NFL Cap set at 255.4 million for 2024. 13 million more than most expected.
NFL Cap set at 255.4 million for 2024. 13 million more than most expected.
Some of these numbnuts owners are going to go crazy. I'm wondering if the Jest owner will try to sign a couple big names for the offensive line.
Guter needs to call Joe Douglass and remind him he can have a former pro-bowl left tackle who happens to be Aaron Rodgers's best friend for a fourth-round pick.
"The Devine era is actually worse than you remember if you go back and look at it."
KYPack
Bak, Cletidus and the Jesters’ 2nd from the Butte trade for Sauce. Make it happen!Originally Posted by Fritz
I'm not going to stop the wheel. I'm going to break the wheel.
It's a good thing none of us are the Packers' GM, except maybe Harv. But it's an ESPECIALLY good thing that you're not.
"The Devine era is actually worse than you remember if you go back and look at it."
KYPack
Not bad from the Packers point of view, but very doubtful the Jets would do it.
What could be more GOOD and NORMAL and AMERICAN than Packer Football?
https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2...-gary-contract
From a cash perspective, Gary’s situation has not changed in 2024. He will still be due the original $9 million this year that he was slated to be owed when he signed his extension in 2023. The only difference is that the 2025-2027 Packers will also be paying a share of Gary’s 2024 effort.
Actually, it could, and likely does mean more money for Gary. He got $6.2 million 19 days earlier than he otherwise would have. Deposits into my "cash holding" account of my investment account earn 4.95% interest (if held a minimum of 5 days). Assuming Gary has something similar. just holding that $6.2 million for 19 days would yield around $15,000.
Or he could go to FL 19 days early and buy has year's worth of pot and get caught with it in the back of his pickup like Letroy Guion.
But Rodgers leads the league in frumpy expressions and negative body language on the sideline, which makes him, like Josh Allen, a unique double threat.
-Tim Harmston
Tex - not all bonuses are the same. A roster bonus is different from signing bonus. it's all in the timing.
signing bonus is at signing the contract, hence immediately payable. The roster bonus is dependent on being on the roster on date X.
So...you're saying the signing bonus is paid out when you sign the contract and the roster bonus is paid out if you're on the roster at a stipulated date?
Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget your perfect offering
There is a crack, a crack in everything
That's how the light gets in - Leonard Cohen
LOL Captain Obvious McMansplainer hacked my account.
Sometimes that's what it takes for it to be understood, appraently.
Yes but (on the bonus thing), in both cases, once they're paid, there's no getting them back or undoing them - short of something like fraud or something else really weird.
What could be more GOOD and NORMAL and AMERICAN than Packer Football?
correct
Yes. The difference is the roster bonus hits all in the year it's paid, so you can cut or trade the player with no acceleration of cap into that year. When you push cap into future years using signing bonuses, you end up in situations where cutting or trading a player accelerates so much cap it's not possible to cut or trade the player. You then might have to carry a worthless player on your roster for one or more years paying significantly more than if you had not pushed so much cap into future years.
So for a simplistic financial conservative like me, roster bonus = good because you're not living on credit, and signing bonuses pushed ahead = bad because then in 2026 you're paying for something that you bought in 2022 that you may not even have any more.
Simplistic, I know. But you helped me understand the concepts, so thank you.
"The Devine era is actually worse than you remember if you go back and look at it."
KYPack
Neither is good or bad. You just have different consequences. Contrary to some arguments, it's not possible to cook the cap and never have consequences.
True, but in the short term, there is benefit - just like buying a house or car to use your credit analogy. Is it a good thing to have to walk or ride a bicycle until you can pay cash for a car?
And consequences? Yes, but ...... You can count on the cap going up, which enables if not cooking it per se, pushing things on down the road over and over and over, and benefiting every step of the way. The consequence might be not being able to afford quite as much as some other team for a free agent, but going overboard like that might be overpaying and not wise anyway. The successful teams generally push the cap to near the limit and are generally glad they did.
What could be more GOOD and NORMAL and AMERICAN than Packer Football?
Tex, were you one of those guys who was juggling four or five women at a time??
"The Devine era is actually worse than you remember if you go back and look at it."
KYPack
Thank god we never did that!!!
I don't hold Grudges. It's counterproductive.
The original post assumes the players all remain healthy and a playing at an appropriate level. I stole a bit from Darrell Royal** but three things can happen when signing a player to a multiyear contract and two of them are bad; the player can meet/exceed expectations, fail to play to the level of the contract, or suffer an injury (injuries) that make the contract a cap burden. The third of these is especially detrimental as a team then needs to spend additional money for a replacement player. Most teams try to structure contracts to have an out after year two and the option to kick money into future years by using roster bonuses that can be converted to a signing bonus and divided out over the remaining years of a contract.
** Darrell Royal (60s Texas Longhorns coach) " I’ve always felt that three things can happen to you whenever you throw the football, and two of them are bad. You can catch the ball, you can throw it incomplete, or have it intercepted."
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote