5 Teams Facing Serious Salary Cap Issues In 2016

[Nightman]

The article says 140m claiming the numbers from Spotrac
But the Spotrac page has it at 133m
OTC has it at 122m

Only thing I can think is that the article added the 8m for Hardy to 2016
It also lists 67 active contracts vs 53 for OTC. That would be another 8m
Neither has the full hit for BJones, which should be about 2m+
Spotrac has 4.9m for Brinkley and 3.6m for Gachkar. OTC has Brinkley at 2.9m and Gachkar at 1.9m

I would put the number a lot closer to OTC's 122m. On a 150m cap they would be 28m under and not in any trouble

 

[CCBoy]

If Carr is gone and they restructure Tyron, they will have 41M in cap space. They would need about 7M for the 1st year of a long term contract for Dez.

Nothing like actually attempting to solve a projected problem with real solutions...as always, X.

 

[Fredd]

that article is laughable and SCREAMS "get hits by using the Cowboys in my list"...the other 4 are already projected over in 2016; Dallas? projected under, and their numbers aren't even correct...articles like this make we wonder how some writers stay employed

 

[Future]

Any idea why their cap number is wildly different from this (showing $122 million in cap charges for 2016):

http://overthecap.com/salary-cap/dallas-cowboys

My guess is that they just moved over the same cap hits as this year to next year...that would be well over 20 mil for just Dez and Hardy alone.

 

[erod]

I pay almost no attention to the salary cap anymore. It's a mystical dragon. It doesn't really exist.

Any team can sign anybody they want any time they want. Numbers can be pushed around in all directions to make it work if they want to. It's a false issue created by owners to give them an excuse to not spend money their fans desperately want them to. Nothing more.

Now, if they changed it to a simple, hard cap, then you'd have a true obstacle for teams to outmaneuver.

The NFLPA knows this, which is why they pushed so hard to force teams to pay 90 percent of the cap.

 

[Sandyf]

It is an article written by someone who has no clue on how the NFL works. Looking at a possible salary cap problem before the 2016 NFL year begins is just someone with nothing to do.

Point. If you want to read the CBA, you would see that the salary cap will most likely rise at least 5 percent (7 Million) if not more. There are escalators that could make it go up as high as 20 percent more but I wouldn't count on it.

Point. There are about to be several items of the CBA renegotiated as anyone can see based on punishments doled out. The NFL wants out of court and to do that they will have a give and take session with the NFLPA. A most likely thing is the salary cap will rise as a concession.

Point. If Dallas extents Carr, which appears likely at this point, it will lower his cap value this year and next year.

Point. When Dez is signed then his cap number is lowered this year and probably a contract where a rework will happen once or twice.

Point. T. Smith contract will be redone next year since it is a $14 million hit as of now.

Point. If we keep Hardy and it is an IF, then the contract will most likely be a contract like Smith which can be reworked.

Point. Right now we have little to no dead money in 2016. That has happened when?

Point. Salary cap for every team will be in flux and every team will be under the cap before free agency, it happens every year so why worry about something that will never be a problem.

 

[jrumann59]

how many years did peopel tell me "the Commanders are going to be in cap hell"? they been in the basement longer than cap hell.

The new cap hell is below average performance. You have to sign low tier guys to fill in for depth and pray none of your starters go out. So yeah the Commanders have been in "cap hell" a while.

 

[Garrettop]

Dead money and overpaying underproducers are the only real concern re: salary cap. As already noted we have finally broken free of the former, which has a lot to do with not engaging in the latter. I'm not concerned about the Cowboys cap these days at all. The majority of "journalism" in the internet era consists of clickbait, and can generally be either skimmed or ignored outright

 

[USMarineVet]

We're missing one thing here. It's the Cowboys he's talking about.

Just as we were going to be a perpetual 8-8 team, Romo will choke in December. If he manages to escape that, Romo will choke in the playoffs. Our Defense will be one of, if not the worst in the league. JJ can't help but blunder something on Draft Day. Yada yada.

And so the story goes....

Who cares. Win football games. That's all that matters.

 

[ShiningStar]

The new cap hell is below average performance. You have to sign low tier guys to fill in for depth and pray none of your starters go out. So yeah the Commanders have been in "cap hell" a while.

they have been in coach hell more than Cap hell. two different hells.

 

[AbeBeta]

Dead money and overpaying underproducers are the only real concern re: salary cap. As already noted we have finally broken free of the former, which has a lot to do with not engaging in the latter. I'm not concerned about the Cowboys cap these days at all. The majority of "journalism" in the internet era consists of clickbait, and can generally be either skimmed or ignored outright

No. Dead money in and of itself is not a real concern. In fact, the process by which you generate dead money is actually a bit superior financially in many cases. If I can take 10 million dollars in cap charges and kick it down the road for several years, that 10 mill become a smaller % of the cap because the cap constantly rises. This like buying a car for 30k but only having to pay 25k

 

[xwalker]

No. Dead money in and of itself is not a real concern. In fact, the process by which you generate dead money is actually a bit superior financially in many cases. If I can take 10 million dollars in cap charges and kick it down the road for several years, that 10 mill become a smaller % of the cap because the cap constantly rises. This like buying a car for 30k but only having to pay 25k

Pushing money forward is an advantage. Dead money is not. Dead money can't be manipulated like contracts for active players.

Dead money is not that big of an issue up to a point. If too much hits in any given year then it's a problem, but in general people worry too much about dead money.

 

[AbeBeta]

Pushing money forward is an advantage. Dead money is not. Dead money can't be manipulated like contracts for active players.

Dead money is not that big of an issue up to a point. If too much hits in any given year then it's a problem, but in general people worry too much about dead money.

Yes. But dead money is ultimately the result of pushing money forward rather than playing "pay as you go" as teams like the Ravens tend to do.

But as you note, realistically, dead money is rather meaningless given a level of cap management that any half-brain with a copy of excel could pull off.

 

[DFWJC]

Funny stuff

Daallas may end up in better shape cap wise next year than in any time recently.

 

[Nightman]

Pushing money forward is an advantage. Dead money is not. Dead money can't be manipulated like contracts for active players.

Dead money is not that big of an issue up to a point. If too much hits in any given year then it's a problem, but in general people worry too much about dead money.

Dead money is the cap charges that were pushed forward. It doesn't activate until the player is actually cut, but any dollar pushed forward is technically dead money.

 

[KingintheNorth]

It's okay, we'll sign 4 or 5 jag linebackers with our limited cap room. We're good.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Incredibly poor journalistic reporting here.

 

[RoboQB]

Line 1 in writing a football related article or doing a TV segment... mention the Cowboys.... sad but true.

 

[xwalker]

Dead money is the cap charges that were pushed forward. It doesn't activate until the player is actually cut, but any dollar pushed forward is technically dead money.

No, it is equivalent to dead money, but technically it is prorated money until the player is cut.

Technically means actually, not equivalent or similar.

 

[Nightman]

No, it is equivalent to dead money, but technically it is prorated money until the player is cut.

Technically means actually, not equivalent or similar.

If it is pro-rated then it is also dead money. It isn't anything until it actually becomes something.

You are just parsing words. Ever website lists it as Dead Money