Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Do the Bengals need to change the way in which they structure contracts?
#17
So we need to take into consideration the required escrow.  98% of guaranteed money and 35% of all salaries must be in cash in an escrow.

Burrow may require $150M go to escrow by himself. Add Chase and Higgins, and just those we will definitely re-sign after next season and this number could get well get over $250M dollars.

The salary cap is the same for all teams as is the %'s of dollars (98% of guarantees and 35% of salaries) for all teams, however the amount of actual cash in in the escrow is very different.

Wonder how the Saints can be so far over the cap yet still sign people? Restructures. How do they work? With bonuses and other guaranteed money. As long as a team has a billionaire owner that can dump cash in the escrow they can manipulate the cap.

If a team cannot afford the cash required in escrow it cannot sign new players. We have a broke owner without external income. We all know they have been hoarding cash for 2 years just to make sure we keep JoeyB. This SB run surely brought in a bunch of cash but also greater expectations for better players that come with higher guaranteed money requirements adding more stress to that escrow account.

This is why a Tunsil with a $10M guaranteed contract is so much more appealing than an Armstead who will require possibly 5X that amount in free agency (also the age factor). That's 40M less that would be required in the escrow.

I have zero doubt that the guaranteed money was a major factor in the Bates negotiation.
Reply/Quote





Messages In This Thread
RE: Do the Bengals need to change the way in which they structure contracts? - casear2727 - 03-08-2022, 06:18 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)