What the Salary Cap Tells Us About the NFL’s Most Extreme Teams

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

Prime Time

PT
Moderator
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
Messages
20,922
Name
Peter
https://www.theringer.com/2018/5/22/17378482/how-nfl-teams-spend-salary-cap-team-building

What the Salary Cap Tells Us About the NFL’s Most Extreme Teams
For some squads, salary cap allocation can provide a peek at their team-building philosophy
By Danny Kelly

NFLSalarySpending_Getty_Ringer.0.jpg

Getty Images/Ringer illustration

It might sound strange, but the salary cap is one of the biggest reasons I love—and am endlessly fascinated by—the NFL. For starters, the cap fosters parity; sure, it’s risen substantially over the past few years to create a league-wide surplus in spending power, but unlike teams in, say, Major League Baseball, a given franchise’s market size (or the depth of its owners’ pockets) has little bearing on the amount of cash it can shell out to retain its best players or land premier free agents.

That level monetary playing field gives long-suffering fans of bad teams legitimate reason to believe that even their franchise can quickly put together a winner. (Hello, Jacksonville.) But more than that, the cap makes roster-building a complex chess match of resource allocation.

Decision-makers must weigh short- and long-term factors in deciding how and when to best wield their regulated allotment of cap space each year. The strategies therein vary wildly and constantly evolve.

The starting point for every team is at quarterback—and the amount of cap space each club has tied up in that position affects how they approach every other spot. A good quarterback who’s still on his cheap rookie contract is perhaps the most valuable thing in sports, and that player affords his team the ability to spend big to fill out the roster around him.

But elite rookie-contract signal-callers are rare, and the teams that can’t lean on that enormous advantage must decide: How much is a top-tier veteran quarterback worth? Is it true that defense wins championships? Is the ability to score points all that really matters? Or is balance between the two sides of the ball the only true way to win consistently?

With free agency and the draft in the books, the bulk of team rosters are more or less set for the season. How each club has chosen to distribute its available cap space for this year reveals plenty about organizational philosophies and desired schematic identities; the cap numbers help us glean where some teams are strongest, where they’re weakest, and on which positions they place the most value.

By reading between the lines of Spotrac’s roster spending charts, here’s what current active roster salary cap numbers tell us about what a few teams are thinking.

(Note: All numbers reflect the cap hits for each full 90-man roster. As teams cut down to 53 players in September, some highly paid players could get cut, which would affect these rankings.)

The Rams: It Is About This Year
Los Angeles seems to realize that its best bet for a Super Bowl is to take advantage of the quickly closing championship window that Jared Goff’s cheap rookie contract affords it. The team has gone all in on this season, trading for Brandin Cooks, Marcus Peters, and Aqib Talib while signing Ndamukong Suh. Essentially, the Rams are saying “We’re just going to worry about the future at a later date, thank you,” to the rest of the league.

Suh is set to count $14 million toward the cap in 2018; Talib, $11 million; Cooks, $8.5 million; and recently re-signed center John Sullivan, $6.3 million. Add in a franchise tag for safety Lamarcus Joyner ($11.3 million) and L.A. is projected to have just over $4.7 million in cap space going into this year, fifth-lowest in the league—and that’s before adding in a potential monster deal the team may (read: should) give Aaron Donald over the next couple of months.

The team’s current nucleus of stars is set to be a short-term swing for the fences, and then the franchise will have some choices to make. In addition to Donald, new contracts will be due to Joyner, Cooks, Suh, Peters, Talib, Goff, and Todd Gurley over the next two years.

L.A. should have plenty of cap flexibility in 2019 (with a projected $60 million-plus in space) to pick and choose which high-impact players to try to retain. But right now, they’re not in a slow, deliberate build-for-the-future mode like San Francisco; they’re in it to win it all in 2018.

The 49ers: It’s Not About This Year
With newly inked franchise quarterback Jimmy Garoppolo under center, an intriguing draft class set to hit the field, plus a handful of key free-agency additions (cornerback Richard Sherman, running back Jerick McKinnon, center Weston Richburg) now in the fold, the 49ers look like a challenger in the NFC West.

But the way in which the team has constructed its most recent contracts and utilized the approximately $100 million in cap space it started the offseason with says, more or less, that what happens this year doesn’t matter. At least, it doesn’t matter as much as the flexibility and potential spending power they’re going to gain in 2019, 2020, and beyond.

GM John Lynch called San Francisco’s strategy “aggressively prudent” after the team signed Garoppolo to a massive five-year, $137.5 million contract. That contract front-loaded a huge portion of the signal-caller’s signing bonus to 2018, giving Garoppolo an NFL-high $37 million cap hit this year. (That’s over $10 million more than second-ranked Matt Stafford’s $26.5 million cap hit this season, by the way.)

The 49ers did the same type of front-loading in McKinnon’s deal—he’ll count $10.5 million against the cap this year and then just $4.5 million in 2019—and then abstained from spending the $37 million and change in cap space the team had left over after all that free-agency action. Instead, they’ll roll that excess cap money into the 2019 offseason.

In other words, the 49ers brass doesn’t likely see the team as a legitimate Super Bowl contender in 2018. That might be obvious, but it’s important nonetheless: Instead of spending major free-agency dollars on a handful more big-name free agents with the goal of putting the team over the proverbial top—which San Francisco had the money to do—the 49ers decided instead to play the long game.

By eating a big chunk of Garoppolo’s signing bonus in Year 1, they sacrifice some of their championship potential in 2018 but give themselves a better chance to field a competitive team around him in the long term, at least in theory.

The Raiders: Experience Matters
Thanks to Garoppolo’s aforementioned front-loaded contract, the 49ers are set to field the most expensive offense (by cap dollars) in the league next year. Coming in a close second, though, are the rapidly aging Oakland Raiders with an offensive unit that currently accounts for $113.3 million of the team’s 90-man salary cap—dwarfing the $71.7 million its defense is eating up.

For GM Reggie McKenzie and head coach Jon Gruden, there’s apparently no substitute for experience, and the team is paying for its shortage of first-contract contributors on that side of the ball. Quarterback Derek Carr’s cap hit is $25 million in 2018, third-most among all players, and the team has invested a pretty penny in protecting him, too:

Oakland is projected to field the third-most-expensive OL in the NFL next year, a unit led by guards Gabe Jackson and Kelechi Osemele (both with $10.5 million cap hits), tackle Donald Penn ($8.4 million), and center Rodney Hudson ($2.8 million).

Add in sizable veteran deals for 32-year-old receiver Jordy Nelson ($7.4 million), 32-year-old running back Marshawn Lynch ($4.5 million), 31-year-old tight end Jared Cook ($5.8 million)—plus depth players like tackle Breno Giacomini ($3.5 million), tight ends Lee Smith ($3.3 million) and Derek Carrier ($2.0 million), and running back Doug Martin ($1.5 million)—and what you get is a very expensive offense that, outside of Martavis Bryant and Amari Cooper, is not getting much help from its cost-controlled first-contract players.

The Falcons: We’re Going to Score More Points Than You
The Falcons have some exciting young players on their defense, but judging by the way the team spends its money, they know that their best bet for a championship comes through Matt Ryan’s arm. As it currently stands, Atlanta has $111.1 million in cap dollars dedicated to its offense (third-most), and with just $61.5 million of its cap committed to its defense (31st), has the second-largest disparity of any team in the league (behind only the Colts) between offensive and defensive spending ($49.5 million).

It’s not just that the Falcons recently gave the 33-year-old signal-caller a record five-year, $150 million contract extension. (Because of the way the Falcons structured it, Ryan comes into 2018 with an extremely reasonable $17.7 million cap hit, 16th among all quarterbacks.) But elsewhere, Atlanta’s dedicated significant cap space to giving its quarterback as much support as possible:

He’s got the NFL’s second-most-expensive offensive line (by cap), with tackles Jake Matthews ($12.5 million) and Ryan Schraeder ($6.5 million), center Alex Mack ($11.1 million), and guard Andy Levitre ($5.7 million)—plus some combination of Brandon Fusco ($3 million), Ben Garland ($2.9 million), and Wes Schweitzer ($663,095). Ryan will be throwing to pass catchers Julio Jones ($12.9 million) and Mohamed Sanu ($7.5 million) and handing off to running back Devonta Freeman ($5 million).

In 2016, Atlanta led the league in scoring, averaging 33.8 points per game, and Ryan won MVP honors. Both Ryan and the rest of the offense fell back to earth under new offensive coordinator Steve Sarkisian last year, and the team finished 15th in points per game (22.1)—but if you follow the money, the Falcons are banking on their offense returning to something resembling that 2016 squad.

The Jaguars: Defense Does Win Championships
The Jags clearly subscribe to the belief that a dominant defense can overpower even the best offense, and they’ve gone about using years of rolled-over salary cap space to put together the most expensive defense ever. As it stands now, Jacksonville’s defense accounts for $119.6 million against the cap—which is about $41.4 million more than they’ve got dedicated to their offense, for those of you keeping track at home.

Three players on that unit are set to count north of $15 million in 2018 (DE Calais Campbell, CB A.J. Bouye, and DT Malik Jackson), and DT Marcell Dareus accounts for another $10.2 million. Add in DE Dante Fowler ($7.4 million), safety Tashaun Gipson ($7.1 million), corner Jalen Ramsey ($6.3 million), LB Telvin Smith ($5.8 million) safety Barry Church ($5.0 million), and corner D.J. Hayden ($3.9 million), and this is a highly paid, very talented squad. After finishing first in defensive DVOA in 2017 and guiding the Jags to the AFC championship game, it’s a group that somehow looks primed to get even better.

The Seahawks: Balance Is Key
From 2013 through 2015, the Seahawks were incredibly efficient on both sides of the ball. The team’s offense under Russell Wilson and Marshawn Lynch could beat you both through the air and on the ground—and its defense was regularly among the league’s most complete. That balance has escaped Seattle: The Seahawks have been awful in the run game in each of the past two seasons, and the defense took a step back last year.

The result? Head coach Pete Carroll fired almost the entire staff over the offseason and enacted what looks like an attempt to regain that missing equilibrium. On defense, they’ve gotten younger, and hopefully for Carroll, faster. On offense, the team’s moves in free agency (signing tight end Ed Dickson and guard D.J. Fluker) and the draft (taking running back Rashaad Penny in the first round) reflect a desire to get better in the run game.

Perhaps unsurprising, then, is the fact that as it stands now, Seattle features the most evenly distributed salary cap in the NFL. Just $301,760 separates the offensive and defensive cap numbers, with both units hovering right around $79 million. The Seahawks’ current spending clearly illustrates Carroll’s offseason goal of recapturing the Seahawks’ fading identity as a beat-you-in-every-facet type of team.

The Ravens: Special Teamers Are Football Players, Too
The Ravens value the third, and oft-overlooked phase of football: special teams. Baltimore has $10.7 million currently dedicated to that group—all-world kicker Justin Tucker is set to take up $5 million, with former Pro Bowl punter Sam Koch another $3.5 million.

Longtime long-snapper Morgan Cox even breaks the seven-figure mark, set to count $1.14 million against the cap. Somehow I doubt you’re going to hear former special teams coach John Harbaugh complain about any of the salaries of his top-tier special-teamers.
 

Ram65

Legend
Joined
Apr 30, 2015
Messages
9,771
I would have liked even more salary cap observations. Good read even if I don't agree with his Rams assessment

Essentially, the Rams are saying “We’re just going to worry about the future at a later date, thank you,” to the rest of the league.

L.A. should have plenty of cap flexibility in 2019 (with a projected $60 million-plus in space) to pick and choose which high-impact players to try to retain. But right now, they’re not in a slow, deliberate build-for-the-future mode like San Francisco; they’re in it to win it all in 2018.

I hope the Rams are thinking future and I think they are. Look at the drafting of offensive lineman to replace soon to be free agents. They drafted some defensive line help too. They didn't go after the flashy edge rusher early that many are saying is their weak spot along with inside Lber help. We have to wait and see next years plan come together but, they can keep things going with good drafting and the cap space available. The Rams will be contending in the near future.

GM John Lynch called San Francisco’s strategy “aggressively prudent” after the team signed Garoppolo to a massive five-year, $137.5 million contract. That contract front-loaded a huge portion of the signal-caller’s signing bonus to 2018, giving Garoppolo an NFL-high $37 million cap hit this year. (That’s over $10 million more than second-ranked Matt Stafford’s $26.5 million cap hit this season, by the way.)

The 49ers did the same type of front-loading in McKinnon’s deal—he’ll count $10.5 million against the cap this year and then just $4.5 million in 2019—and then abstained from spending the $37 million and change in cap space the team had left over after all that free-agency action. Instead, they’ll roll that excess cap money into the 2019 offseason.

Hate to say it but the Whiners did the smart cap moves by front loading these big deal. Hopefully, JG fades out and isn't worth the investment.

I'm not a fan of the cap rollover. It raises the price tag on free agents with teams having so much extra cap room from not spending in previous years. Teams can clear cap space (not resign and cut or trade high cost players) and dog it for a couple of years and then be flush with cash to spend. I think teams have to spend 89 percent of cap amount each year and tell the NFL how much they want to carry over 14 days before the league year. That 11 percent has become more money as the cap goes up. Can't get a complete handle on this here is a link that explains some more. It's a few years old.
https://www.bigcatcountry.com/2015/2/26/8113215/nfl-salary-cap-89-percent-spending-jaguars



http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/san-francisco-49ers/cap/
http://www.askthecommish.com/SalaryCap/Faq.aspx
Que
Question 1.2a
Is there a Minimum Salary?

Answer: Yep. Under the new CBA, The cap (max)for 2018 is $177.2 M per team. Each team must average around $168.4 M. That is a league-wide average not an individual team minimum. League-wide, teams were required to spend 99% of the cap in 2011 and 2012. In 2013 and beyond, they must spend 95% of the cap. In the event that player costs are less than this overall league minimum, then, on or before April 15 of the next League Year, the NFL must pay an amount equal to such deficiency directly to the players.

In terms of minimum salary for each team, the salary floor is 89% of the cap. That became effective in 2013, as this requirement was by-passed in 2011 and 2012. Hence, there was in essence no salary floor in 2011 or 2012.

Under the prior edition of the CBA, beginning in 2006 each team had to pay a guaranteed Minimum Team Salary of 84% of the Salary Cap. Each year that percentage went up by 1.2%. However, the Minimum Team Salary was not to extend beyond 90% of the Salary Cap and any shortfall in the Minimum Team Salary at the end of a league year had to be paid, on or before April 15 of the next league year, by the team(s) having such shortfall, directly to the players who were on that team's roster at any time during the season.
 
Last edited:

Elmgrovegnome

Legend
Joined
Jan 23, 2013
Messages
22,708
This piece says the Rams will have 60 million in space next year, but most other reports were saying 100 million. Did the players they add that are not on one year deals really add up to forty million? Such is on a one year deal. I believe Shields is also. And Cooks is on his last year. So that would mean Talib and Peters will cost 40 million next year? Somebody has the wrong Intel. Maybe it's me.
 

leoram

LA/St Louis/LA fan
Joined
May 25, 2013
Messages
1,294
I find this article decidedly contradictory concerning the Rams. On one hand, it suggests they care only about 2018 and not the future, then it admits they have enormous cap space and CHOICES next year. Isn’t it true that injury, age, expiring contracts, and surprising rookies wildly change team needs from year to year? FLEXIBILITY is the key to future team building. I believe the Rams have more of that flexibility next year than most teams in the NFL.

Yes, the team is loaded for 2018 but the space next year suggests they can reconstruct next year based on performance and team chemistry. Joyner was chosen over Watkins because he was more important to Wade’s structure and fit the culture better (I believe Sammy wrote his ticket out of town the moment he complained publicly about his targets and Sean had to sell him on the team concept. Yes, he recanted, but at his core it would always be a struggle.) Sadly, Peters may be on a similar trajectory with his “pay the man” comment as though the Rams don’t intend to do so. Doesn’t he realize, the more they pay Donald, the less they can pay him? McVay gets to sell Peters now. We will see how this plays out but that’s my point...this year is AS MUCH about winning this year as it is about learning who fits next year and beyond.

Finally, in my estimation, the real key to sustainability is a lack of “dead money” spent on players who either underperform or have left a team. Ogletree and Austin are examples of why “pay the man” isn’t necessarily prudent. What if Donald’s future is similar to the last couple years of JJ Watt? If a coaching staff is strong enough, teams like the Patriots can retool every year as long as they keep their QB and don’t wrap up too much money in long term contracts. In today’s NFL, the most difficult gamble is determining which players are most likely to be essential for the next five years.
 

Ram65

Legend
Joined
Apr 30, 2015
Messages
9,771
This piece says the Rams will have 60 million in space next year, but most other reports were saying 100 million. Did the players they add that are not on one year deals really add up to forty million? Such is on a one year deal. I believe Shields is also. And Cooks is on his last year. So that would mean Talib and Peters will cost 40 million next year? Somebody has the wrong Intel. Maybe it's me.

It is just over 60 Million. However, take around 10 Million increase next year and 7 Million if they cut Barron it gets up to 77 Million Million. I thought it was more too. Could be Sullivan and NRC who now account for 4.25 Mil and 6.05 Million in 2019 has lowered what you expected. Talib and Peters are under 10 Million each..Still Rams have cap space but, also have players to resign.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/los-angeles-rams/cap/2019/
 

Akrasian

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
4,935
It is just over 60 Million. However, take around 10 Million increase next year and 7 Million if they cut Barron it gets up to 77 Million Million. I thought it was more too. Could be Sullivan and NRC who now account for 4.25 Mil and 6.05 Million in 2019 has lowered what you expected. Talib and Peters are under 10 Million each..Still Rams have cap space but, also have players to resign.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/los-angeles-rams/cap/2019/

Besides what you mentioned, Gurley hadn't been tendered his fifth year contract yet - that is approximately 10% of the original cap space available for 2019. Also, to clear space for this season, most of Hekker's salary for 2018 was converted to signing bonus - which increases his hit for future years.
 

Ram65

Legend
Joined
Apr 30, 2015
Messages
9,771
Besides what you mentioned, Gurley hadn't been tendered his fifth year contract yet - that is approximately 10% of the original cap space available for 2019. Also, to clear space for this season, most of Hekker's salary for 2018 was converted to signing bonus - which increases his hit for future years.

So both Gurley and Peters 2019 salaries have been accounted for now in the link. That is close to 20 Million at 18.699 Million. The Millions go fast at nearly 10 Million a player. LOL

  • Gurley: $9.63 million
  • Peters: $9.069 million
If the Rams can do extensions on these contracts they could lower the cap hits in 2019.
 

Akrasian

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
4,935
So both Gurley and Peters 2019 salaries have been accounted for now in the link. That is close to 20 Million at 18.699 Million. The Millions go fast at nearly 10 Million a player. LOL

  • Gurley: $9.63 million
  • Peters: $9.069 million
If the Rams can do extensions on these contracts they could lower the cap hits in 2019.

Extensions probably won't help. I'd expect both players to command average annual salaries of well over $10 million per on any extensions.
 

Limey

Rookie
Joined
Aug 24, 2014
Messages
359
What they don’t mention is the extra draft picks (=cheap young players) next year for not signing Watkins, Tru, Davis or Carrier. If they can’t afford to keep everyone next year, there are likely to be more picks the year after for the players they can’t afford. I think the Rams do have a long-term plan, it’s just not the conventional one.
 

Ram65

Legend
Joined
Apr 30, 2015
Messages
9,771
Extensions probably won't help. I'd expect both players to command average annual salaries of well over $10 million per on any extensions.

They could help with signing bonuses that are prorated over the life of the contract and yearly salary/roster bonus increases.
 

Akrasian

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
4,935
They could help with signing bonuses that are prorated over the life of the contract and yearly salary/roster bonus increases.

Possibly, much more with Gurley than with Peters. Keep in mind that any cap savings for 2019 would increase the cap hit for years later.

Gurley is slated to get a tad over $9.6 million. That's about a million per year more than the biggest multi-year RB contract. Of course, contracts have been going up, Bell is slated to get over $12 million for being franchised, and Gurley is basically guaranteed that $9.6 million, so I doubt that he signs for an AAV of less than $9.6 million, and likely a slight increase. Conservatively, I'd say 5 years/$50 million, with most of it guaranteed. Even reducing his first year cap hit to $8 million, his cap hit in future years would average $10.5 million - doable, but not much cap savings in 2019.

Peters is more problematic. Top CBs were signing for about 5 years/$72 million this offseason. I doubt he does an extension for less than 5 years/$75 million. Getting his 2019 cap hit down to $7 million would mean the rest of the contract would average $17 million per season.

So yes, money could be saved for 2019 - but realistically, it would put the Rams in serious cap trouble for years to come. Especially when you factor in Donald, Cooks, and Goff, plus various other players.
 

Ram65

Legend
Joined
Apr 30, 2015
Messages
9,771
Conservatively, I'd say 5 years/$50 million, with most of it guaranteed. Even reducing his first year cap hit to $8 million, his cap hit in future years would average $10.5 million - doable, but not much cap savings in 2019.

Well, 8 Million is 1.63 Million less than what he counts now in 2019. Demoff is going to have to be creative to get as many players signed as possible. There is a lot more money in 2020 available. Of course they have less players signed that far out.
 

Akrasian

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jun 18, 2014
Messages
4,935
Well, 8 Million is 1.63 Million less than what he counts now in 2019. Demoff is going to have to be creative to get as many players signed as possible. There is a lot more money in 2020 available. Of course they have less players signed that far out.

That's why I said there could be some savings. But in order to do that the Rams would need to guarantee a lot of money years in the future. I'm not fully convinced the Rams should try to sign Gurley for that many years out. RBs often decline early, and realistically under the scenario where the Rams could save a little money with Gurley signing a relatively conservative contract, almost all the money would have to be guaranteed. At best there would be some cap savings cutting him in his 9th NFL season, and probably not a lot then.

I suspect that Gurley at some point is going to need be the sacrifice - compared to Donald, Peters, Cooks, and Goff. Not because he's not a great player - he is - but because he has had one major knee surgery already, and has absorbed 300+ hits each season, which usually takes a toll on running backs. Personally, I think they franchise him in 2020 with the non-exclusive tag, and see if they can get somebody to bite on signing him away.
 

Ram65

Legend
Joined
Apr 30, 2015
Messages
9,771
That's why I said there could be some savings.

That's what I said to begin with.

You could be right that Gurley will be the odd man out. A lot is going to happen between now and 2020. Rams could franchise him in 2020 provided they got a deal with Donald signed. I was writing in another thread that Peters may not get resigned after his Donald contract statements. With Peters it's as much about the entire package that could go south as far as the Rams are concerned. I don't think he would give in much. Stay turned hopefully we get some new deal soon.