With an Estimated 20 Mil Under the Cap...

[Mongo3451]

With an estimated 20 mil of cap space and no-one to sign. What should JA do? (hindsight welcome)

[Mongo3451]

With an estimated 20 mil of cap space and no-one to sign. What should JA do? (hindsight welcome)

I tried to enter a poll and screwed up more than once. Please disregard and/or delete.

[bowlingtwig]

I tried to enter a poll and screwed up more than once. Please disregard and/or delete.

Thats a great question. I would think about resigning Cutler. I don't see him getting the extension that Eli just got but he should deserve money close that.

[LT2_3]

With an estimated 20 mil of cap space and no-one to sign. What should JA do? (hindsight welcome)

 

I think Angelo should think about using it ONLY if it looks like we'll have a salary cap next year closer to the deadline to apply contract extensions to this years' cap.

 

With the NFLPA sniping about the NFL opening their books, it doesn't look like there will be a salary cap next year. If that's the case, there is no reason to try and use it up unless they use it to lock up Cutler for a longer term deal.

[nfoligno]

I agree we don't just want to spend to spend. But I do think we need to look long and hard at a couple players, w/ Cutler at the top of the list. For me, extending Cutler sooner rather than later is a win/win situation, regardless of the salary cap situation.

 

If we sign him now, and the salary cap goes way, we have not hurt ourselves as we need to re-sign Cutler regardless. Further, if there is no cap, his cost could go up considerably, to the point where we may not be capable of outbidding teams like Dallas, Washington, etc who could care less about the bottom line.

 

If we sign him now, and there is a cap in place, we would likely have front loaded his deal and thus would be in a much better situation in future years.

 

I think Angelo should think about using it ONLY if it looks like we'll have a salary cap next year closer to the deadline to apply contract extensions to this years' cap.

 

With the NFLPA sniping about the NFL opening their books, it doesn't look like there will be a salary cap next year. If that's the case, there is no reason to try and use it up unless they use it to lock up Cutler for a longer term deal.

 

[Ed Hochuli 3:16]

Nothing. I wanted Holt but he's a Jaguar now. I say hold onto that until next year when elite WR's are on the market (Roddy White, Brandon Marshall).

[CrackerDog]

Nothing. I wanted Holt but he's a Jaguar now. I say hold onto that until next year when elite WR's are on the market (Roddy White, Brandon Marshall).

 

If there isn't a cap next year then you're holding onto something. You'd have $20 mil in real cash still available to spend. But if there is, that $20 disappears at the end of the year. You can't really roll it forward.

 

Either way, if Cutler is what we all hope he is, we should use this money to extend him during the season. Look for that to happen after the first 6 games of the year.

 

And I doubt the owners would allow a season to be played under an uncapped year. There'd be huge pressure on them to close negotiations to avoid this. And if the players union refused to negotiate, just waiting out the uncapped season, the owners would lock them out. This literally has to get done. And with the economy being in the toilet, I think the owners will probably have an easier time getting a deal they like.

[Ed Hochuli 3:16]

If there isn't a cap next year then you're holding onto something. You'd have $20 mil in real cash still available to spend. But if there is, that $20 disappears at the end of the year. You can't really roll it forward.

 

Either way, if Cutler is what we all hope he is, we should use this money to extend him during the season. Look for that to happen after the first 6 games of the year.

 

And I doubt the owners would allow a season to be played under an uncapped year. There'd be huge pressure on them to close negotiations to avoid this. And if the players union refused to negotiate, just waiting out the uncapped season, the owners would lock them out. This literally has to get done. And with the economy being in the toilet, I think the owners will probably have an easier time getting a deal they like.

You're right. I totally forgot about next year being uncapped.

[LT2_3]

If there isn't a cap next year then you're holding onto something. You'd have $20 mil in real cash still available to spend. But if there is, that $20 disappears at the end of the year. You can't really roll it forward.

 

Either way, if Cutler is what we all hope he is, we should use this money to extend him during the season. Look for that to happen after the first 6 games of the year.

 

And I doubt the owners would allow a season to be played under an uncapped year. There'd be huge pressure on them to close negotiations to avoid this. And if the players union refused to negotiate, just waiting out the uncapped season, the owners would lock them out. This literally has to get done. And with the economy being in the toilet, I think the owners will probably have an easier time getting a deal they like.

 

I think you are confusing the salary cap with of real money. For instance, if the Bears don't spend any of the $20 mil they have in cap space this year, they still have the $20 mil they didn't spend in the bank. They could also spend $30 mil this year as long as enough of it is prorated that it applies less than the $20 mil under this year's cap.

 

If the cap disappears next year and the Bears didn't spend any more money, then they would still have that money to spend next year after earning interest on it sitting in the bank.

 

One other thing, it's the players that really don't want an uncapped year believe it or not. The way it's setup now, there would be very few players available in FA next year. Players drafted in 2005-06 would become RFAs because the number of years required to reach free agency changes from 4 to 6. There are actually very few players with 6 years experience with their contracts expiring.

[nfoligno]

One. I disagree it is as simple as you make it out when talking about leaving the money in the bank for a year. Just because the money isn't spent on Cutler, or players, or whatever, doesn't mean the money will simply sit there in the bank and be saved for the following year. For example. We have a family ownership, some of which may get paid (or have a bonus) which is a percentage based on profit or whatever. Anyway, that $20m (or whatever) may not simply sit there for a year. Maybe there is a new statue the team wants to build, and hey, they have $20m on the book. Point is, I am not sure it is as simple as that, either in personal or business accounting.

 

I can guarantee you this much. If my wife decides not to spend $100 on a pair of shoes, that does not mean the money is simply going to sit in our bank and collect interest. It very well could simply mean she decides the next week to use that money on a purse.

 

I work for a corporation, and I can say that isn't always so different in the business world. You may come in under budget in 2008, but that does not always mean you have that much more to spend in 2009.

 

Two. Lets say we do save the money and ear mark it for Cutler next year, and thus it truly was saved. Sure, we would then have the real cash, but I would argue it may not go as far. The longer we wait, the higher the contract demand is going to be. If we signed him a week ago, I don't think we would be talking about the sort of deal Eli just got, but wanna bet his agent is now looking at that? Rivers is likely next, and you can bet his agent will be looking to best Eli's deal. The longer we wait, the higher the contract demand will be. Thus $20 today may not go as far next year.

 

Three. I still have a hard time believing we will have an uncapped season. I think the odds are greater the owners pull a lockout before they allow an uncapped season.

 

I get the future is not certain, but i think there is greater reason to expect a deal gets done, and thus we should assume we will still have to deal w/ a salary cap. W/ that assumption, I would rather spend and eat the cap money today when we can afford it.

 

W/ regard to your final point, I know about that, and agree w/ the logic. At the same time, I am not sure how much that will matter. The power structure of the players association is going to play hardball, and X number of players who may not get their FA period may not have a loud enough voice.

 

I think you are confusing the salary cap with of real money. For instance, if the Bears don't spend any of the $20 mil they have in cap space this year, they still have the $20 mil they didn't spend in the bank. They could also spend $30 mil this year as long as enough of it is prorated that it applies less than the $20 mil under this year's cap.

 

If the cap disappears next year and the Bears didn't spend any more money, then they would still have that money to spend next year after earning interest on it sitting in the bank.

 

One other thing, it's the players that really don't want an uncapped year believe it or not. The way it's setup now, there would be very few players available in FA next year. Players drafted in 2005-06 would become RFAs because the number of years required to reach free agency changes from 4 to 6. There are actually very few players with 6 years experience with their contracts expiring.

 

[CrackerDog]

I think you are confusing the salary cap with of real money. For instance, if the Bears don't spend any of the $20 mil they have in cap space this year, they still have the $20 mil they didn't spend in the bank. They could also spend $30 mil this year as long as enough of it is prorated that it applies less than the $20 mil under this year's cap.

 

If the cap disappears next year and the Bears didn't spend any more money, then they would still have that money to spend next year after earning interest on it sitting in the bank.

 

One other thing, it's the players that really don't want an uncapped year believe it or not. The way it's setup now, there would be very few players available in FA next year. Players drafted in 2005-06 would become RFAs because the number of years required to reach free agency changes from 4 to 6. There are actually very few players with 6 years experience with their contracts expiring.

 

Actually, I'm not confusing it. That's the point I was trying to make. Of course, as usual, you did a much better job of it. But my point was exactly that they might "roll over" some real money but that the cap situation might be irrelevant since 1.) there might not be a cap (which I doubt) and 2.) if there is, you can't use this year's dollars next year.

[CrackerDog]

One. I disagree it is as simple as you make it out when talking about leaving the money in the bank for a year. Just because the money isn't spent on Cutler, or players, or whatever, doesn't mean the money will simply sit there in the bank and be saved for the following year. For example. We have a family ownership, some of which may get paid (or have a bonus) which is a percentage based on profit or whatever. Anyway, that $20m (or whatever) may not simply sit there for a year. Maybe there is a new statue the team wants to build, and hey, they have $20m on the book. Point is, I am not sure it is as simple as that, either in personal or business accounting.

 

I can guarantee you this much. If my wife decides not to spend $100 on a pair of shoes, that does not mean the money is simply going to sit in our bank and collect interest. It very well could simply mean she decides the next week to use that money on a purse.

 

I work for a corporation, and I can say that isn't always so different in the business world. You may come in under budget in 2008, but that does not always mean you have that much more to spend in 2009.

 

Two. Lets say we do save the money and ear mark it for Cutler next year, and thus it truly was saved. Sure, we would then have the real cash, but I would argue it may not go as far. The longer we wait, the higher the contract demand is going to be. If we signed him a week ago, I don't think we would be talking about the sort of deal Eli just got, but wanna bet his agent is now looking at that? Rivers is likely next, and you can bet his agent will be looking to best Eli's deal. The longer we wait, the higher the contract demand will be. Thus $20 today may not go as far next year.

 

Three. I still have a hard time believing we will have an uncapped season. I think the odds are greater the owners pull a lockout before they allow an uncapped season.

 

I get the future is not certain, but i think there is greater reason to expect a deal gets done, and thus we should assume we will still have to deal w/ a salary cap. W/ that assumption, I would rather spend and eat the cap money today when we can afford it.

 

W/ regard to your final point, I know about that, and agree w/ the logic. At the same time, I am not sure how much that will matter. The power structure of the players association is going to play hardball, and X number of players who may not get their FA period may not have a loud enough voice.

 

One - He should've said "All else being equal" and it would've solve your concern.

Two - I agree. Unless Turner turns Cutler into a chump, sign him up long term before the end of the season!

Three - Agree.

Four - I think the players may be more forward thinking than LT is giving them credit for. A league with a few Stienbrenner type owners in it, driving up salaries, would be a bonanza for the players in the long run. Of course it would make for a much less interesting and competitive league but the players would benefit at least for a while. I think they'd LOVE to see a cap free season and they might hope it never came back.

 

[nfoligno]

Four - I think the players may be more forward thinking than LT is giving them credit for. A league with a few Stienbrenner type owners in it, driving up salaries, would be a bonanza for the players in the long run. Of course it would make for a much less interesting and competitive league but the players would benefit at least for a while. I think they'd LOVE to see a cap free season and they might hope it never came back.

 

Here is something to think about though. How many players in the league make the league minimum? The "big boys" always get the hype, and those are the players who would benefit if the salary cap went away. However, I think the majority of the players would suffer. If you no longer have the a ceiling cap, you no longer have a floor either. Further, the many, many players who get the league minimum might find themselves playing for $50,000, rather than $850,000, or whatever the minimum is today.

 

At the end of the day, I just believe a deal gets done. It can be debated whether the owner or the players have the best argument or whatever, but the simple reality is, both owners and players have benefited big time though the recent CBAs. Football is at an all time high in popularity, and I just am not sure either side really wants to mess with that, as to do so would only threaten future payouts, for both sides.

 

I think, at the end of negotiations, owners will cave to their % cut of the players, while the players end up caving on most everything else. The owners will use the % cut as a bargaining tool to force more strict ethics/punishments, rookie pay structure/cap, and maybe a longer season. Players will say they won by maintaining their % of the pie, while owners say they won by winning most everything else.

[LT2_3]

One. I disagree it is as simple as you make it out when talking about leaving the money in the bank for a year. Just because the money isn't spent on Cutler, or players, or whatever, doesn't mean the money will simply sit there in the bank and be saved for the following year. For example. We have a family ownership, some of which may get paid (or have a bonus) which is a percentage based on profit or whatever. Anyway, that $20m (or whatever) may not simply sit there for a year. Maybe there is a new statue the team wants to build, and hey, they have $20m on the book. Point is, I am not sure it is as simple as that, either in personal or business accounting.

 

I can guarantee you this much. If my wife decides not to spend $100 on a pair of shoes, that does not mean the money is simply going to sit in our bank and collect interest. It very well could simply mean she decides the next week to use that money on a purse.

 

I work for a corporation, and I can say that isn't always so different in the business world. You may come in under budget in 2008, but that does not always mean you have that much more to spend in 2009.

 

I hear what you're saying, and you are right that it's not that simple. That being said, the Bears have a budget that they are willing to pay to players each year. Sometimes that might go up if there is a unique situation where they want to spend more, but I'm pretty sure that if they don't spend it, they have an idea on how they are going to spend it on the guys like Cutler and Olsen in the future and act accordingly.

 

Bottom line: They aren't going to have it taken away by the family if they just intend to write the contracts next year.

 

Two. Lets say we do save the money and ear mark it for Cutler next year, and thus it truly was saved. Sure, we would then have the real cash, but I would argue it may not go as far. The longer we wait, the higher the contract demand is going to be. If we signed him a week ago, I don't think we would be talking about the sort of deal Eli just got, but wanna bet his agent is now looking at that? Rivers is likely next, and you can bet his agent will be looking to best Eli's deal. The longer we wait, the higher the contract demand will be. Thus $20 today may not go as far next year.

 

I agree, but there may be a strategic reason for waiting until a new CBA is written. I'm just saying that it's not the end of the world if nothing happens this year. He's under contract for 2 more seasons after this year.

 

Three. I still have a hard time believing we will have an uncapped season. I think the odds are greater the owners pull a lockout before they allow an uncapped season.

 

I get the future is not certain, but i think there is greater reason to expect a deal gets done, and thus we should assume we will still have to deal w/ a salary cap. W/ that assumption, I would rather spend and eat the cap money today when we can afford it.

 

Well, we really don't have to worry about it until week 7. Also, there won't be many guys on the market for other reasons, and not all teams will be able to sign whomever they want. Teams will have an extra franchise or transition tag available. How many teams have more than 2 top tier guys entering FA once subtracting the guys with less than 6 years? I'm tempted to research it just for fun if I have time.

 

Also, the top 8 teams in the playoffs would only be able to sign new FA if they lose one that signs the same size contract. So, if when we win the SB, we'll only be able to sign a FA once a player (like Ogun) signs a contract elsewhere, and then not for more than he signs for.

 

W/ regard to your final point, I know about that, and agree w/ the logic. At the same time, I am not sure how much that will matter. The power structure of the players association is going to play hardball, and X number of players who may not get their FA period may not have a loud enough voice.

 

We'll have to see I guess. My overall point is that there is roughly 3 months before teams have to make a decision about using up this year's cap space. That is a major decision deadline where teams will have to decide what to do, and HOW they act regarding using their remaining cap space, will itself send a message about how likely the owners think an uncapped year is in reality.