Surprise wastes of salary cap dollars

[Patler]

According to the National Football Post, several teams did not use the phony incentive clauses to push considerable amounts of unused cap dollars into 2009. Instead, they let the 2008 dollars go unused, and therefore wasted:

According to Salary Cap data, the Buffalo Bills and Atlanta Falcons did not use roughly $5M each of Cap room, the Cincinnati Bengals did not use $10.8M of Cap room and, astonishingly, the Kansas City Chiefs elected to not carry forward almost $22M of available Cap room to 2009, preferring to leave their money on the table in 2008, never to be used again.

With a projected $123M Cap for 2009, all of these teams are presently showing less than $100M of committed Cap expenses for the year, so having extra room does not appear to be a problem. However, from a football operations point of view, it is always better to have as much flexibility as possible, which these teams appear not to be doing.

It will be interesting to see the union’s reaction to over $43M of available Cap room being flushed away with the end of the 2008 Cap year, never to be heard from again. $43M can pay a lot of players…

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2009/01/monday-money-matters-18/

[Rastak]

Re: Surprise wastes of salary cap dollars

According to the National Football Post, several teams did not use the phony incentive clauses to push considerable amounts of unused cap dollars into 2009. Instead, they let the 2008 dollars go unused, and therefore wasted:

According to Salary Cap data, the Buffalo Bills and Atlanta Falcons did not use roughly $5M each of Cap room, the Cincinnati Bengals did not use $10.8M of Cap room and, astonishingly, the Kansas City Chiefs elected to not carry forward almost $22M of available Cap room to 2009, preferring to leave their money on the table in 2008, never to be used again.

With a projected $123M Cap for 2009, all of these teams are presently showing less than $100M of committed Cap expenses for the year, so having extra room does not appear to be a problem. However, from a football operations point of view, it is always better to have as much flexibility as possible, which these teams appear not to be doing.

It will be interesting to see the union’s reaction to over $43M of available Cap room being flushed away with the end of the 2008 Cap year, never to be heard from again. $43M can pay a lot of players…

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/...ey-matters-18/

I agree it's a waste but keep in mind if you push that kind of cap forward and then actually use it the next year (I know, you don't HAVE to), your actual payroll is much higher than it would be. Far over the actual cap. Maybe they didn't want to tempt themselves!

[Patler]

Re: Surprise wastes of salary cap dollars

I agree it's a waste but keep in mind if you push that kind of cap forward and then actually use it the next year (I know, you don't HAVE to), your actual payroll is much higher than it would be. Far over the actual cap. Maybe they didn't want to tempt themselves!

But your two year payroll is no larger than anyone other team. You can make yourself into the Twins and Brewers competing with the Yankees if you throw cap dollars away for too many years!

[Fritz]

Makes you wonder if this is some kind of strategy to undermine the whole idea of a salary cap. Not sure why these teams would be the ones to do so, but it does make you wonder.

For all those who complain that Ted doesn't use the cap dollars, please note the Packers are not on that list of teams...

[Cleft Crusty]

Certainly, this is where the football entertainment value is hiding. Nothing says fun like scouring through the Excel spreadsheets and Quicken Books files of the NFL team you love, looking for those missing cap dollars, and deciding which will count against this fiscal year and which will be used in the next. Almost as enthralling as pouring over actuarial tables. Fun!

[Fritz]

Darn tootin' Cleft. Now I'm off to go stare at pictures of soccer moms in glasses and parkas and dream a little dream...

[red]

i wonder if some teams are just trying to save some money in these tough times

[Noodle]

Hmmmm, the Chiefs, Bengals, and Bills. Besides being tight-fisted and capologically challenged, what do these three teams share in common?

If you answered -- they each finished at the bottom of their respective divisions -- then you are correct!

[run pMc]

just because the cap is X dollars doesn't mean they have to spend up to that, nor does it mean the owners have that money in their bank accounts to spend it. BUF isn't exactly a big market, their stadium isn't brand new, and they don't have many big stars. I wouldn't doubt some of these owners are cheap, but I wouldn't be surprised if they're just trying to balance their books.

[Noodle]

Given revenue sharing, I'm thinking that all teams have more than enough money to cover the salaries up to the cap. In fact, the cap is based on a percentage of the TV revenues and the revenue sharing forumula, so each team should have enough do-re-me to pay salaries up to the cap.

Now, they also have to pay for coaches and other crap, but the revenue streams from TV should be enough. So I wonder what reason there could be for not paying it out or moving it forward so that it could be paid next year. Besides the owners being cheap bastards, that is.

[mngolf19]

Makes you wonder if this is some kind of strategy to undermine the whole idea of a salary cap. Not sure why these teams would be the ones to do so, but it does make you wonder.

For all those who complain that Ted doesn't use the cap dollars, please note the Packers are not on that list of teams...

Fritz, I don't think that is the only teams or the actual order. Just some the writer mentioned. Does anyone know what the Packers cap amount for this year ended at?

[Lurker64]

Fritz, I don't think that is the only teams or the actual order. Just some the writer mentioned. Does anyone know what the Packers cap amount for this year ended at?

Kevin Seifert at ESPN reports that the cap space for the NFC North teams (before credits and adjustments) for the upcoming season are:

Detroit: $26.8 million
Minnesota: $20.4 million
Green Bay: $19.09 million
Chicago: $17.4 million

But that's not including various tricks teams use to push caproom forward. I know that Minnesota and Green Bay tend to make heavy use of those, I don't know about Chicago, and I've just come to expect incompetency from Detroit.

[The Leaper]

A. If they roll the cap forward, players will eyeball that money and start grousing like Javon Walker for "their share". One way to shut them up is to just not leave it lying around.

B. The owners decision to opt out of the current CBA may have something to do with this as well.

[Fritz]

I'm thinking B) is correct, Leap. Don't know the tie-in or the logic, but somehow it would seem to lead that way.

[prsnfoto]

Fritz, I don't think that is the only teams or the actual order. Just some the writer mentioned. Does anyone know what the Packers cap amount for this year ended at?

Kevin Seifert at ESPN reports that the cap space for the NFC North teams (before credits and adjustments) for the upcoming season are:

Detroit: $26.8 million
Minnesota: $20.4 million
Green Bay: $19.09 million
Chicago: $17.4 million

But that's not including various tricks teams use to push caproom forward. I know that Minnesota and Green Bay tend to make heavy use of those, I don't know about Chicago, and I've just come to expect incompetency from Detroit.

From what I understand a lion's share of A-Rod's salary was used this year but that number is not very impressive considering they have to lock up Jennings and Rodgers salary for this coming season is only less than a million before he jumps to 8 million in 2010 it would seem the Packers are not as rich as some would think.