Packers calculate $4 million benefit

[HarveyWallbangers]

Notes: Packers calculate $4 million benefit
By BOB McGINN

Green Bay - Taking advantage of loopholes in National Football League rules, the Green Bay Packers have removed $4 million from their 2007 salary cap but will receive credit for that same amount on their 2008 salary cap.

On Oct. 23, one day after Krause was promoted from the practice squad, vice president Andrew Brandt and agent Buddy Baker negotiated the deal.

Most of it was a standard one-year contract, giving Krause the minimum base salary of $510,000. Considering that he missed seven weeks, his cap charge was $300,000.

However, the deal also gave Krause an incentive clause for performance on special teams. Worth $4 million, the clause is payable only if a miracle were to happen and Krause blocked more than six punts and also played an extreme number of snaps on special teams.

Krause isn't even playing on the punt-block team and isn't a core player on special teams.

Under NFL rules, however, the Packers were able to designate the $4 million under the "likely to be earned" incentive category. Therefore, it was charged immediately against their current cap.

At the time, the Packers had about $11.9 million of cap space. Now, after the $4 million reduction plus the addition of Krause and wide receiver Koren Robinson, the Packers are $7.39 million beneath the cap.

After the season, the Packers will have the $4 million incentive that wasn't earned by Krause to show league officials. That amount will be debited back against their cap and added to their adjusted cap for 2008.

The Packers are trying to use some of their remaining cap space on a contract extension for tight end Donald Lee. No doubt, the team is considering whether to make a move on defensive tackle Corey Williams, their other top player headed for unrestricted free agency.

But if the Packers have a substantial amount of cap room left by the end of the league year, it is expected they'll make other financial maneuvers to ensure that it is credited onto their adjusted '08 cap.

[Brohm]

Brandt is one of the best in the business.

[Rastak]

This is pretty common. The Vikings pushed something like 10 mil into next year using the same device.

[4and12to12and4]

We NEED to resign Williams. I don't want to lose any of our defensive lineman. Suddenly you've got guys winded at the end of the game like all these other teams, and that's why we are 6-1. Because in the 4th quarter, crunch time, our trench is better than yours.

[LL2]

It great to see Brandt and TT push the money to next year when the Packers will have around 30 million in cap room, but I doubt TT will even spend half of it.

[Bretsky]

Re: Packers calculate $4 million benefit

Notes: Packers calculate $4 million benefit
By BOB McGINN

Green Bay - Taking advantage of loopholes in National Football League rules, the Green Bay Packers have removed $4 million from their 2007 salary cap but will receive credit for that same amount on their 2008 salary cap.

On Oct. 23, one day after Krause was promoted from the practice squad, vice president Andrew Brandt and agent Buddy Baker negotiated the deal.

Most of it was a standard one-year contract, giving Krause the minimum base salary of $510,000. Considering that he missed seven weeks, his cap charge was $300,000.

However, the deal also gave Krause an incentive clause for performance on special teams. Worth $4 million, the clause is payable only if a miracle were to happen and Krause blocked more than six punts and also played an extreme number of snaps on special teams.

Krause isn't even playing on the punt-block team and isn't a core player on special teams.

Under NFL rules, however, the Packers were able to designate the $4 million under the "likely to be earned" incentive category. Therefore, it was charged immediately against their current cap.

At the time, the Packers had about $11.9 million of cap space. Now, after the $4 million reduction plus the addition of Krause and wide receiver Koren Robinson, the Packers are $7.39 million beneath the cap.

After the season, the Packers will have the $4 million incentive that wasn't earned by Krause to show league officials. That amount will be debited back against their cap and added to their adjusted cap for 2008.

The Packers are trying to use some of their remaining cap space on a contract extension for tight end Donald Lee. No doubt, the team is considering whether to make a move on defensive tackle Corey Williams, their other top player headed for unrestricted free agency.

But if the Packers have a substantial amount of cap room left by the end of the league year, it is expected they'll make other financial maneuvers to ensure that it is credited onto their adjusted '08 cap.

GOSH NOW I SEE WHY WE AVOIDED ALL THAT SPENDING. GOOD TO SEE WE'RE USING ALL OF THAT CAP SPACE UP ALL SO WISELY

[HarveyWallbangers]

I'm cool with this. Soon our best players will be coming up on FA. Keep pushing that money back. I'd rather keep the corps of the team together over blowing my wad on FAs. (Most of which haven't come close to panning out.) Take care of your own. That's a recipe for success in the NFL. See Indianapolis and Pittsburgh.

[Rastak]

Kind of interesting from PFT.com

PACKERS CAP SHENANIGANS THE CAUSE OF THE GOODELL MEMO?

Several readers have been trying to help us figure out the catalyst for the Friday memo from NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell requiring all owners to submit a weekly statement in which they expressly state that they authorize any new contracts or renegotiations, and that they have read the documents.

Some of our readers thought that the e-mail might have been caused by the Antonio Bryant situation. Bryant has sued the league to block the imposition of discipline under the substance-abuse policy, and the paperwork and media reports suggest that Bryant was and/or is poised to sign with another team. But since the new procedure applies only to new contracts and not to mere negotiations, the Bryant case most likely isn't the reason for the change.

A couple of other readers have raised a much more intriguing possibility. Bob McGinn of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel recently reported that, on October 23, the Green Bay Packers recently signed tight end Ryan Krause from their practice squad. His one-year contract with a prorated base salary of $510,000 also included a $4 million "likely to be earned" incentive that kicks in only if Krause blocks more than six punts over the balance of the season.

It would be quite an impressive feat, especially since Krause doesn't play on the punt block team.

Because these types of incentives are characterized under the CBA as "likely to be earned," the cap charge applied when the deal was signed. If/when Krause doesn't earn the incentive, the money gets pushed into the next cap year.

It's a fairly common device. Earlier this year, the Vikings used the tactic to push $13.2 million in 2007 cap money into 2008 when extending the contract of defensive tackle Pat Williams.

But the NFL Players Association isn't keen on the practice, since it essentially takes money out of the pockets of the players and pushes it into a future cap year. "What you don't want is all that money taken out of the pool for other players who might get contract extensions during the season," a union source told Jason Cole of Yahoo! Sports in September.

Our guess? After the Krause contract was reported, the union went bonkos. The league office looked into the situation, and Packers president Bob Harlan (since there's no specific owner of the publicly-held team) said that he didn't know that the front office had pulled of the cap maneuver. So, as a result, the league office has decided to intercept any future efforts by owners to rely upon the "I don't know nothing" defense by requiring all of them to affirmatively state that they are aware of any new contracts, and that they have read them.

[Bretsky]

Kind of interesting from PFT.com

PACKERS CAP SHENANIGANS THE CAUSE OF THE GOODELL MEMO?

Several readers have been trying to help us figure out the catalyst for the Friday memo from NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell requiring all owners to submit a weekly statement in which they expressly state that they authorize any new contracts or renegotiations, and that they have read the documents.

Some of our readers thought that the e-mail might have been caused by the Antonio Bryant situation. Bryant has sued the league to block the imposition of discipline under the substance-abuse policy, and the paperwork and media reports suggest that Bryant was and/or is poised to sign with another team. But since the new procedure applies only to new contracts and not to mere negotiations, the Bryant case most likely isn't the reason for the change.

A couple of other readers have raised a much more intriguing possibility. Bob McGinn of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel recently reported that, on October 23, the Green Bay Packers recently signed tight end Ryan Krause from their practice squad. His one-year contract with a prorated base salary of $510,000 also included a $4 million "likely to be earned" incentive that kicks in only if Krause blocks more than six punts over the balance of the season.

It would be quite an impressive feat, especially since Krause doesn't play on the punt block team.

Because these types of incentives are characterized under the CBA as "likely to be earned," the cap charge applied when the deal was signed. If/when Krause doesn't earn the incentive, the money gets pushed into the next cap year.

It's a fairly common device. Earlier this year, the Vikings used the tactic to push $13.2 million in 2007 cap money into 2008 when extending the contract of defensive tackle Pat Williams.

But the NFL Players Association isn't keen on the practice, since it essentially takes money out of the pockets of the players and pushes it into a future cap year. "What you don't want is all that money taken out of the pool for other players who might get contract extensions during the season," a union source told Jason Cole of Yahoo! Sports in September.

Our guess? After the Krause contract was reported, the union went bonkos. The league office looked into the situation, and Packers president Bob Harlan (since there's no specific owner of the publicly-held team) said that he didn't know that the front office had pulled of the cap maneuver. So, as a result, the league office has decided to intercept any future efforts by owners to rely upon the "I don't know nothing" defense by requiring all of them to affirmatively state that they are aware of any new contracts, and that they have read them.

Kind of funny when you think about it; behind closed doors TT thinking of ways to fudge contracts to he can push more numbers into this year and free up cap space for the future.

Oh well, sounds like he'll need to find the next loophole to work through

[RashanGary]

This sounds like BS. I don't believe the league is pissed about this. It's not taking away from the players at all. That money has to eventually be spent.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Sounds like typical B.S. from Florio. He really hasn't come through much--since some initial successes that got him noticed.

[Rastak]

Sounds like typical B.S. from Florio. He really hasn't come through much--since some initial successes that got him noticed.

So where did you first hear of the memo from the league office? I didn't hear of it anywhere but at PFT. I think you're a bit bitter there Harv!

[retailguy]

This sounds like BS. I don't believe the league is pissed about this. It's not taking away from the players at all. That money has to eventually be spent.

Not so sure I agree with you. While I'm sure everyone looks the other way for moving some money, the Packers are moving LOTS this year. Remember how pissed the NFL got over the Hutchinson deal? Maybe too much, is too much. $4 mill for 6 blocked punts for a guy not on the punt team? A little blatent, don't you think?

There could be some merit to this.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Sounds like typical B.S. from Florio. He really hasn't come through much--since some initial successes that got him noticed.

So where did you first hear of the memo from the league office? I didn't hear of it anywhere but at PFT. I think you're a bit bitter there Harv!

It would be interesting to see how often Florio is wrong. I'm guessing many more times than not. I don't care for his kind of journalism. Throw everything out there to get attention (to make him more money). The fact he's a Vikings and takes cheap shots at Favre makes me more likely to call him. Bitter? Over what? Somebody should review Florio's rumors on here.

Didn't you yourself brag about the Vikings ($10M) and other teams doing this type of thing?

Yeah, the NFL got real pissed at the Hutchinson deal. So much so that they didn't even close the poison pill loophole.

Funny!

http://packerrats.com/ratchat/viewtopic.php?t=1107&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=florio

[retailguy]

Harv,

don't you find it strange that no one else has done a deal like that since? I think there was some truth to the rumors about warnings from the NFL office.

Maybe I'm wrong, in any event, I don't understand why you posted a link to that thread. What were you pointing out?