NFL salary cap system is insane

[JPostSam]

man, the nfl salary cap system is insane.

jut take the cowboys as an example:

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/dallas-cowboys/cap-hit/

(every team in the league has similar problems.)

romo's $16.8 million cap hit means that 1 man takes up more than 13% of the cap.

put another way: romo counts more than every wide receiver, tight end, and running back on the roster, COMBINED.

didn't i say this was insane?

how about this: for the price of doug free ($10 million!) you can get demarcus ware AND bruce carter -- with enough change left over for either dwayne harris, dan bailey or alex albright.

DOUG FREAKING FREE!

like i said, insane.

vickers counts for more than demarco murray.

yeah. insane.

just 5 salaries -- 9% of the roster -- take up more than 41% of the cap.

there's no other word for that but insane.

when doug free costs as much as TEN sean lees, how are you supposed to field a decent team?

when 1 bad contract can keep you from signing or re-signing 3 or 4 solid contributors, or bringing in an above-average free agent forces you to cut 3 or 4 solid contributors to get under the cap, how are you supposed to maintain continuity from one year to the next?

it's insane, i tell you.

the problem is not just the amounts of money. i mean, it's not only that free costs more than smith, livings, bernadeau, costa and cook COMBINED (although that is definitely insane). it's that excellent players are getting pushed into retirement while they can still play, because their contracts are so backloaded to manipulate the cap that a team can no longer justify the expense. it's like people are buying lexuses, paying $100 a month for 3 years, then looking at a balloon payment of $2,000 a month thereafter and saying, "damn, i've got to sell this thing or default on my loan. i can't spend $2,000 a month on a car!" but it's still a good car!

i'm shaking my head because this whole thing is insane.

these signing bonuses are nonsensical, too. i don't know why the league pretends they're a separate part of the player's compensation, prorating them over the life of the contract, and allowing teams to use fuzzy math on salary figures.

(what do you mean demarcus ware's salary is only $840,000 a year? the backup quarterback, who only threw 10 passes all last season, is going to make $1.35 million this year! who in their right mind believes kyle orton should be paid more than demarcus ware? that's right -- no one. because it's insane!)

someone needs to have the guts to say, "no player on any team can count for more than 10% of their team's salary cap. there can be no phony baloney 'signing bonuses'. you pay a player a salary, period. and terms of the deal are like this: 5 years for $50 million means 5 years at $10 million per year. if they're not worth it, don't offer it and then try to play around with the numbers after the fact."

that, at least, would be sane.

[/rant]

 

[Blue Eyed Devil]

maybe it's not the salary cap that's insane, maybe (just maybe) it's the GM of the team who's making these deals that is.

 

[speedkilz88]

The reason Ware is lower this year is because they restructured and lowered his base into signing bonus(5 million). They could do that with Free too, but they either plan on getting him to take a pay cut or they will release him. They probably haven't done that yet because they don't have a replacement yet other than Parnell. Thought being if you don't get his savings until June than why not wait until after the draft to make a decision on him. There also won't be a lot of money left in June so he may be more acceptable to a pay cut then.

 

[JPostSam]

The reason Ware is lower this year is because they restructured and lowered his base into signing bonus(5 million). They could do that with Free too, but they either plan on getting him to take a pay cut or they will release him. They probably haven't done that yet because they don't have a replacement yet other than Parnell. Thought being if you don't get his savings until June than why not wait until after the draft to make a decision on him. There also won't be a lot of money left in June so he may be more acceptable to a pay cut then.

i understand that ware's numbers are doctored. that's part of my point. the man signed a 7-year, $78 million contract. put it on the books for just over $11 million per year, and be done with it. any other accounting of it is voodoo.

also, there's no way the cowboys will pay doug free 10 million dollars this year. and i'm not sure he'd be willing to take a fraction of that figure... which is also insane, of course. because, let's face it: the indignity of being told that you suck is mitigated quite a lot by 2 or 3 million bucks.

 

[JPostSam]

maybe it's not the salary cap that's insane, maybe (just maybe) it's the GM of the team who's making these deals that is.

every gm in the league is doing this.

 

[TwoCentPlain]

The veterans complained about the rookies getting obscene salaries so the NFL and the union adopted the rookie salary cap. More money for the vets and less for the rookies.

The NFL and the union agreed to a salary cap tied to the TV revenue. The TV revenue didn't rise as much as the players expected.

The best thing for the majority of the NFL players is to adopt a maximum wage of $10M/yr or something. That would allow a better distribution of the available money.

The league would also benefit if a percentage of the salary cap (say 15% of the salary cap) would be set aside and awarded to the players at the completion of the season who were the most productive for the year. The captains could vote on it alone or along with the players. The players could decide to spread the money around as they see fit.

 

[JPostSam]

The veterans complained about the rookies getting obscene salaries so the NFL and the union adopted the rookie salary cap. More money for the vets and less for the rookies.

The NFL and the union agreed to a salary cap tied to the TV revenue. The TV revenue didn't rise as much as the players expected.

The best thing for the majority of the NFL players is to adopt a maximum wage of $10M/yr or something. That would allow a better distribution of the available money.

The league would also benefit if a percentage of the salary cap (say 15% of the salary cap) would be set aside and awarded to the players at the completion of the season who were the most productive for the year. The captains could vote on it alone or along with the players. The players could decide to spread the money around as they see fit.

i do think the rookie system is part of the solution. i also think vets are starting to see that signing the biggest contract you can get 1) is meaningless, because they'll cut you or demand a pay cut if you're not worth it 2 or 3 years later; 2) is worth less in the long run than a more reasonable deal that goes to completion and 3) limits your chances of playing with enough high-level guys to win games that mean something.

 

[Blast From The Past]

man, the nfl salary cap system is insane.

jut take the cowboys as an example:

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/dallas-cowboys/cap-hit/

(every team in the league has similar problems.)

romo's $16.8 million cap hit means that 1 man takes up more than 13% of the cap.

put another way: romo counts more than every wide receiver, tight end, and running back on the roster, COMBINED.

didn't i say this was insane?

how about this: for the price of doug free ($10 million!) you can get demarcus ware AND bruce carter -- with enough change left over for either dwayne harris, dan bailey or alex albright.

DOUG FREAKING FREE!

like i said, insane.

vickers counts for more than demarco murray.

yeah. insane.

just 5 salaries -- 9% of the roster -- take up more than 41% of the cap.

there's no other word for that but insane.

when doug free costs as much as TEN sean lees, how are you supposed to field a decent team?

when 1 bad contract can keep you from signing or re-signing 3 or 4 solid contributors, or bringing in an above-average free agent forces you to cut 3 or 4 solid contributors to get under the cap, how are you supposed to maintain continuity from one year to the next?

it's insane, i tell you.

the problem is not just the amounts of money. i mean, it's not only that free costs more than smith, livings, bernadeau, costa and cook COMBINED (although that is definitely insane). it's that excellent players are getting pushed into retirement while they can still play, because their contracts are so backloaded to manipulate the cap that a team can no longer justify the expense. it's like people are buying lexuses, paying $100 a month for 3 years, then looking at a balloon payment of $2,000 a month thereafter and saying, "damn, i've got to sell this thing or default on my loan. i can't spend $2,000 a month on a car!" but it's still a good car!

i'm shaking my head because this whole thing is insane.

these signing bonuses are nonsensical, too. i don't know why the league pretends they're a separate part of the player's compensation, prorating them over the life of the contract, and allowing teams to use fuzzy math on salary figures.

(what do you mean demarcus ware's salary is only $840,000 a year? the backup quarterback, who only threw 10 passes all last season, is going to make $1.35 million this year! who in their right mind believes kyle orton should be paid more than demarcus ware? that's right -- no one. because it's insane!)

someone needs to have the guts to say, "no player on any team can count for more than 10% of their team's salary cap. there can be no phony baloney 'signing bonuses'. you pay a player a salary, period. and terms of the deal are like this: 5 years for $50 million means 5 years at $10 million per year. if they're not worth it, don't offer it and then try to play around with the numbers after the fact."

that, at least, would be sane.

[/rant]

I pretty much agree with the jist of your entire rant.

 

[Fla Cowpoke]

Old players cost more than young ones. Big deal. It's the same way in every other sport.

 

[visionary]

maybe it's not the salary cap that's insane, maybe (just maybe) it's the GM of the team who's making these deals that is.

Quoted for truth

GM and son(s) ( Stephen and Garrett) have run this team into the ground

 

[AmericasTeam31]

It's a logical thought, but there are a few issues keeping it from ever becoming a reality:

1. How can you implement it now? You can't very well go back and restructure every contract on your roster to fit into this mold. There is just no way for the teams to get all their players to renegotiate their contracts to fit this.

2. Guaranteed money. NFL contracts (at least the annual salary part) are not guaranteed. Without signing bonuses and roster bonuses there is no guaranteed money for the players in their deal. How much roster movement do you think would go on if every player on the team was essentially on a one year contract and was able to cut, penalty free, at the end of each season? Even if you kept the bonus program, how do you divide that up into the salary cap figures?

3. Who sets the market and what is the price? If I had the time and resources, I would look at our roster and figure out every deal that we have in place and see if with your idea we can even field a team... It would seem to me that this idea puts the odds of fielding a 50+ player roster even more slim without a market adjustment. Which player is gonna be the first at their position to accept a "new" contract based on a non existent market value?

This is the beauty of the current system for both the players and the team. The back loading of contracts offsets the up front signing bonus and levels the playing field for both sides. IF this were the NBA where all contracts are guaranteed we'd be stuck with guys like Free with no chance of getting out from under his contract. But since he's already gotten his bonus money and he knows he's not getting anywhere close to $10mill on the open market, it leaves the team some leverage to renegotiate or threaten a cut.

 

[erod]

You have it completely backwards.

It only takes one GM to pay an insane salary to a player, and a new market is established. The salary cap is the only thing sane thing in the equation.

 

[TwoCentPlain]

Quoted for truth

GM and son(s) ( Stephen and Garrett) have run this team into the ground

So, I guess we can infer from your thinking that ground = playing for NFC East title in final week of last two seasons.

If that is ground level, location-wise (other than FL and KC) where exacty are the Jaguars and Chiefs? And Browns? How about the Eagles lately? Great GM moves there, no doubt.

And wouldn't you agree the Jets had/have a well-respected GM? And where are the Jets right now? Wouldn't you agree the Jets are much closer to "the ground" than the Cowboys?

Basically, if it weren't for poor coaching the past two years, the Cowboys would have most likely been in the playoffs.

 

[Doomsday101]

I'm no fan of the cap or Free agency. Once Players got their FA it was only logical the Owners would call for a cap. They went hand in hand.

 

[randy932]

So, I guess we can infer from your thinking that ground = playing for NFC East title in final week of last two seasons.

If that is ground level, location-wise (other than FL and KC) where exacty are the Jaguars and Chiefs? And Browns? How about the Eagles lately? Great GM moves there, no doubt.

And wouldn't you agree the Jets had/have a well-respected GM? And where are the Jets right now? Wouldn't you agree the Jets are much closer to "the ground" than the Cowboys?

Basically, if it weren't for poor coaching the past two years, the Cowboys would have most likely been in the playoffs.

OhNo blew it last year for certain.

 

[visionary]

So, I guess we can infer from your thinking that ground = playing for NFC East title in final week of last two seasons.

If that is ground level, location-wise (other than FL and KC) where exacty are the Jaguars and Chiefs? And Browns? How about the Eagles lately? Great GM moves there, no doubt.

And wouldn't you agree the Jets had/have a well-respected GM? And where are the Jets right now? Wouldn't you agree the Jets are much closer to "the ground" than the Cowboys?

Basically, if it weren't for poor coaching the past two years, the Cowboys would have most likely been in the playoffs.

1) coaching is certainly a big part of it and that is why i included jason in my post

2) it is a sad day when fan expectations are so low that we are happy to be better than the bottom dwellers in the NFL: thanx making my point

3) the jets GM built a team that went to the AFC CG for 2 years and then when they under-performed for the last 2, you know what happened to that GM? he got fired. Yeah, novel concept, your performance determines your job security. What has our team done in the last 5, 10, 15 years? same GM, no accountability

 

[Doomsday101]

man, the nfl salary cap system is insane.

jut take the cowboys as an example:

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/dallas-cowboys/cap-hit/

(every team in the league has similar problems.)

romo's $16.8 million cap hit means that 1 man takes up more than 13% of the cap.

put another way: romo counts more than every wide receiver, tight end, and running back on the roster, COMBINED.

didn't i say this was insane?

how about this: for the price of doug free ($10 million!) you can get demarcus ware AND bruce carter -- with enough change left over for either dwayne harris, dan bailey or alex albright.

DOUG FREAKING FREE!

like i said, insane.

vickers counts for more than demarco murray.

yeah. insane.

just 5 salaries -- 9% of the roster -- take up more than 41% of the cap.

there's no other word for that but insane.

when doug free costs as much as TEN sean lees, how are you supposed to field a decent team?

when 1 bad contract can keep you from signing or re-signing 3 or 4 solid contributors, or bringing in an above-average free agent forces you to cut 3 or 4 solid contributors to get under the cap, how are you supposed to maintain continuity from one year to the next?

it's insane, i tell you.

the problem is not just the amounts of money. i mean, it's not only that free costs more than smith, livings, bernadeau, costa and cook COMBINED (although that is definitely insane). it's that excellent players are getting pushed into retirement while they can still play, because their contracts are so backloaded to manipulate the cap that a team can no longer justify the expense. it's like people are buying lexuses, paying $100 a month for 3 years, then looking at a balloon payment of $2,000 a month thereafter and saying, "damn, i've got to sell this thing or default on my loan. i can't spend $2,000 a month on a car!" but it's still a good car!

i'm shaking my head because this whole thing is insane.

these signing bonuses are nonsensical, too. i don't know why the league pretends they're a separate part of the player's compensation, prorating them over the life of the contract, and allowing teams to use fuzzy math on salary figures.

(what do you mean demarcus ware's salary is only $840,000 a year? the backup quarterback, who only threw 10 passes all last season, is going to make $1.35 million this year! who in their right mind believes kyle orton should be paid more than demarcus ware? that's right -- no one. because it's insane!)

someone needs to have the guts to say, "no player on any team can count for more than 10% of their team's salary cap. there can be no phony baloney 'signing bonuses'. you pay a player a salary, period. and terms of the deal are like this: 5 years for $50 million means 5 years at $10 million per year. if they're not worth it, don't offer it and then try to play around with the numbers after the fact."

that, at least, would be sane.

[/rant]

Romo contract was not a big deal until this season, it is just the way the contacts are done. when his cap hit was 4.5 in 08 and 09 no one said a thing or in 2011 and 2012 when the hit was 6 and then 8 mill. If you look at the individual year as opposed to the overall contract it can be over whelming.

 

[conner01]

i don't have a problem with the cap. you can't take away bonus money unless you make contracts guaranteed and thats never, ever going to happen and should'nt. thats what the bonus money is for. rookies should make less than vets and comparing vickers to murray is silly since murray is under his rookie deal.
the salary cap is doing exactly what it was intended to do. it creates parity and like it or not thats good for the league as a whole

 

[AmericasTeam31]

i don't have a problem with the cap. you can't take away bonus money unless you make contracts guaranteed and thats never, ever going to happen and should'nt. thats what the bonus money is for. rookies should make less than vets and comparing vickers to murray is silly since murray is under his rookie deal.
the salary cap is doing exactly what it was intended to do. it creates parity and like it or not thats good for the league as a whole

Agreed! Given Jerry's history with paying current players, the last thing Cowboys fans should want is fully guaranteed contracts! We would have NO ONE on our roster if we couldn't cut/restructure players contracts from the books...

 

[Hook'em#11]

I would much rather not have the salary cap. Wish it were gone.