36 million in cap room

[Guiness]

I suck at salaries, but can I be Rodan?

Rodan vs Mothra

http://www.veoh.com/browse/videos/category/technology/watch/v1344143syFexepH

[Lurker64]

I suck at salaries, but can I be Rodan?

Let me think about that, for a bit:



*rimshot*

[Patler]

Are you sure of this? Once a tender has been offered, is the team still allowed to negotiate with the player before he signs that tender?

Yes, they can sign him to a multi-year contract before July 15. Thereafter he can sign only a one year contract, which can not be extended until after the last regular season game.

[KYPack]

This is as good a spot to put this out there as any. The cap amount is up from 123 million to 127. i hadn't seen that before, although I'm sure someone has posted it somewhere

[Freak Out]

Maybe it's more like watching Charlie Chan vs. Dr. Who.

The Chan family. The original Doctor who show from the BBC was awesome.

[Patler]

What often happens is that the terms of the trade are agreed on between the teams. The acquiring team then negotiates a contract with the player, and the player signs a contract with his former team that has tradeable terms consistent with the terms he has negotiated with the new team. This is often just a formality, but it is that contract that is traded to the new team.

See, I'm not so sure about this either, if I understand you correctly. Are you saying the player signs a contract (other than the tender) with the trading team? I can't see how this works, because that contract would have a signing bonus...which would be accelerated into the trading team's cap as soon as the trade went through.

That is what I meant about signing a contract with "tradeable terms" and that is why a second contract is generally signed with the acquiring team.

The NFL also passed some exceptions at one time for "sign to trade" transactions, but to be honest with you I don't remember if that was under the old CBA or the current one.

[sharpe1027]

Ok, you were typing this response while I was mine...

Are you sure of this? Once a tender has been offered, is the team still allowed to negotiate with the player before he signs that tender?

There are some rules about the tag, and I remember teams getting in trouble for bending them in the past. IIRC once you sign a tagged player, you are then free to negotiate a longer term contract. If you do, the player is no longer under the tag, and you can use it again. Some team got in trouble because the league decided they'd negotiated a long term deal with a player during some time period they weren't allowed to.

I think so. Remember that the RFA signings end before the URFA signings. Maybe the teams you remember getting into trouble where teams negotiating with restricted free agents during the URFA-only period?

See, I'm not so sure about this either, if I understand you correctly. Are you saying the player signs a contract (other than the tender) with the trading team? I can't see how this works, because that contract would have a signing bonus...which would be accelerated into the trading team's cap as soon as the trade went through.

I agree, unless there is some trick to have the signing bonus contingent on the trade, so that it would be paid by the second team. My guess is that are ways to get to whatever end result they want.

[Patler]

There are lots of things that can be done, for example:

Have a roster bonus that is due after the trade. It counts nothing against the trading team. Then, after the trade, the acquiring team guarantees the roster bonus, which results in it being treated like a signing bonus for cap purposes.

[sharpe1027]

There are lots of things that can be done, for example:

Have a roster bonus that is due after the trade. It counts nothing against the trading team. Then, after the trade, the acquiring team guarantees the roster bonus, which results in it being treated like a signing bonus for cap purposes.

I didn't think roster bonuses were pro-rated though...

[Guiness]

What often happens is that the terms of the trade are agreed on between the teams. The acquiring team then negotiates a contract with the player, and the player signs a contract with his former team that has tradeable terms consistent with the terms he has negotiated with the new team. This is often just a formality, but it is that contract that is traded to the new team.

See, I'm not so sure about this either, if I understand you correctly. Are you saying the player signs a contract (other than the tender) with the trading team? I can't see how this works, because that contract would have a signing bonus...which would be accelerated into the trading team's cap as soon as the trade went through.

That is what I meant about signing a contract with "tradeable terms" and that is why a second contract is generally signed with the acquiring team.

The NFL also passed some exceptions at one time for "sign to trade" transactions, but to be honest with you I don't remember if that was under the old CBA or the current one.

That's what I thought you meant about tradeable terms.

That would involve a reasonable level of trust between the player and the trading team though. And considering the player is on his way out, I can't see that being there. The player is essentially putting his name on a contract he wants nothing to do with...if I were him, I'd be concerned the team would try and hold me to it.

But maybe this is what goes on, and I've just never heard of it. I'd love to see some examples of how this is done. Did CW sign a contract outside of the franchise tender with GB before heading off to Cleveland last year?

[Guiness]

There are lots of things that can be done, for example:

Have a roster bonus that is due after the trade. It counts nothing against the trading team. Then, after the trade, the acquiring team guarantees the roster bonus, which results in it being treated like a signing bonus for cap purposes.

I didn't think roster bonuses were pro-rated though...

If it is guaranteed before it is due, it can be (is?) pro-rated.

Forgot about that one Patler. This still has a player signing a contract with little or no SB, but it could be done this way.

[Patler]

There are lots of things that can be done, for example:

Have a roster bonus that is due after the trade. It counts nothing against the trading team. Then, after the trade, the acquiring team guarantees the roster bonus, which results in it being treated like a signing bonus for cap purposes.

I didn't think roster bonuses were pro-rated though...

As Guiness stated, by guaranteeing the roster bonus it is treated like a signing bonus. Teams do this quite often to gain cap space.

[sharpe1027]

There are lots of things that can be done, for example:

Have a roster bonus that is due after the trade. It counts nothing against the trading team. Then, after the trade, the acquiring team guarantees the roster bonus, which results in it being treated like a signing bonus for cap purposes.

I didn't think roster bonuses were pro-rated though...

If it is guaranteed before it is due, it can be (is?) pro-rated.

Forgot about that one Patler. This still has a player signing a contract with little or no SB, but it could be done this way.

If it is guaranteed then, by definition, it is not a roster bonus. Right? *edit* Never mind, google helped cure my ignorance. Prorated if:
roster bonus is earned or paid before preseason training camp;
reporting bonuses where the contract is signed after the start of training camp; or
roster bonuses where the contract was signed after the last preseason game.

[Patler]

There are lots of things that can be done, for example:

Have a roster bonus that is due after the trade. It counts nothing against the trading team. Then, after the trade, the acquiring team guarantees the roster bonus, which results in it being treated like a signing bonus for cap purposes.

I didn't think roster bonuses were pro-rated though...

If it is guaranteed before it is due, it can be (is?) pro-rated.

Forgot about that one Patler. This still has a player signing a contract with little or no SB, but it could be done this way.

If it is guaranteed then, by definition, it is not a roster bonus. Right?

it's all in the timing. Teams do this very, very frequently. When the contract is signed, it may contain a roster bonus in year 2, 3, etc. In year 2 or 3 they can guarantee it before it is paid, and thereafter it is treated as a signing bonus.

In my hypothetical, team A franchises the player, and negotiates a trade with team B. Team B negotiates terms with the player, including $15M bonus now. Team A signs a contract with Player that includes a $15M roster bonus due June 1. They execute the trade before June 1. The roster bonus is not yet due, so it counts nothing against Team A's salary cap. Immediately after the trade, Team B guarantees the roster bonus. Player is assured of getting it, and it is now treated as a signing bonus for cap purposes against Team B.

[vince]

That's exactly what the Packers, Browns and Corey Williams did last year - on the first day of free agency period I believe.