Going all in

[xwalker]

http://espn.go.com/new-york/nfl/sto...-broncos-complete-tim-tebow-trade-second-time

That was about a salary advance which is money Tebow had already received.

Money that has already been paid to the player normally stays with the original team and money to be paid after the trade is the responsibility of the new team.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

"Thinking outside the box, I would actually approach Denver and see if they are interested in swapping 7th round draft picks to get Ware off their books. We could agree to pay some of his guaranteed money, and he would become a very nice rotational player for us. Certainly an upgrade from Spencer. Let's say between 3 and 5 million dollars."

OK. I see what you are saying. Not sure you can do what you suggest here but at least I now understand what it is you are talking about.

 

[Galian Beast]

That was about a salary advance which is money Tebow had already received.

Money that has already been paid to the player normally stays with the original team and money to be paid after the trade is the responsibility of the new team.

The money was guaranteed money that was paid ahead of time. No reason to think that couldn't be worked out in a trade.

 

[xwalker]

The money was guaranteed money that was paid ahead of time. No reason to think that couldn't be worked out in a trade.

Why would Denver want to pay part of his contract and only get a swap of late round picks when the point of the trade is to get him off the books?

 

[Galian Beast]

Why would Denver want to pay part of his contract and only get a swap of late round picks when the point of the trade is to get him off the books?

I posit that if Denver didn't guarantee Ware's contract, he would be cut. By assuming part of that guaranteed salary, denver reduces their cap hit for the year, and clears up money immediately for future caps.

You would have to involve picks or a player in a trade, so I suggested a swap of 7s.

 

[xwalker]

I posit that if Denver didn't guarantee Ware's contract, he would be cut. By assuming part of that guaranteed salary, denver reduces their cap hit for the year, and clears up money immediately for future caps.

You would have to involve picks or a player in a trade, so I suggested a swap of 7s.

Only half of his salary is guaranteed, IIRC, so the Cowboys would have to pay more than half or give up a better draft pick.

 

[irishline]

Please cite me an nfl rule where it says you can negotiate a portion of an advance but not a guaranteed salary...

Again an advance is not a guaranteed salary and you don't see the difference. This has nothing to do with rules, but everything to do with economics and why it isn't done. In Tebow's case Denver was able to lower it's cap hit by getting the Jets to agree to "repay" and take on some of that advance (aka Bonus) as their own as part of the trade.

In the case of guaranteed salary, why would we agree to pay Denver to lower their cap hit? It makes no sense. A players salary is paid out over 17 weeks at the responsibility of the team who's roster he is on. Denver can say they would repay some of it, but ultimately it doesn't change the fact that 17/17 weeks that player was on our roster (so it can't be prorated). Therefore, from a cap perspective, the team he is on the roster for that week is responsible for the cap hit associated with him.

I have seen zero language anywhere in anything stating that a player can be on the roster of team A and have his salary (not bonus or advance) be paid by team B. That is what you are proposing. The only other way is to negotiate with the player.

By assuming part of that guaranteed salary, denver reduces their cap hit for the year, and clears up money immediately for future caps.

I don't see anything anywhere that says a team can take the cap hit for another players salary anywhere. Bonus (and advances) are different beasts by nature. I could be wrong. But from a cap standpoint I just don't see it.

 

[Galian Beast]

Again an advance is not a guaranteed salary and you don't see the difference. This has nothing to do with rules, but everything to do with economics and why it isn't done. In Tebow's case Denver was able to lower it's cap hit by getting the Jets to agree to "repay" and take on some of that advance (aka Bonus) as their own as part of the trade.

In the case of guaranteed salary, why would we agree to pay Denver to lower their cap hit? It makes no sense. A players salary is paid out over 17 weeks at the responsibility of the team who's roster he is on. Denver can say they would repay some of it, but ultimately it doesn't change the fact that 17/1/7 weeks that player was on our roster (so it can't be prorated). Therefore, from a cap perspective, the team he is on the roster for that week is responsible for the cap hit associated with him.

I have seen zero language anywhere in anything stating that a player can be on the roster of team A and have his salary (not bonus or advance) be paid by team B. That is what you are proposing. The only other way is to negotiate with the player.

That's actually not the case at all. The advance was on guaranteed salary.

 

[Galian Beast]

Only half of his salary is guaranteed, IIRC, so the Cowboys would have to pay more than half or give up a better draft pick.

I think they'd be lucky to get anything at this point.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I think they'd be lucky to get anything at this point.

Guy did have 10 sacks last year. I mean, it wasn't all horrible.

 

[xwalker]

I think they'd be lucky to get anything at this point.

The point is that they get rid of half of his salary by cutting him. The Cowboys would have to pay more than half to make it better for the Broncos than to just cut him.

 

[Galian Beast]

Guy did have 10 sacks last year. I mean, it wasn't all horrible.

He disappeared late, and now they're probably going to be forced into a rebuilding process. Not sure how Ware plays a role in that.

 

[Galian Beast]

The point is that they get rid of half of his salary by cutting him. The Cowboys would have to pay more than half to make it better for the Broncos than to just cut him.

His Base Salary is 7 million. The original guaranteed money was 20 million.

He was paid 5 million in signing bonus, making the first 15 million of his contract guaranteed.

That takes you into 2016.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

He disappeared late, and now they're probably going to be forced into a rebuilding process. Not sure how Ware plays a role in that.

I don't disagree with any of this but he would obviously still have value. That's all I'm saying.

 

[Galian Beast]

I don't disagree with any of this but he would obviously still have value. That's all I'm saying.

I think he has more value to us than to the Broncos who are going to want to reinvest in younger players.

 

[burmafrd]

Ware clearly cannot play 50 a game and have a lot left inthe tank at the end of the year. All those years we did that to him have caught up to him. BUT as a 30 play a game guy that could well be a different story.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I think he has more value to us than to the Broncos who are going to want to reinvest in younger players.

He would have more value to lots of teams I think. The question is his contract.

 

[irishline]

That's actually not the case at all. The advance was on guaranteed salary.

Advances, as the post I gave your for Manning, are treated as bonuses and prorated the same way. They are not treated as an unpaid guaranteed.

I do see that you are right though on the guaranteed salary part. Good catch, I missed that. When Tebow signed the contract the salary was guaranteed. However, the next year he took the 6.2775 million in guaranteed salary and turned it into an advance, therefore changing it from a salary to a bonus from a cap hit standpoint.

From an accounting standpoint even if Denver were willing to pay part of the guaranteed salary it would still be salary and the responsibility of the team who's roster he is on each week. I cannot find anything stating that a team can pay the salary of a player on another teams roster (cap hit wise).

The only way I can see to do this would have to include the player and a renegotiation of the contract to turn that guaranteed money into a bonus or advance shifting its cap accounting. The bonus would then be Denver's responsibility and they would have to negotiate with us to pay some of it. There are a lot of moving parts to that.

Again, I could be missing something, but while I see no verbage that teams can't negotiate this, I also see no verbiage stating that a team can agree to assume the cap hit for the weekly salary of a player on another team (which is what would be happening in this case).

His Base Salary is 7 million. The original guaranteed money was 20 million.

He was paid 5 million in signing bonus, making the first 15 million of his contract guaranteed.

That takes you into 2016.

He got a $5 million signing bonus, a $5 million roster bonus, and a base salary of $3 million last year. His cap hit for this year is actually $1,666,666 more than his salary would be. So they would save money if they release him (though less than $200,000), nothing guaranteed would carry to 2106 except the prorated portion of his signing bonus (which was already paid) and of course the $10 million in non-guaranteed money (base salary and roster bonus) if they keep him.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/denver-broncos/demarcus-ware/

 

[kevm3]

I think there is a difference between saving cap (not spending it) and using it wisely on the right players. For example: If the team decides that spending cap to sign certain players, above and beyond what their market value is or should be, that's a recipe for disaster. You end up paying for players who have long outlived their value to the team. It straps you in future years. However, spending cap for players who can help you in out years is obviously desired. In the past, we have spent big money on players who were probably past their primes and we paid for it because we felt like it might get us over the top. I think that can work but usually it doesn't.

Exactly. If this means bringing in overpriced FAs which are signed to these long contracts, then no thanks. We've been 'all in' with the Roy Williams trade and the Morris Claiborne signing. Denver did the 'go all in' thing this year and it didn't work out. I hope we continue doing what we've been doing, which is making smart, long-term decisions.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

kevm3,

That's a good looking Pup you got there on your Avi.