(03-21-2022, 12:30 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Bengals rolled over the 8th most this year. 

No they didn't.  Your numbers are not accurate.  From the source you cited

After the playoffs, the NFL will audit incentives, bonuses, etc by team. That figure will be added/subtracted to the number below.


Instead of the $5.3 million number in this list it was actually just $3.4 million.  see: 2021 NFL Team Salary Cap Space Tracker | Spotrac  That makes the Bengals rank 18th instead of 8th.  That is less than 7 other playoff teams (Eagles, Steelers, Titans, Patriots, Packers, Cowboys, Chiefs) and only $600K more than the Champion Rams.

(03-21-2022, 02:07 PM)Au165 Wrote: If you commit to going the dead cap route, cap does not matter but you have to be committed to buying cap space each year with cash (This is what the Saints have done for 5+ years). 

You can't "buy" cap space.  You can just pay to move it to later years.

And "dead cap" does matter.  This year the Saints have $29 million in dead cap space while the Bengals have only $4.6 million.  So no matter what moves the Saints do to create more "cap space" the fact is that they are starting out almost $25 million behind the Bengals.  So even if they somehow come up with the same "cap space" it means they are spending $25 million less than the Bengals in payments to players on their roster.

(03-21-2022, 12:24 PM)2MinutesHate Wrote: Anyone here think they keep Waynes just to avoid the 5 million in dead cap hit?  Could they add a year to his contract and spread out the 15 million that's left over 2 years?  He played a bit at the end of the season but didn't play in the playoffs at all really.

Just wondering as he hasn't been cut yet.  Probably just waiting to sign a replacement I suppose.

No. 

Avoiding a $5 mil dead cap hit by taking a $16 mil cap hit is the definition of cutting iff your nose to spite your face. It makes no financial sense. We save $10.9 by cutting him (minus whatever his replacement costs). 

(03-21-2022, 02:39 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You can't "buy" cap space.  You can just pay to move it to later years.

And "dead cap" does matter.  This year the Saints have $29 million in dead cap space while the Bengals have only $4.6 million.  So no matter what moves the Saints do to create more "cap space" the fact is that they are starting out almost $25 million behind the Bengals.  So even if they somehow come up with the same "cap space" it means they are spending $25 million less than the Bengals in payments to players on their roster.

Yes you can because you never have to face repercussions for it through moving different people's money around in different years. The Saints have been over the cap by at least 15 million each of the last 6 years heading into the off season, some years as much as 40 million, but it never hinders their ability to sign people. As long as you are committed to the ponzi scheme it can go on in perpetuity. The one caveat is I believe in a potential "uncapped" year like what happened leading into CBA negotiations one season it would come due.

Your second statement here is actually false when you say they are spending "$25 million less than the Bengals on players on their roster", which is actually my point. By cap they may be, but the cap is simply an accounting method but does not measure actual money spent on players in any given year. Void years and restructures are tools used to manipulate this fact. By paying CASH this year I can only have a cap hit that is minimal while paying them way more this year than that number. So teams that don't use these tools may be more hindered by the cap because their initial cap hits for players are more in year 1 than people using void years.

Interestingly we have started to use void years, last year with Reiff and now with Collins.

(03-21-2022, 02:59 PM)Au165 Wrote:  As long as you are committed to the ponzi scheme it can go on in perpetuity. 

Not when you can only pro-rate signing bonuses for 5 years.  Eventually the entire cap will be dead cap space.

Look at the Saints last year.  Here are the players they lost

Hendrickson..........$15.0 million per year
Janoris Jenkins.....$7.5 
Emanuel Sanders..$6.0
Sheldon rankins....$5.5
Jarod Cook...........$4.5

Meanwhile the only free agent they signed at more than scrub level $2.6 million per year was Jameis Winstead at just $5.5 million per year.

That is a huge loss of talent and it was the main reason they missed the playoffs.  If the cap did not matter then I am sure they would have signed other quality players to replace the ones they lost.

Now this year they have already lost Marcus Williams ($14 million per year) and still have holes to fill due to free agent starters at OT (Armstead), QB (Winston), and LB (Kwon Alexander). 

(03-21-2022, 03:30 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Not when you can only pro-rate signing bonuses for 5 years.  Eventually the entire cap will be dead cap space.

Look at the Saints last year.  Here are the players they lost

Hendrickson..........$15.0 million per year
Janoris Jenkins.....$7.5 
Emanuel Sanders..$6.0
Sheldon rankins....$5.5
Jarod Cook...........$4.5

Meanwhile the only free agent they signed at more than scrub level $2.6 million per year was Jameis Winstead at just $5.5 million per year.

That is a huge loss of talent and it was the main reason they missed the playoffs.  If the cap did not matter then I am sure they would have signed other quality players to replace the ones they lost.

Now this year they have already lost Marcus Williams ($14 million per year) and still have holes to fill due to free agent starters at OT (Armstead), QB (Winston), and LB (Kwon Alexander). 

No, because the cap hit in most cases is absorbed in a single year, so you keep rotating the hit from year to year. So dead cap hits I take this year from past void years won't effect the dead cap I take on next year because this will clear. That's why I am saying it's a ponzi scheme you just keep plugging in new dead cap then restructure other contracts to offset it rinse and repeat. 

As to letting guys go, everyone let's guys leave for various reasons. Hendrickson was let to test the market because they have Cam Jordan and drafted Marcus Davenport in the 1st round a few years prior and are giving him a shot to be the guy. Jenkins is an aging vet along with Sanders, and Cooks which those decisions are always tough.

They just resigned Winston and they have close to 20+ million in cap space (with 61 on roster). They are going to, as they do each year, do rounds in the 2nd and 3rd wave of FA to fill out the team with quality vets (that's how they signed Alexander). Again, they have done this for 6 years now and somehow every year they keep making it work. The Eagles are also notorious for doing this as well but haven't been as aggressive as of late doing it. 

(03-21-2022, 03:46 PM)Au165 Wrote: No, because the cap hit in most cases is absorbed in a single year, so you keep rotating the hit from year to year. So dead cap hits I take this year from past void years won't effect the dead cap I take on next year because this will clear. That's why I am saying it's a ponzi scheme you just keep plugging in new dead cap then restructure other contracts to offset it rinse and repeat. 

Once you push cap space down the road you are locked into the original cap.  It is impossible to keep going over the cap every year.  Eventually you would end up with zero cap space.

If the cap is 200 million and you sign 250 million worth of contracts then next year you only have 150 cap space.  If you then go back to the 200 million cap you can keep pushing 50 down the road.

But if you go over the 200 cap and sign another 250 then the next year you only have 100 in cap space.

So you either have to work under the cap at some point or else you will eventually have zero cap space.

The cap will go up some every year, but the theory still applies.  You can spend over the cap one year and continually push it down the road, but you can't continually spend over the cap and push more and more down the road.

(03-21-2022, 04:29 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Once you push cap space down the road you are locked into the original cap.  It is impossible to keep going over the cap every year.  Eventually you would end up with zero cap space.

If the cap is 200 million and you sign 250 million worth of contracts then next year you only have 150 cap space.  If you then go back to the 200 million cap you can keep pushing 50 down the road.

But if you go over the 200 cap and sign another 250 then the next year you only have 100 in cap space.

So you either have to work under the cap at some point or else you will eventually have zero cap space.

The cap will go up some every year, but the theory still applies.  You can spend over the cap one year and continually push it down the road, but you can't continually spend over the cap and push more and more down the road.

No? Like I don't even know where to start with this but pretty much everything here is wrong. For instance you can never go over the cap in terms of cap accounting. You can however spend over the cap in cash and you can, and many teams do, every year. The proration of signing bonuses allow for things like void years to exist and there is no degradation of cap space to 0 doing such because dead cap is taken in a single year than the cap space is re allocated back. Using restructures and void years along with the proration mechanic of signing bonus you can keep this up forever through proper planning (see Saints).

If you took a $50 Million dollar dead cap hit this year, assuming you didn't take a NEW $50 million hit next year (After this year's fell off) PLUS additional dead cap beyond the new $50 million you would not have a falling allotment as you say above. It's not about pushing more and more out it's about pushing the same amount forward and forward as needed via different players and deals, like a Ponzi scheme.

(03-21-2022, 05:05 PM)Au165 Wrote: It's not about pushing more and more out it's about pushing the same amount forward and forward as needed via different players and deals, like a Ponzi scheme.

Exactly.  But what I am saying is that a ponzi scheme is limited. 

If you spend 50 million over the cap one year then the next year you are either going to be limited to 150 million or else you will have to spend 250 million to get 200 value because of dead cap space.  So you either have to spend 250 million every year just to break even and get 200 million value every year or you eventually have to take a hit on the dead money.

If you try to get more than 200 million in value every year then eventually you will be spending 400 million every year just to break even and get 200 million in value.
 

Am I thinking about this correctly - seeing cap space of roughly 25.3M after Johnson's release and that does not reflect recent signings (Collins, Apple, Morgan and Irwin). As they have more then 51 players under contract, the signings of Collins, Apple, Morgan and Irwin would only impact the current cap number by the amount that their salary exceeds somebody who falls out of the top 51 salaries. So it could look like with numbers as placeholders until actuals are known:

Cap room: 25.3
Less Apple (Roughly 3.3M differential which is 4M - 700K)
Less Collins (9.3M)
Less Morgan (200K)
Less Irwin (200K)

And understood that cap space is needed for draft picks and also a balance that they will carryover to 2023. Thanks!

Am I looking at this correctly - I see roughly 18M in cap space for the upcoming season per spotrac. I understand that some of this cap space will go to draft picks and that they always keep a balance to carry forward to the next season. I really like what they've done this off season and would be excited to see them do more - but also wonder about them using some of this cap space to get creative with extending a key player or two that will be a FA next year (Bell and Pratt)

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/cincinnati-bengals/cap//

(03-29-2022, 01:47 PM)bk42 Wrote: Am I looking at this correctly - I see roughly 18M in cap space for the upcoming season per spotrac.  I understand that some of this cap space will go to draft picks and that they always keep a balance to carry forward to the next season.  I really like what they've done this off season and would be excited to see them do more - but also wonder about them using some of this cap space to get creative with extending a key player or two that will be a FA next year (Bell and Pratt)

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/cincinnati-bengals/cap//

Morgan's number is not included, but it likely does not move the number much ($100k) because he likely makes roughly the same as the guy he'll replace on the top 51.  

I would not budget more than $3 mil for the draft picks. Possibly less depending on who gets released as a result, and how many guys make the team. We definitely like to keep some money available for in-season moves/rollover and we surely will want to be able to have space on cutdown day. 

I knew we had a good bit of cap space to work with.  And I know that they can easily draft the contract so that the cap hit the first year (or years) is much smaller than the average salary.  But I am still surprised to see we have this much space left.

I use spotrac all the time. but I don't understand how they are calculating the salary cap hits for our draft picks.  Even though they have separate columns for "total" and "top 51" the numbers don't make sense.  From their projections of the salaries and signing bonuses it doesn't look like we need more than $3 million.

No real big players eligible for an extension either (Bell, Jonah).  We can still work out a long term deal with Bates if he wants to, but a new contract for Bates could actually give us more cap room (if we needed it).

I believe they can offer Burrow an extension after next season.  Maybe they will roll most of that over to use on Joe.

All I was expecting was a mid tier OT ($4-$6 million) and maybe another CB.  But I was thinking we only had about $10 million in cap space left.  I had not checked the exact numbers recently.

(03-29-2022, 03:51 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I knew we had a good bit of cap space to work with.  And I know that they can easily draft the contract so that the cap hit the first year (or years) is much smaller than the average salary.  But I am still surprised to see we have this much space left.

I use spotrac all the time. but I don't understand how they are calculating the salary cap hits for our draft picks.  Even though they have separate columns for "total" and "top 51" the numbers don't make sense.  From their projections of the salaries and signing bonuses it doesn't look like we need more than $3 million.

No real big players eligible for an extension either (Bell, Jonah).  We can still work out a long term deal with Bates if he wants to, but a new contract for Bates could actually give us more cap room (if we needed it).

I believe they can offer Burrow an extension after next season.  Maybe they will roll most of that over to use on Joe.

All I was expecting was a mid tier OT ($4-$6 million) and maybe another CB.  But I was thinking we only had about $10 million in cap space left.  I had not checked the exact numbers recently.

Due to signing bonuses, pick #31 will have the bonus portion distributed over 4 years, 2nd round pick amy have it over life of their contract as well so some of the pay would be spread out so it reduces their cap hit in 2022. Most teams structure 1st round picks this way. Picks after round 4 will have minimal impact on the cap replacing players already on the top 51. I have not looked recently, but I thought I saw only 5.3 million needed for our rookie pool.


There are teams with multiple picks in round 1 or a lot of picks that will need 10 to 18 million for their rookie pools according to Spotrac.

The great news for the Bengals is looking ahead to 2023 because we have not used a lot of cap gymnastics, we have close to 70 million in cap space. A lot of teams in 2023 are again up against the cap because they kicked the can down the road.

As for the earlier discussion, I think an easy way to see teams struggling with the cap is when you see their inability to sign their own or trade them. The Saints have no franchise QB (expensive) on their roster but still lost some of their best players the past few years, this year an all pro LT and an all pro safety off the top my head. KC traded all pro Hill and let Mathieu walk, cut a starting LB and let other receivers walk as well. The Packers traded all pro Adams. They don't do these moves if they can afford the players in the future.

Yes teams like the Saint play cap gymnastics, but eventually when something out of the norm happens *cap goes down in 2020 vs. up, then their model is screwed. It was over a 20 million swing in one year of less cap space than anticipated. Thus the cause of them getting under the cap as they have to do, but losing all pro players in the process.

(03-29-2022, 05:22 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Due to signing bonuses, pick #31 will have the bonus portion distributed over 4 years, 2nd round pick amy have it over life of their contract as well so some of the pay would be spread out so it reduces their cap hit in 2022. Most teams structure 1st round picks this way. Picks after round 4 will have minimal impact on the cap replacing players already on the top 51. I have not looked recently, but I thought I saw only 5.3 million needed for our rookie pool.

Seems to me no matter who we add to the roster, either draft pick or free agent, the cap hit would be net of the player bumped out of the top 51.  But Spotract had the same cap hit for our draft picks under both "total" and "top 51"

(03-29-2022, 09:57 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Seems to me no matter who we add to the roster, either draft pick or free agent, the cap hit would be net of the player bumped out of the top 51.  But Spotract had the same cap hit for our draft picks under both "total" and "top 51"

If you look at NFL cap for Bengals, to the right top corner it breaks down the cap. I believe the number they use for all cap includes cost of projected rookie salary without any offset of top 51 salaries but numbers do not match exactly. I was trying to figure it out. In our case the rookie pool offset is 5.3 million, but they take our current 18.3 million and subtract almost 7 million leaving us with 11 million after rookie contracts.

If you look after the cap and it breaks down every draft pick, there are 2 numbers, I think 1st is projected rookie contracts, I think the second number (5.3 million in our case) offsets against current top 51.

(03-29-2022, 10:12 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: If you look at NFL cap for Bengals, to the right top corner it breaks down the cap. I believe the number they use for all cap includes cost of projected rookie salary without any offset of top 51 salaries but numbers d o not match exactly. I was trying to figure it out. In our case the rookie pool offset is 5.3 million, but they take our current 18.3 million and subtract almost 7 million leaving us with 11 million after rookie contracts.

If you look after the cap and it breaks down every draft pick, there are 2 numbers, I thin 1st id projected rookie contracts, I think the second number (5.3 million in our case) offsets against current top 51.

Projected rookie salaries are not included either number.

Adjusted Salary Cap     212,200,000
Active Contracts (Less) 190,685,156
Dead Cap          (Less)     9,592,578  
Est Cap Space (All)         11,922,266

This number includes all 60 salaries currently signed and accounted for to the team (Stanley Morgan's numbers have not been added).

Add the 9 smallest contracts: 6,465,000 to the All Cap and you have the Top 51 number: 18,387,266

The numbers match exactly.

(03-29-2022, 05:22 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: As for the earlier discussion, I think an easy way to see teams struggling with the cap is when you see their inability to sign their own or trade them. The Saints have no franchise QB (expensive) on their roster but still lost some of their best players the past few years, this year an all pro LT and an all pro safety off the top my head. KC traded all pro Hill and let Mathieu walk, cut a starting LB and let other receivers walk as well. The Packers traded all pro Adams. They don't do these moves if they can afford the players in the future.

KC let Mathieu walk and signed Justin Reid to $10.5m/yr deal to replace him. I think letting Mathieu walk was about more than money. Also I don't think trading Hill was about a lack of cap space either. There's just no world that exists where a single WR is worth $30m/yr. They also signed a $10m/yr WR and if PFF has any basis, the "starting LB" they cut was graded at 44.1 in 2021, 50.5 in 2020, and 48.8 in 2019.

The Packers offered Adams more money than the Raiders, so that wasn't about cap struggle either, he just wanted to leave.

You're putting a whole lot of things together as evidence of struggling with the cap, but most of them simply... aren't. The Bengals didn't struggle with the cap, and they "cut a starting C". Sometimes you just want someone else.

(03-21-2022, 10:56 AM)psychdoctor Wrote: The draft may indicate whether the organization is going to extend bates, he is very popular with the organization and fans. It would be a tough pill to swallow if they let him go at the end of the year.  With that said, they took a big cap hit this year with the franchise tag.

I would imagine a safety will now be picked in the first two rounds and Bates will be long gone.  From what I understand, they are miles apart.  This frustrates me to no end.  I am fairly sure the Bengals took the average of the top 5 safeties and offered it to Jesse over 4 years, with a large signing bonus, but not all guaranteed.  This is how they have structured every contract.  His agent wants top dollar and splash, and Jesse is carrying all the risk of an "off" season and then his next contract could be half of what has been offered.  

Look at what Hilton and Awuzie are playing for.  Probably half what Jesse has been offered.  Not enough.  Well, Jesse, the agent works for you and right now he isn't serving you, he is serving himself.  

Now the Bengals will be forced to draft another safety high and this will likely be your last in Cincy with this defense around you.  There may be a big payday (short term) for a team like the Jets ahead of you, but that is only until someone comes in and wipes out their expensive talent to start over.  Sucks because everyone on this team likes you.  

(03-21-2022, 12:30 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Bengals rolled over the 8th most this year. 15 teams rolled over $2m or less. The only "playoff" team that had more rollover than the Bengals were the fake 7th seeds who shouldn't have been there and got stomped into oblivion. 3 other conference championship teams....

Rams: $137k
Chiefs: $1.32m
49ers: $1.56m

Yeah, but the Rams added OBJ late, didn't they?  That is the whole point of having a little rollover is in case of an injury and the ability to bring in a solid talent.  If you don't spend it, you can use it for bonus for someone's contract next year.  I don't blame them at all for doing it...