|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556
Hall of Famer
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556 |
Posted by Mike Florio on July 30, 2011, 1:57 AM EDT wbbm-1018-cash Getty Images One of the highlights of the labor deal, from the perspective of the players, comes from the requirement that each team muat spend at least 89 percent of the salary cap in cash on an annual basis. “We cannot have teams like KC spend only 67% of the cap like they did in 2009,” Saints quarterback Drew Brees wrote in an e-mail to his teammates. “It doesn’t matter how high the cap is if they are only going to spend that much. So with a minimum in place, it requires all teams to be at or above that minimum. More money in players pockets.” The players got what they wanted. But it doesn’t apply until 2013. Yes, for 2011 and 2012 no minimum cash spending requirement applies on a per-team basis. We were first alerted to this reality on Thursday morning, during a weekly segment with Steve Davis and Ed Norris of 105.7 the Fan in Baltimore. Davis said that Ravens president Dick Cass had explained the situation in a recent on-air interview, and Davis forwarded the audio to us later in the day. The summary of the final deal that we obtained on Monday confirms that, indeed, the “minimum team cash spend” applies on a four-year basis from 2013 through 2016, and from 2017 through 2020. No minimum per-team expenditure applies for 2011 and 2012. Still, on a league-wide basis, the labor deal requires the NFL to spend 99 percent of the salary cap in cash in 2011 and 2012. So what happens if too many teams spend so little that the league isn’t able to average 99 percent of the cap in actual cash spent? NFL general counsel Jeff Pash, via NFL spokesman Greg Aiello, explained Friday night that the league would be required to pay the difference to the players. That said, the league doesn’t believe that it will be a problem, even if teams like the Bucs and Bengals and Chiefs decide to spend as little as possible over the next two years. Based on the money spent to date, the league thinks that the average expenditure of $119 million per team easily will be met. Remember, it’s not cap space but cash spent. So when a team like the Panthers gives defensive end Charles Johnson a $30 million signing bonus on a six-year deal, only $5 million counts against the cap — but $30 million counts against the league’s total spending requirement of $3.8 billion. The more relevant point, for the next two years, is that teams like the Bucs, Bengals, and Chiefs can choose to stay as far below the salary cap as they want. PFT rumormill
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,959
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,959 |
thanks Mour Quote:
The players got what they wanted. But it doesn’t apply until 2013.
that SHOULD stop all the nonsense by posters about them having to spend more money NOW...
I said SHOULD,, but it won't... some still won't get it..
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 658
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 658 |
Quote:
stop all the nonsense by posters about them having to spend more money NOW...
I said SHOULD,, but it won't... some still won't get it..
The teams have to spend more now. 
Thomas - The Tank Engine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,513
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,513 |
Heard that on the radio this morning and my first though was that I'd be fine with not spending a ton his year and staying under the cap for a big FA year next year.... I still think we'll get another corner this year
<><
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
thanks Mour
Quote:
The players got what they wanted. But it doesn’t apply until 2013.
that SHOULD stop all the nonsense by posters about them having to spend more money NOW...
I said SHOULD,, but it won't... some still won't get it..
Well you can't fault them for not knowing it will not take effect until 2013.
Thanks Mourg.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,959
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,959 |
Quote:
Quote:
thanks Mour
Quote:
The players got what they wanted. But it doesn’t apply until 2013.
that SHOULD stop all the nonsense by posters about them having to spend more money NOW...
I said SHOULD,, but it won't... some still won't get it..
Well you can't fault them for not knowing it will not take effect until 2013.
Thanks Mourg.
Oh hell no.. no fault at all for the time before Mour posted this,,
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,506
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,506 |
Well that helps explain some things.
Thanks for posting the article.
Edit to add: Actually, this makes sense as well. There is no way that teams at or over the cap can spend a specific percentage in cash if they are already at or over the cap already. They would need a "buffer" to structure future contracts so that they can use cash clauses instead of straight signing bonuses.
Last edited by YTownBrownsFan; 07/30/11 02:43 PM.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,964 |
First I've heard of this and I am not sure how saving money this year is help in the future, BUT this removes something that would force the team to pay more for football players. We need more football players.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 814
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 814 |
Quote:
thanks Mour
Quote:
The players got what they wanted. But it doesn’t apply until 2013.
that SHOULD stop all the nonsense by posters about them having to spend more money NOW...
I said SHOULD,, but it won't... some still won't get it..
And the Nonsense that lerner is not saving his sheckles for next year. This team is so full of holes and is content to sit on their hands they are asking the fans to support their 5 year plan. We are shooting for the #1 pick.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,986
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,986 |
Quote:
Quote:
thanks Mour
Quote:
The players got what they wanted. But it doesn’t apply until 2013.
that SHOULD stop all the nonsense by posters about them having to spend more money NOW...
I said SHOULD,, but it won't... some still won't get it..
And the Nonsense that lerner is not saving his sheckles for next year. This team is so full of holes and is content to sit on their hands they are asking the fans to support their 5 year plan. We are shooting for the #1 pick.
No way are we "shooting" for the #1 pick. You honestly believe that Holmgren, a guy who has won as much as he has, would actually be trying to lose this season?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,674
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 39,674 |
Thanks....I know i asked the question in one of these threads and it answers what happens if the money isn't spent.
I always thought this would somehow have to be a transition rather then just run willy nilly this year handing out money to players.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. GM Strong ![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/small-gator-chomp.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 814
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 814 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
thanks Mour
Quote:
The players got what they wanted. But it doesn’t apply until 2013.
that SHOULD stop all the nonsense by posters about them having to spend more money NOW...
I said SHOULD,, but it won't... some still won't get it..
And the Nonsense that lerner is not saving his sheckles for next year. This team is so full of holes and is content to sit on their hands they are asking the fans to support their 5 year plan. We are shooting for the #1 pick.
No way are we "shooting" for the #1 pick. You honestly believe that Holmgren, a guy who has won as much as he has, would actually be trying to lose this season?
Sorry that was Irony. not filling a few holes on a team with more holes than a 100lbs of swiss cheese only SEEMS like a plan for someone shooting for the #1 pick. I am open for other theories.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 17,284
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 17,284 |
We won't have the #1 pick. Look at Buffalo.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 814
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 814 |
Quote:
We won't have the #1 pick. Look at Buffalo.
ahh there is alway Buffalo, who BEAT us last year.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 17,284
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 17,284 |
Quote:
Quote:
We won't have the #1 pick. Look at Buffalo.
ahh there is alway Buffalo, who BEAT us last year.
And they still finished with a higher pick.
They were just a match up for us.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 814
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 814 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
We won't have the #1 pick. Look at Buffalo.
ahh there is alway Buffalo, who BEAT us last year.
And they still finished with a higher pick.
They were just a match up for us.
I can't find too many on our schedule we match up well with too bad Vanderbelt isn't there.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,506
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,506 |
We play the NFC West ..... who couldn't even get a single team to .500 last year.
If we can't get to .500 against this weak ass schedule ..... I don't hold out much hope for the future. (barring major injuries)
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024 |
My opinion is 8-8 is nothing but a pipe dream.
I do believe it mostly hinges on Colt. And I'm not at all unhappy with what appears to be a quiet FA period for the Browns with one exception. I wished we would have addressed WR. We have a bunch of bums and a rookie who didn't play last year and converted to WR the year before.
I thought we needed good WRs to make this offense go. I think this misstep could cost us a couple of games.
LOL - The Rish will be upset with this news as well. KS just doesn't prioritize winning...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,718 |
Quote:
Thanks....I know i asked the question in one of these threads and it answers what happens if the money isn't spent.
I always thought this would somehow have to be a transition rather then just run willy nilly this year handing out money to players.
Yep...exactly as I predicted a couple of weeks ago.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
vanderbilt has had better QBs than what Seattle is running out there this year 
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
thanks for posting. makes sense but i hadn't seen anything verified before.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Per-team spending minimum
doesn’t apply until 2013
|
|
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/FL_Dawg/Logo5_1.gif){kind=logo}
