Rams opt not to carry over all of their unused cap space from last season

[Prime Time]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...s-saints-opt-not-to-carry-over-all-cap-space/

Broncos, Rams, Saints opt not to carry over all cap space
Posted by Mike Florio on February 25, 2016

Before the 2011 CBA, teams had to engage in creative accounting to carry over unused cap space from one year to the next. With the current labor deal, the NFL Players Association realized that it’s in the union’s best interests to make it easy for any team to automatically bump unused space from one cap year to the next.

The NFL Players Association has announced the amounts carried over by each team, with this curious notation: the Broncos, Rams, and Saints opted not to carry over all of their remaining cap space.

It’s not known how much wasn’t carried over, or why. (We’re trying to find out answers to both.)

Here are the amounts carried over, from least to most:

Seahawks: $11,587.

Rams: $933,521.

Lions: $862,191.

Bears: $867,589.

Patriots: $1.347 million.

Saints: $1.4 million.

Ravens: $1.633 million.

Texans: $1.637 million.

Vikings: $2.090 million.

Jets: $2.484 million.

Chiefs: $2.622 million.

Chargers: $2.287 million.

Steelers: $3.00 million.

Cardinals: $3.031 million.

Broncos: $3.30 million.

Cowboys: $3.571 million.

Panthers: $3.731 million.

Falcons: $3.905 million.

Bills: $4.467 million.

Colts: $4.950 million.

Washington: $5.837 million.

Packers: $6.953 million.

Eagles: $7.255 million.

Bengals: $7.587 million.

Buccaneers: $7.987 million.

Dolphins: $9.137 million.

Giants: $11.193 million.

49ers: $12.206 million.

Raiders: $13.373 million.

Browns: $20.734 million.

Texans: $20.783 million.

Jaguars: $32.774 million.

 

[OldSchool]

The Rams did the same last year. Teams are allowed to use the spare cap to pay bonuses to people who outplayed their contracts.

 

[Legatron4]

Jesus man what the hell are the Jaguars doing? Can't they get fined for that?

 

[fearsomefour]

Jesus man what the hell are the Jaguars doing? Can't they get fined for that?

Just remember, the two owners (according to some) are the exact same guy in terms of trying to invest in their teams.

 

[OldSchool]

Jesus man what the hell are the Jaguars doing? Can't they get fined for that?

They're about to after this season. The much lauded Khan doesn't seem to want to spend on salaries.

 

[DaveFan'51]

Jesus man what the hell are the Jaguars doing? Can't they get fined for that?

From what I understand, according to the CBA, the Jags MUST spend that money this year or lose it!!

 

[LesBaker]

@fearsomefour and @OldSchool this is an accounting "thing" and is part of the new "floor" on the cap. It's no indicator of what you are assuming it is.

Keep in mind that if teams don't spend up to a certain amount of their cap space they get fined, similar to the NBA's "luxury tax" only in reverse. So carrying over a large amount can actually cost "real dollars", not semi-fake "contract dollars" because there may not be enough contracts in place to get to the new floor. It's part of the new CBA from 5 or so years ago. It was designed to stop the bullshit incentives put into contracts that we used to see so often, that worked to the owners advantage by making it appear they were spending when in reality they were never going to fork that money over. The players association wanted this rule to put an end to that practice. The most notable was Donovan McNabb's 100MIL plus contract that really wasn't anything close because of the "incentives". If I recall it was more like 40MIL.

If a team had several expiring contracts or had managed the cap so that older guys in their final year or two had small salaries they can end up with a big number that if they carry over they can't cover the next year without suddenly overpaying players by immediately redoing deals to up their dollars spent. They can't get up to the "floor" so to speak.

And keep in mind it's "totaled" in a rolling 4 year window so the number can vary wildly from year to year. After next year the Rams may roll over millions and millions if they have the ability and need to do so to create some space. It requires a lot of planning and Demoff understands the rules probably as well as anyone.

In fact you guys think it can be an indicator of an owner not wanting to spend on player salaries when in fact it is also possible that carrying over very little means the teams floor is lower. In other words Kahn just committed to spending more money THIS YEAR on the roster than Kroenke did. Next year it could be totally different based on the 4 year window.

Teams have to spend 89% of their available cap, Kahn just increased his available cap and so now will be spending more money that Kroenke this year.

Do you see that now?

This is another way for teams to be creative with the cap based on what contracts are coming up and when players usefulness may be coming to an end. It's a good thing that Demoff handles this because he's proven to be excellent so far at dealing with the details. He must have one HUGE spreadsheet to handle all of this.

 

[Merlin]

Demoff is money.

 

[ScotsRam]

Demoff is a liar.

FTFY.

 

[fearsomefour]

@fearsomefour and @OldSchool this is an accounting "thing" and is part of the new "floor" on the cap. It's no indicator of what you are assuming it is.

Keep in mind that if teams don't spend up to a certain amount of their cap space they get fined, similar to the NBA's "luxury tax" only in reverse. So carrying over a large amount can actually cost "real dollars", not semi-fake "contract dollars" because there may not be enough contracts in place to get to the new floor. It's part of the new CBA from 5 or so years ago. It was designed to stop the bullcrap incentives put into contracts that we used to see so often, that worked to the owners advantage by making it appear they were spending when in reality they were never going to fork that money over. The players association wanted this rule to put an end to that practice. The most notable was Donovan McNabb's 100MIL plus contract that really wasn't anything close because of the "incentives". If I recall it was more like 40MIL.

If a team had several expiring contracts or had managed the cap so that older guys in their final year or two had small salaries they can end up with a big number that if they carry over they can't cover the next year without suddenly overpaying players by immediately redoing deals to up their dollars spent. They can't get up to the "floor" so to speak.

And keep in mind it's "totaled" in a rolling 4 year window so the number can vary wildly from year to year. After next year the Rams may roll over millions and millions if they have the ability and need to do so to create some space. It requires a lot of planning and Demoff understands the rules probably as well as anyone.

In fact you guys think it can be an indicator of an owner not wanting to spend on player salaries when in fact it is also possible that carrying over very little means the teams floor is lower. In other words Kahn just committed to spending more money THIS YEAR on the roster than Kroenke did. Next year it could be totally different based on the 4 year window.

Teams have to spend 89% of their available cap, Kahn just increased his available cap and so now will be spending more money that Kroenke this year.

Do you see that now?

This is another way for teams to be creative with the cap based on what contracts are coming up and when players usefulness may be coming to an end. It's a good thing that Demoff handles this because he's proven to be excellent so far at dealing with the details. He must have one HUGE spreadsheet to handle all of this.

Jags spend $134M last year, at least in cap space.
But, you have now convinced me. Kahn is great, Kroenke is the devil.

 

[Ram65]

Demoff is money.

Demoff knows money.

Money was Money.

 

[OldSchool]

@LesBaker
I'm well aware of that and have talked about the 89% minimum spent in many different threads. We'll see how it ends up after the draft and free agency but it's comical that a guy can spend 75% of the salary cap for three years and then in the fourth finally meet his four year obligation and that makes him better than other owners who regularly meet theirs.

 

[BigRamFan]

FTFY.

Care to elaborate?

 

[Prime Time]

FTFY.

Kevin Demoff is a member of ROD. He's actually taken the time to post here. Please be respectful of how you treat fellow members no matter what you may think of them.

 

[ScotsRam]

Kevin Demoff is a member of ROD. He's actually taken the time to post here. Please be respectful of how you treat fellow members no matter what you may think of them.

My apologies. No offence meant, just kidding around.

 

[RamFan503]

@fearsomefour and @OldSchool this is an accounting "thing" and is part of the new "floor" on the cap. It's no indicator of what you are assuming it is.

Keep in mind that if teams don't spend up to a certain amount of their cap space they get fined, similar to the NBA's "luxury tax" only in reverse. So carrying over a large amount can actually cost "real dollars", not semi-fake "contract dollars" because there may not be enough contracts in place to get to the new floor. It's part of the new CBA from 5 or so years ago. It was designed to stop the bullcrap incentives put into contracts that we used to see so often, that worked to the owners advantage by making it appear they were spending when in reality they were never going to fork that money over. The players association wanted this rule to put an end to that practice. The most notable was Donovan McNabb's 100MIL plus contract that really wasn't anything close because of the "incentives". If I recall it was more like 40MIL.

If a team had several expiring contracts or had managed the cap so that older guys in their final year or two had small salaries they can end up with a big number that if they carry over they can't cover the next year without suddenly overpaying players by immediately redoing deals to up their dollars spent. They can't get up to the "floor" so to speak.

And keep in mind it's "totaled" in a rolling 4 year window so the number can vary wildly from year to year. After next year the Rams may roll over millions and millions if they have the ability and need to do so to create some space. It requires a lot of planning and Demoff understands the rules probably as well as anyone.

In fact you guys think it can be an indicator of an owner not wanting to spend on player salaries when in fact it is also possible that carrying over very little means the teams floor is lower. In other words Kahn just committed to spending more money THIS YEAR on the roster than Kroenke did. Next year it could be totally different based on the 4 year window.

Teams have to spend 89% of their available cap, Kahn just increased his available cap and so now will be spending more money that Kroenke this year.

Do you see that now?

This is another way for teams to be creative with the cap based on what contracts are coming up and when players usefulness may be coming to an end. It's a good thing that Demoff handles this because he's proven to be excellent so far at dealing with the details. He must have one HUGE spreadsheet to handle all of this.

It is also due to a different method. Obviously Khan is not going with the pay as you go method.

BTW - Khan will not get fined the entire amount if he doesn't spend it this year IIRR. He can only be fined that which falls under the minimum.

 

[-X-]

You're like the cap whisperer.

 

[-X-]

Well, don't get a big head now or anything, but I find myself looking for your posts when matters of this nature come up. I've tried and tried and tried to fully understand the cap and all of the nuances of future money, dead money, moving bonuses around, accelerations, and the likes, but I just can't seem to wrap my head around it sometimes. Everytime I think I have something figured out, I forget about a specific rule that makes it all work, or one that negates something entirely.

So, yeah. Keep up the good work. I appreciate it.