT to what he is worth.

Over the remainder of his contract, Peyton is scheduled to make $13.86M/year. This is roughly what Peyton is worth.

Tom Brady's remaining prorated bonus is roughly equal to his remaining discount. We can therefore say that his "rotten money" hit is zero.

Peyton Manning has no remaining discount to offset his prorated bonuses. We can therefore say that his "rotten money" hit is roughtly $21M.

Even during 2008 (a best case scenario for your argument):

Tom Brady's $6.62M is almost completely offset (I would argue 90%) by his $8M compensation in that year, which is an enormous discount to what he is worth.

Peyton Manning's $7.2M is only partially offset (I would argue 35%) by the discount represented by the $11.5M he is scheduled to make that year.

 

[solman]

If I am understanding you right, the money paid to the duo in 2004/2005/2006/2007 but not yet amortized was not dead money in 2006/2007 but will be in 2008. That just does not seem right to me.

In 2006, Manning counted $10.6M against the cap. This was a great value for a player of mannings caliber.

In 2007, Manning will count $8.2M against the cap. This is an even better value.

In 2008 Manning will count $18.7M against the cap. This is a poor value.

In 2009 Manning will count $21.2M against the cap. This is an even worse value.

 

[solman]

If all 4 players were to suffer career-ending injuries in 2007 and decided to retire in 2008, the Colts would have less dead money hitting the 2008/2009 cap years than would the Pats.

Let me try to communicate it this way:

"Rotten money" is the difference between a player's remaining prorated signing bonus, and the "discount" represented by his future compensation.

Peyton Manning, who is scheduled to earn roughly $13.9M/year for the next five years is more or less playing for what he is worth. He therefore has no discount to offset the prorated signing bonus.

AD, who is scheduled to earn $3M/year for the next five years is playing for substantially less than he is worth. BB/SP must believe that this discount is worth AT LEAST $20M, or they wouldn't have signed the deal with AD. Therefore, no rotten money is associated with AD's contract.

 

[mgteich]

Who are you trying to convince?

Many of us have discussed the colts cap situation for at least five years. Many here have expected them to implode from the consequences of their cap behavior and the various contracts for all these years, and then, of course, they would be a terrible team and would collapse and have to re-build. The colts have many times been compared to Washington.

So, now, YOU make the PREDICTION that the colts will be severely negatively affected by what you perceive of as $24M of rotten money over 2008 and 2009. OK, even this were really wasted money, there is absolutely no reason to believe that the colts would not be able to adjust their cap by $12M for 2008 and 2009. I suggest that we simply wait and see whether the colts make the playoffs in 2008 and 2009. My PREDICTION is that they should be expected to make the playoffs in both years. A $12M a year cap problem is not much of a challenge for such organizations as the colts. It's really that simple. If we wanted to, we could come up with several plans for the colts to succeed in 2008 and 2009. We don't have that interest. We would rather figure out how to build up our own team, so that we are favored to beat the colts in those years.

In my mind, to wait and hope that the colts collapse under cap pressue in 2008 and 2009 is silly indeed. But then others are free to disagree.

Let me try to communicate it this way:

"Rotten money" is the difference between a player's remaining prorated signing bonus, and the "discount" represented by his future compensation.

Peyton Manning, who is scheduled to earn roughly $13.9M/year for the next five years is more or less playing for what he is worth. He therefore has no discount to offset the prorated signing bonus.

AD, who is scheduled to earn $3M/year for the next five years is playing for substantially less than he is worth. BB/SP must believe that this discount is worth AT LEAST $20M, or they wouldn't have signed the deal with AD. Therefore, no rotten money is associated with AD's contract.

 

[solman]

Who are you trying to convince?

Many of us have discussed the colts cap situation for at least five years. Many here have expected them to implode from the consequences of their cap behavior and the various contracts for all these years, and then, of course, they would be a terrible team and would collapse and have to re-build. The colts have many times been compared to Washington.

I'm just setting the stage for victoriously collecting on my bet with Miguel when the Colts do implode

I'm content to let the passage of time and the happening of events on the field to prove my correctness.

In the mean time, I'd like to arrive at language that explains WHY the Colts were no longer competitive by the start of the 2008 season.


If you predicted that the Colt's were going to implode before the 2004-2006 seasons for salary cap reasons, then you probably didn't do your homework. Just because you or others got it wrong then, doesn't mean that you can take the opposite position right now and automatically be right.

“past performance is no guarantee of future results”

In this case we know that the Colts are looking at a VERY different situation as they peer into the future. In my opinion its pretty silly to assume that they will still achieve the same results.

 

[mgteich]

For the record, I presonally have never predicted the implosion of the colts, just their continued choking, for years their only real impediment to being a SB contender.

I'm just setting the stage for victoriously collecting on my bet with Miguel when the Colts do implode

I'm content to let the passage of time and the happening of events on the field to prove my correctness.

In the mean time, I'd like to arrive at language that explains WHY the Colts were no longer competitive by the start of the 2008 season.


If you predicted that the Colt's were going to implode before the 2004-2006 seasons for salary cap reasons, then you probably didn't do your homework. Just because you or others got it wrong then, doesn't mean that you can take the opposite position right now and automatically be right.

“past performance is no guarantee of future results”

In this case we know that the Colts are looking at a VERY different situation as they peer into the future. In my opinion its pretty silly to assume that they will still achieve the same results.

 

[PatsSteve1]

Thanks, mgteich. That's the best summary of the situation I can imagine. This isn't a zero-sum game; Indy management doesn't have to be stupid for NE management to be smart. (Miguel consistently demonstrates this, but in a manner that -- presumably unintentionally -- comes off as a kind of provocation/challenge to the "true believer.")

* That's right, A true Patriots fan has to say the Colts will be in cap trouble every "next" year even though it never happens. Your not allowed to be objective about the Colts. It's not allowed.

 

[RyanTheColtsFan]

During the 2007-2009 seasons the Colts will not win more than one playoff game, TOTAL.

I'll wager an amount of your choosing from $20 to $200 on that proposition.

I'm interested in finding out if you actually believe the crap you're spouting, or if you're just frustrated at the end of the Colt's run, and trolling to get rid of your frustrations. Send me a PM with an email address and we'll make arrangements.

I know that wasn't intended for me but i'll take the bait and agree. But let's make the loser donate the money to Miguel's charity listed in his sig.

Do we have a deal?