Zero2Cool
a year ago
We always hear about the salary cap gonna be massive jump next year or in two years or in three years. Simply put, that's BS. The CBA limits the amount it can increase per year and they (NFL and NFLPA?) also go over the money and set the cap before league year starts. 

Based on the trends, we can guess the 2024 and 2025 salary cap with probably no accuracy whatsoever, but hey, why not?

2025 $254,973,780   $15,561,780
2024 $239,412,000   $14,612,000

So, not really a massive jump at all. Just the normal 5-7% we've seen throughout the last decade or so. 2021 dropped due to COVID-19 and 2022 was doubled to compensate. 


2023    $224,800,000    $16,600,000    7.97%    
2022    $208,200,000    $25,700,000    14.08%    
2021    $182,500,000    $-15,700,000    -7.92%
2020    $198,200,000    $10,000,000    5.31%    
2019    $188,200,000    $11,000,000    6.21%    
2018    $177,200,000    $10,200,000    6.11%    
2017    $167,000,000    $11,730,000    7.55%    
2016    $155,270,000    $11,990,000    8.37%    
2015    $143,280,000    $10,280,000    7.73%    
2014    $133,000,000    $9,400,000    7.61%    
2013    $123,600,000    $3,000,000    2.49%    
2012    $120,600,000    $225,000    0.19%    

 
UserPostedImage
earthquake
a year ago
From what I understand there have been limits to the cap in place the last couple of years due to Covid. In 2020 league revenue was down significantly (nobody was able to attend the games), and the NFL and NFLPA agreed to spread the hit over a few years. Next year will be the first year without the cap reduction in place, so most are expecting the cap to go up significantly. I'll see if I can find a source for this. Edit: nothing coming up - I read this on twitter at some point so take it with a grain of salt.

If I recall correctly, there were new TV deals worked out within the last couple of years too. These are expected to raise the cap as well.

https://overthecap.com/salary-cap-space 

It looks like OTC is predicting:
2024: $256m
2025: $282m
2026: $308m

I have no idea if that is remotely accurate though.
blank
beast
a year ago

We always hear about the salary cap gonna be massive jump next year or in two years or in three years. Simply put, that's BS. The CBA limits the amount it can increase per year and they (NFL and NFLPA?) also go over the money and set the cap before league year starts. 

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



Um, I don't know what the CBA says, but I was under the impression that the CBA locks the cap in at a certain percentage level of the prior years earnings and therefore no limits.

Under normal circumstances, I agree with you, that way too much is made about the salary cap going up, as percentage wise, I don't think it goes up as much as fans think as teams and agents make contacts under the assumption that it's going to go up, so that money is largely already spent on contracts and most that isn't goes towards that years FA class.


That being said, the NFL signed some ridiculous high new TV contracts (which is where the huge money actually is) and that was strongly expected to jump the cap when it official kicked in which was like 2023 or 2024, but COVID hurt and the NFL and Union came to an agreement to level out the Covid hurt and TV contract rise. So it's going to be more steady (which is smart).


That being said, again, teams and agents assumpted the raise was coming and have been spending it ... so even if there is some huge jump, it's not going to feel like it (unless the jump was expected by teams ans agents years in advanced).


I strongly believe the NFL would be incredible smart to change future CBAs to say that instead of the cap being scheduled based on last year's profit, that they should change it to say the year prior to that, to give them a bigger planning window, in case of some surprise like COVID happens again.

Of course the Union would need something in return.

The Union has been trying to get it allowed to make contract in terms of percentage, so instead of saying Aaron Jones earnings $12 million of the cap this year, he instead gets 5.338% of the cap so if the cap goes up, he gets more, if it goes down, he gets less. The owners have always refused, as they assume it'll always go up and therefore the players are working on a smaller number.

But when Covid hit, it was the NFL whom were strongly trying to get a year or two based on cap percentages, and the Union said you'll never allow us to do it when it goes up, so hell no.

But these changes would make things so much simpler for both parties, planning wise, and overtime needing less guys to do the math ASAP, and instead getting more than a full year to get the numbers together instead of a few months would save money and easier for fans and players.

But never going to happen.
​​​​​
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
a year ago
In the CBA the salary cap cannot increase more than 10% -- so I've been told. it could be an inferrence too based on trends
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
a year ago

https://overthecap.com/salary-cap-space 

It looks like OTC is predicting:
2024: $256m
2025: $282m
2026: $308m

I have no idea if that is remotely accurate though.

Originally Posted by: earthquake 


I certainly trust OTC more than myself on cap information. But that exceeds the 10% threshold from the CBA. However, if the NFL and NFLPA both agree, I believe that supercedes everything -- just like it did with COVID-19
UserPostedImage
beast
a year ago

In the CBA the salary cap cannot increase more than 10% -- so I've been told. it could be an inferrence too based on trends

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

 

I mean, that seems reasonable, but with how over concerned (and maybe rightfully so) the Union is worried about the players potential being screwed, I have a hard time seeing them to straight limit it like that.

Maybe something more complex, like everything over 10% goes into the following year to ensure there is no decrease after a shockingly high jump or some safety net measure to make sure it doesn't then go down, but as far as I know, the CBA, in general, lacks safety net measures. And really I would support them putting in a lot more.

According to the article below, the Salary cap is equal to 48% to 48.8% of the profits

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2020/03/01/players-share-of-revenue-can-go-as-high-as-48-8-percent/ 

Players’ share of revenue can go as high as 48.8 percentMike Florio3 years ago    The proposed CBA, as revised by the NFL on Tuesday, stops tying a so-called “media kicker” to the 17th game. However, the proposed CBA still includes a broader media kicker tied to all TV money from what would be 272 total regular-season games.  The summary sent by the NFL Players Association to all players explains that the player’ share bumps from 48 percent of revenue to 48.5 percent if the league secures a 60-percent increase in TV revenue. If TV revenue grows by more than 120 percent, the percentage jumps to 48.8 percent. This provides an extra reason for the players to want to maximize the TV deals. And it also provides a glimpse into the anticipated growth in TV revenue, if those deals can be redone before the broader climate changes. A 60-percent increase seems like a lot, but that’s below the low end of what the league currently anticipates. And while 120 percent may be an impossibility, the fact that it’s even on the radar screen shows just how strong these new TV deals can be.




UserPostedImage
dfosterf
a year ago
Nailed it. 

 
Zero2Cool
a year ago

I mean, that seems reasonable, but with how over concerned (and maybe rightfully so) the Union is worried about the players potential being screwed, I have a hard time seeing them to straight limit it like that.

Maybe something more complex, like everything over 10% goes into the following year to ensure there is no decrease after a shockingly high jump or some safety net measure to make sure it doesn't then go down, but as far as I know, the CBA, in general, lacks safety net measures. And really I would support them putting in a lot more.

According to the article below, the Salary cap is equal to 48% to 48.8% of the profits

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2020/03/01/players-share-of-revenue-can-go-as-high-as-48-8-percent/ 

Originally Posted by: beast 



My presumption is the Owners levied the 10% "limit", not the Players. The NFL doesn't give the Players something unless they get something in return. So, maybe the players said we want less two-a-days and the Owners said OK but salary cap won't increase more than 10% from previous year. That is EXAMPLE that is NOT TRUE. I'm just tossing it out as a negotiation tacti example to explain how such a limit could be implemented.
UserPostedImage
beast
a year ago

My presumption is the Owners levied the 10% "limit", not the Players. The NFL doesn't give the Players something unless they get something in return. So, maybe the players said we want less two-a-days and the Owners said OK but salary cap won't increase more than 10% from previous year. That is EXAMPLE that is NOT TRUE. I'm just tossing it out as a negotiation tacti example to explain how such a limit could be implemented.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



Agreed, to that's how the process would work to make it happen. But I just have a hard time seeing the Union agreeing to that ever. I think putting a cap on the amount the players could make would be considered suicide by them, as if they ever hit the limit, they're screwed as ALL of their clients are pissed.

The only trade off I would think would warranted a max limit would be a min limit, as COVID showed we don't got that, though they worked through an agreement that would help both sides, and I think that limited both the COVID hurt but also spread out the new TV contracts helping ability.
 
UserPostedImage
Zero2Cool
a year ago

Agreed, to that's how the process would work to make it happen. But I just have a hard time seeing the Union agreeing to that ever. I think putting a cap on the amount the players could make would be considered suicide by them, as if they ever hit the limit, they're screwed as ALL of their clients are pissed.

The only trade off I would think would warranted a max limit would be a min limit, as COVID showed we don't got that, though they worked through an agreement that would help both sides, and I think that limited both the COVID hurt but also spread out the new TV contracts helping ability. 

Originally Posted by: beast 



I'm not sure why it's hard to believe. 🤷‍♂️ The Owners are billionaires and likely made their wealth outside of the NFL, therefore, the NFLPA clients kind of need the NFL in order to earn their wealth.  Think about Thursday games, the exhibition season, the 17th game to which we can expect 18th game coming, I mean, the list of "no way this is approved" items and I think it's because NFL has more leeway to walkaway than the players do. How many times post free agency change (Reggie White) have the players really "won" in the CBA? Looking at everything, it just seems the NFL that comes out on top where the NFLPA is hosed -- relatively speaking. 
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
packerfanoutwest (42m) : Feliz Navidad!
Zero2Cool (5h) : Merry Christmas!
beast (14h) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁
beast (22h) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : both games Watson missed, Packers won
Martha Careful (24-Dec) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!
Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol
buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier
buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol
Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Jacobs gonna be OK???
Zero2Cool (24-Dec) : Watson gonna be OK???
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?
bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.
bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?
bboystyle (23-Dec) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network
beast (23-Dec) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th
beast (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
bboystyle (23-Dec) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
beast (23-Dec) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?
packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (23-Dec) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (23-Dec) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (23-Dec) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (23-Dec) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (23-Dec) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (23-Dec) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs
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 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
2h / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17h / GameDay Threads / bboystyle

23h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Dec / Random Babble / beast

24-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

23-Dec / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

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