WSJ: What's Behind All the NFL Blowouts

[alldaway]

Here is a post season accolade that could be used to carry money over to the following year.

"Clayton makes the Pro Bowl"

That's true.  

Too bad it looks like it will be an uncapped year....>.>

[Booker Reese]

I think people are making way too much about the uncapped year.

A lot of players are going to get absolutely hosed on the change from 4 to 6 years for free agents, especially considering how short the average career span of an NFL player. 

I bet there will be a ton of holdouts by guys like Wilfork, Ruud, Ware, etc. who should be free agents but won't get to because of the uncapped year rules.

[Feel Real Good]

I think people are making way too much about the uncapped year.

A lot of players are going to get absolutely hosed on the change from 4 to 6 years for free agents, especially considering how short the average career span of an NFL player. 

I bet there will be a ton of holdouts by guys like Wilfork, Ruud, Ware, etc. who should be free agents but won't get to because of the uncapped year rules.

I agree, but for the record Wilfork will have his 6 years after this season.

[Booker Reese]

My bad - for some reason I thought that Wilfork was one of those 4 year guys. But you are right, he came out the same year as Clayton.

[Booker Reese]

Here's another flaw in that article - it's supposed to explain the "blowouts" this season.

Except, several of the teams blown-out this year (and last year) were big spenders in 2008. The Raiders spent $60 million more than the Pats in 2008. The Rams and Jags were in the top 10, and the 0-16 Lions were 13th in spending.

The article could have used an editor.

[Caveat Emperor]

Here is a post season accolade that could be used to carry money over to the following year.

"Clayton makes the Pro Bowl"

"Clayon makes the Pro Bowl" is more of a post-apocalyptic accolade -- considering it's accomplishment will undoubtedly mean the end-times are upon us.

[Caveat Emperor]

Or 1/3 of the world's population has already been wiped out. Then, he'd probably have a good shot at success.

Only if the remaining 2/3 were women, children, the elderly, and the seeing-impaired. Even then, it'd be a stretch.

so does this mean...    the Glazers "Capologists" cap spending is actually MUCH LESS than the what they are actually spending?  so we're pretty close to the minimum Cap amount, but the actual spending is much less.   that figures!     What a freaking scam!

[Booker Reese]

No, it is not what a means.

[calicojack]

Here's another major problem with that article:

Chuk wasn't signed until August 28 - in other words, right before the season started. Noah Herron was signed in November of 2008 - in the middle of the season.

If their contracts were designed to keep the team above the "floor" than the Bucs were in violation of the salary cap for most of 2008.   

Salary Cap and Salary Floor are two different things.  Salary Cap is always enforced.  Salary Floor is calculated after the end of the league year.

[Madman]

so does this mean...    the Glazers "Capologists" cap spending is actually MUCH LESS than the what they are actually spending?  so we're pretty close to the minimum Cap amount, but the actual spending is much less.   that figures!     What a freaking scam!

That is certainly what is implied.

[Booker Reese]

I assumed they were calculated at the same time.

Still, are we really to believe that the Bucs needed $25 million in shenanigans that late just in order to get to the cap floor? I find that a bit hard to believe.

[Booker Reese]

so does this mean...    the Glazers "Capologists" cap spending is actually MUCH LESS than the what they are actually spending?  so we're pretty close to the minimum Cap amount, but the actual spending is much less.   that figures!     What a freaking scam!

That is certainly what is implied.

In 2008, if actual spending was "much less" then cap spending, then the Bucs would have been bumping up against the cap ceiling. The cap floor in '08 was $98 million, and the Bucs spent - actual payments made to players - $104 million.

[mennoman]

That whole LTBE incentives stuff has been tough for me to grasp completely.  I think the name is half of my problem, since they are actually completely UNlikely to be earned.  Anyway, it seems that we were supposedly using them a while ago to carry over real room under the cap we weren't spending in a given year to the following year so that we could use it then.  Well, we're obviously NOT using it then (aka NOW or even last year).  Yet we've continued to employ/exploit the loophole/technique, even as we hover around the cap minimum.  Ownership and everyone else in the front office obviously knew there was no way we were going to be spending anything near to the cap maximum any time soon.  So what other  possible motive could there have been them to write contracts like the examples above?

[Ladyfan]

What I can't understand is why a player would sign a contract like that!    This is why I decided not to let my daughter become a lawyer even though she argues like one.   lol