I am trying to do some rough math here

[Flamma]

if the cap is $200 million in 2020 and it is normally projected to increase annually by 10%..

that means normally it would normally go up to in 2021 to $220 million.

if the proposed cap only increases by 30% that leaves...

(70% of $20,000,000 proposed increase in 2021.is $14,000,000 dollars lost.)

So the new cap for 2021 looks like $200,000,000 plus $6,000,000 adjusted cap

for a total of $206,000,000 total adjusted cap for 2021.

If the figure of our total contracts to be at $187,000,000 as of today for 2021 is correct..

$19,000,000 is available in proposed cap space I believe based on an adjusted cap of $206,000,000 for 2021.

I am lousy at math and surely I am missing something as you guys keep up with this stuff better than I..

But that seems like plenty of money to resign whom we have to keeping the team together plus some contracts could be extended and more money could factor in.

and if Dak decides to sign for less than his current asking price to gain financial security in a troubled world..

We should be in really good shape.

Agree or no?

I know you guys will tear this post apart but I am not looking for debate..just some sort of overall way to view all of this coming.

All I know is..if we win a SB or 2 because we had a FO that managed the money well, I do not want any asterisks by our name saying it is tainted or something like the strike shortened season of years back.

We can just donate a trophy to Will Clay and the FO, whatever.

For a team that has historically butchered the salary cap and probably prevented us from winning more than we should have..

I think I like this.

​

Don't count on that math. The salary cap was 143 million in 2015, it's a 198 million for 2020. It's been pretty steadily going up 10-11 million a year, not 10%.

Where are you getting the 70% of expected cap hike? If the cap was only going to rise 30% of the normal projection then no one would write an article about it. I think they were talking millions in possible cap reduction. IF there are no fans in the stands, they're going to make less money. Cap should go down, not up.

 

[Redball Express]

Because unless there’s a “pandemic clause” in the contract, owners have to pay as long as the seasons actually happen. You can’t sign someone to a contract and just not pay them because you aren’t making as much $ as you used to. The owners take the risk of losing $, not the employee. Just like any other business.

I am not sure how that would work. The season would have to be played and players paid per the basic contracts plus whatever changes have to be made by agreement.

As an employer myself at times, I can have a contract to work and I can hire you to work for me. I can tell you to set aside enough help for you to supply me the labor. But if the work suddenly stops due to no fault of my own, I do not owe you anything. You may have bought trucks to expand your workforce or moved to a bigger office to handle the workload., etc.

But should the job end, you are only paid for what you actually did..not the whole amount.

"The owners take the risk of losing $, not the employee." Really?

I think that statement is not fleshed out. I can think of many reasons why an employee could and would be on the hook for any losses. But I am not looking for any debate on that.

thanx for posting.

 

[Redball Express]

Don't count on that math. The salary cap was 143 million in 2015, it's a 198 million for 2020. It's been pretty steadily going up 10-11 million a year, not 10%.

Where are you getting the 70% of expected cap hike? If the cap was only going to rise 30% of the normal projection then no one would write an article about it. I think they were talking millions in possible cap reduction. IF there are no fans in the stands, they're going to make less money. Cap should go down, not up.

I got the 70% from another thread we all have been reading and posting to.

It just set me to thinking.

And I do not want to get into fact check this or that.

I am just asking am I thinking correctly or not.

We seem like we should be Ok for now and maybe another year going forward.

That's all.

"Cap should go down, not up." That's my question..

How do we interprete this. Does the cap consider before the pandemic or do we look at the numbers after the pandemic?

Profit is going down. Cap is either going down and not there or is there a percentage still the owners and players plan to divide ?

I am just trying to see where we are going.

 

[Flamma]

I got the 70% from another thread we all have been reading and posting to.

I'm pretty sure that thread was about the cap dropping 70 million, not 70% of the projected increase. So somewhere around 130 million instead of 210 or whatever.

That is the 2nd thread of its type. The first projected a possible 30-70 million drop I believe. So they're looking at a drop in salary cap of between 15% to 35%. Not of the projected increase, but the cap itself.

 

[Williamsboys]

I didn't like math when I was in skool, spelling was my straingth.

 

[Redball Express]

I'm pretty sure that thread was about the cap dropping 70 million, not 70% of the projected increase. So somewhere around 130 million instead of 210 or whatever.

That is the 2nd thread of its type. The first projected a possible 30-70 million drop I believe. So they're looking at a drop in salary cap of between 15% to 35%. Not of the projected increase, but the cap itself.

I will reread it. Thanx.

 

[cern]

if the cap is $200 million in 2020 and it is normally projected to increase annually by 10%..

that means normally it would normally go up to in 2021 to $220 million.

if the proposed cap only increases by 30% that leaves...

(70% of $20,000,000 proposed increase in 2021.is $14,000,000 dollars lost.)

So the new cap for 2021 looks like $200,000,000 plus $6,000,000 adjusted cap

for a total of $206,000,000 total adjusted cap for 2021.

If the figure of our total contracts to be at $187,000,000 as of today for 2021 is correct..

$19,000,000 is available in proposed cap space I believe based on an adjusted cap of $206,000,000 for 2021.

I am lousy at math and surely I am missing something as you guys keep up with this stuff better than I..

But that seems like plenty of money to resign whom we have to keeping the team together plus some contracts could be extended and more money could factor in.

and if Dak decides to sign for less than his current asking price to gain financial security in a troubled world..

We should be in really good shape.

Agree or no?

I know you guys will tear this post apart but I am not looking for debate..just some sort of overall way to view all of this coming.

All I know is..if we win a SB or 2 because we had a FO that managed the money well, I do not want any asterisks by our name saying it is tainted or something like the strike shortened season of years back.

We can just donate a trophy to Will Clay and the FO, whatever.

For a team that has historically butchered the salary cap and probably prevented us from winning more than we should have..

I think I like this.

​

isaac newton gave us differential calculus. not really sure what you've just done.

 

[Redball Express]

I'm pretty sure that thread was about the cap dropping 70 million, not 70% of the projected increase. So somewhere around 130 million instead of 210 or whatever.

That is the 2nd thread of its type. The first projected a possible 30-70 million drop I believe. So they're looking at a drop in salary cap of between 15% to 35%. Not of the projected increase, but the cap itself.

I went back and re-read it.

You are correct. Thanx for helping understand that statement.

That bodes even more darkness but it s the same for all teams.

I have to believe that the NFL and NFLPA has to have a Rainy Day contingency plan to sustain the league in the event of an issue.

But illnesses like this is a totally unknown risk to plan for.

I said this in another thread..shut the whole thing down and do not spend the resources until we know we have a cure.

Yeah, going to be disappointing but let's save lives and stop as much suffering as possible. Live to fight another day.

These people are all millionaires from what they do. The rest of us aren't. They can overcome this but the rest of us have a huge amount to lose.

 

[big dog cowboy]

I am implying that now we are.

For years we had to deal with Deon's contract when he injured his toe and we let him go..

same for Emmitt..and others like Haley when he hurt his back from those 90's teams.

Your talking 20+ years ago!

 

[Redball Express]

Your talking 20+ years ago!

Yes I am.

Ain't no statute of limitations on stupid.

 

[Flamma]

That bodes even more darkness but it s the same for all teams.

I have to believe that the NFL and NFLPA has to have a Rainy Day contingency plan to sustain the league in the event of an issue.

But illnesses like this is a totally unknown risk to plan for.

There's not a lot of ways to fix it without going to direct pay cuts. One way is to just freeze the cap. If it's only around 30 million, they can resolve that in a few years. But if it's the worse case scenario like in some of these predictions, 70 million could take a 7-8 years to recoup. Contract extensions will not be player friendly during that time to say the least.

 

[JJHLH1]

If Dallas won the SB in a tainted season it would be legit but if Philthy or SF won then it’s not, right?

Correct.

 

[Rayman70]

the well runneth dry if no fans in stands this year to help fulfil contracts players agreed to. OWNERS are panicked.

 

[kskboys]

I didn't like math when I was in skool, spelling was my straingth.

N chicks n booze.

 

[kskboys]

Because unless there’s a “pandemic clause” in the contract, owners have to pay as long as the seasons actually happen. You can’t sign someone to a contract and just not pay them because you aren’t making as much $ as you used to. The owners take the risk of losing $, not the employee. Just like any other business.

I highly highly doubt if it's that simple.

 

[Creeper]

I cannot imagine the NFL will reduce the salary cap at all, but reducing it by $70 million will have the players talking strike. Every team would be forced to cut a number of players to get under the cap and no teams would be able to sign any of those players because they would all be cap strapped too. It would be crazy.

But since the cap is based on revenue, if we see a huge decrease in revenue from a short season, no fans, or some other problems, my guess is the owners would agree to allow everyone to exceed the calculated cap by the same amount. Remember when the CBA ran out and they had an "uncapped" season, then penalized Dallas and Washington for exceeding the cap? It would be a funny rule like that.

The Cowboys are projected to be about $25 million under the cap in 2021 assuming a normal cap is set. That's with 61 players under contract. However, that does not include Dak Prescott. If he signs another franchise deal, he will count $37 million against the cap meaning Dallas will need to find $12 million just to get him signed. Then they need room for the rookies. And that means no free agents. So it is not a great situation for Dallas.

The Eagles are in a much worse position. They are projected to be $63 million over the cap. And they have no contracts to dump like the $25 million they save when they let Foles go. A reduction in the cap is going to hurt the Eagles a lot.

There is one other thought, if the players are not paid in 2020 because of a short season then their teams would come in under the cap and then they would be able to carry those savings into 2021, right? So let's say they play half a season and the players only get paid for 8 games (just an example), then teams would come in under their caps by at least 50% (which is a violation of another rule they would have to waive). But then they can add that number to their 2021 cap.

I guess I am saying they will find a way to even it out because a major reduction in the cap would blow up the league.

 

[ColoradoCowboy]

The problem with your analysis (not the math) is that you aren't taking into account WHO we have under contract in 2021 for that cap number.

For example, we have one QB under contract at this time for 2021: Clayton Thorson.

 

[Bullflop]

Yes I am.

Ain't no statute of limitations on stupid.

Don't feel bad -- sure am glad I wasn't the one to take that math task upon myself! It's a heavy load to carry. That took balls!

 

[Redball Express]

Your talking 20+ years ago!

You will recall Jerrah wanting to draft Johnnie Mansel just a few seasons back.

Something about his son over ruling him?

So Jerrah still has it in him to make a Crazy Ivan decision that could send us back to the dark ages.

 

[TwoCentPlain]

From what I read, if there is no season this year the players and owners have to negotiate something to deal with the situation. I heard the owners have clauses to get out of paying or pay reduced amounts.

Tricky how the negotiations are going to go with rich people fighting over money. Bengals owner Brown does not strike me as someone willing to pay players and lose $150M out of his pocket. Owners would have to get loans to cover paying the players unless they have a couple hundred million dollars laying around. Cash flow is the issue.

Revenue this year is going to be down. Down, Down, Deeper Down - Status Quo song, check it out. And revenue may be down for longer than the league had thought. That is the huge pole in the tent, the elephant in the room people have to consider. One year without football and a lot of fans may just realize they do not need football and would rather keep their own money.

Players can strike over reduced payments due to reduced revenue but that would be like pouring gas on a fire. Fans could leave in droves, fed up with billionaires and millionaires fighting over the fans’ money.