Are There Ways Around The Salary Cap?

[BFritz21]

I understand that the salary cap protects teams from having to spend a boatload on players, but say there's a free agent that a team really wants, they just have no salary cap space.

Would it be against league rules to find other ways to pay that player? Other ways like having him appear in commercials or at events or having him have his own product that the team sells and then gives him the proceeds? If the team owns a separate company, could it have the company pay the player?

I realize that this would be unethical, but would it be illegal in terms of league salary cap rules?

Why don't teams do it if it's not illegal? Or do they do it?

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

It is illegal. That was a (smaller) part of the problem with bounties. They were uncapped financial incentives.

[Benton]

I think anything along those lines would be against the agreements. If that were permitted , a few owners with deep pockets could just go capless and small market, small owner teams would be irrelevant.

[BFritz21]

(06-05-2017, 11:01 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: It is illegal. That was a (smaller) part of the problem with bounties. They were uncapped financial incentives.

I thought bounties were just among the players.

(06-06-2017, 01:38 AM)Benton Wrote: I think anything along those lines would be against the agreements. If that were permitted , a few owners with deep pockets could just go capless and small market, small owner teams would be irrelevant.

I figured they were but that's why I asked.

I wonder how fine of a line it is, though, and wonder if a team could say "if you come here, you'll get x amount of money from these local companies."

[BengalChris]

I believe the team arranging anything official is against the rules. However, some cities offer more opportunities for players just due to the nature of the city itself. Example such as New York and Los Angeles. I assume Las Vegas would be similar.

Can a team introduce a player to an opportunities in the city? Probably as long as it's not official.

[HarleyDog]

When a team inserts a performance clause I'm not sure that's part of the cap is it? Something like if you offered a player X-mil guaranteed but if you gain over 1,000yds during the season you get a higher amount?

[Au165]

(06-06-2017, 07:20 AM)HarleyDog Wrote: When a team inserts a performance clause I'm not sure that's part of the cap is it? Something like if you offered a player X-mil guaranteed but if you gain over 1,000yds during the season you get a higher amount?

It is a bonus and counts against the cap number.

[*ochocincos*]

(06-06-2017, 03:21 AM)BengalChris Wrote: I believe the team arranging anything official is against the rules. However, some cities offer more opportunities for players just due to the nature of the city itself. Example such as New York and Los Angeles. I assume Las Vegas would be similar.

Can a team introduce a player to an opportunities in the city? Probably as long as it's not official.

Could you imagine what would happen if Adam Jones ended up going to play for the Las Vegas Raiders after his time with the Bengals?

[*ochocincos*]

(06-06-2017, 07:20 AM)HarleyDog Wrote: When a team inserts a performance clause I'm not sure that's part of the cap is it? Something like if you offered a player X-mil guaranteed but if you gain over 1,000yds during the season you get a higher amount?

I thought that in the case of the performance clauses that the cap space had to be reserved for that extra incentive, and only in the case of that performance not being achieved would it count as available after the season was over?
So like let's say Eifert had a 10 TD incentive of $1 million. Until the season is over, that $1 million counts toward the cap, and it's only until after the season but before the start of the new league year does that money come off the cap books if he doesn't meet the performance. In which case, that freed up $1 million could then be rolled over to the next year or used toward an extension or pocketed by the owner?

[THE PISTONS]

(06-05-2017, 10:10 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: I understand that the salary cap protects teams from having to spend a boatload on players, but say there's a free agent that a team really wants, they just have no salary cap space.

Would it be against league rules to find other ways to pay that player?  Other ways like having him appear in commercials or at events or having him have his own product that the team sells and then gives him the proceeds?  If the team owns a separate company, could it have the company pay the player?

I realize that this would be unethical, but would it be illegal in terms of league salary cap rules?

Why don't teams do it if it's not illegal?  Or do they do it?

You can't do the ways you mention...but the Steelers restructure contracts all the time to sign players. Basically they shift money to a signing bonus to change how the cap hit occurs.

[Au165]

(06-06-2017, 11:47 AM)THE PISTONS Wrote: You can't do the ways you mention...but the Steelers restructure contracts all the time to sign players. Basically they shift money to a signing bonus to change how the cap hit occurs.

Yes, but that eventually comes due. It is kind of like a Ponzi scheme. They basically take the hit after they hit on a couple rookies who are really good but under contract a couple years and don't need resigned. The scheme collapses when you don't draft well for a while.

[grampahol]

This kind of falls under the idea of government run business to 'create jobs'.. The idea, and it gets shot down with good reason every time because it's a direct conflict of interest is for the government to start building cars, furniture, whatever to directly compete with the businesses that actually provide jobs and so on. 
I'll tell you what..Come to my house and cut the grass every week and I won't actually pay you, but if I ever sell the house for a million times more than it's worth I'll split the profits with you..90/10..90 for me, 10 for you.  

[Benton]

(06-06-2017, 10:13 AM)ochocincos Wrote: I thought that in the case of the performance clauses that the cap space had to be reserved for that extra incentive, and only in the case of that performance not being achieved would it count as available after the season was over?
So like let's say Eifert had a 10 TD incentive of $1 million. Until the season is over, that $1 million counts toward the cap, and it's only until after the season but before the start of the new league year does that money come off the cap books if he doesn't meet the performance. In which case, that freed up $1 million could then be rolled over to the next year or used toward an extension or pocketed by the owner?

That was my thinking of it.

And I think it leads into some of the differences between organizations saying they have X in cap space and media saying they have Y. The X is the money they could have to spend, the Y is what they will at a minimum.

(06-06-2017, 11:49 AM)Au165 Wrote: Yes, but that eventually comes due. It is kind of like a Ponzi scheme. They basically take the hit after they hit on a couple rookies who are really good but under contract a couple years and don't need resigned. The scheme collapses when you don't draft well for a while.

Yup. It's not just the Steelers. It happens to other teams where you push things off for a few seasons and suddenly wake up with no talent and pushed to the cap. You have a bad season or two and start all over again. The new wage scale has made it easier to do this in a way. You can still have some affordable talent through the draft even during those years where your restructures catch up to you.

[Nebuchadnezzar]

Get local businesses to pay players a certain amount to do a commercial.

Have a "Boosters" club that will take players out to eat, buy them a car, let them win a golf tourney.

I can come up with some real inventive stuff.

Player signs a contract with a business to be their "Spokesperson" and once a year gives a speech on "Being a team player" in Hawaii after a two week stay.

[Benton]

(06-06-2017, 05:00 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: Get local businesses to pay players a certain amount to do a commercial.

Have a "Boosters" club that will take players out to eat, buy them a car, let them win a golf tourney.

I can come up with some real inventive stuff.

Player signs a contract with a business to be their "Spokesperson" and once a year gives a speech on "Being a team player" in Hawaii after a two week stay.

To a degree, that already happens. But a team can't guarantee a player that X company will provide Y amount for doing a commercial. All they can say is "Hey, come play in New York. Look at the sponsorship deals these other athletes got. You can't make that kind of side money in Jacksonville." On the flip side, a small market team has to put up with that team from New York or Dallas or whatever big market making that pitch.

[Au165]

(06-06-2017, 05:00 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: Get local businesses to pay players a certain amount to do a commercial.

Have a "Boosters" club that will take players out to eat, buy them a car, let them win a golf tourney.

I can come up with some real inventive stuff.

Player signs a contract with a business to be their "Spokesperson" and once a year gives a speech on "Being a team player" in Hawaii after a two week stay.

You could, you as a player would risk the NFL finding out and suspending you (subsequently losing your game checks) for attempting to circumvent cap rules.  The team would be risking draft picks and fines to do so as well. I tend to lean to the side of, in the post bounty gate era teams don't screw around in the fringes nearly as much.

[Nebuchadnezzar]

(06-06-2017, 05:40 PM)Au165 Wrote: You could, you as a player would risk the NFL finding out and suspending you (subsequently losing your game checks) for attempting to circumvent cap rules.  The team would be risking draft picks and fines to do so as well. I tend to lean to the side of, in the post bounty gate era teams don't screw around in the fringes nearly as much.

This is what got San Francisco in trouble not that long ago.

But if you think this doesn't happen, you are mistaken. 

[bengalhoel]

(06-05-2017, 10:10 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: I understand that the salary cap protects teams from having to spend a boatload on players, but say there's a free agent that a team really wants, they just have no salary cap space.

Would it be against league rules to find other ways to pay that player?  Other ways like having him appear in commercials or at events or having him have his own product that the team sells and then gives him the proceeds?  If the team owns a separate company, could it have the company pay the player?

I realize that this would be unethical, but would it be illegal in terms of league salary cap rules?

Why don't teams do it if it's not illegal?  Or do they do it?

I pretty much guarantee that Robert Kraft does this constantly. 

[Au165]

(06-06-2017, 05:50 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: This is what got San Francisco in trouble not that long ago.

But if you think this doesn't happen, you are mistaken. 

The bigger issue in the 49'ers deal was that they were using a CBA loophole to pay out prorated bonuses after the next CBA would expire allowing them to pay people with no cap hit. Either way, it was almost 17 years ago and we haven't heard about such violations since as they increased the punishment allowed for such a thing. The next closest thing was the bounty gate issue, punished under those new provisions which most found to be excessive to prove a point. Simply because something occurred nearly 20 years ago doesn't make it a fact it is occurring today simply because your a cynic.

The other difference between now and when the 49'ers got caught? The cap is roughly 5 times what it was then. Also, the advent of social media makes it tougher for cover ups in many different realms.

[Au165]

(06-07-2017, 01:23 AM)bengalhoel Wrote: I pretty much guarantee that Robert Kraft does this constantly. 

Huh? They aren't even up against the cap usually, why would he need to? The reason it works is because Brady takes below market value. Brady can take below market value because his wife is worth $350 million.