Redskins 2011 Salary Cap Status

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinster

Just curious where you get you numbers from. I'm not doubting you, but portis's release fee on the warpath salary cap info is 5.5 mil and carters is 10.5. Even their 2012 release fees are still above 10 mil combined.

It seems weird that the cap went down so much this year with contracts going up year after year. I think contracts will still go up due to reports I've heard (i.e asomuaghs possible contract) and the obvious agents demands stemming, but it seems that many owners that want to spend wont be able to, and many owners that don't want to spend will be forced to or just give up their money. Also speaking of which, where does that money go to if a team doesn't meet the salary floor and has to cut a check to make up the difference.

It just seems weird the way this agreement was come to. I don't see it benefitting the owners too much. The ones that want to spend cant and the ones that dont want to have to.

Also, this isn't really that important, but it seems to me that the redskins will not meet the floor due to the amount of dead cap we will have, and have to pay the difference.

Release fees are a one time thing. Releasing a player creates a deadcap obligation, but it's a one time obligation. Once its paid, then he's off the books.

The ones who want to spend can always spend. Just need to find the right exemption that allows for it.

[skinster]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Release fees are a one time thing. Releasing a player creates a deadcap obligation, but it's a one time obligation. Once its paid, then he's off the books.

The ones who want to spend can always spend. Just need to find the right exemption that allows for it.

It might be a one time obligation, but with teams that like to spend alot, it causes a chain reaction that affects the future. Like with us in the past, our release fees forced us to push money from the present year into the future, which increased future cap numbers as well as future release fees. Present mass-spending prevents future spending, and causes some players to be necessities to hold on to even if they are desired to be released.

I don't anticipate large contracts to be lowered at all, so lowering the cap and raising the floor just seems to hurt more teams than it helps because of the reasons I said in my last post. It just seems odd for the the owners to agree to.

I'd still like to know how you got your numbers, how they differ from the warpath's numbers, so I can better understand the cap. Also I'd like to know if you know where the check that the owner pays for going under the cap goes to.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinster

It might be a one time obligation, but with teams that like to spend alot, it causes a chain reaction that affects the future. Like with us in the past, our release fees forced us to push money from the present year into the future, which increased future cap numbers as well as future release fees. Present mass-spending prevents future spending, and causes some players to be necessities to hold on to even if they are desired to be released.

I don't anticipate large contracts to be lowered at all, so lowering the cap and raising the floor just seems to hurt more teams than it helps because of the reasons I said in my last post. It just seems odd for the the owners to agree to.

I'd still like to know how you got your numbers, how they differ from the warpath's numbers, so I can better understand the cap. Also I'd like to know if you know where the check that the owner pays for going under the cap goes to.

All my sources in this thread are linked in the OP. The Warpath Cap Sheets are a great resource of mine that were used in this thread. Problem is, they're just not up to date accurate. They still have great info on them, but the bottom line totals are not inclusive of anything that has happened in the last nine months.

The cash minimum and salary cap are just completely different entities. The only way they are related at all is that the cash minimum is determined by a percentage of that year's salary cap. The average cash spent per club is almost certainly going to exceed the salary cap in any given year, because the NFL's accounting methods allow cash bonuses to be deferred to future seasons in cap sheets.

Deadcap is certainly a limiting factor on the cash to cap ratio, but with that said, the total value of signing bonuses in any given offseason is going to exceed the total value of deadcap. That's why the cash minimum isn't much of a hurdle at all: it's just not going to affect the behavior of 75% of NFL franchises who spend x amount of dollars in every season anyway.