The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Salary plan will help, hurt these teams

One of the issues that helped bring the players closer to the owners in labor discussions was changing the amount of money teams must spend during a season.

In the now-expired collective bargaining agreement, teams were required to invest about 86 percent of their salary cap in cap dollars. That was called the payroll floor in the old CBA. A few teams created phony incentives that they never planned to pay just to get over the payroll floor and then pocketed the unspent money.

Hoping to get a deal, owners in the past few weeks upgraded a proposal that changed the formula. On March 11, owners were willing to set the floor at 90 percent of the salary cap in cash. Now, they are willing to make the floor close to 100 percent of the salary cap.

Thus, if the salary cap is around $120 million this year, teams would have to put close to that amount of money in cash to meet the minimum payroll requirements. Using numbers from my 2011 salary database, let's look at the teams affected the most if this system went into effect.

Overall there is more than $500 million of cap room available, and the average payroll of a team is $92 million.

Teams affected positively:

1. Washington Redskins: Owner Dan Snyder gave defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth and cornerback DeAngelo Hall around $36 million in bonus money in 2010 to free up room to be a big spender in free agency in 2011. Snyder and Mike Shanahan will have to be creative in how they structure contracts, because the $120 million cap would give them only around $10 million of cap room. On the positive side, the Redskins' current payroll is $75.7 million, meaning Snyder would have to spend close to $45 million in cash to meet the potential minimum floor requirements. Imagine a system that forces Snyder to spend.



2. Arizona Cardinals:



3. Seattle Seahawks:



4. Carolina Panthers:



5. Philadelphia Eagles: Among last year's playoff teams, the Eagles may have one of the best chances to upgrade their roster and bring in stars. They have $13 million of cap room, and their payroll is a modest $95 million. They could try to bring in defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth, wide receiver Plaxico Burress and maybe running back Reggie Bush if the price were right. They would have enough cap flexibility to even go for Nnamdi Asomugha or a top cornerback, if they like.

Teams affected negatively:

1. Cincinnati Bengals:


2. Tampa Bay Buccaneers:


3. Oakland Raiders:


4. That team in Texas: Owner Jerry Jones made sure his team wouldn't be ripped apart during tough labor times. He's always aggressive in re-signing his top players. But the Cowboys are currently a minimum of $18.9 million over the salary cap, which could spell doom for right tackle Marc Colombo, wide receiver Roy Williams and others. Jones also has to come up with some room to re-sign left tackle Doug Free and others.



5. New York Jets:

So now we have a article about the NFL Salary Cap.....
Of course the Redskins are the first team mentioned ....
but in a positive light

Yeah TH.n members knew the Skins would be OK, but after a decade of being told the Redskins have mis-managed the Cap, and Cap-Hell has always been just around the corner, how is this possible?

Hint: Look at the books when Vinny is removed from the top of the teams Football Operations chain of command, and what they look like one year later.

Nik I'm confused, it says: "Snyder and Mike Shanahan will have to be creative in how they structure contracts, because the $120 million cap would give them only around $10 million of cap room. On the positive side, the Redskins' current payroll is $75.7 million, meaning Snyder would have to spend close to $45 million in cash to meet the potential minimum floor requirements."

So do we only have $10 million or do we have $45 million? Does it mean we have to spend $45 million in cash but we can only take a cap hit of $10 million? I know they do that with the long term deal calcs, but it seems like a screwy system.

Also if what I said is right, I thought we cleaned forwarded cap last year, do we really still have $35 million in hit from prior years beyond cash already paid?

KazooSkinsFan wrote:Nik I'm confused, it says: "Snyder and Mike Shanahan will have to be creative in how they structure contracts, because the $120 million cap would give them only around $10 million of cap room. On the positive side, the Redskins' current payroll is $75.7 million, meaning Snyder would have to spend close to $45 million in cash to meet the potential minimum floor requirements."

So do we only have $10 million or do we have $45 million? Does it mean we have to spend $45 million in cash but we can only take a cap hit of $10 million? I know they do that with the long term deal calcs, but it seems like a screwy system.

Also if what I said is right, I thought we cleaned forwarded cap last year, do we really still have $35 million in hit from prior years beyond cash already paid?

With the proposed rule changes the team will have to spend about $45M in payroll (cash). The projected cap space of $10M free doesn't take into account that about $4M will be freed up when the AH comes off the books, and McNabb frees up another close to $5M. So they have to spend about $45M in real dollars and can only account for about $19M in cap space for 2011

4. That team in Texas: Owner Jerry Jones made sure his team wouldn't be ripped apart during tough labor times. He's always aggressive in re-signing his top players. But the Cowboys are currently a minimum of $18.9 million over the salary cap, which could spell doom for right tackle Marc Colombo, wide receiver Roy Williams and others. Jones also has to come up with some room to re-sign left tackle Doug Free and others.

Oh man do I hope that happens. Please please please let that happen. Because that would mean dumping the guy they traded 1st, 3rd, and 6th round picks for, and paid $26 mil guaranteed to (as a part of a 6-year $54 mil contract), after two and a half mediocre, forgettable seasons.

Or maybe I've got that wrong. Maybe we should want this guy to stay there . . . soaking up the $$$ for very little output, as long as possible . . .

Here is a link to a related article that helps explain the salary cap in terms of Team Salary and Benefits and Cap minimum vs Cash Minimum. It doesn't explain how each team benefits or is hurt by the proposed cap,, but it gives a good understanding about what is the cap.

Understanding the Cap

The Salary Cap (Cap) – which defines NFL revenue allocated to players – is one of the most misunderstood mechanisms in sports. It is not well known that the NFL Cap consists of two parts: the “Team Salary” (TS) portion and the “Benefits” portion.

The TS number is the number we usually peg at the Cap number, the amount of negotiable dollars that a team can use to pay its players.

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Key ... e-Cap.html

I am not too concerned about the new salary cap. I am happy to hear we have some progress with this freaking lockout. It is good to hear that our team will benefit from the proposed new CBA. Lets start this season already.

Requiring Dan Snyder to spend money is certainly not a good thing for the Skins. That's like handing an alcoholic the keys to a liquor store.

CanesSkins26 wrote:Requiring Dan Snyder to spend money is certainly not a good thing for the Skins. That's like handing an alcoholic the keys to a liquor store.

Not sure we'll like this, but it's going to be like old times for "the Danny"

If they settle on spending 96% of the proposed $120M, the Skins will have $41.76M in cap space and will have to spend about $48.28M in real dollars, once McNabb and Haynesworth are gone.


A lot of it will have to be spent simply because they only have 52 players under contract (50 without AH & #5), and training camp rosters possibly going up to a 90 player limits. They've got 12 rookies and 5 players signed to future contracts that aren't accounted for in the cap, so that leaves 23 slots open for free agents.

They can be paid low signing bonuses but high roster bonuses, because $48.3M in real cash that must be spent and $41.8M in cap space means they can let most of the money hit this year (Signing bonus are pro-rated and roster bonuses count the year it's paid... Players get all their money either way), and have very little money on future caps. So it won't be a down side to over paying a player they want.

It's "the Danny" in a toy store, with cap money almost equal to cash being spent. (in the past he spent the money and needed 4-5 years to account for it, that's not going to be a issue in 2011) It'll be up to Bruce and Mike to keep "the Danny" out of the store...

Anyway you look at it... they can pay anybody... whatever they want, to sign.

Bruce and Mike might not know what that leads to, but we do...

DON'T WE

1niksder wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:Requiring Dan Snyder to spend money is certainly not a good thing for the Skins. That's like handing an alcoholic the keys to a liquor store.

It's "the Danny" in a toy store, with cap money almost equal to cash being spent. (in the past he spent the money and needed 4-5 years to account for it, that's not going to be a issue in 2011) It'll be up to Bruce and Mike to keep "the Danny" out of the store...

Anyway you look at it... they can pay anybody... whatever they want, to sign.

Bruce and Mike might not know what that leads to, but we do...

DON'T WE

This is not the same FO that had this franchise in desparate straits a little while ago - I'm not concerned about Snyder - this franchise is now managed by Allen and Shanahan and they have shown that they can get this franchise back on track - it will take some time but we will not see a return to the old ways while they are in charge


I'm looking forward to having a consistently competitive product on the field - it will take another year or so but this franchise is not going to be spending Snyder's money on players that don't show up OR don't help make the other players around them better OR are not going to be able to contribute for some time as well


I also think we'll see a trend towards younger players and a much younger franchise than we have had in a long time

namndi would take some of that 45 mil off our hands....

gay4pacman wrote:namndi would take some of that 45 mil off our hands....

Yessir. Him or Cullen Jenkins for sure.

Skins Jock wrote:

I also think we'll see a trend towards younger players and a much younger franchise than we have had in a long time

I'm looking forward to seeing our young guys play. Our defense actually played better toward the end of the season last year when our young guys got a chance to play. If we're lucky, Kerrigan, Jenkins, Neild, Hankerson, Helu, Selvish Capers, Lichtensteiger, Perry Riley, Jarmon, etc can prove their worth on the field this year, and those to come.

I'd love to get this guy, BUT - IF Asomugha is in the NFC East I think it will be with either the Eagles or the Cowboys - he's going to want to be a part of a franchise that's got a better chance than with us - his salary will be huge wherever he ends up

no worries - we'll be fine without him - we're getting there

1niksder wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:Requiring Dan Snyder to spend money is certainly not a good thing for the Skins. That's like handing an alcoholic the keys to a liquor store.

Not sure we'll like this, but it's going to be like old times for "the Danny"

If they settle on spending 96% of the proposed $120M, the Skins will have $41.76M in cap space and will have to spend about $48.28M in real dollars, once McNabb and Haynesworth are gone.


A lot of it will have to be spent simply because they only have 52 players under contract (50 without AH & #5), and training camp rosters possibly going up to a 90 player limits. They've got 12 rookies and 5 players signed to future contracts that aren't accounted for in the cap, so that leaves 23 slots open for free agents.They can be paid low signing bonuses but high roster bonuses, because $48.3M in real cash that must be spent and $41.8M in cap space means they can let most of the money hit this year (Signing bonus are pro-rated and roster bonuses count the year it's paid... Players get all their money either way), and have very little money on future caps. So it won't be a down side to over paying a player they want.

It's "the Danny" in a toy store, with cap money almost equal to cash being spent. (in the past he spent the money and needed 4-5 years to account for it, that's not going to be a issue in 2011) It'll be up to Bruce and Mike to keep "the Danny" out of the store...

Anyway you look at it... they can pay anybody... whatever they want, to sign.

Bruce and Mike might not know what that leads to, but we do...

DON'T WE

I count 87 on THN's site. 14 are either FA's or will be dumped (AH & #5).
That leaves 73 (including draft picks & futures). Who am I missing?

yupchagee wrote:

1niksder wrote:

CanesSkins26 wrote:Requiring Dan Snyder to spend money is certainly not a good thing for the Skins. That's like handing an alcoholic the keys to a liquor store.

Not sure we'll like this, but it's going to be like old times for "the Danny"

If they settle on spending 96% of the proposed $120M, the Skins will have $41.76M in cap space and will have to spend about $48.28M in real dollars, once McNabb and Haynesworth are gone.


A lot of it will have to be spent simply because they only have 52 players under contract (50 without AH & #5), and training camp rosters possibly going up to a 90 player limits. They've got 12 rookies and 5 players signed to future contracts that aren't accounted for in the cap, so that leaves 23 slots open for free agents.They can be paid low signing bonuses but high roster bonuses, because $48.3M in real cash that must be spent and $41.8M in cap space means they can let most of the money hit this year (Signing bonus are pro-rated and roster bonuses count the year it's paid... Players get all their money either way), and have very little money on future caps. So it won't be a down side to over paying a player they want.

It's "the Danny" in a toy store, with cap money almost equal to cash being spent. (in the past he spent the money and needed 4-5 years to account for it, that's not going to be a issue in 2011) It'll be up to Bruce and Mike to keep "the Danny" out of the store...

Anyway you look at it... they can pay anybody... whatever they want, to sign.

Bruce and Mike might not know what that leads to, but we do...

DON'T WE

I count 87 on THN's site. 14 are either FA's or will be dumped (AH & #5).
That leaves 73 (including draft picks & futures). Who am I missing?

6 guys are signed to future contracts and don't take up any cap space nor has any real money been spent on them, the same can be said for the 12 draft picks, 14 will be free agents. Mike Furrey may or may not have retired but he's not on the roster neither is Rashad Duncan. I did overlook James Davis and his $480K cap hit 

So Davis makes it, 53 under contract if you count AH and #5, 14 free agents makes 67, plus 12 draft picks and 6 future contracts makes 85. With Duncan and Furrey, that's 87. You're not missing anything.

I said there are 50 guys under contract, not counting AH and McNabb, there are actually 51 guys under contract, not counting AH and McNabb so I missed 1

All I have to say is thanks to 1nik and the others who have a deeper understanding (and drive to have that understanding) and dumb it down for people like me.
HTTR

VetSkinsFan wrote:All I have to say is thanks to 1nik and the others who have a deeper understanding (and drive to have that understanding) and dumb it down for people like me.
HTTR

let me add my thanks to 1niksder - totally agree with Vet

not only with the research involved but also in making it easier to understand

SkinsJock wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:All I have to say is thanks to 1nik and the others who have a deeper understanding (and drive to have that understanding) and dumb it down for people like me.
HTTR

not only with the research involved but also in making it easier to understand

Let's be honest... with no CBA in 2010 I've had a whole year off

And I'm still not sure what the Redskins current cap position is

Anyone that says they do... don't know what they are talking about.

In one form or another there will be a cap in place this season and until there is, everyone is guessing. As of now I have 53 Redskins under contract taking up $97.86M in Cap Space and $85.54M in cash spent on salaries.

At this time we don't know what the cap will be, how dead money from previous years (including last year's un-capped year) will be dealt with, what percentage of the Cap will equal the cash to spend floor, or the number of players that will be allowed on team rosters, and there will be a rookie wage scale to factor into the cap as well.

The Redskins have been very good with their cash over cap approach and sharing the wealth, when signing vets to short term contracts, but have had trouble keeping their own players from leaving town.


If the CBA comes out the way it looks like it will, the Skins will have more cash than cap space. However they'll have plenty of cap space. With "the Danny" cash has never been the problem, it was always the lack of cap space that led to the restructures and converting of base salaries into signing bonuses. Now they will be able to get the guys they want, account for most of the money this year and still have money to re-sign players (LL30) now before they are able to hit the market next year. If done right they can pretty much do the same thing next year, with less needs and fewer holes to fill.

As the details are finalized we will get a better picture of what will be what.
As it stands I'm debating a guy about the number of guys under contract (I've got 53, he's got 59 but not counting the six future contracts), so until there is a cap and the NFLPA site goes back online it's all guess work, and preparation.

SkinsJock wrote:let me add my thanks to 1niksder - totally agree with Vet

As a Staff (I get the roster info from "mostly" Jake and others help out too) this is what we do... when we can

1niksder wrote:

yupchagee wrote:

1niksder wrote: Not sure we'll like this, but it's going to be like old times for "the Danny"

If they settle on spending 96% of the proposed $120M, the Skins will have $41.76M in cap space and will have to spend about $48.28M in real dollars, once McNabb and Haynesworth are gone.


A lot of it will have to be spent simply because they only have 52 players under contract (50 without AH & #5), and training camp rosters possibly going up to a 90 player limits. They've got 12 rookies and 5 players signed to future contracts that aren't accounted for in the cap, so that leaves 23 slots open for free agents.They can be paid low signing bonuses but high roster bonuses, because $48.3M in real cash that must be spent and $41.8M in cap space means they can let most of the money hit this year (Signing bonus are pro-rated and roster bonuses count the year it's paid... Players get all their money either way), and have very little money on future caps. So it won't be a down side to over paying a player they want.

It's "the Danny" in a toy store, with cap money almost equal to cash being spent. (in the past he spent the money and needed 4-5 years to account for it, that's not going to be a issue in 2011) It'll be up to Bruce and Mike to keep "the Danny" out of the store...

Anyway you look at it... they can pay anybody... whatever they want, to sign.

Bruce and Mike might not know what that leads to, but we do...

DON'T WE

I count 87 on THN's site. 14 are either FA's or will be dumped (AH & #5).
That leaves 73 (including draft picks & futures). Who am I missing?

6 guys are signed to future contracts and don't take up any cap space nor has any real money been spent on them, the same can be said for the 12 draft picks, 14 will be free agents. Mike Furrey may or may not have retired but he's not on the roster neither is Rashad Duncan. I did overlook James Davis and his $480K cap hit 

So Davis makes it, 53 under contract if you count AH and #5, 14 free agents makes 67, plus 12 draft picks and 6 future contracts makes 85. With Duncan and Furrey, that's 87. You're not missing anything.

I said there are 50 guys under contract, not counting AH and McNabb, there are actually 51 guys under contract, not counting AH and McNabb so I missed 1

Thanks. I think it is almost starting to make sense