03-05-2016, 10:50 PM
(03-05-2016, 05:30 PM)jowczarski Wrote: Jim, why don't we see other teams across the league budgeting huge chunks of cap space towards things like the rookie pool, injury settlements, the offseason program, the practice squad, etc.?
Banner said each team allots $6-7 million to the rookie pool. It's the injury pool and carry over that changes team to team. Injury pool is totally private - a team would have to release that info to the media. The practice squad is standard and collectively bargained for every team - it's just over $100K per player x 10 players. There is a very, very small percentage of teams that will offer a single player a little more to sign to their squad over another. Offseason program is individual. The Bengals work those into bonuses because while not "technically" guaranteed, they kind of are. Every player is going to get that workout bonus.
The carryover is uniform , the NFLPA releases that. Also varies team to team. Seattle only rolled over $11K to use on free agents / extensions mocked up in 2015. Bengals always roll over a big amount, from what I understand.
Jim, I think where much of the confusion lies for some of us is why a lot of things are brought up (By Geoff) when discussing the cap. I'm not sure what the practice squad has to do with our cap space. And while I don't doubt each team, depending on where they draft, has 6-7 million budgeted for rookies, I don't understand what that figure has to do with our remaining cap dollars.
Say we draft 7 rookies. Only 3-5 of them are going to count against the cap (Top 51). So while the total for all of their respective 2016 salaries is in that range (6-7 mil) it's not what will count against us. And the biggest thing I take issue with him writing it in the way he does is he never accounts for who these rookies will replace. Some incoming players will mean existing players will come off the books. Veterans gets cut, all of who usually make more than the 2nd and 3rd round guys. So I mean, really, how much are we adding (if anything at all)?
It just seems a tad dishonest. If he were writing about the total payroll of the 2016 rookie class, then yeah, sure, it's right on the money. Setting that amount to the side makes zero sense though.
Fwiw, I thought many of these teams had those bonuses already accounted for in the "likely to be earned" category?
All I'm saying is plenty of teams are up against the cap every year. Say within 5 mil. I can't think of any team that just sets aside the money we do for these expenses. And why the team's writer (again, Geoff) references practice squad salaries I don't know. It seems as relevant to the cap conversation as toiletries and things like a Cincinnati Water Works bill.
