Schefter reveals the framework of the new deal

[Rob0729]

I have no idea why people have so much trouble understanding this. It is really very simple and very basic. (Even Mike Reiss has at times said things that suggest that he does not understand it.)

If it were up to me, people would have to pass a test demonstrating that they do understand this fundamental concept about the salary cap before being allowed to post here.

If people on this board were banned because they were posting posts about topics that they knew very little about, this board would be a ghost town. Most of us, myself included, who post here more than occassionally have fallen in the trap of getting into a discussion that is over our heads in football knowledge.

The cap is not a cut and dry thing. There are some loopholes that makes it confusing like LTBE bonus loophole. There are ways to perpetually cheat the cap eventhough technically cash and cap are supposed to be tied together. But before the new proposed CBA where each team must spend 90% of the cap in real dollars for a small market team to perpetually cheat the cap floor by giving out ridiculous LTBE bonuses (like blocking 8 punts in a season since all special team bonuses are considered LTBE) and never have to actually spend to the cap floor eventhough be technically under it. There were several teams for the last few years of the cap constantly being over the cap floor, but not actually spending anywhere near the cap floor. Hence why this provision is being included in the next CBA that teams must spend 90% of the cap in real dollars.

So technically there is a way that cash and the cap are not tied together and they are addressing closing that loophole in the new CBA. The Bucs have been exploiting it for a few years. It is harder to cheat the cap to go over the cap in real dollars, but under the old system it was easy to cheat the cap to go under the cap floor if you wanted.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

People fail to grasp that because they have watched teams like the Redskins spend cash over cap like drunken sailors and get away with it for the last couple of seasons despite the fact that it should have caught up with them at some point. The 2006 CBA was great for players and it was also a get out of looming cap jail card for the biggest consistent cash over cap spenders. Their spending was driving the competitive cost up for teams who lacked revenue or personal wealth to use that bonus cap manipulation to advantage. Then to top it off the new formula in the wake of the new TV deals resulted in the cap imploding. It rose $41M in just 4 years... Some of those teams were also ones who didn't share in much of the off the top expensing of new or renovated stadiums because they weren't in position to build or in the midst of a renovation...because it takes money to make money and they didn't have the revenue to jump into that fray either. One of the reasons KC dropped their spending was not only were they in the midst of a new management roster rebuild, they were also in the midst of a stadium renovation to increase their future revenue stream to which they currently had to commit substantial funding.

Even with a cash cap approaching 100% those teams may be better off under this deal because they are provided with sufficient cash to meet their maximum cap obligations annually via revenue sharing. SD has been letting the cap cover it's payroll for some time now via contract structure because they lack revenue to operate alternatively. Brandt said teams that pay as they go should be fine under the new method. The remaining issue will be one of competitive balance if the few who swim in cash are allowed to consistently continue to exceed the cap dramatically, even though it hasn't helped them achieve actual success to date, although barring another get out of jail free circumstance the cap itself should eventually catch up to them. But that's an ownership issue, or it should be if the union allows it to be. A way to level the field in the interim would be to tax them on overspending over a certain % of cap and redistribute that money to low revenue teams. The union might fight that on principle because they abhor any constriction on spending, but earmarking close to 100% of that money to be spent on players only within that 3 year time frame in some way, shape or form (either on actual payroll or maybe using any unspent balance to fund a year end merit/playing time bonus system similar to the one that already exists or designating it is distributed to all current players in the form of a retirement plan or post career benefits account bonus distribution should placate them. Parity, or at least the perception the ability to achieve it exists, is part of the reason this league has outpaced all others in terms of fan interest. Other factors impact success in this league to a greater extent, but having a fairly level financial playing field makes it easier for fans to still anticipate potential improvement if their team doesn't achieve it in any given year - unlike say Pirates fans who have been reduced to accepting following their team as a mere passtime.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

A Patriots fan on a Patriots fan board "have to pass a test demonstrating that they do understand this fundamental concept about the salary cap before being allowed to post here"???????

who died and appointed you Sanctimonious Self Important Bloated D-Bag Of The Century...?

I, for one, cannot STAND this round and round, incessant blather about money and the Patriots...it infects seemingly every thread on this board lately and it is people like you, with your condescending, snotty accountant's attitude that are most responsible. How about this...YOU petition to get your own precious little "salary cap" page here and then you and your money mad friends can amortize and soft and hard cap all day and night. Until then try to realize SOME FANS, and let me re-emphasize this, some PATRIOT fans, can't stand any of this money talk crap.How about YOU keep your big mouth clamped about who should or shouldn't "be allowed" to post here" and just live with it, like some us have to live with YOUR pecuniary dissertations.

A salary cap sub-forum would probably be a good idea. That said, as long as the league has one the cap will be an integral part of most roster building discussions... unless you think we should just all blather about fantasy rosters and talent collection or the principles of Bill's 2 gap or value philosophies or why the JETS suck...

 

[Joker]

I have NOTHING against blithering AND blathering on ANY topic...Lord knows I head the list of blithering blatherers. I DO have a GIGANTIC problem with the suggestion that this board be censored according to the whims of some managerial accountant wannabe....THAT is not going to change.

 

[Patspsycho]

Ian and/or the Mods have got to come up with something that allows civil and CONSTRUCTIVE discussion or debate on this board without having it denigrate into pointless bickering, vicious ad hominem attacks, vilifying or belittling. Nobody, much less I, learn anything from those stupid back and forths.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Clayton has his take on 5 winners and losers in the potential new formula. I'd take this with a grain of salt though because we don't really yet know what the formula will be or just how it will work and at least as far as cash spending the league proposed a 3 year window of calculating cash % and not a year by year one...not to mention he didn't indicate the # of players already under contract or tender which puts current payroll in reasonable context vs. needed spending.

We are not on either list.

NFL: Teams most hurt, helped by salary-cap proposal - ESPN

 

[Rob0729]

Clayton has his take on 5 winners and losers in the potential new formula. I'd take this with a grain of salt though because we don't really yet know what the formula will be or just how it will work and at least as far as cash spending the league proposed a 3 year window of calculating cash % and not a year by year one...not to mention he didn't indicate the # of players already under contract or tender which puts current payroll in reasonable context vs. needed spending.

We are not on either list.

NFL: Teams most hurt, helped by salary-cap proposal - ESPN

Gotta like the Jets being on the losers list. They are going to have problems. If the 90% rule passes, they could be screwed. I am assuming they were planning on converting Sanchez's $14 million base salary partly into a bonus to create cap room, but the 90% rule makes that harder because they already have some big contracts with big bonuses that have been paid out or will be paid out this season that will be amortized against the cap in future years. I wonder if Tannebaum didn't see that coming.

I agree it is too early to draw any conclusions, but the Jets look like they might be in a tough position to keep many of their own free agents (they might only be able to keep Holmes from their key free agents) much less address some of their other needs.

It is kinda funny that #1 and #2 on the losers list are teams that are hurt because they don't spend enough, not because they are over the proposed cap.

 

[Observer]

I think we ned to take some time off and enjoy a little poetry by Steve Breaston:

NFL: Steve Breaston's thoughts on the lockout are refreshing - ESPN

 

[plk]

If people on this board were banned because they were posting posts about topics that they knew very little about, this board would be a ghost town.

It would certainly be different.

The cap is not a cut and dry thing. There are some loopholes that makes it confusing like LTBE bonus loophole. There are ways to perpetually cheat the cap...

Just out of interest, how much money are you claiming a team can cheat by?

Are you claiming that a team can do this once, and then roll it over year after year after year?

Or are you claiming that a team can add certain number of dollars to its salary cap every year, year in and year out?

 

[spacecrime]

If it were up to me, people would have to pass a test demonstrating that they do understand this fundamental concept about the salary cap before being allowed to post here.

Gosh, we are so lucky to have you here to do that. Do you have an email address or URL where we can send our opinions to you so you can judge whether or not they match your own before you allow us to post them? :sleeping:

 

[plk]

Gosh, we are so lucky to have you here to do that. Do you have an email address or URL where we can send our opinions to you so you can judge whether or not they match your own before you allow us to post them? :sleeping:

Understanding how the salary cap works at least in its most basic elements is not a matter of opinion.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

A salary cap sub-forum would probably be a good idea. That said, as long as the league has one the cap will be an integral part of most roster building discussions... unless you think we should just all blather about fantasy rosters and talent collection or the principles of Bill's 2 gap or value philosophies or why the JETS suck...

I've suggested previously that Patsfans has a highlighted FAQ page here with topics like the cap and the PUP rules as we get myriad posts during summer camp indicating fan confusion about the rules (you can't practice even once and go on PUP, etc.).

But maybe a better idea is a CAP sub forum moderated by Miguel where we pay a small fee, say $10 where $5 goes to Patsfans for disk space and the rest goes to Bread of Life food pantry. Something like that.

edit: Clayton does not say how many players each cap enabled or challenged team has signed for 2011 so the analysis is suspect at best

 

[TruthSeeker]

Just out of interest, how much money are you claiming a team can cheat by?

Are you claiming that a team can do this once, and then roll it over year after year after year?

Or are you claiming that a team can add certain number of dollars to its salary cap every year, year in and year out?

I believe the only ultimate difference between cash and cap is the vet minimum exclusion which pays vets around $700K+ but only counts around $400K+ against the cap. In every other way, cap eventually becomes cash or cash eventually becomes cap.

The last time I made note of this no one corrected it so my confidence has grown that this is actually accurate.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

Understanding how the salary cap works at least in its most basic elements is not a matter of opinion.

Not all people are good at math, some are Patriot fans, should we not allow them to root for the team and post on the board?

 

[Ring 6]

I have no idea why people have so much trouble understanding this. It is really very simple and very basic. (Even Mike Reiss has at times said things that suggest that he does not understand it.)

If it were up to me, people would have to pass a test demonstrating that they do understand this fundamental concept about the salary cap before being allowed to post here.

We should probably also require a test that people understand that cap and cash EVENTALLY equalling does not mean there is no difference.

 

[patfanken]

We should probably also require a test that people understand that cap and cash EVENTALLY equalling does not mean there is no difference.

I think we all understand that there IS a difference between the cash that is spent and the cap dollars that are counted. We have perhaps the premier cap expert/fan available to all of us right here. We should all be thankful for his presence.

I take great pride in being mentioned among those who helped Miguel when he started, though for the life of me I can't remember what I contributed.

My complaint is that how much incorrect information is published by media professionals which is just plain inaccurate. In one post of this thread someone gave us 2 links to current cap numbers and both were wildly different for several teams.

One of the things I'm looking forward to is at some point after a CBA is finalized, that someone does a definitive list that includes where a team stands as to the new cap #, AND how many players they have under contract.

I'm not sure how impactful FA is going to be for the Pats, but with the volume of players that will be out there if the 4 year rule becomes an actuality, teams with room can become very healthy (talent-wise) VERY quickly.

 

[Ring 6]

I think we all understand that there IS a difference between the cash that is spent and the cap dollars that are counted. We have perhaps the premier cap expert/fan available to all of us right here. We should all be thankful for his presence.

I take great pride in being mentioned among those who helped Miguel when he started, though for the life of me I can't remember what I contributed.

My complaint is that how much incorrect information is published by media professionals which is just plain inaccurate. In one post of this thread someone gave us 2 links to current cap numbers and both were wildly different for several teams.

One of the things I'm looking forward to is at some point after a CBA is finalized, that someone does a definitive list that includes where a team stands as to the new cap #, AND how many players they have under contract.

I'm not sure how impactful FA is going to be for the Pats, but with the volume of players that will be out there if the 4 year rule becomes an actuality, teams with room can become very healthy (talent-wise) VERY quickly.

I was resonding to a post that implied the sum total of the difference between cash and cap, is that over the long term they add up to the same thing, within a thread where I was discussing the impact of the differences.

As far as actual discussion, it looks to me as if the Pats will have a healthy amount of cap room.
I am under the belief that current NFL contracts on the books were written with cap growth expected. If you look at an 'average' contract in 08-10 vs 04-06 I believe you will find that the growth of cap numbers within those contracts anticipate more cap growth than already happened, not to mention what looks like returning to 2009 level numbers for 2011.
If that is the case, not only will 2011 FAs be faced with the prospect of available money being no greater than what it was in 2009, it may actually be less because the contracts on the books grow more quickly than the cap looks like it will.
If thats the case, after the sharks have their long awaited feeding frenzy there should be good football players available at reasonable costs.

 

[Rob0729]

It would certainly be different.



Just out of interest, how much money are you claiming a team can cheat by?

Are you claiming that a team can do this once, and then roll it over year after year after year?

Or are you claiming that a team can add certain number of dollars to its salary cap every year, year in and year out?

Tens of millions easily.

In 2008, the Tampa Bay Bucs gave running back Noah Herron and defensive end Patrick Chukwurah combined $25 million in salary and bonuses all of which counted vs. the cap to get them above the cap floor. Each player would get their bonuses if they blocked 6 punts during the 2008 season (special team related bonuses are considered LTBE bonuses no matter how ridiculous they are and even if the player has no chance of playing special teams). Obviously, neither reached their bonus and Herron was paid $157k and Chukwurah was paid $71k. So the Bucs used $25 million in cap money and paid out about $225k in real money.

Yes, the Bucs' 2009 cap was adjusted to reflect this, but the Bucs went into the 2009 season $30 million under the cap so the $25 million passed forward was never spent by the Bucs. So the Bucs got $25 million cap dollars by spending $225k real dollars.


From the Wall Street Journal, October 23, 2009:

A person familiar with the finances of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers says that last season, the team signed two free-agents, running back Noah Herron and defensive end Patrick Chukwurah, for contracts that totalled $25 million. Under the rules of the salary cap, the Buccaneers were charged that full amount for the players. But to actually earn that money, each player had to, among other things, block six punts apiece—an exceedingly difficult prospect. In the end, neither player ended up taking a single snap. Mr. Herron was paid $157,000 and Mr. Chukwurah $71,000, although the team's salary-cap number reflected the full value of their contracts. Tampa Bay, which ranked among the lowest teams in spending last season, has lost all six of its games. Tampa Bay and NFL officials declined to comment.

NFL Blowouts: What Causes Them - WSJ.com

From the St. Pete Times September 22, 2009 after the season started:

The Bucs are nearly $30 million under the salary cap this season, which is almost twice as much as the next closest team. The league average is $8.33 million below the cap.

Huge space under salary cap could have made Tampa Bay Bucs a much better team - St. Petersburg Times

This is why there is going to be a 90% rule because the NFL cap is a hard cap in name only. As Andrew Brandt puts it (and PatJew will approve), he calls the NFL cap a yarmulke (a soft flimy skull cap). The current cap is too easy to cheat especially for teams trying to cheat the cap floor. The Bucs have shown you can spend tens of millions of cap dollars for only a few hundred thousand real dollars.

The cap is a regulatory mechanism that, in theory, puts teams on an equal playing field to acquire and maintain player talent. However, with ways of allocating cap charges to future years through prorated signing bonuses and other tricks of the trade, the cap is a fluid number. The NFL salary cap has not been a “hard” cap but a “soft” one, a yarmulke, if you will (some of you just laughed, some of you said, “A what?”).

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Making-points-Union-must-think-cash-not-cap.html

 

[Miguel]

I have not read the CBA cover to cover, so if your argument is if I cant quote where it appears in the CBA, I lose, then I guess I lose.

My argument is that when you are contending something about the CBA that I think that none of us have heard before - teams have to be above the floor before the regular season starts and are presenting it as fact. One should be able to back up that fact or say I think that it is my opinion but I am not sure if it is true.

 

[plk]

This is why there is going to be a 90% rule because the NFL cap is a hard cap in name only. As Andrew Brandt puts it (and PatJew will approve), he calls the NFL cap a yarmulke (a soft flimy skull cap). The current cap is too easy to cheat especially for teams trying to cheat the cap floor. The Bucs have shown you can spend tens of millions of cap dollars for only a few hundred thousand real dollars.

Okay. So you are talking about teams moving large amounts of money around between years. That can certainly be done.

I incorrectly assumed that by "cheating on the salary cap" you meant spending more money overall than other teams are allowed to spend, not just moving salary cap space from one year to another year.

Can we agree that over a period of years the cash spent and the salary cap figures converge? Or are you saying that over a period of years the Tampa Bay Bucs spent less than they were required to, and they got away with it?

We seem to have a different perspective on the salary cap. I think of the salary cap as a device to prevent the sort of runaway spending that exists in baseball. Teams with more money will always have an advantage, and in my view, the major function of the salary cap is to restrict the degree to which they can use that advantage. As has been said, the salary cap protects the owners from themselves.

Flexibility in the salary cap, what you call loopholes, does not bother me. I see the cap as designed to prevent major abuse, not to put the clubs in financial straitjackets.

You seem to emphasize the "level playing field" aspect of it, and that does explain why you think that it is a "soft" cap, and some other things that you have said. I certainly pay less attention to the "salary floor" as a device to promote competitiveness than to the "salary cap." I had never thought about "cheating on the floor."