PDA

View Full Version : Salar cap update(could end up 17 MILLION UNDER)



OrangeShadow
01-23-2005, 05:22 AM
Keep in mind this is just a rough projection and the information I go off, I get from the Post, Rocky, Co Spgs Gazette, and the BDC. This is also what can be done, and not necessarily what Shanahan will do.****

http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0...2646407,00.html

Quote:

Last year, the Broncos acquired cornerback Champ Bailey in a trade for running back Clinton Portis and signed safety John Lynch to a large contract. This year, the Broncos - projected to be about $3 million under the salary cap - likely will try to keep free agents and fill in with role players.


If that number is correct and Williamson didn't do some fiddling with what he thinks will be done to get that number, Denver will probably be pretty close to its best cap shape in years.

A number of roster bonuses are due, and those count entirely against the cap this year instead of being prorated over the life of the deal like a signing bonus. What will most likely happen with the roster bonuses, is that if Denver decides to keep the guy, they'll simply restructure the deal to spread out the hit as basically a new signing bonus.

Roster bonuses due:
Jake- $6 mil
Changing to a signing bonus will save $4.8 mil this year

Al- $5 mil
New SB- about $4.15 mil in savings

Neil, Lepsis and Nalen- unknown numbers
Really don't see Lepsis or Nalen being let go, Neil's inability to stay healthy over the last two seasons might cause hiim to be cut. Cutting him would accelerate all his bonus money that had already been paid to hitting on this year's cap, but Denver would save his salary and whatever that roster bonus is.

Possible roster bonus
Champ- I think his signing bonus was really 3 straight years of $6 mil bonuses, though I can't find the article where I got that idea. But Shefter (or DeBruin) wrote an article that said his cap number was under $2 mil this year, so that does lend some creedance to the possibilty of a split bonus.
If that's true, he will obviously be kept saving Denver $5 mil if it's spread out over the remaining six years of the year.

Base salaries (top 12):

Pryce, Trevor 6,500,000.00
Coming off an injured season, I believe this will be his 3rd year with the team's highest base salary and he has not been asked to restructure until now. Probably a very likely candidate to restructure.
Smith, Rod 5,000,000.00
Team guy always been willing to restructure if asked.
Nalen, Tom 3,900,000.00
See Rod
Lepsis, Matt 3,500,000.00
Restructured last year, if he does it again will probably go into the Rod and Nalen category.
Neil, Dan 3,325,000.00
If he's kept see Rod
Plummer, Jake 3,300,000.00
I'd bet he'll restructure his base when they deal with the roster bonus
Anderson, Mike 2,160,000.00
Can't see being kept if he doesn't do something to that salary
Lynch, John 1,900,000.00
Leader and team guy, don't know if that translates into restructuring his contract. Ask a Tampa fan.
Carswell, Dwayne 1,575,000.00
Cut possiblity anyone?
Johnson, Ellis 1,450,000.00
This season was voided, he'll be a UFA
Wilson, Al 1,365,000.00
Bailey, Roland 1,000,000.00
Doubt these two will be asked to do anything to their base salaries.

The problem with redoing base salaries is the same with restructing roster bonuses, the money will eventually hit the cap and what hasn't hit can accelerate if the guy is cut or retires.


Overall:
If the $3 mil under number is correct, just turning Jake's, Al's, and Champ's (if he has one) roster bonuses into new signing bonuses will put Denver to about $17 million under the cap. That's before doing anything with the 3 OL's roster bonuses, or asking anyone to do something about their base salaries. There are quite a few RFAs who will be tendered to eat up some of that room, but I could see Denver easily $15 or so mil under the cap with very minimal effort on their part. To put that in perspective, as I noted above, Champ Bailey of the largest CB contract in league history had a cap number of less then $2 mil this past season.

The Dark Knight
01-23-2005, 07:01 AM
:huh:

Too many numbers for poor Benny's head.

Snk16
01-23-2005, 07:28 AM
Wow!:O

Feeling faint............
help.............
feeling faint.........
too many numbers..........
enough numbers in school................













































































































(Falls on floor)

JoRo
01-23-2005, 08:25 AM
Sounds good, but if shanny is smart hell try to do that to someone that will be around awhile (jake) cuz if we do that to rod or nalen, an they retire? were in the same boat we were in with Griese before........(alot of cap room lost..........)

Mat'hir Uth Gan
01-23-2005, 09:28 AM
This is flawed.

You cant do what youre suggesting because it would put us in salary cap hell in the near future and we would have to dismantle our entire team like the 49ers have had to do the last few years.

There is more to the salary cap then restructuring for one year.

On top of that youre suggesting 10+ players will agree to restructure....a team is lucky if 2 players agree to restructure. The business side of the NFL is brutal and not many players will agree to take money out of their pockets for future promises that tend to not happen.

Finally, that 3 million under the cap will be soaked up in basically one contract. We have a TON of FAs we need to sign.

Hayward will command a 5 year, 25 million contract with a 5million signing bonus.
* That would count 6 million against the cap on average, though it can be spaced out.

Putzier is in line for a nice raise.

We need to keep money free for Herndon and Walls and lock them up.

On our O-line, Hamilton is a must sign. As is Carlisle if we let Neil go. Then there is Neil, and if we cut him, we get hit by his prorated signing bonus.

We have other role players that are all in line for raises.


We are in about as bad of salary cap shape as it gets, we will be losing key players this offseason, there is no doubt.

Johnny Law Man
01-23-2005, 09:40 AM
Everyone wants everything right now regardless of consequence. Are these "Cap-crunchers" the same people who want Coach Shannahan fired and Jake plummer traded or cut loose? I want the Denver Broncos to remain competetive every year. That's a tall enough order in itself.

Dean
01-23-2005, 10:42 AM
Last year we were "in about as bad a cap shape as it gets" and we still cleared room for new additions and lost only Burt Berry. Mike will clear room to resign who he wants unless they are like Gold and are being unreasonalbe and we will pick up a couple of free agents. Where there is a will there is a way. With the exception of needing money for building the stadium for which the NFL penalized us, we have flexed the cap to accomplish what we wanted to do. We will again.

TXBRONC
01-23-2005, 12:47 PM
Keep in mind this is just a rough projection and the information I go off, I get from the Post, Rocky, Co Spgs Gazette, and the BDC. This is also what can be done, and not necessarily what Shanahan will do.****

http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0...2646407,00.html

Quote:

Last year, the Broncos acquired cornerback Champ Bailey in a trade for running back Clinton Portis and signed safety John Lynch to a large contract. This year, the Broncos - projected to be about $3 million under the salary cap - likely will try to keep free agents and fill in with role players.


If that number is correct and Williamson didn't do some fiddling with what he thinks will be done to get that number, Denver will probably be pretty close to its best cap shape in years.

A number of roster bonuses are due, and those count entirely against the cap this year instead of being prorated over the life of the deal like a signing bonus. What will most likely happen with the roster bonuses, is that if Denver decides to keep the guy, they'll simply restructure the deal to spread out the hit as basically a new signing bonus.

Roster bonuses due:
Jake- $6 mil
Changing to a signing bonus will save $4.8 mil this year

Al- $5 mil
New SB- about $4.15 mil in savings

Neil, Lepsis and Nalen- unknown numbers
Really don't see Lepsis or Nalen being let go, Neil's inability to stay healthy over the last two seasons might cause hiim to be cut. Cutting him would accelerate all his bonus money that had already been paid to hitting on this year's cap, but Denver would save his salary and whatever that roster bonus is.

Possible roster bonus
Champ- I think his signing bonus was really 3 straight years of $6 mil bonuses, though I can't find the article where I got that idea. But Shefter (or DeBruin) wrote an article that said his cap number was under $2 mil this year, so that does lend some creedance to the possibilty of a split bonus.
If that's true, he will obviously be kept saving Denver $5 mil if it's spread out over the remaining six years of the year.

Base salaries (top 12):

Pryce, Trevor 6,500,000.00
Coming off an injured season, I believe this will be his 3rd year with the team's highest base salary and he has not been asked to restructure until now. Probably a very likely candidate to restructure.
Smith, Rod 5,000,000.00
Team guy always been willing to restructure if asked.
Nalen, Tom 3,900,000.00
See Rod
Lepsis, Matt 3,500,000.00
Restructured last year, if he does it again will probably go into the Rod and Nalen category.
Neil, Dan 3,325,000.00
If he's kept see Rod
Plummer, Jake 3,300,000.00
I'd bet he'll restructure his base when they deal with the roster bonus
Anderson, Mike 2,160,000.00
Can't see being kept if he doesn't do something to that salary
Lynch, John 1,900,000.00
Leader and team guy, don't know if that translates into restructuring his contract. Ask a Tampa fan.
Carswell, Dwayne 1,575,000.00
Cut possiblity anyone?
Johnson, Ellis 1,450,000.00
This season was voided, he'll be a UFA
Wilson, Al 1,365,000.00
Bailey, Roland 1,000,000.00
Doubt these two will be asked to do anything to their base salaries.

The problem with redoing base salaries is the same with restructing roster bonuses, the money will eventually hit the cap and what hasn't hit can accelerate if the guy is cut or retires.


Overall:
If the $3 mil under number is correct, just turning Jake's, Al's, and Champ's (if he has one) roster bonuses into new signing bonuses will put Denver to about $17 million under the cap. That's before doing anything with the 3 OL's roster bonuses, or asking anyone to do something about their base salaries. There are quite a few RFAs who will be tendered to eat up some of that room, but I could see Denver easily $15 or so mil under the cap with very minimal effort on their part. To put that in perspective, as I noted above, Champ Bailey of the largest CB contract in league history had a cap number of less then $2 mil this past season.

For the most part I agree with MUG about what you're trying to say here. First and foremost the organization can not arbitrarily restructure contracts the player has to be willing to do so otherwise its a no go. Also Rod Smith has restructured his contract on at least one occassion, it would classless of the organization to even consider doing it again same with Nalen.

Now you also mention possibly cutting a player or two ok that's fine but then you have to replace that person and that may or may not be the best for the team. As MUG said two maybe but ten that's laughable. No offence intended.

OrangeShadow
01-23-2005, 12:55 PM
ok but just turning the roster bonuses into signing bonuses shouldnt be hard because the players get the money eitehr way yet it still saves us money.

Mat'hir Uth Gan
01-23-2005, 01:42 PM
Last year we were "in about as bad a cap shape as it gets" and we still cleared room for new additions and lost only Burt Berry. Mike will clear room to resign who he wants unless they are like Gold and are being unreasonalbe and we will pick up a couple of free agents. Where there is a will there is a way. With the exception of needing money for building the stadium for which the NFL penalized us, we have flexed the cap to accomplish what we wanted to do. We will again.

The thing that helped us a ton last year was that Mobley "retired". Thus, his salary went kaput. I would say losing Berry and Gold because of our cap situation was two pretty damn big loses. Gold forced us to use our 1st rounder on a LB instead of a DE, and Berry we still havent replaced.

It looks like we will lose Hayward this year, as he will want the same contract as Berry got, and he deserves it.

We also have a LOT more FAs this year to resign then last year. THAT is the reason we are in horrific salary cap space. If we didnt have any FAs, we'd be ok. But we have alot, and thats going to be a massive problem.

Sam_Z
01-23-2005, 02:01 PM
This is flawed.

You cant do what youre suggesting because it would put us in salary cap hell in the near future and we would have to dismantle our entire team like the 49ers have had to do the last few years.

There is more to the salary cap then restructuring for one year.

On top of that youre suggesting 10+ players will agree to restructure....a team is lucky if 2 players agree to restructure. The business side of the NFL is brutal and not many players will agree to take money out of their pockets for future promises that tend to not happen.

Finally, that 3 million under the cap will be soaked up in basically one contract. We have a TON of FAs we need to sign.

Hayward will command a 5 year, 25 million contract with a 5million signing bonus.
* That would count 6 million against the cap on average, though it can be spaced out.

Putzier is in line for a nice raise.

We need to keep money free for Herndon and Walls and lock them up.

On our O-line, Hamilton is a must sign. As is Carlisle if we let Neil go. Then there is Neil, and if we cut him, we get hit by his prorated signing bonus.

We have other role players that are all in line for raises.


We are in about as bad of salary cap shape as it gets, we will be losing key players this offseason, there is no doubt.

Good point and if I was an Al Wilson or Champ Bailey, I would not be in the mood to give anything back to a caoching staff that claims everything is A-ok, and calls bonehead plays in our biggest game of the year!

mikemustgo
01-23-2005, 02:39 PM
we are in better shape than we were last year though!! i think we like 4mil over the cap at the begining. remember we were still paying for griese's punk ass..one more thing we have to think about is we have to keep around 5 mil for the draft..though it looked like it would be a short draft but with the addition of comp picks it appears right now that we will have a pick in each round again.


I agree with alot of what you said though. neil, rod smith and plummer will be asked to do redos on their contracts and that right there will free up some good money to add 2 or 3 good FA's.

if hayward wants 25 mil then let someone else pay that. i do believe he was on the line that sucked so bad people are freaking out!! bottom line is he is under sized and not good enough for 25 mil!!

PRBronco
01-23-2005, 02:46 PM
Bert was undersized too, and now he's a pro bowler. As far as money for the draft goes, i'm pretty sure i read that every team has a separate little chunk of cap money set aside already, and they don't factor it into their FA situation.

Dean
01-23-2005, 02:47 PM
Correct me if I am wrong here. When a player retires all bonuses still have to be paid. All you don't pay is that year's salary and he was about to be suspended by the NFL for multiple DUI infractions. I believe we improved over Gold at weak side LB Wasn't Gold at 220 lbs and teams constantly ran right at him in short yardage situations? Didn't he have greaat speed but continually over ran plays? Didn't Hayward get as many sacks as Berry got the previos year?

What am I missing?

TXBRONC
01-23-2005, 03:33 PM
The thing that helped us a ton last year was that Mobley "retired". Thus, his salary went kaput. I would say losing Berry and Gold because of our cap situation was two pretty damn big loses. Gold forced us to use our 1st rounder on a LB instead of a DE, and Berry we still havent replaced.

It looks like we will lose Hayward this year, as he will want the same contract as Berry got, and he deserves it.

We also have a LOT more FAs this year to resign then last year. THAT is the reason we are in horrific salary cap space. If we didnt have any FAs, we'd be ok. But we have alot, and thats going to be a massive problem.

Berry and Gold were not cap casualities but rather Denver was unwilling to pay them what they thought they were worth in other words they could have resigned them but didn't think they were worth the kind of money they were looking for. Gold coming off an blown ACL thought he was worth being paid like he was a top 5 linebacker which he wasn't. He's was good but not that good. Also if I'm mistaken the contract Gold got with the Bucs was dollar wise about what he was offered here.

Dean
01-23-2005, 08:33 PM
I repeat-Mike will make enough cap room to sign any of the free agents that he wants who are not unreasonable. He also will pick up a couple of free agents.

He always does!

AdamJT13
01-24-2005, 12:12 AM
If the $3 mil under number is correct, just turning Jake's, Al's, and Champ's (if he has one) roster bonuses into new signing bonuses will put Denver to about $17 million under the cap.

The problem is, they don't have roster bonuses due, they have option bonuses due. And option bonuses already are prorated. Plummer's $6 million option bonus counts only $1 million in 2005, as does Wilson's $5 million option bonus. And Bailey's $6 million option bonus counts only $1.2 million. So there's no money to be saved from the bonuses -- unless the Broncos simply don't pay them.

And since Bailey's salary is only $1 million and Wilson's only $1.365 million, the only real way the Broncos can save cap room on any of them -- if they want to keep them -- is by reducing Plummer's $3.3 million base salary or converting part of it to a bonus. But that won't save more than a few million.

Return of Lava
01-24-2005, 03:09 PM
i dont know about you guys but i am really uncomfortable with rod making 5 mil, also i am pretty sure champ's salary number will increase dramatically over these next few years he signed a heavily backloaded contract.

Dream
01-24-2005, 03:42 PM
I'm not worried about the cap situation at all, I'm pretty sure we'll be getting rid of some players and asking for some of them to re-structure their contracts. I have a feeling we should have enough money to atleast re-sign several of the key players on our team (Hayward, Putzier, etc.) and still be able to pick up someone in FA. Otherwise I don't see why Bowlen would be talking about targeting two big names this off-season. He obviously must have an idea up his sleeve, hopefully it's not cheating the system again.

Dean
01-24-2005, 03:59 PM
Last year the same gloom and doom posts were here that we couldn't possibly get in under the cap, retain our people, and have money for free agency and the draft. We did then and we will now.

Relax and smell the roses.

TXBRONC
01-24-2005, 04:10 PM
Last year the same gloom and doom posts were here that we couldn't possibly get in under the cap, retain our people, and have money for free agency and the draft. We did then and we will now.

Relax and smell the roses.

I think there is hughe difference between relaxing and smelling the roses and going off the deep end with ideas of clearing 17 million in cap space. I believe Shanahan will clear some space like he always does but clear 17 mill just isn't a credible idea. (No offence intend to the one who started the thread.)

NeedDLinemen
01-24-2005, 05:25 PM
The problem is, they don't have roster bonuses due, they have option bonuses due. And option bonuses already are prorated. Plummer's $6 million option bonus counts only $1 million in 2005, as does Wilson's $5 million option bonus. And Bailey's $6 million option bonus counts only $1.2 million. So there's no money to be saved from the bonuses -- unless the Broncos simply don't pay them.

And since Bailey's salary is only $1 million and Wilson's only $1.365 million, the only real way the Broncos can save cap room on any of them -- if they want to keep them -- is by reducing Plummer's $3.3 million base salary or converting part of it to a bonus. But that won't save more than a few million.

It depends on whether the bonuses are guaranteed or not and when they are due. Most offseason roster/option/reporting bonuses are unguaranteed. I think Jake's is, not sure about the others. An unguaranteed bonus is not porated and counts against the cap in the season the player receives it. So it can be easily turned into a signing bonus. These give teams the option of cutting a player without the hit of the additional bonuses later in the contract.

PRBronco
01-25-2005, 12:26 AM
Hey, I just found a good article that pretty much lays out our cap situation for us: here (http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/sports/10662186.htm?1c)

AdamJT13
01-25-2005, 12:51 AM
It depends on whether the bonuses are guaranteed or not and when they are due. Most offseason roster/option/reporting bonuses are unguaranteed. I think Jake's is, not sure about the others. An unguaranteed bonus is not porated and counts against the cap in the season the player receives it. So it can be easily turned into a signing bonus. These give teams the option of cutting a player without the hit of the additional bonuses later in the contract.

As I said in my post, the option bonuses for Bailey, Plummer and Wilson already are prorated. So "turning them into a signing bonus" and prorating them wouldn't change anything, since they're ALREADY prorated.

NeedDLinemen
01-25-2005, 10:52 AM
As I said in my post, the option bonuses for Bailey, Plummer and Wilson already are prorated. So "turning them into a signing bonus" and prorating them wouldn't change anything, since they're ALREADY prorated.

The bonuses aren't porated they are hitting this years cap, how else do you think Denver is hitting $85 million already with only 43 players under contract for 2005??

NeedDLinemen
01-25-2005, 11:18 AM
Hey, I just found a good article that pretty much lays out our cap situation for us: here (http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/sports/10662186.htm?1c)

That article isn't that accurate IMO. Did Pat Bowlen not state that Denver hoped to sign at least 1-2 new starters?? We will have plenty of room to play with. This is the 1st year in my living memory that we are under the cap before we've restructured/released any players. Last offseason we were nearly $10 million over!!

Return of Lava
01-25-2005, 12:30 PM
That article isn't that accurate IMO. Did Pat Bowlen not state that Denver hoped to sign at least 1-2 new starters?? We will have plenty of room to play with. This is the 1st year in my living memory that we are under the cap before we've restructured/released any players. Last offseason we were nearly $10 million over!!
Yeah but i dont think you guys are appreciating the jump champ's salary is gonna take i think he made 1 mil this 1st year but next year it might be like 5 or 6 mil. If i remember right it was a 5 year 63 million dollar contract that was very slim in the first year due to our cap issue last year, but would increase. Depending on how much his signing bonus was, that's gonna account for the highest paid on the team probably.

NeedDLinemen
01-25-2005, 01:02 PM
Yeah but i dont think you guys are appreciating the jump champ's salary is gonna take i think he made 1 mil this 1st year but next year it might be like 5 or 6 mil. If i remember right it was a 5 year 63 million dollar contract that was very slim in the first year due to our cap issue last year, but would increase. Depending on how much his signing bonus was, that's gonna account for the highest paid on the team probably.

Champ's deal was supposed to be really cap friendly for the 1st 2 seasons if I remember correctly.

NeedDLinemen
01-25-2005, 02:07 PM
2004: $1,000,000
2005: $1,000,000
2006: $5,500,000
2007: $5,500,000
2008: $7,500,000
2009: $6,500,000
2010: $9,500,000

Plus about (just under) $18,000,000 signing bonus.
Thatís about $2,500,000 per year against the cap.

Yeah I know but the $18 million was split into 2/3 different bonuses, I read the article from Shefter in the Denver Post previously. This is a quote from the article. "Yet Denver had no problems squeezing Bailey's new deal under the NFL's $ 80.6 million salary cap. Bailey is scheduled to carry a $ 2.5 million salary cap number this season, $ 3.7 million next season and $ 9.7 million in 2006 and 2007". So the big hit comes in 2006!

AdamJT13
01-25-2005, 03:08 PM
The bonuses aren't porated they are hitting this years cap

No, those bonuses already are prorated.



how else do you think Denver is hitting $85 million already with only 43 players under contract for 2005??

Because they have 20 players with a cap number of more than $1 million, including Trevor Pryce's $9,166,666, Matt Lepsis' $6,100,000, Tom Nalen's $5,799,500 and Dan Neil's $5,055,000 -- not to mention more than $6 million in dead money for Daryl Gardener and John Mobley.

AdamJT13
01-25-2005, 03:23 PM
This is strange and new to meÖ
A team can NOT decided how much of the S.B will be against the cap each year; it is automatically divided between the number of years in the contract.

The cap hit in 2006 suppose to be $5.5m B.S + ~$2.5m S.B (total: ~$8m)

Bailey didnít get an $18 million signing bonus. He got a $6 million signing bonus, which is prorated at $1 million each season from 2004 to 2009. He has a $6 million option bonus due in 2005, and that is prorated at $1.2 million each season from 2005 to 2009. And he has another $6 million option bonus due in 2006, prorated at $1.5 million per season from 2006 to 2009.