dhazer
  • dhazer
  • Veteran Member Topic Starter
15 years ago
Im doing some research on this but i figured i would just ask here. Alot of posters understand this cap stuff better than me. I heard Mort talking about the Pats and how they are going to Franchise tag Cassell and how they would have $29 million tied up in 2 qbs but the thing is the cap space is going up 123 million per team. If thats true we should have tons of money to spend in Free Agency. It just did sound right to me thats why i figured i would ask here. Like said if it is true Ted Thompson better start spending.



Ok i found this and it says it goes to a minimum of $123 million from $116 million so we will still be way under the cap again so like i said he has no excuses not to go after a FA.

http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/article/58422 
Just Imagine this for the next 6-9 years. What a ride it will be 🙂 (PS, Zero should charge for this)
UserPostedImage
buckeyepackfan
15 years ago
TT spend money on FA's!!!! :icon_smile: :icon_smile: :icon_smile:

Why would anyone think he is going to change his way of thinking?

It's not about putting together and keeping together a winning team, it's all about being young and full of potential.

PROVE ME WRONG TED AND I WILL BE HUMBLED.
I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!
HoustonMatt
15 years ago
Yes, the numbers you posted are true, but there's something else to consider. The cap is set relative to total league revenue. Of course, not all teams are created equal, so the NY Giants bring in more revenue that the Detroit Lions. Just because the cap is $123 million, doesn't mean that all teams can afford to spend up to that limit. Can the Packers? I'm not sure. You might want to see if you can find team revenue numbers for the past five years in order to determine what would be a reasonable spending limit for 2009. That may be difficult to impossible to find though.

EDIT: Typing "packers revenue" into Google brings up quite a few articles over the past 5-6 years. I won't post them all here, but they show that the Packers are consistently in the top half of the league in terms of revenue and had jumped all the way to #7 as recently as 2006. Now that's a very quick and dirty analysis of the Packers financial constraints, or lack there of, but it would suggest that we don't necessarily have to keep our hands on the purse strings.
blank
dhazer
  • dhazer
  • Veteran Member Topic Starter
15 years ago

Yes, the numbers you posted are true, but there's something else to consider. The cap is set relative to total league revenue. Of course, not all teams are created equal, so the NY Giants bring in more revenue that the Detroit Lions. Just because the cap is $123 million, doesn't mean that all teams can afford to spend up to that limit. Can the Packers? I'm not sure. You might want to see if you can find team revenue numbers for the past five years in order to determine what would be a reasonable spending limit for 2009. That may be difficult to impossible to find though.

"mattresell" wrote:




Matt way i'm reading it that is what the team has to spend the league minimum. I culd be wrong but thats how i read it. Heres another interesting article i found and why Mike McCarthy won't be fired or other coaches. That money would count against the cap and Ted Thompson won't want that.

http://blogs.nfl.com/2008/12/14/economy-impacts-coachs-jobs-and-salary-cap/ 
Just Imagine this for the next 6-9 years. What a ride it will be 🙂 (PS, Zero should charge for this)
UserPostedImage
HoustonMatt
15 years ago


Matt way i'm reading it that is what the team has to spend the league minimum. I culd be wrong but thats how i read it. Heres another interesting article i found and why Mike McCarthy won't be fired or other coaches. That money would count against the cap and Ted Thompson won't want that.

http://blogs.nfl.com/2008/12/14/economy-impacts-coachs-jobs-and-salary-cap/ 

"dhazer" wrote:



You're correct on that. Every team must spend the league minimum, but that number will be far lower than the $123 million cap. In fact, it's usually low enough to be irrelevant. The salary floor is designed to keep teams from fielding $15 million dollar clubs like the Florida Marlins do and then pocketing the shared revenue. The NFL shares a much larger portion of its revenue amongst all 32 teams than does MLB, so the wealthy teams put this floor in to keep the other teams honest.

EDIT: Interesting tidbit from that article. The Giants were $20 million under the cap when they won the Super Bowl. Keep that in mind when you start railing against Ted Thompson because we still have $10 million in unused cap later this offseason. If you can't field a competitive team for $100 million bucks, you're the problem, not the amount of money you spend.
blank
PackFanWithTwins
15 years ago
Not exact, but for a rough estimate. The Cap is expected to rise to 123 million. What I have is GB is currently sitting with 90 million of the 2009 cap used. Leaving roughly 30 million. This has not taken into consideration any money moved forward from 2008.

While 30 million sounds like a lot of money, with players that need to be signed, and hopefully extended. the amount left for FA is probably enough for 1 big signing and a couple smaller moves. Unless other moves are made. (ex. cutting clifton would save another 6.3 million), but a replacement would be needed and would offset some of that savings.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
all_about_da_packers
15 years ago
What makes the cap a lot more complex is that you can prorate signing bonus (as the Cowboys do with big time guaranteed money, making payments well into the future after the contract was sign), and you can also carry space into next year by throwing in "likely" to be earned money into the deal via Likely To Be Earned Incentives (IE participate 75% of ST snaps in your star QBs contract, when in fact your QB won't come close to ever playing on ST).

It's a really interesting thing.
The NFL: Where Greg Jennings Happens.
bozz_2006
15 years ago

Yes, the numbers you posted are true, but there's something else to consider. The cap is set relative to total league revenue. Of course, not all teams are created equal, so the NY Giants bring in more revenue that the Detroit Lions. Just because the cap is $123 million, doesn't mean that all teams can afford to spend up to that limit. Can the Packers? I'm not sure. You might want to see if you can find team revenue numbers for the past five years in order to determine what would be a reasonable spending limit for 2009. That may be difficult to impossible to find though.

"dhazer" wrote:




Matt way i'm reading it that is what the team has to spend the league minimum. I culd be wrong but thats how i read it. Heres another interesting article i found and why Mike McCarthy won't be fired or other coaches. That money would count against the cap and Ted Thompson won't want that.

http://blogs.nfl.com/2008/12/14/economy-impacts-coachs-jobs-and-salary-cap/ 

"mattresell" wrote:



I think you misunderstand the article. Coaches salaries don't count against the salary cap. Not at all. But, all coaches salaries are guaranteed. So, since Ted and Mike signed their contract extensions this year, if they were to be fired, they would still receive all the money for the rest of their contract. What the article is implying is that while some teams may be better able to afford firing a coach and paying him the remainder of his salary, some teams (like the Packers) can't afford to throw that money down the toilet, so to speak.
UserPostedImage
HoustonMatt
15 years ago
FYI - If the salary cap is going to be set at $123 million, then the salary floor, defined as 86.4% of the cap, will be $106.2 million. Every team must spend above the floor, but below the cap. Though as AADP points out, there are plenty of ways to "massage" your final numbers to ensure that you are within that range. It's the NFL equivalent of creative accounting. If Andy Fastow weren't locked up, he'd be a helluva a Capologist.
blank
dhazer
  • dhazer
  • Veteran Member Topic Starter
15 years ago
Well Matt im taking the floor being 123 million when they say minimum i would think. Like i said i have very little knowledge of how the cap works.
Just Imagine this for the next 6-9 years. What a ride it will be 🙂 (PS, Zero should charge for this)
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
beast (30m) : In other news, the Green Bay Packers have signed Zero2Cool to update their website 😋 jk
beast (3h) : Might just re-sign the kicker we got
beast (3h) : Are there any kickers worth drafting next year?
Zero2Cool (3h) : Preston Smith for Malik Willis
Mucky Tundra (3h) : Getting a 7th rounder from the Stillers
Zero2Cool (3h) : At least we get 7th round pick now!! HELLO NEW KICKER
Mucky Tundra (3h) : Steelers getting a premier lockdown corner!
Zero2Cool (3h) : Packers are trading edge rusher Preston Smith to the Pittsburgh Steelers, per sources.
Mucky Tundra (3h) : Preston Smith traded to the Steelers!!!!
Zero2Cool (5h) : CB Marshon Lattimore to Commanders
Zero2Cool (9h) : Bears are sending RB Khalil Herbert to the Bengals, per sources.
Zero2Cool (10h) : ZaDarius Smith continues his "north" tour.
Zero2Cool (10h) : Let the Chiefs trade a 5th for him
Zero2Cool (10h) : Nearing 30, large contract, nope.
Martha Careful (23h) : any interest in Marshon Lattimore?
Zero2Cool (4-Nov) : What does NFL do if they're over cap?
Mucky Tundra (4-Nov) : They've been able to constantly push it out through extensions, void years etc but they're in the hole by 72 million next year I believe
hardrocker950 (4-Nov) : Seems the Saints are always in cap hell
Mucky Tundra (4-Nov) : Saints HC job is not an envious one; gonna be in cap hell for 3 years
Mucky Tundra (4-Nov) : Dennis Allen has now been fired twice mid-season with Derek Carr as his starting QB
Zero2Cool (4-Nov) : Kuhn let go
beast (4-Nov) : I wonder if the Packers would have any interest in Z. Smith, probably not
Zero2Cool (4-Nov) : Shefter says Browns and Lions will figure out how to get a deal done for Za'Darius Smith..
Zero2Cool (4-Nov) : Packers are more likely to have 1,000 yard rusher than 4,000 yard passer
Zero2Cool (3-Nov) : It's raining hard.
Zero2Cool (3-Nov) : Packers inactives vs. Lions: CB Jaire Alexander S Evan Williams C Josh Myers Non-injury inactives: WR Malik Heath OL Travis Glover DE Bren
packerfanoutwest (3-Nov) : Malik Willis: My focus is helping the Packers win, not proving I can start elsewhere. But he could
Zero2Cool (1-Nov) : I had Texans, but the loss of another WR flipped me
wpr (1-Nov) : I thought about taking the Jets but they've been a disaster. Losing to the Pats last week
Zero2Cool (1-Nov) : Surprised more didn't pick Jets in Pick'em.
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 12:00 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

10h / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

13h / Around The NFL / Mucky Tundra

21h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

22h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

22h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

22h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

4-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

4-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

2-Nov / Around The NFL / wpr

1-Nov / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

1-Nov / Around The NFL / beast

Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.