Salary Cap for Each NFL Team & Cash to Cap Crap

[Mike]

Bills: $31M under the Cap
- we have opportunity to sign some good FAs
- have to completely abandon 'Cash to Cap' philosophy after considering the following facts:

Top Teams in great Cap situations
Green Bay: 33.1M
Denver: $29.4M
Indianapolis: 45.2M
Seattle: 25.6M
Cincinnati: 40.8M

* Having a Top QB (Manning/Rogers) with a recent contract doesn't mean that your Cap should go to ****! How is it that teams Like Denver & GB can have top talent & pay their QBs 20M/yr and still have better Cap than the Bills?

Poor Teams with Top Cap Space
Jags: 68.2M
Browns: 53.7M
NYG: 24.2M
NYJ: 51.4M
Raiders: 55.4M
Titans: 44.4M
- Each of these teams had made it to playoffs in past 15 years; however their Cap is far more reflective of their winning than our.


http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2...for-every-team

[Night Train]

How many players under contract for each team as of now ? They may be that far under because they have to fill 20 roster spots or more. Deceiving rant.

I look at Denver and they have a bunch of expiring contracts and FA's. Doesn't leave a big roster, currently.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/denver-broncos/

You should check out the other teams before reading some article and shooting from the hip.

[streetkings01]

Green Bay cap situation is the way it is because they rarely sign free agents and they replace guys with rookies. If Rodgers were to miss a season thats a 3-5 team at best much like Indy if Luck were to go down.

[YardRat]

I don't know why some have such issue with cash-to-cap, one can't run a business continually pumping funds into the revenue side of the ledger without eventually going broke, I don't care how many billions they sport in their bank account.

[The Jokeman]

I don't know why some have such issue with cash-to-cap, one can't run a business continually pumping funds into the revenue side of the ledger without eventually going broke, I don't care how many billions they sport in their bank account.

The issue I have with the cash to cap philosophy is it means we're never maximizing our funds. I mean what benefit do the Bills have leaving $18m in their bank when the players they have on the field aren't good enough. Pony up that extra cash and bring in a better player. I mean as good as Corey Graham was last year just imagine how much better our D would have been with Aqib Talib last season? This isn't a knock on Graham as think he was a great addition last year but think we'd be that much better with Talib.

[YardRat]

The issue I have with the cash to cap philosophy is it means we're never maximizing our funds. I mean what benefit do the Bills have leaving $18m in their bank when the players they have on the field aren't good enough. Pony up that extra cash and bring in a better player. I mean as good as Corey Graham was last year just imagine how much better our D would have been with Aqib Talib last season? This isn't a knock on Graham as think he was a great addition last year but think we'd be that much better with Talib.

Well, that's the problem with the perception, they're not leaving $18mil in their bank, they're leaving $18mil in an accounting practice. Real money vs 'fake' numbers.

[The Jokeman]

Well, that's the problem with the perception, they're not leaving $18mil in their bank, they're leaving $18mil in an accounting practice. Real money vs 'fake' numbers.

I get the reason to be a cash to cap from a business model but from a football/sport model it's not as wise. That's all I am saying.

[Meathead]

cash to cap bad deferred liabilities good terry iz cheap

[Meathead]

me so done with team

[Mike]

I don't know why some have such issue with cash-to-cap, one can't run a business continually pumping funds into the revenue side of the ledger without eventually going broke, I don't care how many billions they sport in their bank account.

YardRat,
Cash to cap is simply a different way of accounting; the difference being on when/how bonuses are paid out. Just like any method, if abused can lead to financially negative consequences.

[Mike]

How many players under contract for each team as of now ? They may be that far under because they have to fill 20 roster spots or more. Deceiving rant.

I look at Denver and they have a bunch of expiring contracts and FA's. Doesn't leave a big roster, currently.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/denver-broncos/

You should check out the other teams before reading some article and shooting from the hip.

Everyteam has pending FAs, Nevertheless they still have $30M to sign some of those players!!!
Also look at that roster & who they have added in the past few years: Manning, Talib, Ware, Sanders, Wes W, etc...
They have been signing Top FA & future HOF players & they are $30M under the Cap!

Last but not least, my point is valid no matter how we dice it up. Just look at GB!

[Mike]

Green Bay cap situation is the way it is because they rarely sign free agents and they replace guys with rookies. If Rodgers were to miss a season thats a 3-5 team at best much like Indy if Luck were to go down.

GB is loaded! They sent 5 players to Pro Bowl last year! And signed players like J. Peppers in FA!

[better days]

YardRat,
Cash to cap is simply a different way of accounting; the difference being on when/how bonuses are paid out. Just like any method, if abused can lead to financially negative consequences.

Bonuses are all paid out in the same manor, over the life of the contract.

That is why if a team wants to gain cap space, they convert salary into a bonus.

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Good teams have cap space this year, but they also have a number of expensive fas to sign. Demaryus Thomas, Randall Cobb, Terrance Knighton, etc. And Indy and Seattle specifically have 9 figure qb contracts to give out in the next few seasons.

[YardRat]

YardRat,
Cash to cap is simply a different way of accounting; the difference being on when/how bonuses are paid out. Just like any method, if abused can lead to financially negative consequences.

Bonuses are all paid out in the same manor, over the life of the contract.

That is why if a team wants to gain cap space, they convert salary into a bonus.

I'm well aware of that Mike, and already addressed it, but the parts in bold from both you and better days is incorrect.

Signing bonuses are paid in full, up front, when the ink is dried...they are not paid out in installments unless the language in the contract specifically states that, and those are usually referred to as something else (roster bonus, workout bonus, etc), most of the time not subject to pro-ration like signing bonuses (the only time a reporting bonus is counted as a signing bonus is if the contract is signed after the beginning of training camp, and the only time a roster bonus is considered a signing bonus is if it is signed after the last preseason game). That's the difference between cap accounting and cash to cap accounting. In the NFL cap world, a $10mil signing bonus on a 5 year contract counts $2mil against cap accounting for each of five years, but the reality is the player gets the full amount in one payment. In the cash to cap world, the team counts the full $10mil against the cap internally.

Also, teams convert salary into bonuses because it gives them accounting relief for cap purposes, but the money is still up front, one time. Win-win because the team can take advantage of an accounting procedure (if they are not running under a cash-to-cap model) and the player gets his money immediately in the form of a bonus instead of having to wait for next year's salary (and maybe subsequent years) to kick in.

Cash to cap is actually a much more conservative model with less risk, because it balances 'real dollar' revenues with 'real dollar' expenses. The only way a team like Buffalo (low revenues) can sustain financial viability without the owner annually pumping money into the franchise (to pay signing bonuses) from his personal wealth is to operate under cash to cap. Buffalo may appear to have been $18mil 'under the cap' in the past (and for NFL accounting purposes they were) but in real dollars/real time that $18mil was spent.

[Mr. Pink]

Considering the television contract pays for every teams salary cap, doing anything but spending to near the cap is quite, well, pathetic.

[Skooby]

Considering the television contract pays for every teams salary cap, doing anything but spending to near the cap is quite, well, pathetic.

I think we make a few big splashes this FA period, getting pretty close to the cap.

[SpikedLemonade]

Considering the television contract pays for every teams salary cap, doing anything but spending to near the cap is quite, well, pathetic.

Plus the cap floor is on a 4 year period and 2016 is the end of the first period.

This is the year to spend rather than next year when teams trying to reach the floor may be throwing money around.

[swiper]

And the NFL is considering expanding the rosters by 2 players.

[Downinfloflo]

* Having a Top QB (Manning/Rogers) with a recent contract doesn't mean that your Cap should go to ****! How is it that teams Like Denver & GB can have top talent & pay their QBs 20M/yr and still have better Cap than the Bills?


http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2...for-every-team

Superior scouting department..