Pats to lose some cap space

[Miguel]

With the increase of minimum salaries, every player whose salary was at the minimum for a player with his experience will get a raise.

From PFT, "Per a league source, the new minimum for a first-year player is $275,000. For a second-year player, it's $350,000. For a third-year player, it's $425,000. For a fourth-year player, it's $500,000. For a player in years five through seven, it's $585,000. In years eight through ten, it's $710,000. In years eleven and beyond, it's $810,000. Across the board, the increases are $40,000 above the 2006 minimum levels."

​

 

[DefenseRules]

With the increase of minimum salaries, every player whose salary was at the minimum for a player with his experience will get a raise.

From PFT, "Per a league source, the new minimum for a first-year player is $275,000. For a second-year player, it's $350,000. For a third-year player, it's $425,000. For a fourth-year player, it's $500,000. For a player in years five through seven, it's $585,000. In years eight through ten, it's $710,000. In years eleven and beyond, it's $810,000. Across the board, the increases are $40,000 above the 2006 minimum levels."

​

How much will we lose?

 

[edzo44]

With the increase of minimum salaries, every player whose salary was at the minimum for a player with his experience will get a raise.

From PFT, "Per a league source, the new minimum for a first-year player is $275,000. For a second-year player, it's $350,000. For a third-year player, it's $425,000. For a fourth-year player, it's $500,000. For a player in years five through seven, it's $585,000. In years eight through ten, it's $710,000. In years eleven and beyond, it's $810,000. Across the board, the increases are $40,000 above the 2006 minimum levels."

​

In that case it's not just the Pats, it's every team in the NFL. So everbody loses some cap space.

 

[pats1]

Miguel - I see on your page you have Gay and the other ERFA's listed on the 2006 page. Have they accepted their tenders?

 

[Welker83]

It will be offset by the larger cap, And all the NLTBE incentives will no longer count for this year. Overall this is really just a drop in the bucket, especially with the "veteran discount"

 

[Miguel]

Miguel - I see on your page you have Gay and the other ERFA's listed on the 2006 page. Have they accepted their tenders?

I have no idea.

I am presuming that they will. As soon as the tender offer was made, it counted against the cap. I am also presuming that the Pats made the offers.

 

[Pats726]

I have no idea.

I am presuming that they will. As soon as the tender offer was made, it counted against the cap. I am also presuming that the Pats made the offers.

So how will one know if the were tendered?? I would assume all did as well..would they show up on the NFLPA site??? Not sure when that does show up there for the ERCAs.

 

[jct]

They just posted on profootballtalk.com talk that qualifying veteran salaries will only count as $425k against the cap. So we are actually saving money.

 

[Miguel]

How much will we lose?

Over 1.1 million
29 players of the Top 51 players will have their salaries increased by $40,000.
1 player (Bethel Johnson) will have his salary increased by $22,000.
1 player (Eugen Wilson) will have his salary increased by $1,250.

The cap hits for 3 players (Poteat, Tucker, Davis) will go down by $20,000. I am figuring that the Pats will increase their signing bonus by $15,000.

 

[Miguel]

would they show up on the NFLPA site???

They will show up when they sign the tender.

 

[pats1]

I have no idea.

I am presuming that they will. As soon as the tender offer was made, it counted against the cap. I am also presuming that the Pats made the offers.

OK, thanks. I just wanted to know if it was an assumption or something in the news I missed (in which case I'd whip myself repeatedly in self-punishment).

 

[smg93]

It's good to see that this new deal has some benefit to the players in the lower end of the scale. There was some fear that the increase in salary cap would only benefit the highest paid free agents. That would have been a shame if that were the case and i'm glad that this union deal also benefits arguably the players who "need" it most.

 

[PatsSteve1]

I assume/hope that for older vets only a portion of that minimum salary will count against the cap?

 

[smg93]

Yes, I read on PFT that to encourage the signing of Vets the program of only a portion of the minimum salary being counted against the cap is still the norm. I think they mentioned the figure of $425k but i'm not 100% sure

 

[Miguel]

It's good to see that this new deal has some benefit to the players in the lower end of the scale. There was some fear that the increase in salary cap would only benefit the highest paid free agents. That would have been a shame if that were the case and i'm glad that this union deal also benefits arguably the players who "need" it most.

The more I read about the deal, the better it was for the players.

 

[smg93]

The more I read about the deal, the better it was for the players.

From what I've read, the percentages that were in place last year are close to what it is to this years CBA. The main difference of course was how Revenues were calculated. It's apparent that the decrease in the percentage number was more than offset by the increase in the Revenue figure. I agree that it's certainly better for the players who play next year as evidenced by a larger cap number (+19% year on year) combined with having the same number of players in a roster. The owners however still have a good deal considering that they did not have to address the issue of guaranteed contracts for all players in this CBA.