The "Inside Word" on the QB Search

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I'm still not so sure entirely what to believe on Manning. My understanding is they don't really intend to negotiate with Manning. They have a set "take it or leave" deal in mind (don't know what the terms are). And if he accepts great. If not, they move on.

Well, by the sound of it, it doesn't sound like they really HAVE to negotiate with Manning. After all, it sounds like he would be happy with an incentive laced contract as opposed to a lot of guaranteed money up front. If this happens to be true, I'm sure any GM would jump on that deal in a heartbeat. It would be a no-brainer to sign PM then.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

Well, by the sound of it, it doesn't sound like they really HAVE to negotiate with Manning. After all, it sounds like he would be happy with an incentive laced contract as opposed to a lot of guaranteed money up front. If this happens to be true, I'm sure any GM would jump on that deal in a heartbeat. It would be a no-brainer to sign PM then.

I'm not totally sure of this, so I defer to CC. But I believe that incentive laden deals, particularly if the incentives are reasonably attainable, are potentially more damaging to your salary cap than regular deals

[CrazyCanuck]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I'm not totally sure of this, so I defer to CC. But I believe that incentive laden deals, particularly if the incentives are reasonably attainable, are potentially more damaging to your salary cap than regular deals

Ya I'm not sure if the rules have changed with the new CBA, but in the past any incentive that was "likely to be earned" counted against the cap right away. So incentives wouldn't help the cap situation too much.

They could use "unlikely to be earned" incentives. These only count on the cap if/when they are achieved. But if they are "unlikely" to be reached then Peyton might not want them in the first place.

Of course the ultimate "incentive" is to give Peyton very little guaranteed money up front, but then give him huge salaries every year. So basically if Peyton is still playing he will continue to earn these huge salaries every year. Once we have to trade/cut him it wouldn't hurt our cap at all since salary is not guaranteed.

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by CrazyCanuck

Ya I'm not sure if the rules have changed with the new CBA, but in the past any incentive that was "likely to be earned" counted against the cap right away. So incentives wouldn't help the cap situation too much.

They could use "unlikely to be earned" incentives. These only count on the cap if/when they are achieved. But if they are "unlikely" to be reached then Peyton might not want them in the first place.

Of course the ultimate "incentive" is to give Peyton very little guaranteed money up front, but then give him huge salaries every year. So basically if Peyton is still playing he will continue to earn these huge salaries every year. Once we have to trade/cut him it wouldn't hurt our cap at all since salary is not guaranteed.

Ahhhh I see! I didn't realize the incentives counted toward the salary cap. I always thought it was just purely the guaranteed money. In that case, then I change my mind on the incentive based contract.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

Ahhhh I see! I didn't realize the incentives counted toward the salary cap. I always thought it was just purely the guaranteed money. In that case, then I change my mind on the incentive based contract.

I think you have to count the max amount of the incentives. So if the floor is $5 million incentives but the ceiling is $40 million, you have to account for the $40 million.

But let's say only $10 million are reached, you can roll that remaining $30 million over to the next year. I think

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I think you have to count the max amount of the incentives. So if the floor is $5 million incentives but the ceiling is $40 million, you have to account for the $40 million.

But let's say only $10 million are reached, you can roll that remaining $30 million over to the next year. I think

Hhhhmmmm....OK! So if no incentives were reached in year one of the contract, you'd still have to roll the entire ceiling over to the next season? So, if you had $40 million to count against the salary cap this season, none of it was reached, you'd still have to turn around and count it again the following season? So, if $10 million was reached this year, then $30 million would count against the salary cap in season two? So forth and so on? Couldn't you write something in the contract that says this particular incentive loses its value the longer it takes to be achieved? So for instance, if the incentive was Peyton Manning sends us to the Super Bowl in the first year, he will receive an incentive of $50 million dollars. However, if the 'skins don't go to the Super Bowl this year, that incentive gets devalued to $30 million in year two of the contract, so forth and so on? Would that be legal?

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

Hhhhmmmm....OK! So if no incentives were reached in year one of the contract, you'd still have to roll the entire ceiling over to the next season? So, if you had $40 million to count against the salary cap this season, none of it was reached, you'd still have to turn around and count it again the following season? So, if $10 million was reached this year, then $30 million would count against the salary cap in season two? So forth and so on? Couldn't you write something in the contract that says this particular incentive loses its value the longer it takes to be achieved? So for instance, if the incentive was Peyton Manning sends us to the Super Bowl in the first year, he will receive an incentive of $50 million dollars. However, if the 'skins don't go to the Super Bowl this year, that incentive gets devalued to $30 million in year two of the contract, so forth and so on? Would that be legal?

Um ask Canuck

[CrazyCanuck]

Originally Posted by skinsguy

Hhhhmmmm....OK! So if no incentives were reached in year one of the contract, you'd still have to roll the entire ceiling over to the next season? So, if you had $40 million to count against the salary cap this season, none of it was reached, you'd still have to turn around and count it again the following season? So, if $10 million was reached this year, then $30 million would count against the salary cap in season two? So forth and so on? Couldn't you write something in the contract that says this particular incentive loses its value the longer it takes to be achieved? So for instance, if the incentive was Peyton Manning sends us to the Super Bowl in the first year, he will receive an incentive of $50 million dollars. However, if the 'skins don't go to the Super Bowl this year, that incentive gets devalued to $30 million in year two of the contract, so forth and so on? Would that be legal?

Higskin's post seems to confirm the incentive rules haven't changed.

It's not that complicated:

- If an incentive is "likely to be earned' it counts right away against the cap, with a credit the following year if the incentive is unreached.

- If an incentive is "unlikely to be earned" it won't count against the cap in the current year. It will count against the cap the following year if the incentive is reached.

... and any incentive involving the Redskins winning the Super Bowl would definitely be deemed "unlikely".

[Higskin]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I think you have to count the max amount of the incentives. So if the floor is $5 million incentives but the ceiling is $40 million, you have to account for the $40 million.

But let's say only $10 million are reached, you can roll that remaining $30 million over to the next year. I think

Yep...per new 10 year CBA -

(c) Incentives

(i) Any and all incentive amounts, including but not limited to performance bonuses, shall be included in Team Salary if they are "likely to be earned" during such League Year based upon the player's and/or Team's performance during the prior year.

(ii) At the end of the season, if performance bonuses actually earned resulted in a Tearm's paying Salary in excess of the Salary Cap, then the amount by which the Team exceeded the Salary Cap as a result of such actually paid performance bonuses shall be subtracted from the Tearm's Salary Cap for the next Lague Year.

(iii) At the end of a season, if performance bonuses previously included in a Tearm's Team Salary but not actually earned exceed performance bonuses actually earned but not previously included in Tearm Salary, an amount shall be added to the Team's Salary Cap for the next League Year equaling the amount, if any, by which such overage exceeds the Team's Room under the Salary Cap at the end of a season.