I blew up WGR's afternoon programming!!!!!

[Ebenezer]

Today the WGR weekend guys get on and start criticizing the Bills for making up "Cash to cap" economics and that no other team uses this system. After about two minutes of their blather I called in to remind them that this is exactly how the Bills lost Antoine Winfield and that it is merely a matter of accounting - counting the money as guarenteed roster bonuses instead of signing bonuses which are amoratized. The teams gives the same amount of money, the player is not cheated and the cap is preserved in future years. I remind them that this happens all the time in the NFL and will be happening more. As soon as I stop talking they cut my line. There is a brief pause, a couple seconds of stutter and then........

"So, Clarke MacArthur......."

no more Bills talk the rest of the afternoon!!

:roflmao:

[Devin]

:bf1:

[hammerbillsfan]

Outstanding! :clap:

[Bert102176]

awesome EB great job buddy

[Michael82]

:lmao:

[Mitchy moo]

Where you watching it on TV as well??

J/K

[Jan Reimers]

I think those guys are too stupid to realize how stupid they really are.

[Ebenezer]

the interesting thing was that I had been awake for all of 3 minutes and made more sense than they did...

[clumping platelets]

:gag:

[kgun12]

Very nice Eb!

[Night Train]

Great job.

They have no answers to someone who isn't part of their short bus demographic.

[YardRat]

WGR sucks...plain and simple.

It's too bad because they used to be a decent station, but they've gone way down hill.

[X-Era]

Today the WGR weekend guys get on and start criticizing the Bills for making up "Cash to cap" economics and that no other team uses this system. After about two minutes of their blather I called in to remind them that this is exactly how the Bills lost Antoine Winfield and that it is merely a matter of accounting - counting the money as guarenteed roster bonuses instead of signing bonuses which are amoratized. The teams gives the same amount of money, the player is not cheated and the cap is preserved in future years. I remind them that this happens all the time in the NFL and will be happening more. As soon as I stop talking they cut my line. There is a brief pause, a couple seconds of stutter and then........

"So, Clarke MacArthur......."

no more Bills talk the rest of the afternoon!!

:roflmao: Absolutely awesome! that station is dumb people *****ing, thats all it is.

[jamze132]

Michael Irvin would fit in nice on WGR.

[SABURZFAN]

WGR sucks...plain and simple.

It's too bad because they used to be a decent station, but they've gone way down hill.



where have you gone Stan Roberts?

[SABURZFAN]

Absolutely awesome! that station is dumb people *****ing, thats all it is.


reminds me of a certain "c-lick" around here.

[mybills]

Thanks, Ebby! :up:

[Billsrock4life]

awsome...good job

[Statman]

Today the WGR weekend guys get on and start criticizing the Bills for making up "Cash to cap" economics and that no other team uses this system. After about two minutes of their blather I called in to remind them that this is exactly how the Bills lost Antoine Winfield and that it is merely a matter of accounting - counting the money as guarenteed roster bonuses instead of signing bonuses which are amoratized. The teams gives the same amount of money, the player is not cheated and the cap is preserved in future years. I remind them that this happens all the time in the NFL and will be happening more. As soon as I stop talking they cut my line. There is a brief pause, a couple seconds of stutter and then........

"So, Clarke MacArthur......."

no more Bills talk the rest of the afternoon!!

:roflmao:
Typical. You exposed those that think they know as people that do not.

Still, one has to question the ability of the Bills to sign players in this way. Given the choice, would you want a lump sum signing bonus, which is essentially guaranteed money, for say $10M, or would you settle for roster bonuses annually totalling $10M, or the inflationary equivalent, that you know you may not get should you not be with the team?

Now if the roster bonuses are greater, that's one thing. But then you're still spending more than you would using a simple signing bonus. So the tradeoff there would be salary for risk. Signing bonuses can be the better way to go for players with small likelihoods of getting injured early in their careers.

In other words, the Bills will get outbid for the top players when other teams offer them the same in SB as opposed to roster bonus. In a supply/demand environment, all teams will not conduct their business as such.

Either way, it doesn't save the team any money unless they make poor decisions. So in that light it will save the Bills plenty. For teams that make better decisions with players sticking around to the length of their contracts, or at least to the last year or two which are typically "written off," it's less of a factor.

People are way overrating this entire thing. It's a shell game, nothing else.

[McBFLO]

So if I'm understanding this whole "Cash to the Cap" thing right, a player who signs a $5 mil signing bonus gets that up front instead of having it spread out over the length of a contract, right?

If that's the case, you'd BETTER be making the right decisions on FAs because of 2 things: 1) the amount of money you'd be spending on, and the value you'd be getting for that particular player (whether he sticks around long enough for the entire length of his contract), and 2) if you spend it on the wrong guy and he slacks off knowing he's already gotten a HUGE chunk of his contract up front.

If I'm not understanding this thing correctly, please, someone point out what I'm not understanding.

All this being said, the more I read about this "Cash to the Cap" strategy, the more I think it's not such a bad thing. I think Marv and his staff are the right people to run it. He was brought in here to build a consensus, to work as group, which is exactly what TD didn't do. So, I'm not all that upset, like WGR was/is, that Marv doesn't understand the cap. He's got someone on his "team", so to speak, that will handle that aspect for him.

[Mahdi]

So if I'm understanding this whole "Cash to the Cap" thing right, a player who signs a $5 mil signing bonus gets that up front instead of having it spread out over the length of a contract, right?

If that's the case, you'd BETTER be making the right decisions on FAs because of 2 things: 1) the amount of money you'd be spending on, and the value you'd be getting for that particular player (whether he sticks around long enough for the entire length of his contract), and 2) if you spend it on the wrong guy and he slacks off knowing he's already gotten a HUGE chunk of his contract up front.

If I'm not understanding this thing correctly, please, someone point out what I'm not understanding.

All this being said, the more I read about this "Cash to the Cap" strategy, the more I think it's not such a bad thing. I think Marv and his staff are the right people to run it. He was brought in here to build a consensus, to work as group, which is exactly what TD didn't do. So, I'm not all that upset, like WGR was/is, that Marv doesn't understand the cap. He's got someone on his "team", so to speak, that will handle that aspect for him.
I guess pretty much,,,, they have certain players targeted,,,, in order to ensure that they dont lose out on them they will give them their SB/RB upfront which is much more attractive than getting parts of it every year. Its actually pretty smart if they already know that they only want 3-4 players and want to make sure they get them and at the same time keeping cap space available in coming years to re-sign their skill guys--- like Losman, Evans and Lynch(hoping).

[X-Era]

reminds me of a certain "c-lick" around here.

I missed that one, if its a slam cent my way at least let me understand it

[Ebenezer]

So if I'm understanding this whole "Cash to the Cap" thing right, a player who signs a $5 mil signing bonus gets that up front instead of having it spread out over the length of a contract, right?

that is the way ALL signing bonuses have ALWAYS been...they are prorated for CAP ACCOUNTING purposes only. All the money goes into the players pocket when he gets the check.

For the Nth time - Whether a player gets $10 mil in a signing bonus or in a roster bonus is irrelavant. It only has to do with how the team accounts for the money.

[McBFLO]

Then what's the difference between a signing bonus and a roster bonus other than the wording? Nothing?

[Ebenezer]

Then what's the difference between a signing bonus and a roster bonus other than the wording? Nothing?
as far as the player is concerned, correct.

Traditionally, roster bonuses have been for far less money than traditional signing bonuses. They probably started off as a perk to entice marginal players to try harder and make the team...then they probably evolved into something given to aging vets and rookies to protect the team. Minnesota (and/or others) probably found a great loophole that maybe Buffalo is trying to exploit. Again, though, I believe the Bills are doing this to keep future cap clean so that it is enticing to buyers.

[G. Host]

Minnesota's loophole is to burn money years they woulld be underfunding their cap so the player (Winfield) is cheaper later years and they have more money to spend.

Works for a young, rarely hurt player at key need for a postion where number for that position is rising faster than cap.