So who is still in cap trouble? Anyone?

[Jeff1220]

I know the Skins, Fins, Raiders, and a few others were in really bad shape in comparison to the original $94.5 or whatever cap. With the new deal, are they still in at least a little bit of trouble? Does anyone still need to cut significant cap weight? A week or so ago there was a thread about teams in worst cap shape and those in the best cap shape, with dollar amouont above/below. Is there an updated version of that?

[ICE74129]

Re: So who is still in cap trouble? Anyone?

An extra 7.5 mil doesn't help most teams. It does help teams like the Bills have that little extra to sign two more guys.

[clumping platelets]

Re: So who is still in cap trouble? Anyone?

Basically...no one really.

This really helps the Skins and to a lesser degree the Raiders, Fins, Jets, and any other team that was close to the cap...now their cuts or restructurings can create cap space to address needs instead of just cap compliance

[SpanishBill]

Re: So who is still in cap trouble? Anyone?

Just a Q:

When a player accepts to restructure his contract, does that always imply that he's accepting a pay cut?

I'm asking this because I read that the Redskins had a bunch of veterans about to restructure their contracts to get under the cap. But if the cap is higher now, those same players could say no to the restructuring if it means a pay cut, thus eating part of those extra 7,5 millions of cap the teams got after the new CBA... or am I absolutely wrong?

[Stewie]

Re: So who is still in cap trouble? Anyone?

Just a Q:

When a player accepts to restructure his contract, does that always imply that he's accepting a pay cut?

I'm asking this because I read that the Redskins had a bunch of veterans about to restructure their contracts to get under the cap. But if the cap is higher now, those same players could say no to the restructuring if it means a pay cut, thus eating part of those extra 7,5 millions of cap the teams got after the new CBA... or am I absolutely wrong?

Not necessarily a paycut... A player may take future salary and accept it as a signing bonus, to help his team manage the cap. For instance, if player x has 3 million in salary coming to him this year and next, he might restructure and take 2.5 million as a bonus, a 500k salary this year, and a 3 million salary next year. Doesn't change the total dollars, but it will lower this years cap number from 3 million to something like 1.75 or so.

[SpanishBill]

Re: So who is still in cap trouble? Anyone?

Not necessarily a paycut... A player may take future salary and accept it as a signing bonus, to help his team manage the cap. For instance, if player x has 3 million in salary coming to him this year and next, he might restructure and take 2.5 million as a bonus, a 500k salary this year, and a 3 million salary next year. Doesn't change the total dollars, but it will lower this years cap number from 3 million to something like 1.75 or so.

Many thanx, Paul. Appreciate your help

[SquishDaFish]

Re: So who is still in cap trouble? Anyone?

I was one that was wanting to see the skins have to cut half their team and play a bunch of rookies LMAO

[clumping platelets]

Re: So who is still in cap trouble? Anyone?

according to nfl network.....4 teams are still over the cap....but not by much...all teams will be players in FA

[Spiderweb]

Re: So who is still in cap trouble? Anyone?

Yes, the
new" cap does help most teams. Those who had space, got more space, yet those who also were begging for a higher cap number got it too, which we go a long way in giving them flexibility in keeping players (restructuring will be much easier) so a purge (Redskins, etc) may not happen and likely won't.

Will this help the Bills? I believe it hurts them in FA, in that more teams will be able to be players. At this time, the Bills aren't exactly the team of choice either for most FA's, I would suspect..

[TigerJ]

Re: So who is still in cap trouble? Anyone?

Just a Q:

When a player accepts to restructure his contract, does that always imply that he's accepting a pay cut?

I'm asking this because I read that the Redskins had a bunch of veterans about to restructure their contracts to get under the cap. But if the cap is higher now, those same players could say no to the restructuring if it means a pay cut, thus eating part of those extra 7,5 millions of cap the teams got after the new CBA... or am I absolutely wrong?

Most restructuring consists of converting current salary into signing bonus, sometimes including an extension. Players often opt for it because salaries are not normally guaranteed, while signing bonuses are for all practical purposes (unless you're Ricky Williams and you try to stiff a team by walking out on a long term deal that has a huge signing bonus). Teams will resort to restructuring because it provides current cap relief. Bonuses are prorated for cap purposes equally over each year remaining on a contract. It can be a poison pill though, because contracts may still be back loaded. Converting salary to bonus may only postpone cap troubles and make the eventual pay back much more painful (cap hell). If a player's contract is extended and a couple years later he no longer fits what the team needs it can be especially painful because then all the remaining prorated bonus bounts against the cap all at once (or equally over two years if the player is cut after June 1).

[SpanishBill]

Re: So who is still in cap trouble? Anyone?

Most restructuring consists of converting current salary into signing bonus, sometimes including an extension. Players often opt for it because salaries are not normally guaranteed, while signing bonuses are for all practical purposes (unless you're Ricky Williams and you try to stiff a team by walking out on a long term deal that has a huge signing bonus). Teams will resort to restructuring because it provides current cap relief. Bonuses are prorated for cap purposes equally over each year remaining on a contract. It can be a poison pill though, because contracts may still be back loaded. Converting salary to bonus may only postpone cap troubles and make the eventual pay back much more painful (cap hell). If a player's contract is extended and a couple years later he no longer fits what the team needs it can be especially painful because then all the remaining prorated bonus bounts against the cap all at once (or equally over two years if the player is cut after June 1).

Man I was about to vote "no" just because at first I really felt like Ralph Wilson... but only at first. After reading your post a couple of times I'm getting a grasp of it. It really is a confusing system IMHO, or maybe I am as slow as Ralphy... which really worries me 'cause I don't even have half his age

BTW, whenever you cut a player, he only gets the signing bonus money (besides that year's salary) of the contract?

[FlyingDutchman]

Re: So who is still in cap trouble? Anyone?

hey clump, do you know whats goin on with the redskins situation?