CrackerDog

I agree. If they added two teams per conference I'd be against it but because of your points above, I like it. It's still few enough teams to keep the regular season's importance.

You're not ignorant of anything. What you say above is 100% right based on what I've read about the clause.

The Bears have the opportunity to do this immediately. They can take the biggest hit this year if they don't need the money and it may turn out to make sense to do so. But they have the option to say $10 million of his 2014 money is now bonus and prorate it, thereby saving themselves a lot of room this year. I realize you don't think they will but the fact remains they can. And that's, once again, the point of the clause.

I've never seen a contract designed for specifically that purpose. Not sure it hasn't happened but just don't recall it. Every other deal I've seen where early reworking happens (like you said, year 2 or later) typically had a signing bonus. Cutler's contract does not.

Another favorite of mine... I think it's fair to argue that the Bears shouldn't have signed Jay. I'd disagree with that but at the end of the day, I'd have to respect your opinion. But if you thought we should've signed Jay, this contract, it seems to me and Biggs, is market. And now that we know about the salary conversion clause, it's a flexible deal that provides the team with valuable opportunities to improve via free agency. End of discussion.

I posted it to Facebook!

And the beauty of the deal as reported seems to be that now Emery has the flexibility to go either way. If the FA's he most wants aren't available, he can do what you suggest above. If he can land a few top-notch players for the D, he converts some portion of Cutler's salary to bonus and... BAM! Shortest rebuilding process in NFL history.

I guess you really are that friggen stupid. I've been consistent throughout saying the deal didn't make sense to me as initially reported. I reacted to new information positively and then was disappointed. But now we hear there's a magic bullet clause in the deal which makes you look like the moron you were all along. The sun rises in the East, death, taxes and Jason is a dope. Things you can always rely on.

But see, it isn't a downside. They can convert salary to bonus without Cutler's approval. Which means they can free up cap space as needed. That's the whole point of the article and something I've been suggesting had to be out there because the deal as written didn't pass the sniff test. This clause effectively means Cutler's deal can be anything we want it to be cap-wise. I wonder what our #1 whiner is going to say about that?

Interesting. Not 100% on your math but I'm not going to doubt you either. Just want to stress that your numbers represent cap space, not real dollars. So they could, in theory, spend a LOT more than even your most generous number above. To me, even if you're close to right, there does seem to be a light at the end of the tunnel.

Very true. Hence why I think there's more to the story. Those that want to hate on Cutler or ream the Bears for anything and everything are going to do so. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt until I see it play out. It feels like they screwed the pooch on this one but they're smarter than that.

I think the Bears share my significant concerns with Nut's health. I think the world of him but it wouldn't surprise me at all if his Bear's career was over.

I tend to agree with you but for your last comment about FA's. Per the article I posted, and I'm not saying he's right, but the Bears could backload THOSE contracts and still do plenty of damage in free agency. Possible. Further, there are cuts coming. And some of those are going to free up cap room even if they create dead space at the same time. And don't forget that contracts once negotiated can be amended such that a portion of the current year salary is converted into a "bonus". Favre used to do it for the Packers every season, it seemed. I think Peppers has done it for us. This practice can lead to a ticking time bomb if abused (Peppers deal may be one of those) but it's a tool that can be very effective if used properly. Cutler won't care because he's getting the same dollars and the team is improving which should help him get his hands on the ball more often. So, all I'm saying is, there might be a silver lining in what looks like a cloud right now. I've always had a lot of trust in Cliff and I'm not going to accuse him of losing his mind over night. Time will tell.

But for the two blown defensive holding / interference calls in the end zone those may have been TDs. The Packers got a lot of calls in their favor today.

OK, now I can relax for the rest of the playoffs.

Duplicate

Not sure I agree with this but it's a "glass half full" take on what many of us are struggling to understand. http://gapersblock.com/tailgate/2014/01/be...iendly-deal.php Again, I don't know what the real contract details are but it seems most are agreeing that first year salary is $22.5. If as this article suggests this doesn't stop them from going after the star defensive FA's out there, it might make sense. I'm still trying to come to grips with it.

I can't. If those numbers turn out to be accurate, as I said before, I don't understand this deal. It may still be "market" but I don't like it at all. Not given that cap hit. They'll need to amend it to convert salary to bonus should the need arise.

Yeah, that's why it made sense to me. However, Spiegel is pulling back and saying his source was in error so we'll have to continue to wait and see.

Well, the waiting game continues...

And so this is in both threads discussing Cutler's deal, here's the annual deal breakdown per Matt Spiegel's source... Base Bonus Total 1.0 10.8 11.8 4.5 10.8 15.3 6.0 10.8 16.8 7.5 10.8 18.3 8.0 10.8 18.8 22.0 - 22.0 23.0 - 23.0 PS. This is just a summary of what Spiegel is posting on Twitter. You now know as much as I do. Take it for what it's worth. I like this set of numbers a lot more than I did the original information from PFT so I sure hope Spiegel's source is solid. This deal makes sense to me from both party's relative perspectives so I think it's probably right, but who the heck knows?

Annual deal breakdown per Spiegel's source... Base Bonus Total 1.0 10.8 11.8 4.5 10.8 15.3 6.0 10.8 16.8 7.5 10.8 18.3 8.0 10.8 18.8 22.0 - 22.0 23.0 - 23.0 PS. This is just a summary of what Spiegel is posting on Twitter. You now know as much as I do. Take it for what it's worth. I like this set of numbers a lot more than I did the original information from PFT so I sure hope Spiegel's source is solid. This deal makes sense to me from both party's relative perspectives so I think it's probably right, but who the heck knows?

He goes on to say that this effectively makes the deal a 5 year with the Bears having "options" on years 6 and 7 if he's still playing at a high enough level to justify that pay scale. In short, in Cliff we trust!

Ha, I thought the same thing so I followed Spiegel so I could see if there was more detail. Here's a summary of the other tweats he posted after the one we've all seen here: Cutler's base salary for 2014 is just $1 million and rises progressively to $8 million by year 5. The contract calls for a prorated bonus of $10.8 million for each of the first five seasons, adding up to the $54 million guaranteed. The base jumps to $22 million and $23 million in years 6 and 7, respectively.

Wow, PFT wrong? When has THAT ever happened before? BWAAAA HA HA HA HA HA. Just kidding, they're almost always wrong. I do wonder though how the two deals we're hearing about couldn't be more different. One is backloaded, the other front. Just really strange. I hope Speigel is right. It leaves tons of room for chasing all sorts of FA's and still signing our own.