Cap affect of paying as you go vs pushing out and having dead space

[texaspackerbacker]

You're also assuming that (a) the cap will go up every year - a reasonable assumption, barring another pandemic and (b) the amount you are kicking down the road stays generally proportional to the cap increase. That's a lot harder to predict and manage, especially since teams don't know the cap increase until just before the new season starts. If the cap goes up 15M but you have to eat 40M because of Bakhtiari and Jones and Rasul, you've kicked too much.

Was going to make an analogy with the national debt and growing economy/GDP, but that wades into FYI so I'll skip it. Point is, red is somewhat correct but managing that ratio of can-kicking to cap increase is almost impossible.

More nicely and patiently worded than I did, but pretty well said, run pMc. And that analogy you didn't make hahahaha is good too. You should show up over there sometime.

It takes a catastrophic injury on the heels of a huge contract like the Bakhtiari situation to even make a minor worrisome situation with the cap. Jones and Rasul very likely were gone for mostly non-cap related reasons. The more massive increase in the cap this year was sort of predictable, at least a safe bet.

The bottom line for anybody with a brain in there head is that the cap or the dead money or whatever else those fools are panicking over has NOT prevented the Packers from having an outstandingly talented team.

[ThunderDan]

What about ARod and Russell Wilson's massive cap hits to their former teams? Neither was a catastrophic injury.

[sharpe1027]

What about ARod and Russell Wilson's massive cap hits to their former teams? Neither was a catastrophic injury.

Catastrophic injury to a team is a very low bar. No catastrophic injury doesn't mean no consequences.

[sharpe1027]

hahahaha And now you've degenerated from dumbass to total imbecile.

The cap is "basically non-existent"? Nobody ever said that. "Play games"? Your ignorant words, not mine.

The cap indeed CAN virtually always be defeated, and it is stupid to worry about it - like a lot of panicky fools in here do. I've explained how, but better than the explanation, all ya'all dumbasses need to do is look at how the Packers and most successful teams have handled it and continue to handle it. Sheeeeeesh, stop being so pathetic.

You an ignorant ashole that constantly calls people names to make yourself feel better.

You literally proved my point in the same post you claim otherwise.

[texaspackerbacker]

What about ARod and Russell Wilson's massive cap hits to their former teams? Neither was a catastrophic injury.

Wilson's quality dropped inexplicably - why I don't know. Did Denver let him go because of the cap? Or just because he his play wasn't worth the money he was being paid? I suspect the latter.

As for Rodgers, if there was a Venn Diagram of ignorant and ungrateful Rodgers haters and ignorant cap panickers, you'd see a large overlap hahahahaha. One factor of the Rodgers situation (with the Packers I mean) was, of course, injury - catastrophic? that depends on your point of view. Regardless, the Packers were under pressure to trade him. If he had continued on for a few more years as the starter with restructuring, there undoubtedly would have been eventual dead money, but it likely would have been less sudden than now. As for Rodgers now with the Jets, I really don't know what his contract is like, but if they do end up with cap problems, his catastrophic injury certainly would have a lot to do with it.

The bottom line, though, I say again, is that the Packers are doing fine, one of the most talented teams in the NFL. Most of the teams that push the limit of the cap also are glad they did. The teams making a big deal of the cap are generally perennial losers.

[Frozen Tundra]

Most of the teams that push the limit of the cap also are glad they did. The teams making a big deal of the cap are generally perennial losers.

Which teams "make a big deal out of the cap", and what does that look like?

[texaspackerbacker]

I should just say check it out for yourself, but I'll tick off a few for you. Panthers, Saints, Dolphins, Chargers, Rams, Giants, Redskins (or whatever they are now), Raiders, Colts, probably others too.

[Joemailman]

Wilson's quality dropped inexplicably - why I don't know. Did Denver let him go because of the cap? Or just because he his play wasn't worth the money he was being paid? I suspect the latter.

Wilson actually had a pretty good year last year. Much better than 2022. He and Sean Payton just didn't get along.

[Frozen Tundra]

I should just say check it out for yourself, but I'll tick off a few for you. Panthers, Saints, Dolphins, Chargers, Rams, Giants, Redskins (or whatever they are now), Raiders, Colts, probably others too.

But I don't understand what you mean by these teams "making a big deal out of the cap". That's a lot of different teams with a lot of very different cap situations; I don't see the common denominator.

[texaspackerbacker]

Frozen, read the news. There are players cut or not signed or traded cheap, etc. past and present. The most recent one I can think of is Keenan Allen. Beyond that, you're on your own. And you want a common thread? How about not having very good teams?

[run pMc]

The Chargers were so far out of cap space they had to redo Bosa and Mack's contracts, didn't bring Ekeler back, and asked Allen to take a pay cut. If they made noise about the cap being a big deal, it's because for them it was.
The Saints are constantly in some level of cap pain or hell going back to Brees. The Micheal Thomas contract. Their defense. Their OL. It's big contracts and they keep kicking them forward. They will continue to with Derek Carr's contract. That's just how Benson goes - he'd rather be in cap hell at 9-8 then have one or two years of purging to get everything clear.

The Dolphins gave Tyreek a yacht full of money, now they have players up for contracts and can't keep them. They weren't going to be able to keep Wilkins, not if they are keeping Tua.

List goes on. Almost every team has cap decisions to make except a few that have a lot of expiring contracts or just have many players they don't want to keep. The Bears have been an example of this in recent years. The teams that have a lot of cap space to spend and aren't in some form of cap pain are often the exception. And yes, they often suck because they don't have big money allocated to good players or an at least average-level starting QB.

When you don't have talent, you don't pay it.

[bobblehead]

if the cap goes up every single year the way it has been going, then it makes sense to kick the can down the road

lets take year 1, you have a guy with a 20 million dollar cap hit, and the cap is 200 million. that guy is taking up 10% of the cap

but you can somehow kick that 20 down the road a couple years to where the cap is gonna be 300 million. now that guys 20 million dollar cap number is only taking up 5% of the cap

so in the long run you win. (i used easy to use numbers, and not real life numbers that suck)

does that make any sense?

See...all I read is that in several years you are handicapped 5% against the cap vs. a team that didn't kick it down the road. Sure, its a good move if you plan on being GM for only a couple years (Rodgers), but not so great for your successor (Love).

[bobblehead]

I should just say check it out for yourself, but I'll tick off a few for you. Panthers, Saints, Dolphins, Chargers, Rams, Giants, Redskins (or whatever they are now), Raiders, Colts, probably others too.

The Raiders have fucked up their cap, it just hasn't hit yet.

The rest of the teams haven't had the talent to push the cap. Its chicken and egg.

edit: actually the dolphins are going to be in cap hell soon enough too. Your list is a list of bad teams with no real bearing on your argument. I assume you grabbed a list of bad teams and did no research as to their cap situation whatsoever meaning you didn't make an argument at all.

[texaspackerbacker]

The Chargers were so far out of cap space they had to redo Bosa and Mack's contracts, didn't bring Ekeler back, and asked Allen to take a pay cut. If they made noise about the cap being a big deal, it's because for them it was.
The Saints are constantly in some level of cap pain or hell going back to Brees. The Micheal Thomas contract. Their defense. Their OL. It's big contracts and they keep kicking them forward. They will continue to with Derek Carr's contract. That's just how Benson goes - he'd rather be in cap hell at 9-8 then have one or two years of purging to get everything clear.

The Dolphins gave Tyreek a yacht full of money, now they have players up for contracts and can't keep them. They weren't going to be able to keep Wilkins, not if they are keeping Tua.

List goes on. Almost every team has cap decisions to make except a few that have a lot of expiring contracts or just have many players they don't want to keep. The Bears have been an example of this in recent years. The teams that have a lot of cap space to spend and aren't in some form of cap pain are often the exception. And yes, they often suck because they don't have big money allocated to good players or an at least average-level starting QB.

When you don't have talent, you don't pay it.

You're demonstrating my point. The Chargers decided they needed to do those things rather than kick the can down the road (unless you assume Ekeler and Allen weren't worth keeping.

Possibly the Saints are doing things my way rather than yours hahaha. It that "purging" thing that I'm referring to as the stupid way to go.

Dolphins: can't keep them by restructuring? or deciding not to?

The Bears are another form of a bad example - not pushing the cap and thus being losers, although arguably they would be losers anyway because they just naturally still suck hahahaha.

True about not paying not good talent, but the converse is the point: if you're smart, you DO pay good talent - you find a way, cap be damned.

[Frozen Tundra]

Frozen, read the news. There are players cut or not signed or traded cheap, etc. past and present. The most recent one I can think of is Keenan Allen. Beyond that, you're on your own. And you want a common thread? How about not having very good teams?

So, basically... you don't know. You're just arguing for the sake of arguing, because you like to find things to disagree with people about so you can shout at them.

Got it. Thanks.