Next Year's Cap Situation

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by freddyg12

Evans? certain to be on the roster?
I don't know the cap like you, but I was surprised you had him on that list. What is his salary/cap impact?

I've been thinking all offseason that he is an almost certain cut from a football standpoint. Wynn & Daniels are old but are solid run stoppers & team leaders, I think Gibbs will want to keep them if possible. Evans on the other hand, seems to have played his best already, but doesn't have the upside that Wynn & Daniels do. He doesn't make what they do either, but I still can't see him making the team once we sign 1 or 2 DE's from the draft.

Again, that's just my take from a football perspective, not cap related. All your cap analysis is greatly appreciated.

Well, certain from a cap perspective. Obviously if he can't make the team this year (like we find 53 more deserving guys), he won't be on it next year

[rypper11]

The only thing the front office has done well in the past 10years is spend outrageous amounts of money and get under the cap. I have no doubt that this will be the case in 08 and beyond. I'm more concerned about who is going to get a windfall of cash next year and not live up to the money or the hype (see lloyd, trotter, sanders, george, etc etc...). If we could figure out a way to get the same results out of the player development and personnel evaluation departments as accounting and we wouldn't just win the Super Bowl in March.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by rypper11

The only thing the front office has done well in the past 10years is spend outrageous amounts of money and get under the cap. I have no doubt that this will be the case in 08 and beyond. I'm more concerned about who is going to get a windfall of cash next year and not live up to the money or the hype (see lloyd, trotter, sanders, george, etc etc...). If we could figure out a way to get the same results out of the player development and personnel evaluation departments as accounting and we wouldn't just win the Super Bowl in March.

My inital post tries to show how this isn't possible. Sure some may want to do that, but it can't be done. It's because of the way the cap was structured before that we are in this mess. Our cap guys aren't any smarter than other cap guys, they are just willing to take measures that sacrifice the future to bail out of immediate cap trouble.

Here's the predicament we are in: we are still capable of further sacrificing the future, but we are NOT capable of avoiding all effects of our past actions any longer. Starting in 2008, we will not have money to sign a starting caliber FA. If we continue to restructure all veteran, 2009 will be a year where we can't sign any free agents nor will be able to resign our own players. By 2010 if we continue the restructuring everyone road, we won't have any veteran talent left. It's not going to get to that point though. We are going to either cut bait after this season (Which means all the vets I outlined in my first post go, minimal restructuring), or choose a more gradual, but longer, rebuilding process (we cut select vets, keep others, and have additional restructuring).

Either way, we already know that the 2008 shopping spree happened a year ago. Don't expect us to add any starting caliber players next year.

[Schneed10]

GTripp, I'm going to respond to your first post in this thread, but I'm not going to quote it because between my response and the length of your first one, I think the Warpath will crash, LOL.

First, good post. I agree with the majority of what you said. I agree that because we're going to be up against the cap for the next few seasons, we really need to hit on our draft picks, especially 2nd and 3rd round type draft picks (ahem, we need to trade out of the 6th spot) because those 2nd and 3rd rounders tend to yield the greatest talent-to-cap space ratio of all draft spots.

Your analysis is good, but I think the following things are going to ease the 2008 situation:

1) First, the 'Skins would not have cleared $10 million in cap space at this point if they did not have a plan to use it. I can see people criticizing this front office's talent evaluation skills, but they definitely know how massage the cap. The fact that they've cleared this much cap room tells me that either:
a) They're planning to trade Springs and take his cap hit all this season.
b) They're planning to cut either Archuleta or Brandon Lloyd and absorb the entire cap hit this season.

Either one of those moves would save a good chunk from the 08 cap. Clearing Archuleta or Lloyd this year would save us approx 4 million each in 08. Clearing Springs, which seems extremely likely IMHO, would save us $7.3 million in 08. I guess you had him making it to 08, so the incremental benefit to your numbers would be $5 million.

2) And the big one, they have oodles of options to restructure players. In 2008, the following players are on schedule for more than a $4 million base salary (excluding Brunell cause he'll be outta here and Springs because of reasons already mentioned): Griffin, Washington, Samuels, Jansen, Thomas, and Portis. There's an opportunity to restructure all of these contracts and save up to $10-$15 million in 08 cap space just on restructures alone. Of course, as you say, we'd kick the hit into 09 and create more headaches down the road. And as I look at 2009, I can see that being the year we decide to either "sh*t or get off the pot" with our current core of guys. That would make 2008 our last year with our current core group. And it just so happens that 2008 is also the last year of Gibbs' current contract. But as for 2008, I can see the team creating plenty of space.

If we want to have any kind of foundation to move into 2009 and beyond, we need to trade down and hit on multiple picks now. And we need to keep our draft picks in the 08 draft, and hit on those as well. Because in 2009, we're quite possibly looking at saying goodbye to a few good players.

This is not to say the Skins won't be able to restructure and create more cap room in 2009. After all, at that point the cap should be about 125 million, which gives us leeway.

But all in all your post was great because as you look at the cap situation and begin to plan for the next three years, the only logical conclusion is we need to hit on multiple draft picks and start developing talent in-house. Seems to me the team has already realized this. Hopefully we hit it big on a couple of these rooks.

Good thread.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

2) And the big one, they have oodles of options to restructure players. In 2008, the following players are on schedule for more than a $4 million base salary (excluding Brunell cause he'll be outta here and Springs because of reasons already mentioned): Griffin, Washington, Samuels, Jansen, Thomas, and Portis. There's an opportunity to restructure all of these contracts and save up to $10-$15 million in 08 cap space just on restructures alone. Of course, as you say, we'd kick the hit into 09 and create more headaches down the road. And as I look at 2009, I can see that being the year we decide to either "sh*t or get off the pot" with our current core of guys. That would make 2008 our last year with our current core group. And it just so happens that 2008 is also the last year of Gibbs' current contract. But as for 2008, I can see the team creating plenty of space.

If we want to have any kind of foundation to move into 2009 and beyond, we need to trade down and hit on multiple picks now. And we need to keep our draft picks in the 08 draft, and hit on those as well. Because in 2009, we're quite possibly looking at saying goodbye to a few good players.

This is not to say the Skins won't be able to restructure and create more cap room in 2009. After all, at that point the cap should be about 125 million, which gives us leeway.

From my understanding of the numbers we have, I felt our "sh*t or get off the pot" year is coming up in 2008. Although it's going to be impossible to field a team w/o any restructuring that year, we already have a pretty rough cap situation in 2009. I'd have to run the numbers with a lot more projections and guessing to test this hypothesis, but I'm concerned that if we push too much more money into that year (either restructuring or big FA contracts), the sky will indeed fall in 2009. I feel that we have the power right now to take measures to avoid that. But to avoid the sky falling situation in 2009, concessions have to be made prior to 2008. Some at least. I'm sure one of us will look over the numbers for 2009 sometime down the road, and I may turn out to be totally and utterly wrong, but I just don't see the cap potential to pick up a solid starter in FA at any point over the next two years and still be able to get 51 contracts in under the cap including our draft picks.

And yes, the more I think about it Springs probably won't be a Redskin next year. These are the type of moves that will lighten the future burden. I know we need Griffin and Washington to be competitive next year, but I do feel that barring a pro bowl type year from either, restructuring them to keep them around for one more year would only breed more financial problems for that tricky 2009 season.

It's also interesting that we have pretty much the entire offense (Cooley being the exception) locked up with so much guarenteed money that we can't even afford to disassemble it. All the roster changes over the next three years are going to be defensive.

To be honest, I went into this analysis thinking the 2008 situation was going to be much much worse. But some key veteran cuts after this season will give us the cap space we need to at least stop the buck right here. I don't think this will prevent us from being competitive in 2008.

Unless Springs restructures, we won't be able to handle a 9 million dollar cap hit this year. If he does, I could see Lloyd or Arch getting the boot.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

From my understanding of the numbers we have, I felt our "sh*t or get off the pot" year is coming up in 2008. Although it's going to be impossible to field a team w/o any restructuring that year, we already have a pretty rough cap situation in 2009. I'd have to run the numbers with a lot more projections and guessing to test this hypothesis, but I'm concerned that if we push too much more money into that year (either restructuring or big FA contracts), the sky will indeed fall in 2009. I feel that we have the power right now to take measures to avoid that. But to avoid the sky falling situation in 2009, concessions have to be made prior to 2008. Some at least. I'm sure one of us will look over the numbers for 2009 sometime down the road, and I may turn out to be totally and utterly wrong, but I just don't see the cap potential to pick up a solid starter in FA at any point over the next two years and still be able to get 51 contracts in under the cap including our draft picks.

And yes, the more I think about it Springs probably won't be a Redskin next year. These are the type of moves that will lighten the future burden. I know we need Griffin and Washington to be competitive next year, but I do feel that barring a pro bowl type year from either, restructuring them to keep them around for one more year would only breed more financial problems for that tricky 2009 season.

It's also interesting that we have pretty much the entire offense (Cooley being the exception) locked up with so much guarenteed money that we can't even afford to disassemble it. All the roster changes over the next three years are going to be defensive.

To be honest, I went into this analysis thinking the 2008 situation was going to be much much worse. But some key veteran cuts after this season will give us the cap space we need to at least stop the buck right here. I don't think this will prevent us from being competitive in 2008.

Unless Springs restructures, we won't be able to handle a 9 million dollar cap hit this year. If he does, I could see Lloyd or Arch getting the boot.

I'm thinking Springs is the one that will be traded, and we'll ride into 2007 with both Arch and Lloyd.

But regarding the '08 cap, the Skins can easily clear the room in 2008, there are so many ways to restructure contracts to make that happen. But you're right, it will bring much pain in 2009.

But can you see the team releasing a bunch of veteran, core guys in Gibbs' last season under contract (2008)? No way, Jose. They'll restructure and keep the team intact for him. Then he'll gracefully exit knowing that 2009 is going to bring oodles of salary cap pain.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

But can you see the team releasing a bunch of veteran, core guys in Gibbs' last season under contract (2008)? No way, Jose. They'll restructure and keep the team intact for him. Then he'll gracefully exit knowing that 2009 is going to bring oodles of salary cap pain.

I think you are right, and this is what I'm afraid of.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Unless Springs restructures, we won't be able to handle a 9 million dollar cap hit this year. If he does, I could see Lloyd or Arch getting the boot.

Just to note, cutting Lloyd or Archuleta would bring a $9 million cap hit, but they're already on the books for $2.5 million each. So the incremental hit is only $6.5 million. So if we cut one of them, that would eat up all but $3.5 million of our remaining space (assuming we have $10 million right now). We could fit rookies under $3.5 million.

But I still think that extra space is reserved for taking the Springs hit now, signing Bly, and signing rookies.

[Bill B]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Just to note, cutting Lloyd or Archuleta would bring a $9 million cap hit, but they're already on the books for $2.5 million each. So the incremental hit is only $6.5 million. So if we cut one of them, that would eat up all but $3.5 million of our remaining space (assuming we have $10 million right now). We could fit rookies under $3.5 million.

But I still think that extra space is reserved for taking the Springs hit now, signing Bly, and signing rookies.

I would have to say you cut Arch Deluxe over Llyod. Although I am not a fan of either Arch Deluxe has a injured back and is done as a effective player - at least with Lloyd he is healthy and there is a chance that he can play somewhat effectively.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Bill B

I would have to say you cut Arch Deluxe over Llyod. Although I am not a fan of either Arch Deluxe has a injured back and is done as a effective player - at least with Lloyd he is healthy and there is a chance that he can play somewhat effectively.

I would go the other way if I had to make a decision. Here's why:

1) Archuleta is far more capable of earning a starting role, and thats at a position thats tougher to fill. Lloyd could play the third receiver, but we could probably get better production from James Thrash.

2) If both were to fail to earn starting jobs, Arch can play teams. Lloyd can't.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Bill B

I would have to say you cut Arch Deluxe over Llyod. Although I am not a fan of either Arch Deluxe has a injured back and is done as a effective player - at least with Lloyd he is healthy and there is a chance that he can play somewhat effectively.

Must have missed something when did Arch injure his back first I've herd of this?

[That Guy]

if they can restructure and extend guys till the next cba, they'll be fine, though we've been and will continue to be at a competitive disadvantage while we maintain such a high level of deadcap and overhead on crappy players.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by That Guy

if they can restructure and extend guys till the next cba, they'll be fine, though we've been and will continue to be at a competitive disadvantage while we maintain such a high level of deadcap and overhead on crappy players.

This assumes that the next CBA will come after another HUGE TV deal. The reason the cap went up so much with the new CBA is because the player's pool of revenues went up in concert with the increase in NFL revenues due to the new TV contract.

But it's hard to imagine TV demand for NFL games getting much higher than it already is here in the US, because interest in the NFL is already at what I'd consider a peak. I don't see a financial catalyst for an even bigger TV deal in 2012 or whenever the next one is up. If there's no increase in TV revenue, there's no reason to believe the cap is going to take another huge jump like it just did.

Unless... the NFL taps into the overseas market and begins to draw more TV viewers in Europe, Mexico, and elsewhere. Which they're attempting to do. Definitely bears watching.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

This assumes that the next CBA will come after another HUGE TV deal. The reason the cap went up so much with the new CBA is because the player's pool of revenues went up in concert with the increase in NFL revenues due to the new TV contract.

But it's hard to imagine TV demand for NFL games getting much higher than it already is here in the US, because interest in the NFL is already at what I'd consider a peak. I don't see a financial catalyst for an even bigger TV deal in 2012 or whenever the next one is up. If there's no increase in TV revenue, there's no reason to believe the cap is going to take another huge jump like it just did.

Unless... the NFL taps into the overseas market and begins to draw more TV viewers in Europe, Mexico, and elsewhere. Which they're attempting to do. Definitely bears watching.

until proven otherwise, the NFL is still a growth industry. prices and the cap have never gone down, which means it hasn't peeked yet. before believing any such proclamations to the contrary, i'll have to see statistical proof that the money's drying up.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by That Guy

until proven otherwise, the NFL is still a growth industry. prices and the cap have never gone down, which means it hasn't peeked yet. before believing any such proclamations to the contrary, i'll have to see statistical proof that the money's drying up.

Not drying up by any means. But what drove the growth over the last five years or so (which led up to the new TV deal) was an increase in TV ratings.

The more eyes watching TV, the more advertisers pay for the 30-second slots.

It'd be good if I could find some data and I'll try to do so, but I'm asserting that TV ratings aren't going to increase here in the US at the same rate that they've been increasing over the last few years.

The NFL could still expand TV viewership into Mexico, Europe, or Canada. That would spur growth, for sure.