Cap Room as if 9/11/13

[clumping platelets]

NFL players releases a public report 4 times a day and the latest has the Bills $19.12 million under with 67 total contracts (plus dead cap from players no longer with team)

Discuss :popcorn:

[tampabay25690]

Cool

[TigerJ]

Unfortunately there aren't really any players out there now worth blowing any cap room on. They just aren't going to make the Bills any better.

[OpIv37]

But we couldn't afford Levitre or any FA's who may have helped...

But Ralph's not cheap....

[BillsFever21]

All the decent proven veterans willing to take cheap deals for one or two years and all we got was Lawson and McKelvin. But hey we have almost 20 million in cap room to spare.

[clumping platelets]

Remember that cap space can be carried over into next cap year :type:

[X-Era]

But we couldn't afford Levitre or any FA's who may have helped...

But Russ's not cheap....Fixed it :D:

[casdhf]

Too bad we couldn't have front loaded a Byrd deal.

[X-Era]

Too bad we couldn't have front loaded a Byrd deal.Front loading 100 pounds when he wants a ton still doesn't get it done.

[justasportsfan]

But we couldn't afford Levitre or any FA's who may have helped...

But Ralph's not cheap....

let's see. We didn't pay for player yet some people argue we overpaid for Wood, Mckelvin , Lawson.

[Thief]

But we couldn't afford Levitre or any FA's who may have helped...

But Ralph's not cheap....Dude, it isn't about affording them. Why strap a future year with an over priced GUARD? The money can be rolled over, rather than way overspent on weak free agents before the new coach even has a chance to adequately identify roster needs.

If they would have spent it you'd be *****ing twice as bad later.

[Night Train]

Too bad we couldn't have front loaded a Byrd deal.

So he he could stand on the sidelines with bad feet, sporting a bigger money belt.

[DesertFox24]

I highly doubt buffalo is going to be active in FA and do anything that resembles what the skins and now the phins are doing.

I think we are going to let some guys walk like Levitre but work to retain certain core young guys.

I know everyone is still mad about Levitre but lets be honest we can draft a guard in the middle rounds and he will be sevicable. Especially if Wood and Glenn turn out to be elite. I am more concerned about RT, I am all for drafting an elite tackle in this years draft.

Two guys we will probably extend towards end of the year if they play well are Carrington and Chandler.

Also this offseason they have to decide whether to use the 5 year option on Dareus which is the average of top 10 DTs salary. I know he is going into year 3 and has a 4 year deal, but teams have to decide after year 3 if they will exercise the option year or not.

Lastly have to assume they are going to want to extend Spiller as well so in actuality 20 million is not that much.

[Saratoga Slim]

Front loading 100 pounds when he wants a ton still doesn't get it done.

Yeah, and there's a point at which front loading becomes a questionable policy as well. For instance, if Byrd wanted 40M over 4 years, and you pay him 25M this year because, hey we have the space, and then he gets a career altering injury (or kills his friend Odin) and you have to release him next year . . . you paid a safety 25M for one year. Alternatively, these guys have a penchant for what-have-you-done-for me-lately. Three years from now when Byrd is looking at his 5m paycheck, he's going to be feeling a little underpaid, despite the fact that he got a big chunk in year 1

[OpIv37]

Dude, it isn't about affording them. Why strap a future year with an over priced GUARD? The money can be rolled over, rather than way overspent on weak free agents before the new coach even has a chance to adequately identify roster needs.

If they would have spent it you'd be *****ing twice as bad later.
Please. $19 million.

I'm not saying they have to spend right up to the cap or go after every big name FA, but don't tell me that there is nothing they could do with that money that would have helped the team.

As far as Levitre- well, Colin Brown got rated the worst player in the entire NFL in week 1. We spent a high draft pick on Levitre just a few years ago. Now, we have replace him with another draft pick or FA, which means NOT using that draft pick or FA money on another position of need (of which we still have many).

You are witnessing the never-ending rebuilding cycle: this team always creates new holes before the current holes are ever addressed.

[justasportsfan]

Please. $19 million.

I'm not saying they have to spend right up to the cap or go after every big name FA, but don't tell me that there is nothing they could do with that money that would have helped the team.

As far as Levitre- well, Colin Brown got rated the worst player in the entire NFL in week 1. We spent a high draft pick on Levitre just a few years ago. Now, we have replace him with another draft pick or FA, which means NOT using that draft pick or FA money on another position of need (of which we still have many).

You are witnessing the never-ending rebuilding cycle: this team always creates new holes before the current holes are ever addressed.

while Levitre would have been better than Brown, the team as a whole did better vs. the PAts than when Levitre was here. If CJ hit those holes, we wouldn't even be talking about Brown.

[stuckincincy]

while Levitre would have been better than Brown, the team as a whole did better vs. the PAts than when Levitre was here. If CJ hit those holes, we wouldn't even be talking about Brown.

There were few holes to hit. Losing Levitre, his pulling, the inanity of not spending peanut $ keeping a decent blocking FB - I recommend grabbing John Connor who CIN dumbly cut.

Spiller can fly. Sure, he can cut corners and go outside. Outside runs are a strung out plays - lotsa defenders show up. Give him an interior seam, well, we saw last season...

[SpikedLemonade]

Remember that cap space can be carried over into next cap year :type:

Well you know there are some restrictions in terms of announcing the rollover in advance and the rollover being a one time thing (the $20M can be used next year but not rolled over again the following year).

[Buddo]

Anyone considered the notion that part of the reason for that much space is the fact that they couldn't get the deal done with Byrd? If Byrd had taken the Bills best offer, then there would be nowhere near that amount available. They aren't necessarily unwilling to spend the $, which seems to be the assumption made whenever anyone talks about how much cap space they have.

Fwiw, Lawson looks like a good pickup, made some plays and showed some leadership on Sunday, imho.

[jdaltroy5]

Anyone considered the notion that part of the reason for that much space is the fact that they couldn't get the deal done with Byrd? If Byrd had taken the Bills best offer, then there would be nowhere near that amount available. They aren't necessarily unwilling to spend the $, which seems to be the assumption made whenever anyone talks about how much cap space they have.

Fwiw, Lawson looks like a good pickup, made some plays and showed some leadership on Sunday, imho.

I believe the 19 million includes Byrd's franchise tag of 6.9 mil.

We'd have about 2.5 million less cap space had we given Byrd what he wanted.

[jimmifli]

They aren't necessarily unwilling to spend the $, which seems to be the assumption made whenever anyone talks about how much cap space they have.

That would be reasonable if we only had a single datapoint. But we've got a decade of spending less than the cap. They even came up with their own name for it if you remember the "cash to cap" years.

[BillsFever21]

Anyone considered the notion that part of the reason for that much space is the fact that they couldn't get the deal done with Byrd? If Byrd had taken the Bills best offer, then there would be nowhere near that amount available. They aren't necessarily unwilling to spend the $, which seems to be the assumption made whenever anyone talks about how much cap space they have.

Fwiw, Lawson looks like a good pickup, made some plays and showed some leadership on Sunday, imho.

This would be different if the Bills had all this cap space this season but it wasn't a theme over almost the past decade. During that time we have consistently been 10+ million under the cap every season with many seasons being 20+ million under. This shows a track record of not being willing to spend the money to keep or bring in good players over a long period of time. It's not like this is a current trend the past couple years.

When a team goes that long with only spending close to the cap for 2 or 3 seasons then you can't use this as a valid excuse for them being cheap. Every year we sit there with 10's of million of dollars under the cap while we continue to let our good players leave or not bring in any free agents that could've helped. This is a trend and not an isolated season or two that we're talking about.

And it's not only with the players but it's also with the front office and coaching staff. We're always hiring a cheap scrub to run the team and then hire a cheap HC to coach the team. Then it trickles down to the coordinators and assistant coaches. Instead of bringing in good coordinators we continue to bring in inexperienced guys or previous failures on the cheap. Time like when we promote unqualified people like Turk Shonert and Alex Van Pelt to be our offensive coordinators. There are many coordinators that have made more then our HC's over the past decade. This also shows a trend of not wanting to spend the money especially when there isn't a salary cap on the coaching staff. That's one area where a team that is willing to spend money can gain an upper hand on the opposition.

This is why we're ALWAYS in rebuilding mode instead of building a team up. We keep or sign the mid level players that won't cost that much but almost anyone who wants a long-term deal for top 5-10 money at their position we either trade or let them walk in free agency. That leaves us continuing to draft replacements and creating new holes instead of using our draft picks to fill in the holes we already had. This isn't how you build a winner in the short-term or the long-term and is why we're always treading water.

[BillsFever21]

That would be reasonable if we only had a single datapoint. But we've got a decade of spending less than the cap. They even came up with their own name for it if you remember the "cash to cap" years.

I had the same comeback and sentiments but didn't read through the rest of the thread. The cash to crap accounting was just a way for them to spend less money and make their cap number look better. Instead or spreading out the bonuses over the term of the contract they added the bonus in the cap for the year they signed the player. Teams can spend more then the cap this way but the Bills weren't even willing to spend to the cap. Yet too many apologist still defend the team as not being cheap for the past decade.

[BillsFever21]

And before some of you name off a short list of random drafted players and free agents that we did give money too that won't work either. You have to sign some guys or you would be 30-40 million under the cap which would really look bad. In some years we would've been close to that if not for their cash to cap accounting.

Most of the time when we have signed any free agents or kept our own we had other higher priced players coming off the books. All they basically did was use the money they saved from one or two guys leaving and use that money to sign somebody else. It fooled enough fans into saying it was proof that we weren't cheap when it reality it was around a net zero when it was all said and done. We still didn't spend any "extra" money and only shifted money around from expiring contracts or guys that were released.

[jimmifli]

I had the same comeback and sentiments but didn't read through the rest of the thread. The cash to crap accounting was just a way for them to spend less money and make their cap number look better. Instead or spreading out the bonuses over the term of the contract they added the bonus in the cap for the year they signed the player. Teams can spend more then the cap this way but the Bills weren't even willing to spend to the cap. Yet too many apologist still defend the team as not being cheap for the past decade.

At this point it's obvious that the Bills have a budget that is less than the cap and the front office does the best it can to field a good team under those constraints.

They don't spend money on coaches, coordinators or GMS. And given those constraints, it really stacks the deck against us.

It means the Bills are trying to win with inexperienced (or previously proven failed) coaches, inexperienced or previously failed coordinators AND giving them an inferior talent pool. Now it's possible, we get lucky and our young coach is good, AND his OC & DC are both good, AND we manage to get an above average level of talent collect for $20 million less than other teams spend.

But that requires so many things to go right it's tough to keep hoping.

[Saratoga Slim]

At this point it's obvious that the Bills have a budget that is less than the cap and the front office does the best it can to field a good team under those constraints.

They don't spend money on coaches, coordinators or GMS. And given those constraints, it really stacks the deck against us.

It means the Bills are trying to win with inexperienced (or previously proven failed) coaches, inexperienced or previously failed coordinators AND giving them an inferior talent pool. Now it's possible, we get lucky and our young coach is good, AND his OC & DC are both good, AND we manage to get an above average level of talent collect for $20 million less than other teams spend.

But that requires so many things to go right it's tough to keep hoping.

It's instructive to remember that the Bills aren't banking massive profits. In 2012 they netted $12.5M. That's a reasonable chunk, but in the bottom five of the league, and in the grand scheme of corporate profits it's kinda small for a business worth $800M. So when people say the Bills are cheap....that's not really fair. They're spending pretty reasonably given their means. Could we have put that 12.5M to use? Sure. But no owner is going to run an Nfl franchise as a non-profit.

[swiper]

Please. $19 million.

I'm not saying they have to spend right up to the cap or go after every big name FA, but don't tell me that there is nothing they could do with that money that would have helped the team.

As far as Levitre- well, Colin Brown got rated the worst player in the entire NFL in week 1. We spent a high draft pick on Levitre just a few years ago. Now, we have replace him with another draft pick or FA, which means NOT using that draft pick or FA money on another position of need (of which we still have many).

You are witnessing the never-ending rebuilding cycle: this team always creates new holes before the current holes are ever addressed.

I keep trying to tell everyone. The cap is just a number to Ralph. And not his number. He has his own number. So the cap number to him is meaningless. If you are going to go out and only win 4 games, then why do it with $85 million dollars when you can do it just as well spending only $65 million.

[stuckincincy]

I keep trying to tell everyone. The cap is just a number to Ralph. And not his number. He has his own number. So the cap number to him is meaningless. If you are going to go out and only win 4 games, then why do it with $85 million dollars when you can do it just as well spending only $65 million.

Alternatively, kick up the cheap cost of seats at RWS. $30/seat or so ought to garner that 20 mil.

http://www.razorgator.com/blog/2013/04/23/nfl-tickets-2013/

[Turf]

That being the case we should have kept Levitre. Instead we signed a DB that can't play. We need to commit to keep our own players. Had we signed both these guys from the beginning we'd still have cap space and not be here.

[BillsFever21]

It's instructive to remember that the Bills aren't banking massive profits. In 2012 they netted $12.5M. That's a reasonable chunk, but in the bottom five of the league, and in the grand scheme of corporate profits it's kinda small for a business worth $800M. So when people say the Bills are cheap....that's not really fair. They're spending pretty reasonably given their means. Could we have put that 12.5M to use? Sure. But no owner is going to run an Nfl franchise as a non-profit.

The profits can change on a yearly basis depending on what kind of bonus and money up front that you paid to players. In 2011 the Bills ranked in the Top 10 in profits and made over 40 million dollars. Their profit was probably less in 2012 because they gave Williams a huge contract along with signing Stevie Johnson and any bonus money given to Fitzpatrick with his horrible contract. They will probably make much more then that in 2013 since we didn't really spend much money and sit 20 million under the cap.

Also I'm not sure if these numbers are including any revenue sharing or if it's just their profits before the money is shared. If that was the case then the Bills profits would rise and the bigger market teams would decrease some.

The Bills also won't sell the naming rights to their stadium as other teams do. If they did that would bring in millions more a year in profits that could be used to spend on the team.

http://www.wgrz.com/news/article/134157/37/Forbes-Bills-Among-NFLs-Most-Profitable-Teams


BUFFALO, N.Y. - While some new numbers suggest the Bills will take the field this season spending far less than many of their competitors, the team now ranks among the top of the league when it comes to profits.

According to a Forbes Magazine analysis (http://www.forbes.com/lists/2011/30/nfl-valuations-11_land.html), the Bills are among the league's 10 most profitable teams. The data is part of the magazine's annual valuations of all NFL Franchises. Forbes ranks the Bills ninth, with an annual operating income of $40.9 million (that's after they pay the players). And it's more than the Philadelphia Eagles, Pittsburgh Steelers, and New York Jets each make.
It's also more than triple what the Miami Dolphins or Super Bowl Champion Greenhttp://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/icon1.png (http://www.wgrz.com/news/article/134157/37/Forbes-Bills-Among-NFLs-Most-Profitable-Teams#) Bay Packers take away.
How do the Bills do it?
According to Forbes Magazine, Buffalo, and other small market teams, drivehttp://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/icon1.png (http://www.wgrz.com/news/article/134157/37/Forbes-Bills-Among-NFLs-Most-Profitable-Teams#) up profits by driving down their payroll.

[OpIv37]

It's instructive to remember that the Bills aren't banking massive profits. In 2012 they netted $12.5M. That's a reasonable chunk, but in the bottom five of the league, and in the grand scheme of corporate profits it's kinda small for a business worth $800M. So when people say the Bills are cheap....that's not really fair. They're spending pretty reasonably given their means. Could we have put that 12.5M to use? Sure. But no owner is going to run an Nfl franchise as a non-profit.
Follow up questions:

1. Why is the profit only $12.5 million?
2. People (myself included) give Brandon credit for being good at marketing. But if that's true, see #1.
3. Brandon clearly isn't a good football mind. The profits suggest he isn't good at marketing either. So, why exactly does he still have a job?

[SpikedLemonade]

It's instructive to remember that the Bills aren't banking massive profits. In 2012 they netted $12.5M. That's a reasonable chunk, but in the bottom five of the league, and in the grand scheme of corporate profits it's kinda small for a business worth $800M. So when people say the Bills are cheap....that's not really fair. They're spending pretty reasonably given their means. Could we have put that 12.5M to use? Sure. But no owner is going to run an Nfl franchise as a non-profit.

Profit reporting can be easily manipulated.

How does the profit of Buffalo based businesses compare to the profit of businesses located in the other 31 NFL cities?

[SpikedLemonade]

Alternatively, kick up the cheap cost of seats at RWS. $30/seat or so ought to garner that 20 mil.

http://www.razorgator.com/blog/2013/04/23/nfl-tickets-2013/


It will no longer be a place for drunks to go on a Sunday morning.

[BillsFever21]

The Bills also made over 28 million dollars in 2010 and were around the top half of the league. So basically over the past few years we have an average profit of 27 million dollars a year. Not too shabby at all for a losing team in a small market.


28 Buffalo Bills $799 million, -12%, $228 million, $28.2 million

http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/venturebiz/content/falling-revenues-tampa-bay-bucs-slip-out-ranks-elite-nfl-franchises

[The Popcorn]

Anyone considered the notion that part of the reason for that much space is the fact that they couldn't get the deal done with Byrd? If Byrd had taken the Bills best offer, then there would be nowhere near that amount available. They aren't necessarily unwilling to spend the $, which seems to be the assumption made whenever anyone talks about how much cap space they have.

Fwiw, Lawson looks like a good pickup, made some plays and showed some leadership on Sunday, imho.

Lawson looks like a steal when you look at the Bills LBs as a whole.

[X-Era]

Sportrac has us at 19.3 as well.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/cap-hit/