Hobson - only $15 million of cap to work with?

[*ochocincos*]

(03-01-2017, 11:02 AM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Burfict may make about $7-8 million a year if they extend him.

They could chose to let him go to free agency and low ball him...as there are some teams that won't want his on-field antics. All it takes is one team to make a huge offer though.

He might. But as Hammerstripes pointed out, Burfict already counts $4.7 million toward the 2017 cap. If he goes up to $7-8 million, that's only a few million more per year. The only way Burfict would command a big consumption of the remaining 2017 cap is if his contract is front-loaded. Front-loading is great in terms of making the subsequent years cost less, but it weakens the first 1-2 years because it's money that could have been spent on other upgrades.

At some point, the Bengals need to try and go "all in" to win it all and quit doing these front-loaded contracts. Maybe sacrifice front loading somewhat and instead invest it in another impact FA. If they keep following the same model, they will stay stagnant. Not going back to the basement, but never reaching the promised land.

[fredtoast]

(02-28-2017, 10:27 PM)Whatever Wrote:   However, setting aside cap dollars to roll into next year just so next year you can set aside more cap dollars to roll into the following year only makes sense if your strategy is to wait for the league to lose revenue, then strike when the cap goes down and everyone else has to dump salary to get under the cap. 

We are not just rolling money over every year.  the last two years we have been able to spend OVER the league salary cap.  So we are spending the money we roll over.  Without the money we rolled over in '14 wewould not have been able to pay all the players we have the last two years.

[THE PISTONS]

(03-01-2017, 11:40 AM)ochocincos Wrote: He might. But as Hammerstripes pointed out, Burfict already counts $4.7 million toward the 2017 cap. If he goes up to $7-8 million, that's only a few million more per year. The only way Burfict would command a big consumption of the remaining 2017 cap is if his contract is front-loaded. Front-loading is great in terms of making the subsequent years cost less, but it weakens the first 1-2 years because it's money that could have been spent on other upgrades.

At some point, the Bengals need to try and go "all in" to win it all and quit doing these front-loaded contracts. Maybe sacrifice front loading somewhat and instead invest it in another impact FA. If they keep following the same model, they will stay stagnant. Not going back to the basement, but never reaching the promised land.

I agree in theory...but Zeitler's cap hit for this past season was $8 million and Kirkpatrick's was $7.5 million.

The Bengals don't look at it as just adding a few more million to what they already make in Zeitler's case.

Another point is that the rollover cap space is perfect for front-loading a deal.

[*ochocincos*]

(03-01-2017, 12:08 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: I agree in theory...but Zeitler's cap hit for this past season was $8 million and Kirkpatrick's was $7.5 million.

The Bengals don't look at it as just adding a few more million to what they already make in Zeitler's case.

Another point is that the rollover cap space is perfect for front-loading a deal.

Yes, but the rollover is just around $6 million. Not $15-20 million.
Front-loading $6 million is fine. $15-20 million is not IMO.

[bengalhoel]

http://www.cincyjungle.com/2017/2/28/14762904/bengals-plan-cheap-internal-free-agents

Yeah, this article on Cincy jungle just about made me throw up. It is tough to be a fan of this team with Mike Brown in charge

[bengalhoel]

(02-28-2017, 11:45 PM)guyofthetiger Wrote: This is the most realistic view. The Bengals are rebuilding. I'm admitting it. Others should too.

Rebuilding for what though?  A future run at a first round playoff exit?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(02-28-2017, 09:46 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Sorry if this has already been explained but I am not going to read 8 pages of whining and crying to find out.

Mike Brown does not put unspent cap space into his pocket like some other owners.  Instead he rolls it over.

Each of the last two years the bengals have spoent ABOVE the league salary cap.  The were able to do this because of the money rolled over.  

Bengals are not ebing cheap.  The last two years they have been spending MORE than most other teams in the league on player salaries.

The Bengals have an adjusted salary cap because of the rollover. Saying they spent above the salary cap when their adjusted salary cap was millions above the League salary cap and still rolled over millions into the next year is #fakefrednews. 

[fredtoast]

(03-01-2017, 12:32 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: The Bengals have an adjusted salary cap because of the rollover. Saying they spent above the salary cap when their adjusted salary cap was millions above the League salary cap and still rolled over millions into the next year is #fakefrednews. 

No.  They are spending the money they roll over.  That is the only reason they are allowedto spend over the league cap.

Claiming they never spend the money they roll over is a lie.

and it also ignores that fact that some teams do not roll this money over and ionstead just put it in the owners pocket.

[muskiesfan]

(03-01-2017, 12:07 PM)fredtoast Wrote: We are not just rolling money over every year.  the last two years we have been able to spend OVER the league salary cap.  So we are spending the money we roll over.  Without the money we rolled over in '14 wewould not have been able to pay all the players we have the last two years.

The Bengals rolled over $6.5m from last season to this season. It has been reported that the Bengals did not roll that money over for this year's free agents, so they're not going to use it. Jim O and Hobson have both reported this. So the best anyone can guess is that money will be rolled over into next year, and possibly more. That's the only way the team can say they only have $15m for this year.

While you can continue to talk about the whining and bitching, fans just don't understand how the team cuts $43m down to $15m when they have 3 key free agents. Especially after they watch a team with half of our cap space franchise their RB and spend $80m on their top WR. I hope you can understand why there is confusion and why people are "whining and bitching".

The argument of smart spending v. Mike Brown spending not withstanding, the Bengals are notorious for front loading contracts. So the rollover and front loading does allow them to spend over the cap because they gave themselves extra cushion. They spend cash over cap because they can count an entire bonus towards cash spent for that year while spreading the cap hit over the life of the contract (up to 5 years). So you are right in that the spend and they know how to set everything up to meet the floor. Let's not try and act like the Bengals are just throwing money around because looking at our own players that have already left and are potentially leaving, that's just not the case.

So while you swear up and down that you're right, we're actually both right. The Bengals are spending the money and they front load the contracts to eat up cap as well as cash over cap. However, they're not doing the best job of it if we sign our own and roll money over for our free agents, but them limit our cap and watch them leave.

[jj22]

Imagine how the players feel to see all these other teams spend and they see what we see (the Bengals have 43m in cap space) yet hear the Front Office claiming they only have 15m to spend. They must know winning a championship isn't in the plans.

AJ must be pissed as he called for the team to add much needed pieces in free agency. Guess he just didn't know what front office he played for.

[fredtoast]

(03-01-2017, 01:04 PM)jj22 Wrote: Imagine how the players feel to see all these other teams spend and they see what we see (the Bengals have 43m in cap space) yet hear the Front Office claiming they only have 15m to spend. They must know winning a championship isn't in the plans.

Bengals have spent over the leaghue cap the last two years.  I'd say the players are happy to see that.

[OrlandoBengal]

(02-28-2017, 11:38 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Even if you're a glass-half-full type, you have to admit that Hobson does this literally every single year.

How is it possible that we're the only NFL team that NEVER has a little extra money for free agency?

Instead of having Hobs bullshit the fanbase every year, maybe the Bengals should just come out and say they don't like using FA, and explain why.

I'm not saying I'd agree with their reasoning, but at least they wouldn't be lying to their fans like they're stupid.

Thank you.  Don't treat the fan base like idiots who can't do math or don't have access to other websites to do the math.  Putting out the same BS article year in and year out is basically laughable at this point.

[THE PISTONS]

(03-01-2017, 12:40 PM)muskiesfan Wrote: The Bengals rolled over $6.5m from last season to this season. It has been reported that the Bengals did not roll that money over for this year's free agents, so they're not going to use it. Jim O and Hobson have both reported this. So the best anyone can guess is that money will be rolled over into next year, and possibly more. That's the only way the team can say they only have $15m for this year.

While you can continue to talk about the whining and bitching, fans just don't understand how the team cuts $43m down to $15m when they have 3 key free agents. Especially after they watch a team with half of our cap space franchise their RB and spend $80m on their top WR. I hope you can understand why there is confusion and why people are "whining and bitching".

The argument of smart spending v. Mike Brown spending not withstanding, the Bengals are notorious for front loading contracts. So the rollover and front loading does allow them to spend over the cap because they gave themselves extra cushion. They spend cash over cap because they can count an entire bonus towards cash spent for that year while spreading the cap hit over the life of the contract (up to 5 years). So you are right in that the spend and they know how to set everything up to meet the floor. Let's not try and act like the Bengals are just throwing money around because looking at our own players that have already left and are potentially leaving, that's just not the case.

So while you swear up and down that you're right, we're actually both right. The Bengals are spending the money and they front load the contracts to eat up cap as well as cash over cap. However, they're not doing the best job of it if we sign our own and roll money over for our free agents, but them limit our cap and watch them leave.

We're 10th in available cap space and some 16 teams have at least $40 million. I doubt that their team websites are saying that they have $15 million to spend in free agency.

[Wes Mantooth]

Hopspin is the Ned Ryerson in the hell that is our never_changing approach to spending. Needlenose Ned is equal parts comical and annoying.

It's the SAME crap year after year, after year. Same coach, same approach, same front office, same resources, same stupid article where we cry poor, despite being in the top half the league in space to work with. It's always the same.

You can point to any set of bogus numbers you want. Numbers massaged and worked over so much much an Asian masseuse would be impressed. They're all bs. If you can't smell it by now then you're down to 4 senses.

Other teams could not do what they do in this magical equation that Hopspin regurgitates year after year. There is no way, accounting for the things he does, other teams could spend the way they do. It couldn't be done. Something isn't adding up.

OK, you're can't spend year or two, for whatever reason, I'll listen. But you can't start every single year with an above average amount to spend and still cry poor. At some point your available dollars have to keep pace with that of other team. At some point, even if you pay in house, you would even out.

It's not as if we have more than average amount of expiring contracts coming off the books. In fact, I would guess it's below average because of practice of "honoring" deals. We don't have a ton of guys coming off the books early. (Like Mauluga and Pac-Man should).

All that said, no reason to be surprised or to be angry. Like Groundhog's day, it's funny. Same damn everything, every single year. How could anyone, after so many years, now seeing the same damn approach, expect anything other than the same results.

It's either incredibly stupid, or incredibly crazy, to buy into any of this. This type of stuff from Hopspin is pure comedy.

[J24]

(03-01-2017, 01:44 PM)ochocincos Wrote: I believe the roll-over is an all-or-nothing thing. A team can't just decide what amount to roll over. It's whatever is left of the previous season's adjusted cap.
So based on this, they must have spent over the normal cap in 2015 and 2016 because the rolled over amount decreased.

Fred actually is right that they have been spending over the normal cap amount the past two years. The Bengals' problem is that they overspend that extra cap money on poor performance like Rey Maualuga to get over that normal cap. They Bengals haven't necessarily been cheap the past two years, they've just been dumb with how they spend their money.

Exactly!

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(03-01-2017, 01:41 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I don't see your point.  Everything I said was true.  The reason the amount that is rolled over decreases is because the Bengals spend over the league cap.  They would not have been able to spend as much as they did the last two years without rolling over cap space.

The amount decreased from $8.6 million to $6.6 million over five seasons while the cap increased by $47 million. 

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

That is a link to the Bengals cap info. I want you to total the NFL salary cap from 2012-2016, the Bengals adjusted salary cap from 2012-2016, and the Bengals total cap from 2012-2016. You should have three sums to compare. Once you're done, tell me if you notice anything. Especially the discrepancy between the Bengals adjusted salary cap and the Bengals total cap (cash spent.). Also, tell me what the trend is between the Bengals adjusted cap and total cap; increasing or decreasing. 

The Bengals are rolling over $6.6 million, but they have squandered roughly $37 million of their adjusted salary. Because the salary cap allows them to prorate the money over future years. By not paying that money to the players, where do you think it ends up? In their pockets. They're skimming. It's salary cap three card Monty. 

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(03-01-2017, 01:44 PM)ochocincos Wrote: I believe the roll-over is an all-or-nothing thing. A team can't just decide what amount to roll over. It's whatever is left of the previous season's adjusted cap.
So based on this, they must have spent over the normal cap in 2015 and 2016 because the rolled over amount decreased.

Fred actually is right that they have been spending over the normal cap amount the past two years. The Bengals' problem is that they overspend that extra cap money on poor performance like Rey Maualuga to get over that normal cap. They Bengals haven't necessarily been cheap the past two years, they've just been dumb with how they spend their money.

What, you mean you don't think that making Peko have the 11th highest DT cap hit in 2014, Rey Maualuga have the 6th largest cap hit among inside LB in 2015, and Michael Johnson having the 21st highest cap hit among DE in 2016 was a smart and competitive way to reach the cap?  

[jj22]

So I guess the moral of the story is 43-15 = 28. We have to pray we don't ever fall below 28m in cap space or we will be unable to even sign our own free agents that offseason. What will they do?!

[THE PISTONS]

If you look at say 2015...we rolled $8.5 million over from 2014. In 2014...could we have spent that money to upgrade the team?

If you look at 2014...we rolled $8.7 million over from 2013.

If you look at 2013...we rolled $8.6 million over from 2012.

[Whatever]

(03-01-2017, 12:07 PM)fredtoast Wrote: We are not just rolling money over every year.  the last two years we have been able to spend OVER the league salary cap.  So we are spending the money we roll over.  Without the money we rolled over in '14 wewould not have been able to pay all the players we have the last two years.

No.  You can rollover up to $10 mill of cap space that you have under the league specified salary cap, not your adjusted cap after rollover.  It is impossible to spend over the cap and rollover cap space into the next year.  If the cap is $160 mill, you rollover $5 mill, and spend $161 mil, you can't roll the $4 mill from the previous year over.