Just what kind of a CAP HIT?

[Mr Cowboy]

I think it would be too big and would mess up our plans to sign Newman next year

I don't think we re-sign Newman. He will be to old, 30+, to give him a big money contract.

I think we take 2 or three CB's in this draft, at least one in the very early part of the draft. Kind of how the Eagles did when they took Brown and Sheppard, when Taylor and the other guy hit 30.

 

[iceberg]

Russell got 30+ million signing bonus yet the cap hit was less then 3 million? that leaves 27+ million to be spread over the next 5 years? THAT is going to hurt. And that is not counting the rest of the money in that contract.

Russell didn't even get a signing bonus. His cap numbers are $2,976,320, $3,720,400, $4,464,480, $5,208,560, $5,952,640 and $6,696,720. Everything else in his contract is based on incentives.

defination of SLAPDOWN ^^^^^

 

[Beast_from_East]

Hard to say exactly what the cap hits would be because we don't know how the deal would be structured, but like I said in a previous thread, Jamarcus Russell got 6yr/60M last year so you can bet DMac would want somewhere in the 6yr/65M range. Thats a average of almost 11m a year for a RB. I'm pretty sure it would make a guy who has never played a down the highest paid RB in the NFL from the start. There is a reason NFL teams don't draft RB's #1 overall these days, and this trade makes zero sense.

$11 mill per season for a rookie RB

 

[TellerMorrow34]

If he signs a 6 year 65 million dollar deal how in the world do you get it as only a 3 million cap hit in year one and a 4 in year two?

That would mean over the final four years of the deal you'd have to pay 58 million dollars jumping the cap hit over 10 million per year. That's a stupid increase and one that would make it IMPOSSIBLE, if he sucked, to dump out of it. (Of course it would be impossible either way, I suppose, cause of how much you're paying)

Not to mention 30+ of that is going to be guarunteed money (last years first got 30 million guarunteed) so that is going to be spread out, as evenly as possible, over the length of the contract. That means the bonus money, alone, is at least a 5 million dollar hit.

I think the cap number would be more around the 6-7 million range and it's far to much to give to anyone, who hasn't played.


Edit: Russel's signing bonus, so to speak, was that 30 million of his deal is guarunteed.

 

[theogt]

If he signs a 6 year 65 million dollar deal how in the world do you get it as only a 3 million cap hit in year one and a 4 in year two?

That would mean over the final four years of the deal you'd have to pay 58 million dollars jumping the cap hit over 10 million per year. That's a stupid increase and one that would make it IMPOSSIBLE, if he sucked, to dump out of it. (Of course it would be impossible either way, I suppose, cause of how much you're paying)

Not to mention 30+ of that is going to be guarunteed money (last years first got 30 million guarunteed) so that is going to be spread out, as evenly as possible, over the length of the contract. That means the bonus money, alone, is at least a 5 million dollar hit.

I think the cap number would be more around the 6-7 million range and it's far to much to give to anyone, who hasn't played.


Edit: Russel's signing bonus, so to speak, was that 30 million of his deal is guarunteed.

He won't necessarily see all $61 million of the contract, and even if he does it won't all count against the cap.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

Granted, but that is where that big guaruntee they're going to have to give is going to come into play. It's going to work much the same way that Roy's Signing Bonus has, thus making it impossible to dumb out of the deal, or move him, if he winds up not being as good as advertised after a couple of years. Then you're going to have to sit there with him for another 3 seasons because trading him or cutting him would just be putting the impact of that guaruntee all into your cap and not having the player anymore.

WAY too much to risk, on the future of your cap, just because the guy is fast and can throw 2 or 3 passes a season.

 

[theogt]

Granted, but that is where that big guaruntee they're going to have to give is going to come into play. It's going to work much the same way that Roy's Signing Bonus has, thus making it impossible to dumb out of the deal, or move him, if he winds up not being as good as advertised after a couple of years. Then you're going to have to sit there with him for another 3 seasons because trading him or cutting him would just be putting the impact of that guaruntee all into your cap and not having the player anymore.

WAY too much to risk, on the future of your cap, just because the guy is fast and can throw 2 or 3 passes a season.

The Russell contract just guaranteed his yearly salaries, which look to be the numbers that Adam provided. There was no signing bonus or the like. He has incentives, but those won't necessarily count against the cap.

There is some risk involved, obviously, but people vastly overrate the cost, at least in terms of cap value, of rookies.

As for not being able to move a rookie because of his guaranteed money, I think there are other reasons it's imprudent to release a 1st round pick unless he's injured.

 

[Billy Bullocks]

First of all, If we trade up to get McFadden #1 overall, I will forget all the good Jerry has done as of late. HE CANT BE THAT STUPID.

You've got a guy in Barber who is definately a top 10 back in this league. Now he hasn't proven he can carry the ball 20+ times a game, but he's had some good outings when he did. It seems oh so much more logical to add a RB in the 2nd-3rd round to complement Barber than to mortgage the future on a guy like McFadden.

I think Adrian Peterson has added alot of hype to what a rookie RB brings to the table. And that's probably what is fueling the hype around him to Dallas (coupled with the Jerry Arkansas thing). I just don't think he's worth the risk when there are so many backs who should be available at 22 and 28 and in the 2nd round.

Id rather have, for exaple, Jonathan Stewart and Marion Barber, PLUS the rest of our draft and salary cap space, than Darren McFadden, and that's it. Especially considering it's time we add another CB, and definately a young WR to groom....the future is not Sam Hurd and Patrick Crayton.

And look at teams like the Pats, or Colts, or other recent SB winners. Kevin Faulk and Maroney (late 1st rounder), Rhodes and Addai (late 1st round pick)....hell Pittsburgh found their guy undrafted.

You don't mortgage your future to get a RB. Look how many top 10 picks have been busts as of late. Benson, Williams (often injured), etc.

I think it's too risky, especially when you have a RB and only need a complement to make it work.

Also, look at what the succesful teams in this league have done (besides having a franchise QB, which we do)...good drafting. Philly (ok so they didnt win anything, but they sure were good for a consistant stretch), New England, Indy, they all hold onto draft and reload the middle and bottom of their roster. New ENgland finally broke tradition this year and got Thomas, and then traded for Moss and Welker. But those trades worked out great for them.

 

[CowboyJeff]

Here's what I would do to keep teams from shying away from the #1 pick. It seems it's only going to get worse every year:

1) The players you draft DO NOT count against the salary cap.
2) Lower the salary cap significantly and only have it count for free agents.

 

[The Panch]

Here's what I would do to keep teams from shying away from the #1 pick. It seems it's only going to get worse every year:

1) The players you draft DO NOT count against the salary cap.
2) Lower the salary cap significantly and only have it count for free agents.

That makes no sense. The league would be played by teams just extending player's contracts and you'd see more expensive players staying with their team cause they could afford to pay em(atleast ones like Washington and Dallas).

Dont get me wrong, I'd love it considering we got an owner will toss a billion dollars for a stadium, but the league isnt stupid. They want parody and that would prevent it.

 

[5mics]

I don't think we re-sign Newman. He will be to old, 30+, to give him a big money contract.
I think we take 2 or three CB's in this draft, at least one in the very early part of the draft. Kind of how the Eagles did when they took Brown and Sheppard, when Taylor and the other guy hit 30.

Yet he STILL is a top-10 CB. I disagree, we NEED to re-sign him. Taking 2-3, rookie CB's does not guarantee they will produce like T-New. So you want Henry and a rookie CB out there???

 

[burmafrd]

I guess I confused guaranteed money with signing bonus. Interesting on how rookie contracts differ from FA contracts. Still, the sum is going to be around $31 million for the first pick in the upcoming draft. If we are only able to spread it around for 6 years, its still going to be a significant cap hit. And just how much more production will we get for all that money? Maybe a few more TDs a year ( MB3 already scores a lot); maybe 3-500 more yds a year.
Unless we cut way down on the carries we want to give MB3. If we want to give him 15-20 carries a game then how many would McFadden get?
If instead we give McFadden the 15-20 carries and MB3 gets the 10 or so- just how much more will mcFadden give us over what MB3 would? Is that worth 4-6 million in cap space a year?

 

[Sandyf]

WOW, we are all over the place on this.

It is about the structure of the contract and the guarantees within it that make it feasible. Look at Nate Clements contract with San Francisco. Although it was for $81 million, only $22 million was guaranteed and the last three years were heavy in salary, ones that he will never see.

Could we sign McFadden to a similar contract such as Russell's with Oakland? Sure we could but my question is why. Whatever RB we get in the offseason be it free agency or the draft, will share carries with Barber. That said, the RB should be a speed back and probably not a banger like Barber.

Now, we have several things going against us in terms of what is going to happen. IMO, McFadden isn't worth going up to get, it just cost to much in picks especially when RB isn't the only spot that needs attention.

One, Jerry appears to be in lust for McFadden but it could be smoke.
Two, Switzer whom Jerry listens to says that McFadden will be better than Peterson. Take that for what it is worth.
Three, the Parcells-Jones connection just flat scares me a little.
Four, has Jerry learned his lessons or will he go back to being the old Jerry.

Alot remains to be seen and it is going to happen faster than we think.

 

[CowboyJeff]

That makes no sense. The league would be played by teams just extending player's contracts and you'd see more expensive players staying with their team cause they could afford to pay em(atleast ones like Washington and Dallas).

Dont get me wrong, I'd love it considering we got an owner will toss a billion dollars for a stadium, but the league isnt stupid. They want parody and that would prevent it.

the current system penalizes teams for drafting well. The better you draft, the higher the likelihood you cannot afford to sign/keep/pay your draft picks longer than 4 years. That's a crime. The only way around this is to not have your draft picks count against the salary cap. The owners are billionaries and can afford to pay expensive players if they so choose. The owners who cry poverty are BSing you. They just want to keep more money in their pockets.

We need a system that doesnt financially penalize teams for drafting well.

 

[SultanOfSix]

...but the league isnt stupid. They want parody and that would prevent it.

They want a good laugh?

 

[L-O-Jete]

They want a good laugh?

Sure! Don't we all? If not so then why give Snyder a team hmmm ?