scs787 Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 So we got the numbers on Jay and Jennings, any word on Slaus? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackerDog Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 This post is hilarious. U Mad? You were wrong then. I posted links that showed people reporting 18M per year, and still you acted like a dumbass and tried to rip me. You have been wrong so many times it's not even funny. And guess what? You're wrong again! Nothing new, just wrong again. Thanks for confirming it. Like I said, you should spend less time trying to rip me and more time waiting for the sound of the pop. LOL! And now with the latest info out about the actual contract numbers, who has that crow deep in their gullet? You're a sap. Look dude, face it, you're just looking for anything to justify how loud of a crybaby you've been here for as long as I can recall. So when you have something you think you can chirp about, you go crazy. And some of the other inmates here fall for it and join in the tears. But at the end of the day, easygoing, steady Crackerdog keeps saying "Wait for the details" and THEN make your mind up. You could learn a thing or two from watching me take you apart almost every day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackerDog Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 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? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bears4Ever_34 Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 Matt Spiegel @MattSpiegel670 24s It appears my source on the Cutler numbers isn't to be trusted. I did say "if the source is correct," but I take responsibility. Apologies. Looks like he made a mistake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackerDog Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 Looks like he made a mistake. Well, the waiting game continues... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 The original values are correct, the 2nd set was bogus and more like what someone believed was a better deal. In the end, ever paying Jay Cutler over $20 million in a single season is just plain ridiculous. He has not earned it and based on his historical performance, he never will. Just think about it for a second, would you ever expect Jay Cutler to receive a contract that makes him the highest paid QB in a given season? The highest one!!! Also, right now he is the highest cap hit of any player in the NFL, #1, first, the biggest cap hit, the highest percentage of a team's payroll, Jay Cutler. Someone please justify that. Please...... http://www.spotrac.com/rankings/nfl/2014/cap-hit/limit-25/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackerDog Posted January 3, 2014 Report Share Posted January 3, 2014 The original values are correct, the 2nd set was bogus and more like what someone believed was a better deal. In the end, ever paying Jay Cutler over $20 million in a single season is just plain ridiculous. He has not earned it and based on his historical performance, he never will. Just think about it for a second, would you ever expect Jay Cutler to receive a contract that makes him the highest paid QB in a given season? The highest one!!! Also, right now he is the highest cap hit of any player in the NFL, #1, first, the biggest cap hit, the highest percentage of a team's payroll, Jay Cutler. Someone please justify that. Please...... http://www.spotrac.com/rankings/nfl/2014/cap-hit/limit-25/ 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASHKUM BEAR Posted January 4, 2014 Report Share Posted January 4, 2014 Fire Mel Tucker already! If you're going to run a hybrid or a 3-4, hire a proven coach who knows how to do it, like Wade Phillips or Ray Horton. Personally I'd go with Phillips because Horton will be a head coach in the near future. Phillips has no chance to be a head coach anymore, meaning he will be here for a while. You may be right on Horton. He is interviewing for the Vikings for the HC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted January 4, 2014 Report Share Posted January 4, 2014 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. To me, it is an organization with historically bad QB play and lack of continuity not wanting to continue that trend. The head shed must believe that this is better than McCown or a rookie, but with the cap hit, the Bears could've signed McCown, and possibly acquired Byrd, Michael Bennett, and Alex Mack for the same cap hit as Cutler. So Cutler, Conte, Peppers, Garza, or McCown, Byrd, Bennett, Mack. Now assuming McCown would be signed either way, it is essentially Cutler vs Byrd, Bennett, and Mack. All 3 of those players would be huge upgrades over the current players and McCown would be a slight downgrade or upgrade, depending on who you ask. Regardless of McCown's play, there is no way Cutler will outplay the value of Byrd, Bennett, and Mack, ever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASHKUM BEAR Posted January 4, 2014 Report Share Posted January 4, 2014 To me, it is an organization with historically bad QB play and lack of continuity not wanting to continue that trend. The head shed must believe that this is better than McCown or a rookie, but with the cap hit, the Bears could've signed McCown, and possibly acquired Byrd, Michael Bennett, and Alex Mack for the same cap hit as Cutler. So Cutler, Conte, Peppers, Garza, or McCown, Byrd, Bennett, Mack. Now assuming McCown would be signed either way, it is essentially Cutler vs Byrd, Bennett, and Mack. All 3 of those players would be huge upgrades over the current players and McCown would be a slight downgrade or upgrade, depending on who you ask. Regardless of McCown's play, there is no way Cutler will outplay the value of Byrd, Bennett, and Mack, ever. I take it with a grain of salt, but John Clayton says the Bears have 2 million left in cap space. That was saying we started with 34. I'm guessing we should be closer to 12-15, and room to improve by cutting Bush and E. Bennett. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASHKUM BEAR Posted January 4, 2014 Report Share Posted January 4, 2014 To me, it is an organization with historically bad QB play and lack of continuity not wanting to continue that trend. The head shed must believe that this is better than McCown or a rookie, but with the cap hit, the Bears could've signed McCown, and possibly acquired Byrd, Michael Bennett, and Alex Mack for the same cap hit as Cutler. So Cutler, Conte, Peppers, Garza, or McCown, Byrd, Bennett, Mack. Now assuming McCown would be signed either way, it is essentially Cutler vs Byrd, Bennett, and Mack. All 3 of those players would be huge upgrades over the current players and McCown would be a slight downgrade or upgrade, depending on who you ask. Regardless of McCown's play, there is no way Cutler will outplay the value of Byrd, Bennett, and Mack, ever. I take it with a grain of salt, but John Clayton says the Bears have 2 million left in cap space. That was saying we started with 34. I'm guessing we should be closer to 12-15, and room to improve by cutting Bush and E. Bennett. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted January 4, 2014 Report Share Posted January 4, 2014 I take it with a grain of salt, but John Clayton says the Bears have 2 million left in cap space. That was saying we started with 34. I'm guessing we should be closer to 12-15, and room to improve by cutting Bush and E. Bennett. I believe we started at 41. Jay @ 22, Jennings @ 7, Gould @ 3, is 32M, so 9M left. If they cut Peppers, Bush, Bennett, and Podlesh that get's their available cap up around 24M. I could also see Marshall extending and lowering his cap hit by 2 or 3M. So I'm hoping all this goes down and the Bears end up with around 27M. Thid of course excludes Slaus and Fiametta who I still don't know what their contracts look like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted January 4, 2014 Report Share Posted January 4, 2014 I believe we started at 41. Jay @ 22, Jennings @ 7, Gould @ 3, is 32M, so 9M left. If they cut Peppers, Bush, Bennett, and Podlesh that get's their available cap up around 24M. I could also see Marshall extending and lowering his cap hit by 2 or 3M. So I'm hoping all this goes down and the Bears end up with around 27M. Thid of course excludes Slaus and Fiametta who I still don't know what their contracts look like. Plus you have the rookie pool, so if you take out the projected $2 million, that is $7 million for Slauson, Fiametta, and the rookie pool. That sounds about right, and makes the Cutler deal even worse if that is the case, because essentially that means no impact FA's will be brought in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 Slauson got 4/12.8 with 4.9 guaranteed. Not bad at all for a guy who was the 5th ranked guard in the league per PFF. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackerDog Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 Plus you have the rookie pool, so if you take out the projected $2 million, that is $7 million for Slauson, Fiametta, and the rookie pool. That sounds about right, and makes the Cutler deal even worse if that is the case, because essentially that means no impact FA's will be brought in. 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 Slausons cap hit is 2.7 this year, goes up to 3.2/3.3/3.4 the next 3 years. I'm also reading that Jennings cap number is 5.2....wasn't it reported to be 7.5???? Anyway, now that all the info is out there on all the signings I believe the Bears have about 6M left for free agents(I took out the money needed for the draft) before they make any cuts. 45.5 to begin with Cutler- 22.5 Jennings 5.2 Slausson 2.7 Gould 2.6 Fiametta .7 Rookies 5 Cap to date ~6.8 Possible cuts and how much they'd free up Peppers 9.8 Bush 1.8 Bennett 2.4 Podlesh 1 Weems 1.1 Total Cap ~22.9 Marshall can be extended to save lets say 2M to make the cap room 24.9 Trading Briggs has been getting some noise here, trading him would free up 6.5 bringing cap available to 31.4....Which is a shit ton of money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bears4Ever_34 Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 Slausons cap hit is 2.7 this year, goes up to 3.2/3.3/3.4 the next 3 years. Not bad. The Bears really need to cut Peppers and get their 9-10 millions in savings or whatever it is to sign a couple of impact players on defense, preferably a D-Lineman or two, or maybe a safety like Byrd. If they cut Peppers Bush, Weems, Earl Bennett, Conte, and Podlesh I think they save about 16.5M. I'm thinking they'll hold onto Earl though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 Agreed. To me, I get the vibe that they are trying to swallow the poison pill right now. They may figure they can line up one good FA, and a couple so-so ones. Make a run with a D that is better (anything would be better than the worst in our history!) dues to a couple key acquisitions, jetisoning some older less capable players, and general better health. ^Then line up something mega-big next off season. 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chitownhustla Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 At this point Im so confused as to how or why they structured the Cutler deal the way they did that I am going to wait and see how this plans out. Emery has to have some type of plan. You dont just sign Cutler to this huge of a deal without taking into condisderation the cap and the rest of players you need to sign to fill out a roster. He already admitted to not doing a good enough of a job with stocking the D. The cap confuses the shit out of me. Im pretty sure this is a true statement, The bears could have structured the Cutler deal to be more cap friendly while paying him the same amount. Right????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 Check out my previous post, I edited it to break down what CAN be done this offseason as far as cap goes....If overthecap.com has all their info correct Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackerDog Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 The bears could have structured the Cutler deal to be more cap friendly while paying him the same amount. Right????? 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 To elaborate a little more on the cap....assuming they cut those 5 guys, and all 7 (or 8 if they trade Briggs) of their draft pick sign they would have 35 players under contract with 24.9 (or 31.4 if they trade Briggs) to spend on 18 guys to fill out the roster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackerDog Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 To elaborate a little more on the cap....assuming they cut those 5 guys, and all 7 (or 8 if they trade Briggs) of their draft pick sign they would have 35 players under contract with 24.9 (or 31.4 if they trade Briggs) to spend on 18 guys to fill out the roster. 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted January 6, 2014 Report Share Posted January 6, 2014 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. Oh absolutely. Like I brought up before the contracts of Bennett and Bushrod combined was 54M in "real dollars" yet only counted 4.9 against the cap. So if they can work out a few deals like that then they absolutely can get the defense where it needs to be even if the Cutlers deal is what it is. There is indeed a light at the end of the tunnel IMO. Got all the numbers off www.overthecap.com so if I'm wrong it's all on them lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted January 7, 2014 Report Share Posted January 7, 2014 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. It's funny how contradictory you have been in this thread. Still waiting for the pop, eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.