One possible factor for the Bills being under the cap

[YardRat]

http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/bills-nfl/inside-the-nfl/article552544.ece

The Bills were about $10 million under the cap in cash spending last year, according to News figures. They had to leave room in case some high draft choices hit incentive bonuses (C.J. Spiller had a $6 million bonus and Aaron Maybin had a $3 million bonus). Those two didn't hit the bonuses, but the incentive for Spiller rolls over into this season.

[X-Era]

http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/bills-nfl/inside-the-nfl/article552544.ece

The Bills were about $10 million under the cap in cash spending last year, according to News figures. They had to leave room in case some high draft choices hit incentive bonuses (C.J. Spiller had a $6 million bonus and Aaron Maybin had a $3 million bonus). Those two didn't hit the bonuses, but the incentive for Spiller rolls over into this season.Dude. Please make clear that this is not a cash to cap league. People get confused. By league accounting rules, we are 20+ mill under the cap. Furthermore, there was no cap last year.

[YardRat]

Dude. Please make clear that this is not a cash to cap league. People get confused. By league accounting rules, we are 20+ mill under the cap. Furthermore, there was no cap last year.

That's a valid point, but it doesn't negate the fact that the team has to be prepared to be on the hook for 6mil this season for Spiller, which apparently is an incentive bonus, not a signing bonus, and as such not eligible for being prorated for cap purposes.

Not to be a stickler, but as of the last CBA it most certainly is a cash-to-cap league now, as well as a salary cap league, per the new language. There are two accounting methods in place simultaneously now, not just one.

[X-Era]

That's a valid point, but it doesn't negate the fact that the team has to be prepared to be on the hook for 6mil this season for Spiller, which apparently is an incentive bonus, not a signing bonus, and as such not eligible for being prorated for cap purposes.

Not to be a stickler, but as of the last CBA it most certainly is a cash-to-cap league now, as well as a salary cap league, per the new language. There are two accounting methods in place simultaneously now, not just one.
Please man. please. It is not a cash to cap league. Read the rules. If you amortize a bonus, which in fact does include incentive bonuses, it cannot apply all in year one for cap purposes. That is the crux of the issue. You can't amortize bonuses but count them all in year one. The league rules will look at it as amortized. A team can pay a SB all in year one, not amortize it, and count it all this year. That is not what we are talking about.

Cash to cap is amortizing but counting it all in year one for cap purposes... That is NOT allowed under the CBA. It will be amortized for cap accounting purposes.

The only way that they are using both is in the league wide guarantees and in the individual team spend guarantees. But the per team yearly cap figure has nothing to do with cash. It's accounted for based on cap rules which do not allow amortizing but applying the whole SB to the cap.

I understand that the Bills love to play games and claim they are right up to the cap because they use different accounting rules... But it simply isn't true. By league rules... which everyone must adhere to... they are not even close and sit at 20+ mill or so under the real cap.

Basically fans need to simply disregard any comment from the Bills that includes the words cash and cap. Because even though they think they are the same, the league doesn't operate that way so it's irrelevant.

[X-Era]

"From this perspective, however, the fact they were $10 million under last year means they should have no problem finishing $10 million over in cash spending this year. That would put them even over the past two seasons. We'll see where they wind up."

Cash over? How is that possible? I thought we had a cap?

We do. The answer is the league doesn't look at it this way. It's confusing as hell when the media and the Bills do this... they are mixing the two and not paying any attention to the leagues accounting rules.

We are around 20 mill under by the leagues rules.

[YardRat]

"From this perspective, however, the fact they were $10 million under last year means they should have no problem finishing $10 million over in cash spending this year. That would put them even over the past two seasons. We'll see where they wind up."

Cash over? How is that possible? I thought we had a cap?

We do. The answer is the league doesn't look at it this way. It's confusing as hell when the media and the Bills do this... they are mixing the two and not paying any attention to the leagues accounting rules.

We are around 20 mill under by the leagues rules.

You're still not getting it.

Cash over? How is that possible? I thought we had a cap?

We do. The answer is the league doesn't look at it this way.

1. It's possible, for hard cap purposes only, because certain bonuses are prorated.

2. They absolutely do 'look at it this way', evidenced by the new 'cash to cap' player payout guarantees language in the current CBA.

[X-Era]

You're still not getting it.

Cash over? How is that possible? I thought we had a cap?

We do. The answer is the league doesn't look at it this way.

1. It's possible, for hard cap purposes only, because certain bonuses are prorated.

2. They absolutely do 'look at it this way', evidenced by the new 'cash to cap' player payout guarantees language in the current CBA.No you're not getting it. Quit mixixng different parts of the CBA together. How is each teams yearly cap figure computed? By league accounting rules. Not the Bills accounting rules. The discussion is around how far under the cap we are right now. Not league wide guarantees, not reaching a salary cap floor in the future, it's how much cap room we have right now.

The per team yearly cap has nothing to do with cash. It is accounted for as cap by league cap rules.

Yes, they look at cash for league wide guarantees and even with the 89% individual team floor a few years from now.

But the Bills are way under this years cap. So any conversation about cash in reference to this year cap figure and how far we are under it is irrelevant.

It's actually really easy. Answer this question:

Does the league think the Bills are as close to the cap as the Bills do? The answer is no.

And Gaughan and the rest of the media makes this very confusing when they talk to the way the Bills account for it. This article paints a picture that seems to say we are 7 mill under the cap. That is not true. We are 20 mill or so under the cap because the league rules are what the league goes by. And Mark is cryptically telling the reader that when he talks about cash over the cap. He realizes it's a fictitious number because the league doesn't work that way.

[Ginger Vitis]

The biggest factor for the Bills being under the Cap is Ralph Wilson

[YardRat]

It's actually really easy. Answer this question:

Does the league think the Bills are as close to the cap as the Bills do? The answer is no.

If you think the league and the team aren't on the same page as far as salary cap and cash to cap figures, then I would think you are mistaken.

Now you answer a question...

How many dollars do the Bills have to account for in this year's hard cap for LTBE incentives?

[X-Era]

If you think the league and the team aren't on the same page as far as salary cap and cash to cap figures, then I would think you are mistaken.

Now you answer a question...

How many dollars do the Bills have to account for in this year's hard cap for LTBE incentives?No, I'm not. And saying 7 mill under in cash proves it. Gaughan used the Bills accounting rules when he wrote that article and it's irrelevant as far at the real salary cap figure goes.

A likely to be earned incentive is not accounted for until it is earned. The only way an incentive would be accounted for this year is if the player basically earned it the year before. If the player performed such that he would earn the incentive if he played the same this year, it will be counted. That is not the case with Spiller. Again Gaughan is being deceptive. He should have said, Spiller has a chance to earn 6 mill in an incentive but since he didn't earn it last year, it won't be accounted for on this years cap until he does.

And, in fact, after re-reading it, Proration applies to any SB whether the club chooses to prorate it or not is irrelevant. It will be prorated according to the rules. Its at the top of page 93 of the CBA.

[YardRat]

No, I'm not. And saying 7 mill under in cash proves it. Gaughan used the Bills accounting rules when he wrote that article and it's irrelevant as far at the real salary cap figure goes.

A likely to be earned incentive is not accounted for until it is earned. The only way an incentive would be accounted for this year is if the player basically earned it the year before. If the player performed such that he would earn the incentive if he played the same this year, it will be counted. That is not the case with Spiller. Again Gaughan is being deceptive. He should have said, Spiller has a chance to earn 6 mill in an incentive but since he didn't earn it last year, it won't be accounted for on this years cap until he does.

And, in fact, after re-reading it, Proration applies to any SB whether the club chooses to prorate it or not is irrelevant. It will be prorated according to the rules. Its at the top of page 93 of the CBA.

An LTBE is not a signing bonus.

As far as the bonus, when does earn it, if it pushes the team over the cap, the dollar amount exceeding the cap is subtracted from the following year.

[X-Era]

An LTBE is not a signing bonus.

As far as the bonus, when does earn it, if it pushes the team over the cap, the dollar amount exceeding the cap is subtracted from the following year.1) Didn't say it was.

2) 6 mill will not even remotely push us over the cap we will still be way under it.