League Low In Cash Payroll

[RayClay]

I think Belichick kept a lot of DBs because it's a passing league and he has some talent he doesn't want to cut.

I think he wants to turn over the DT position and not take snaps from Siliga and Chris Jones. Siliga got hurt. Kelly, playing well or no, isn't the future and he asked to leave.

The DE backups were Buchanan and Moore. If he had good players, he would have kept them and cut someone else. Will Smith is still a free agent. So are any number of "backup" Des, so why hold up a roster spot and salary? He can't predict where injuries will occur, DB was always a good bet in the past.

I don't think he keeps players for "depth" I think he keeps players he doesn't want to see leave for other teams, or who can possibly play a role (more likely at DB).

As far as dollars go, for a team drafting in the bottom 10% every year with consistent success, i don't see why someone would think they could do better.

 

[Ring 6]

Are you talking to me or mgteich?

Mg

 

[mgteich]

The funny thing about all of this is that it is now clear to me that I should have predicted that Mankins would have been released/traded once I realized that Stork would not be the Week 1 starter and I could have supported my prediction stating that the Patriots needed the cap space to provide a cushion for the incentives.

True enough.

Looking back, we had enough information to know that Belichick could not keep Mankins at his contracted salary.

Against that backdrop, we might have had the discussion of how much cap money would be freed up and how that affected decisions about the final roster and additions that might be made.

 

[Sciz]

Would we still be having this discussion if Revis' cap hit this year was $12M rather than $7M with $5M of the signing bonus hitting the cap next year? Belichick "borrowed" $5M in cap room from next season with that contract, and now he's being bashed for not spending that $5M.

 

[Miguel]

Sciz, yes since even with Revis' $12 million cash intake this year the Pats are the lowest in cash spending. Focusing on the latter point allows one to create a story intended to generate page clicks. If Revis had a $12 million cap hit this year, it is not likely that Wilfork's incentive-laden extension happens

 

[Oswlek]

The title is "7 possible reasons for the Patriots to have about 9.5 million in cap space on September 13, 2014".

That was NOT a recommendation to have $9.5 million in cap space.

I'm still totally confused what the point is behind this thread. The cap space quoted was as of the beginning of the season, meaning it will be somewhere around $6mm by season's end and would have been between $4-5mm had Mayo stayed healthy.

That is right in NE's historical range for injury/extension flexibility. Where is all this extra, supposedly unused cap space coming from?

 

[DaBruinz]

Do you really need to compare this team to the 2000 team. Yes, this team and the cap situation is indeed better than the team and situation that Belichick inherited in 2000. And yes, almost everything about running the team is better.

You really are being obtuse. I was comparing the cap situation and what the result demanded the team do. Sorry if that offends your sensibilities.. You ARE the one who started this ridiculous thread. Not to mention all the pot shots you've taken at Belichick over the past few years..

 

[DaBruinz]

The title is "7 possible reasons for the Patriots to have about 9.5 million in cap space on September 13, 2014".

That was NOT a recommendation to have $9.5 million in cap space.

There are a few things people aren't thinking about.
1) the new CBA requires a team to have the cap space for NLTBE that are likely to be earned during the season.
2) Besides the Mankins Trade, the Patriots had Tommy Kelly who also had playing time incentives that would have driven that NLTBE up.
3) If you take the fact that the NLTBE need to be covered and include the money they typically set aside for injury, that removes most of the 9.5M

 

[patfanken]

I haven't read all 101 (to date) posts, but I get the drift. Its a perfect example of someone taking a single fact out of context and in a vacuum in order to back a theory that could be viewed as sensationalism. So if you want to beat your breast and continue the MYTH that the Pats are cheap, this is the perfect vehicle....no matter how flawed the logic is

In summary, the 3 major counter arguments have been:

1. This year is merely a lull between recent years where the Pats were among the league leaders in payroll expenditures. You can't have good cap management leading the league in this category.

2. It conveniently ignores the higher than usual incentives that are likely to be reached.

3. It conveniently ignores the impact of the Hernandez dead money.

So by taking this isolated, out of context factoid, the author of the article that caused this thread to be started, could create a bad hypothesis that would create a justified furor. Because in an age where you can really write anything without a single worry about ACCOUNTABILITY, responsibility, or integrity, why would a writer give a crap whether the concept had merit. Its all about the clicks, the tweets, how often the article gets repeated, and most importantly the reaction it gets.

The only thing that surprised me is that MG took the bait.

 

[Midship]

We already understand that he Patriots have more cap money available than almost any team. Now, we find that the Patriots have spent the lowest amount of cash on their 2014 payroll.

Better team-building approach: New England Patriots or Denver Broncos? - espnBoston

We keep on preaching that the Patriots spend as much as anyone else. How exactly does that work THIS YEAR?

We are told that we have a crucial need for cap money to sign contracts with Revis and McCourty, speaking as if the $25M already allocated to Revis won't cover the two new contracts.

Smh at the 8 dislikes. This is such a homer board - say anything critical of the patriots (true or not) and everybody gets all defensive and hits disagree or dislike... Lame

 

[Miguel]

There are a few things people aren't thinking about.
1) the new CBA requires a team to have the cap space for NLTBE that are likely to be earned during the season.

Not 100% accurate. The old CBA also had this provision - "Any roster bonus which is deemed not “likely to be earned” based upon the player’s performance during the prior year shall immediately be included in Team Salary when earned. Preseason roster bonuses are automatically deemed “likely to be earned.” In the case, the Patriots had several players with NLTBE 46-man active roster bonuses (Wilfork, Mayo, Kelly, Edelman, Chung, Hooman, Amendola, and Browner) on its roster for most of the offseason.

 

[Midship]

Not 100% accurate. The old CBA also had this provision - "Any roster bonus which is deemed not “likely to be earned” based upon the player’s performance during the prior year shall immediately be included in Team Salary when earned. Preseason roster bonuses are automatically deemed “likely to be earned.” In the case, the Patriots had several players with NLTBE 46-man active roster bonuses (Wilfork, Mayo, Kelly, Edelman, Chung, Hooman, Amendola, and Browner) on its roster for most of the offseason.

Grow up

 

[DaBruinz]

Smh at the 8 dislikes. This is such a homer board - say anything critical of the patriots (true or not) and everybody gets all defensive and hits disagree or dislike... Lame

The dislikes aren't about it being critical of the Patriots. But, that just goes to show that you are the one with the issue..

 

[DaBruinz]

Grow up

You're telling Miguel to grow up??? *ROFLMAO Clearly you need your head examined.. not to mention you need to be exiled.

 

[mgteich]

You really are being obtuse. I was comparing the cap situation and what the result demanded the team do. Sorry if that offends your sensibilities.. You ARE the one who started this ridiculous thread. Not to mention all the pot shots you've taken at Belichick over the past few years..

Yes, I understand that you consider discussing cap management to ridiculous. That is your privilege. I also have the right to consider comparisons to 2ooo irrelevant.

 

[Midship]

The dislikes aren't about it being critical of the Patriots. But, that just goes to show that you are the one with the issue..

Whatever you say, man.. Anyone who even poses a question that is contrary to "popular opinion" gets downvoted by everybody here... Now I'm waiting for everyone to come out of the woodwork and bash me - oh no!!! Not my rep!

 

[Miguel]

Smh at the 8 dislikes. This is such a homer board - say anything critical of the patriots (true or not) and everybody gets all defensive and hits disagree or dislike... Lame

I disliked Mgteich's post not because it was critical of the Patriots but because it is not true.

For the following reasons
1.) For most of the offseason the Patriots were among the lowest teams in cap space. It took the Mankins trade for the Pats to become one of the leaders in cap space.
2.) For all of the 2014 League Year the Patriots have been among the lowest teams in cash spending. This is not news. It is like being shocked that gambling took place in Rick's Cafe in Casablanca.
3.) Low cash spending this year does not equate to the Patriots not spending money over a longer time period.

 

[Midship]

You're telling Miguel to grow up??? *ROFLMAO Clearly you need your head examined.. not to mention you need to be exiled.

Relax? Hahaha this is exactly what I was taking about.....

 

[mgteich]

Sciz, yes since even with Revis' $12 million cash intake this year the Pats are the lowest in cash spending. Focusing on the latter point allows one to create a story intended to generate page clicks. If Revis had a $12 million cap hit this year, it is not likely that Wilfork's incentive-laden extension happens

We would. It is SOP in the NFL for contracts to have a low first year cap hit, with dead money or backloading in the future, if the player doesn't compete the contract. Some folks consider this borrowing from the future. Consider that this occurs whenever a team signs a significant bonus and a low first year salary as part of a contract.

 

[mgteich]

You're telling Miguel to grow up??? *ROFLMAO Clearly you need your head examined.. not to mention you need to be exiled.

I strongly agree.