Packers 2009 Salary Cap

[Patler]

Red started a thread, "Calling Patler" asking about the 2009 salary cap. I did a little research (not a lot) and decided to start a thread to discuss what I came up with. Please remember that there could be big swings I am unaware of. For example, in the back of my mind I have a recollection that Woodson has some very pricey years toward the end of his contract. I don't think they are at that point yet, but there could be some other veterans who are. The following is just a very general review:

The following 2008 cap $ (millions) come off the books:
7.7 - KGB
6.3 - Tauscher
2.0 - Franks
1.5 - Cole
1.4 - Favre
0.9 - Manual
2.0 - Misc. dead money from numerous players, (Wynn, Swain, White, Clowney, etc.)
3.5 - - expiring contracts of players like Bush, Bigby, Martin, etc.

$25 million or so from those sources.

Beyond that, Rodgers cap value in 2009 is reported to be $9.6 million, down from $13.9 million in 2008, so that will increase the available cap room by $4.3 million or so.

Looks like Grant will earn the low incentive in his contract for sure (1000 yards) and could get the big one for 1250 yards. He needs 270 yards in his last three games for that. His cap cost in 2009 will be maybe only a little less, and maybe a little more than in 2008.

The Packers probably have about $7 million left in 2008 (after signing Malone, Havner, Porter, etc.) that could get pushed into 2009 if they don't sign anyone between now and the end of the season.

On the "negative" side, they already have about $2 million in dead money against the 2009 cap:
1.6 - KGB
0.2 - Hodge
0.2 - miscellaneous others

Without considering any change in the cap itself, any increases or decreases in the cap hits for other players, and without the tenders required for any RFAs they may have, and without any signings of the players whose contracts expire, it looks like the Packers could easily have $30-35 million in cap space at the start of 2009.

They have a few expiring contracts to deal with after 2008, but 2009 will be more critical in that regard. This year they seem to have Tauscher, Cole, Bigby, Montgomery, Hunter, Martin, Bush, Humphrey and a couple others.

[retailguy]

30-35 million? That's it? Crap. That's not enough to "play" in the free agent market. Maybe in a couple more years... yeah. That's it. <sigh>

Thanks Patler. Appreciate all the effort (even if it wasn't "much" by your standards). :wink:

[red]

you left the cap at what it is this year, correct?

it should go up, what? 5 to 10 million again this year

so we should have around 40 million to play with

wow

[LL2]

The need to re-sign Kampy to a long term deal and maybe give him the KGB money at around 8 mil per yr. Next sign Jennings to a 7 or 8 year deal as he is the Pack’s future at WR. Then re-sign Tauscher to a modest deal. I don’t think he can get a big contract, but I could be wrong. I can’t see him wanting to end his career anywhere else. TT needs to make a big push in FA for once…and maybe get Haynesworth. TT also needs to hit gold with the next 1st rd and 2 (hopefully) 2nd rd picks. This team isn’t that far from being a contender. Yes their performance has sucked, but they lost 5 games by 4 points or less. They could easily be 8-5. I’m glad for once that MM got pissed on the field and threw his headset. He needs to right this ship.

[Patler]

you left the cap at what it is this year, correct?

it should go up, what? 5 to 10 million again this year

so we should have around 40 million to play with

wow

Early estimates were $7 million. I factored in nothing for that.

There are a bunch, including Kampman, Jennings, Collins, Spitz, Colledge, Pickett, Jolly, Moll, Blackmon that expire after 2009. Some of those will not be cheap. Can they even sign those guys early, with the possibility of an uncapped year in the future?

Interesting times.

[cpk1994]

you left the cap at what it is this year, correct?

it should go up, what? 5 to 10 million again this year

so we should have around 40 million to play with

wow

Early estimates were $7 million. I factored in nothing for that.

There are a bunch, including Kampman, Jennings, Collins, Spitz, Colledge, Pickett, Jolly, Moll, Blackmon that expire after 2009. Some of those will not be cheap. Can they even sign those guys early, with the possibility of an uncapped year in the future?

Interesting times.Kampman Jennings and Collins should be priorities, with Colledge,Spitz and Pickett on the second tier. Jolly and Moll you probably don't wnat to make a huge investment in yet. Wait on Blackmon too.

[bobblehead]

I do have to admit I enjoy the TT having cap space and debating who to renew better than shermy days of no space and debating who we can't afford to renew.

I think we resign Tauscher to a fair deal (good guy, unfair injury). Bigby, Cole will probably get Poppinga type deals. Humphrey and Martin will get small contracts (above minimum). I think Hunter, Montgomery, Bush will all be offered minimum and aren't likely to make it out of camp next year. These guys haven't devoped into NFL players, time to try some others.

In '09 (probably to be renewed early to middle of next season) we will probaby give Jennings, Kampman and Collins pretty big deals. College, Spitz and Pickett getting slightly better than the poppinga deal. Jolly, Moll, and Blackman will write their contracts with their play next year.

I like these threads, takes my mind off of how completely shitty our defense has been looking.

[Patler]

I think we resign Tauscher to a fair deal (good guy, unfair injury). Bigby, Cole will probably get Poppinga type deals. Humphrey and Martin will get small contracts (above minimum). I think Hunter, Montgomery, Bush will all be offered minimum and aren't likely to make it out of camp next year. These guys haven't devoped into NFL players, time to try some others.


I agree with all of those, depending on what you think is fair for Tauscher. The issues with Tauscher will be the severity of the injury, and how much they think he slipped this year. If he is looking at a significant knee surgery this late in the season, he might not be ready for the start of next season anyway, so how much do you offer him in a contract? If he were younger, with years ahead of him, it would be different. But if he is not in their plans to start the 2009 season, its a tough situation. If he won't be ready for 2009, what use do they really have for him? Maybe its not that bad.

I agree, Hunter, Montgomery, Bush might be re-signed for near minimum deals to fill out the training camp roster, but the team needs to be looking for replacements for all of them. I would throw Humphrey into that group too.

Bigby and Cole could be looking at modest contracts, as you said. Blackmon and Tramon Williams somewhat less, but perhaps more than the minimum.



In '09 (probably to be renewed early to middle of next season) we will probaby give Jennings, Kampman and Collins pretty big deals. College, Spitz and Pickett getting slightly better than the poppinga deal. Jolly, Moll, and Blackman will write their contracts with their play next year.


If you were the agent of a player who has a contract expiring at the end of '09, and there is the possibility of 2010 being uncapped, would you even discuss a new contract during 2009? Now there might be some that will because the service needed to be a UFA will increase, but others might be leaving a lot of money on the table if they re-sign during 2009.

As I said before...interesting times for the NFL.

[cpk1994]

If you were the agent of a player who has a contract expiring at the end of '09, and there is the possibility of 2010 being uncapped, would you even discuss a new contract during 2009? Now there might be some that will because the service needed to be a UFA will increase, but others might be leaving a lot of money on the table if they re-sign during 2009.

As I said before...interesting times for the NFL.Also remember there will still be restrictions on teams for that uncapped year. IF a player thinks that 2010 is going to be a windfall for them, they will be in for a rude awakening.

[Patler]

Also remember there will still be restrictions on teams for that uncapped year. IF a player thinks that 2010 is going to be a windfall for them, they will be in for a rude awakening.

But generally, the restrictions would be less than the restrictions with a salary cap. Generally, there should be more freedom to spend money, and for some owners that will mean they will spend whatever it takes to get a player they want. For a specific player there might be advantages in signing in 2009, but for many it will be worth it to roll the dice and see what 2010 might bring. Regardless, I do not expect to see agents being very agreeable to long term renewals.

Personally, I think something will get done on the CBA before 2010, and the NFL will not see an uncapped year.

[cpk1994]

Also remember there will still be restrictions on teams for that uncapped year. IF a player thinks that 2010 is going to be a windfall for them, they will be in for a rude awakening.

But generally, the restrictions would be less than the restrictions with a salary cap. Generally, there should be more freedom to spend money, and for some owners that will mean they will spend whatever it takes to get a player they want. For a specific player there might be advantages in signing in 2009, but for many it will be worth it to roll the dice and see what 2010 might bring. Regardless, I do not expect to see agents being very agreeable to long term renewals.

Personally, I think something will get done on the CBA before 2010, and the NFL will not see an uncapped year.BUt if they spend what they want and the cap is put back in place the owners have screwed themselves. I think in the event of an uncapped year, owners outside of Jerry Jones and Dan Snyder aren't going to be throwing money around. Agents are only fooling themselves if they think they are going to get a big windfall. I agree with you that something will get done on the CBA. Otherwise both the players and owners will have killed their golden goose.

[pack4to84]

Three tags instead of one

Currently, a team can put either a franchise tag (average of the top five salaries at his position) or a transition tag (average of the top ten salaries at his position) on any one player on the club to protect the team from losing the unrestricted free agent. If the NFL gets to an uncapped year in 2010 and 2011, teams will have use of one franchise tag and two transition tags. So not only would none of the young players with less than six years of service be free, but now the top three players who are eligible for free agency on a roster can be protected.

If this situation existed in 2008, a team like Pittsburgh -- which used a transition tag to retain OT Max Starks -- could have also tagged Alan Faneca with either a transition or franchise tag if it so desired. If every team in the league used one or two tags, not even the three they would possess, it could take another 40 quality free agents off the market.

There is speculation teams would not overuse this trigger because so many of their quality younger players would not be free to depart.

Playoff restrictions

If the league gets to the point of an uncapped year, people are afraid that deep-pocket owners such as Jerry Jones and Daniel Snyder will come in and buy a championship. If the aggressive owners already have playoff teams, there will be restrictions on how much money they can spend. The formula may slide with the number of players they lose in free agency, but the plan is designed to not let teams buy a championship. The truth is, the first two triggers aren't going to leave too many players available to acquire anyway.

Time will tell, but I think the NFL and the NFLPA will negotiate a new CBA before we ever get to 2010. I also believe a number of the players looking at the prospect of 2010 and 2011 being uncapped and preventing them from being free agents will try to sign long-term extensions with their teams in the near future.

And don't think all the trigger points favor the clubs, because there are other things -- like the end of the NFL draft in 2011 -- which the league doesn't necessarily want to see. And the emergence of a new league could complicate matters. If the owners decide not to continue the CBA this week, all is not lost. There is time, and there are triggers in place, to get this solved.

Longer to hit free agency

To get a clearer picture, let's see what this year's free-agency period would have looked like if players needed more than four years of service to reach the open market.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d80864e15&template=with-video&confirm=true

[Patler]

BUt if they spend what they want and the cap is put back in place the owners have screwed themselves. I think in the event of an uncapped year, owners outside of Jerry Jones and Dan Snyder aren't going to be throwing money around. Agents are only fooling themselves if they think they are going to get a big windfall. I agree with you that something will get done on the CBA. Otherwise both the players and owners will have killed their golden goose.

I doubt you will see an uncapped year followed by a capped year, unless it is a cap structure totally different from the hard cap we see now. For that reason I don't think a team will "shoot itself in the foot" by signing player in an uncapped year.

All that has to happen in an uncapped year is for each team to go overboard on one player. That could happen even for owners being somewhat conservative. That would change the landscape tremendously.

[Bretsky]

Red started a thread, "Calling Patler" asking about the 2009 salary cap. I did a little research (not a lot) and decided to start a thread to discuss what I came up with. Please remember that there could be big swings I am unaware of. For example, in the back of my mind I have a recollection that Woodson has some very pricey years toward the end of his contract. I don't think they are at that point yet, but there could be some other veterans who are. The following is just a very general review:

The following 2008 cap $ (millions) come off the books:
7.7 - KGB
6.3 - Tauscher
2.0 - Franks
1.5 - Cole
1.4 - Favre
0.9 - Manual
2.0 - Misc. dead money from numerous players, (Wynn, Swain, White, Clowney, etc.)
3.5 - - expiring contracts of players like Bush, Bigby, Martin, etc.

$25 million or so from those sources.

Beyond that, Rodgers cap value in 2009 is reported to be $9.6 million, down from $13.9 million in 2008, so that will increase the available cap room by $4.3 million or so.

Looks like Grant will earn the low incentive in his contract for sure (1000 yards) and could get the big one for 1250 yards. He needs 270 yards in his last three games for that. His cap cost in 2009 will be maybe only a little less, and maybe a little more than in 2008.

The Packers probably have about $7 million left in 2008 (after signing Malone, Havner, Porter, etc.) that could get pushed into 2009 if they don't sign anyone between now and the end of the season.

On the "negative" side, they already have about $2 million in dead money against the 2009 cap:
1.6 - KGB
0.2 - Hodge
0.2 - miscellaneous others

Without considering any change in the cap itself, any increases or decreases in the cap hits for other players, and without the tenders required for any RFAs they may have, and without any signings of the players whose contracts expire, it looks like the Packers could easily have $30-35 million in cap space at the start of 2009.

They have a few expiring contracts to deal with after 2008, but 2009 will be more critical in that regard. This year they seem to have Tauscher, Cole, Bigby, Montgomery, Hunter, Martin, Bush, Humphrey and a couple others.


Isn't 30-35MIL the norm in Green Bay after the increases in cap each year ?

Maybe we'll go against our past norm on how we choose to use it all up :idea:

[Gunakor]

Red started a thread, "Calling Patler" asking about the 2009 salary cap. I did a little research (not a lot) and decided to start a thread to discuss what I came up with. Please remember that there could be big swings I am unaware of. For example, in the back of my mind I have a recollection that Woodson has some very pricey years toward the end of his contract. I don't think they are at that point yet, but there could be some other veterans who are. The following is just a very general review:

The following 2008 cap $ (millions) come off the books:
7.7 - KGB
6.3 - Tauscher
2.0 - Franks
1.5 - Cole
1.4 - Favre
0.9 - Manual
2.0 - Misc. dead money from numerous players, (Wynn, Swain, White, Clowney, etc.)
3.5 - - expiring contracts of players like Bush, Bigby, Martin, etc.

$25 million or so from those sources.

Beyond that, Rodgers cap value in 2009 is reported to be $9.6 million, down from $13.9 million in 2008, so that will increase the available cap room by $4.3 million or so.

Looks like Grant will earn the low incentive in his contract for sure (1000 yards) and could get the big one for 1250 yards. He needs 270 yards in his last three games for that. His cap cost in 2009 will be maybe only a little less, and maybe a little more than in 2008.

The Packers probably have about $7 million left in 2008 (after signing Malone, Havner, Porter, etc.) that could get pushed into 2009 if they don't sign anyone between now and the end of the season.

On the "negative" side, they already have about $2 million in dead money against the 2009 cap:
1.6 - KGB
0.2 - Hodge
0.2 - miscellaneous others

Without considering any change in the cap itself, any increases or decreases in the cap hits for other players, and without the tenders required for any RFAs they may have, and without any signings of the players whose contracts expire, it looks like the Packers could easily have $30-35 million in cap space at the start of 2009.

They have a few expiring contracts to deal with after 2008, but 2009 will be more critical in that regard. This year they seem to have Tauscher, Cole, Bigby, Montgomery, Hunter, Martin, Bush, Humphrey and a couple others.


Isn't 30-35MIL the norm in Green Bay after the increases in cap each year ?

Maybe we'll go against our past norm on how we choose to use it all up :idea:

As long as we remember that anyone we sign impacts our cap number next year also, when there are a number of young core players on our team that will need extensions. I don't want to sacrifice the ability to resign Greg Jennings next year just so we can get Julius Peppers this year, for example.

[Patler]

I resurrected this thread to post the following linK:

http://cappage.timesfour.com/2009gbpcapprojection.html

The person who generates this list is usually as accurate as any I know of. This shows committed dollars of about $94 million right now for 2009. With the cap expected to be $123 million, and the Packers having rolled forward a little over $7 million from 2008, it looks like they are at about $36 million in cap space before any RFA tenders, etc.

This pretty much agrees with my original estimation that started this thread in early December. I have seen some projections recently that have the Packers at a much lower amount, including one of the JSO writers who came up with $25 million including the roll-forward. I don't understand why some have the much lower amount, but it is safe to say that they should have $25-35 million.

[vince]

Thanks for the update Patler.

I assume they just neglected to update the contract expiration for Rodgers, as the dollars look right, but his new deal is not reflected in the contract expiration column.

Tauscher ($3.5), Cole ($1.4), Montgomery ($.52), Bigby ($.45), Hunter ($.45), Bush ($.45), Kuhn ($.45), Martin ($.45), Williams ($.37), and Humphrey ($.37) are the players from last year not reflected on the cap projection, as they are not currently under contract.

Each of them will obviously need to be signed or replaced. That was $8.4 million worth in '08. They may be able to recover a few dollars from Tauscher's deal by resigning him for less, but that may not be likely. I would also guess that Williams will get a bump. None of the other guys are likely to be replaced for any less than they were last year, so for all practical purposes, that money is also already spent in addition to the $94 mil number reflected.

[Sparkey]

I resurrected this thread to post the following linK:

http://cappage.timesfour.com/2009gbpcapprojection.html

The person who generates this list is usually as accurate as any I know of. This shows committed dollars of about $94 million right now for 2009. With the cap expected to be $123 million, and the Packers having rolled forward a little over $7 million from 2008, it looks like they are at about $36 million in cap space before any RFA tenders, etc.

This pretty much agrees with my original estimation that started this thread in early December. I have seen some projections recently that have the Packers at a much lower amount, including one of the JSO writers who came up with $25 million including the roll-forward. I don't understand why some have the much lower amount, but it is safe to say that they should have $25-35 million.

Patler,

How current is that link ? It lists Rodgers contract final year as 2009.. Which would be correct prior to the restructuring/extension he signed.

[Patler]

Patler,
How current is that link ? It lists Rodgers contract final year as 2009.. Which would be correct prior to the restructuring/extension he signed.

I don't know how current it is, but as Vince noted, the dollar numbers for Rodgers are correct, it just appears they did not update the year of expiration. His 2008 list was updated through the last part of November. There really was not much of significance that happened after that with anyone's contract for 2009, other than the roll forward of unused 2008 space. A couple guys were signed and I think some were two-year contracts, but under the "Rule of 51" that applies in the off season, they don't matter.

As the off season progresses he will add notes and dates as he updates the list. He will even offer explanations of why his numbers differ from others, why he thinks he is right and they are wrong. I respect his work quite a bit.

[Patler]

Tauscher ($3.5), Cole ($1.4), Montgomery ($.52), Bigby ($.45), Hunter ($.45), Bush ($.45), Kuhn ($.45), Martin ($.45), Williams ($.37), and Humphrey ($.37) are the players from last year not reflected on the cap projection, as they are not currently under contract.

Each of them will obviously need to be signed or replaced. That was $8.4 million worth in '08. They may be able to recover a few dollars from Tauscher's deal by resigning him for less, but that may not be likely. I would also guess that Williams will get a bump. None of the other guys are likely to be replaced for any less than they were last year, so for all practical purposes, that money is also already spent in addition to the $94 mil number reflected.

But that is true when you discuss the cap space for any team, the FAs are not included until they sign. As players are signed, another drops off the bottom of the list because in the off season only the 51 highest paid players are counted, along with all bonuses paid to all players. A portion of the cap space also has to be allocated to the rookie pool, so the money available to sign their own or other FAs is less than the total cap available.

A few years ago the Packers cap space was very deceiving because they had only about 40 players under contract, not even enough to meet the "Rule of 51". As a practical matter they really had about $2-3 million less in available cap space than the lists showed just to fill their roster with 1st or 2nd year players at minimum salaries.

[sharpe1027]

Anyone have a rough number on how much of the salary will end up going to draft picks? A ballpark figure will do. Thanks.

[KYPack]

Anyone have a rough number on how much of the salary will end up going to draft picks? A ballpark figure will do. Thanks.

5-7 million is the usual number.

You have to calculate it, something we all leave to the great and all-powerful Patler/

[Patler]

Anyone have a rough number on how much of the salary will end up going to draft picks? A ballpark figure will do. Thanks.

5-7 million is the usual number.

You have to calculate it, something we all leave to the great and all-powerful Patler/

The league doesn't release those until shortly before the draft. Last year Cincinnati had the #9 pick and 10 picks overall, with extras in rounds 5, 6 and 7. They had a pool of $5.55 million. The Packers have a higher extra pick from the Jets, and with an increase as always, I expect they will be somewhere in the neighborhood of $5.5 - 6 million.

[vince]

Tauscher ($3.5), Cole ($1.4), Montgomery ($.52), Bigby ($.45), Hunter ($.45), Bush ($.45), Kuhn ($.45), Martin ($.45), Williams ($.37), and Humphrey ($.37) are the players from last year not reflected on the cap projection, as they are not currently under contract.

Each of them will obviously need to be signed or replaced. That was $8.4 million worth in '08. They may be able to recover a few dollars from Tauscher's deal by resigning him for less, but that may not be likely. I would also guess that Williams will get a bump. None of the other guys are likely to be replaced for any less than they were last year, so for all practical purposes, that money is also already spent in addition to the $94 mil number reflected.

But that is true when you discuss the cap space for any team, the FAs are not included until they sign. As players are signed, another drops off the bottom of the list because in the off season only the 51 highest paid players are counted, along with all bonuses paid to all players. A portion of the cap space also has to be allocated to the rookie pool, so the money available to sign their own or other FAs is less than the total cap available.

A few years ago the Packers cap space was very deceiving because they had only about 40 players under contract, not even enough to meet the "Rule of 51". As a practical matter they really had about $2-3 million less in available cap space than the lists showed just to fill their roster with 1st or 2nd year players at minimum salaries.
Right. I guess I just wanted to point out just one of those practicalities so those who love to gush about all that cap space Tightwad Ted holds every year don't get too excited gleefully spewing sarcastic remarks over a $35 mil available cap figure that will be wasted if they don't sign the top four guys on the market.

Given 1) the Packers prudent and effective pay-as-you-go contract structuring philosophy, 2) players' demands for getting a big payday upfront with new contracts, and 3) the group of players that will need to be re-upped before the end of next year, substantial portions of the available space are likely to be eaten up very quickly just with re-signings and this year's higher-positioned draftees - not to mention the $10 million or so the existing players cited above (or their replacements) will command - after shaving the bottom 7 or 8 guys from the list of 51.

Though I'm sure it's pointless. None of that will matter when free agent season comes and the usual suspects will once again rejoice in their sarcastic remarks and inaccurate exaggerations about Ted Thompson, ignoring the practical realities of the whole picture.

[Bossman641]

Tauscher ($3.5), Cole ($1.4), Montgomery ($.52), Bigby ($.45), Hunter ($.45), Bush ($.45), Kuhn ($.45), Martin ($.45), Williams ($.37), and Humphrey ($.37) are the players from last year not reflected on the cap projection, as they are not currently under contract.

Each of them will obviously need to be signed or replaced. That was $8.4 million worth in '08. They may be able to recover a few dollars from Tauscher's deal by resigning him for less, but that may not be likely. I would also guess that Williams will get a bump. None of the other guys are likely to be replaced for any less than they were last year, so for all practical purposes, that money is also already spent in addition to the $94 mil number reflected.

But that is true when you discuss the cap space for any team, the FAs are not included until they sign. As players are signed, another drops off the bottom of the list because in the off season only the 51 highest paid players are counted, along with all bonuses paid to all players. A portion of the cap space also has to be allocated to the rookie pool, so the money available to sign their own or other FAs is less than the total cap available.

A few years ago the Packers cap space was very deceiving because they had only about 40 players under contract, not even enough to meet the "Rule of 51". As a practical matter they really had about $2-3 million less in available cap space than the lists showed just to fill their roster with 1st or 2nd year players at minimum salaries.
Right. I guess I just wanted to point out just one of those practicalities so those who love to gush about all that cap space Tightwad Ted holds every year don't get too excited gleefully spewing sarcastic remarks over a $35 mil available cap figure that will be wasted in they don't sign the top four guys on the market.

Given 1) the Packers prudent and effective pay-as-you-go contract structuring philosophy, 2) players' demands for getting a big payday upfront with new contracts, and 3) the group of players that will need to be re-upped before the end of next year, substantial portions of the available space are likely to be eaten up very quickly just with re-signings and this year's higher-positioned draftees - not to mention the $10 million or so the existing players cited above (or their replacements) will command.

Though I'm sure it's pointless. None of that will matter when free agent season comes and the usual suspects will be once again rejoice in their sarcastic remarks and inaccurate exaggerations about Ted Thompson, ignoring the practical realities of the cap.

TT is such a cheap asshole. He is trying to sabotage this team. Why else would he sit on 35 million in cap room when there are all these FA"s to sign? What a snake!!

I'm sorry, were you saying something Vince? :D