DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Bleacher Bums Forum
HTML https://bbf.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Archives
*****************************************************
#Post#: 163192--------------------------------------------------
Re: 2014 Chicago Bears
DIR By: navigator
Date: January 2, 2014, 2:16 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
you mean like Tampa hiring Lovie before their new GM?
#Post#: 163193--------------------------------------------------
Re: 2014 Chicago Bears
DIR By: yapper
Date: January 2, 2014, 2:21 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
In reviewing the media and public criticism of the Cutler deal,
the two biggest points seem to be:
1) Why we are committing so many years to a QB who is already
30, has a chronic life altering medical condition and hasn't
played a full season for several years
2) Why we are putting so much money into the QB position when
multiple positions on our defense are so far below even average
I see more validity in #2 than in #1 but I think both have some
merit. That being said, I'm not against the deal unless it
becomes apparent we are not able to fully fix our D because of
it. No matter how much better Cutler may get, there is still a
baseline level of talent our D will have to come up to or we'll
be in that 8- to 9-win neverland every year, watching things
come down to the last weekend and hoping other teams lose so we
can sneak in as a wildcard. I want more from the Bears than
that.
#Post#: 163195--------------------------------------------------
Re: 2014 Chicago Bears
DIR By: wmljohn
Date: January 2, 2014, 2:28 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote ---
> NFL.com's Ian Rapoport reports Jay Cutler's seven-year deal is
worth $126 million, and includes $54 million guaranteed.
--- End Quote ---
The 54 guaranteed is the signing bonus. That gets spread evenly
over the 7 years so that is 8.14/year
That leaves 126-54=72 million is unguaranteed salary over 7
years. If that is also spread evenly it is 10.3/year
If everything is distributed evenly it is 18.4/year. We know
that it isn't. I would assume the deal is structured so that a
larger ammount of the unguaranteed money is backloaded in the
later years of the deal. That gives them room to redo the deal
later to make some of it guaranteed and leaves room this year
for cap space.
Something like
Year-$Salary-Total $
1 - 7 - 15.4
2 - 8 - 16.4
3 - 9 - 17.4
4 - 10 - 18.4
5 - 13 - 21.4
6 - 14 - 22.4
7 - 11 - 19.4
After 4 years they can redo the remaining to change some of the
salary to guarantee and lower the total.
But I am no capologist so I could be totally wrong.
#Post#: 163196--------------------------------------------------
Re: 2014 Chicago Bears
DIR By: boogie
Date: January 2, 2014, 2:36 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Right so if his salary for this coming year is $1mil, and his
prorated bonus is 8, he only counts 9 mil against the cap this
coming year.
#Post#: 163199--------------------------------------------------
Re: 2014 Chicago Bears
DIR By: boogie
Date: January 2, 2014, 2:37 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Something else I read somewhere was comments made by Blake
Costanzo about how not everyone was buying into Testman and his
system. So a backup LB said that whose primary job is on ST.
And the two parts of the team that stunk from here to high
heaven are D and ST. Nice knowing you Blake.
#Post#: 163200--------------------------------------------------
Re: 2014 Chicago Bears
DIR By: wmljohn
Date: January 2, 2014, 2:39 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Boogie that is correct sir. It all matters as to how the
unguaranteed 72 million over the 7 years is distributed.
Oh yeah also how much is salary and how much is assigned to an
incentive like # games played, % of team offensive plays in
year, pro-bowl selections, playoffs, superbowls, yards
passing...
It could likely be that 1 million of each year salary is tied to
incintives that might not be reached.
#Post#: 163201--------------------------------------------------
Re: 2014 Chicago Bears
DIR By: boogie
Date: January 2, 2014, 2:40 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
And that is where we get the relief over the franchise tag.
#Post#: 163202--------------------------------------------------
Re: 2014 Chicago Bears
DIR By: wmljohn
Date: January 2, 2014, 2:44 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Yeah. The franchise tag is guaranteed money for the next year.
No if's and's or but's about it.
#Post#: 163203--------------------------------------------------
Re: 2014 Chicago Bears
DIR By: wmljohn
Date: January 2, 2014, 3:01 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
An old article but I believe the premise is still in place
regarding how the cap works.
How does the NFL's salary cap work?
In 1994, the owners' and players' associations of the National
Football League approved a new collective-bargaining agreement.
This agreement included a salary cap designed to keep player
salaries from increasing at the rate they were at the time. The
salary cap is essentially a set amount of money that each of the
NFL's 31 teams is allowed to spend on player salaries for any
given year. For the upcoming 2001 season, that amount is
approximately $67.4-million, or 63% of the League's defined
gross revenues (DGR) from last year divided by the 31 NFL teams.
At first glance, that amount of money may seem a lot. When you
factor in an average of 57 players on an NFL roster during the
season, that amounts to a salary of around $1.18-million per
player. Again, a lot of money -- however, each team usually has
a few big-money players, like a star quarterback or running
back. Let's suppose a team has two star players, each with a
salary of $8-million per year. This cuts the cap room to
$51.4-million for 55 players, cutting the average salary of the
remaining players by $245,000 each.
Because salaries have continued to grow at a rate outpacing the
salary cap, teams have found ways to circumvent the cap. Signing
bonuses don't count toward a team's cap for a given year. A
player who receives a signing bonus gets more money for that
year than his recorded "salary," leaving more room in the cap
for the other players.
Say, for example, a player wants a seven-year, $60-million
contract. Let's say that the owner decides to give that player
an $11-million signing bonus, which is all paid out in the first
year but gets factored into the cap as prorated over the course
of the seven-year contract ($11-million / 7 years =
$1.57-million per year). Most NFL contracts are "back-ended" --
most of the base salary is located in the last two or three
years of the contract. If we suppose that our player's contract
is structured so that he has a base salary of $2-million the
first year, with higher base salaries in the final two years of
the contract, the $13-million (base salary + signing bonus) paid
out in the first year appears as $3.57-million to the cap! The
advantage of signing bonuses for the owner is that he now has
more money to spend under the cap. This is how the Washington
Redskins ran up a total payroll of $92.41-million in the 2000
season when the cap was $67-million. The advantage for the
player is that all signing-bonus money is guaranteed to be paid,
whereas an NFL contract is not guaranteed.
There are drawbacks to signing bonuses for the owner, however.
Because the bonus is guaranteed to the player, if the player is
released, traded or waived, all of the bonus money that was
being prorated throughout the length of the contract is
accelerated to the present year. So, if our team released its
star player after the third year of his contract (before June 1)
for whatever reason, the entire remainder of the bonus, almost
$6.3-million, will have to count toward the cap the next year
(if the team releases the player after June 1, only the yearly
$1.57-million will count the next year, and the remainder will
count the subsequent year).
Some teams have gotten themselves in trouble using signing
bonuses, running up huge portions of cap room taken up by
players who haven't played for them in several years. With so
much less money to spend than their rival teams, they have
little chance of fielding a very competitive team for that year,
as the best free agents usually go where the money is.
#Post#: 163204--------------------------------------------------
Re: 2014 Chicago Bears
DIR By: wmljohn
Date: January 2, 2014, 3:06 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I guess the bottom line is we don't know how his contract will
affect next years cap and the ability for the Bears to fix the
Defense until the details of the contract come out. I would
assume Cutler would want to help the Bears to help himself in
the next couple of years. That could be the home town discount
factor.
*****************************************************
Page 16 of 351
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page