Broncos $18 million under next year's cap

[lonestar]

Originally Posted by Kaylore

Rookie contract money is dolled out to teams after the fact based on their drafts. That's the "rookie cap" they mention every year.

Yet it all has to stay under our cap. The "dolled" out number is based on what was paid last year per slot in the draft, ( say number ten pock gets a 40 mil contract) this years gets that plus a kiss that is determined in the CBA as I understand it.

But is all has to fit under the cap. Or teams would have no reason to get better right away they could be in the top five for a few years load up on talent and then make a move. It woul come home to roost later than sooner but the top is the max we can spend on players. It includes salary, incentives, bounsus and prorated signing incentives.

It also covers those that go n IR throughout the year and all injury buyouts.

[lonestar]

Originally Posted by Crushaholic

Before this devolves into a fight, I have a serious question. Under the new CBA rules, don't we have to spend 98% of the cap?

I beleive that number is 89% and it kicks in next year. Pretty sure the carry over stuff goes away at that time also.

[lonestar]

Originally Posted by Drunken.Broncoholic

Tougher team minimum spending rules go into effect in 2013. Not sure why people are crying about Bowlen not spending when it's required this coming year.

I'm guessing many on here have no business experience. Some may still live at home or in a dorm, still on an allowance withnavaaialibaily to call home and ask for more money.

Or they live on a credit card and do not pay the thing off each month. It is a sign of the times. Not living within a budget spend every dime live week to week.

Businesses are not like that they have to plan and budget for their revenue stream. In this case live under self imposed salary caps.

While I would love to have a roster of 20 pro bowlers you jut can not afford them all, a simple fact of life many FF owners will never get.

[UltimateHoboW/Shotgun]

Originally Posted by lonestar

Unlike some I'm facing facts. I have a business background, that required budgets and P&L statements.

Not negative at all just facing the hard truth. This is not fantasy football where ther is not salary cap.

It is the nfl and Pat since mikey blew hundreds of millions of turds and one year rental the last decade, now has a budget for John. we carry over from last year 11.5 mil which I'd guess was the limit of his budget, or it would have been spent.

As far as the ride is concerned I'm enjoying Manning and his success, just not acting like an irresponsible 5 year old telling mommy I want I want everything I see in the FA store.

Frankly I do not see loads of money to spend there.

Bingo!

[Kaylore]

Originally Posted by lonestar

Yet it all has to stay under our cap. The "dolled" out number is based on what was paid last year per slot in the draft, ( say number ten pock gets a 40 mil contract) this years gets that plus a kiss that is determined in the CBA as I understand it.

No, I'm not talking about player salaries. I'm talking about the per team allotment awarded after the draft to sign rookies each year. The league gives each team an amount of money just to sign their picks each year based on how many picks they had. It's usually in the range of 3-5million. The league wouldn't let a cash-strapped team not be able to sign any of their draft picks. They get that money in cap space after the draft.

[BroncoMan4ever]

Originally Posted by Drunken.Broncoholic

Tougher team minimum spending rules go into effect in 2013. Not sure why people are crying about Bowlen not spending when it's required this coming year.

Only spending I worry about with the Broncos isn't how much or how little we spend but rather how we spend. If it is how Elway has spent money I have no issues. Solid players at good value. My issue would be Shanahan style spending. Big money for a big name useless player

[Requiem]

Lonestar just has to take a piss in every thread. What a goon.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by lonestar

Iirc we only have some 35 players under contract for next year.

A lot of that money will be required to finish out the team. As well as again IIRC about 7 million will be needed on rookie contracts both for the coming year as well as the prorated portion of any signing bonuses.

So that whooping 18 mil will,soon be gone.

They'll definitely need a chunk of it to re-sign Clady.

[UberBroncoMan]

Originally Posted by Bacchus

Great news for Broncos, they need to stay away from expensive FA, draft wisely and start trying to re-sign their own players.

I imagine DJ, Mayes and Porter will be gone creating more cap space.

Mays will free up $4 million. Porter frees up nothing since he had a 1 year deal. DJ gets $6 million next year and is then a FA.

I don't really see us going after anyone in FA other than someone who is cheap as hell. We're going to be in cap trouble just trying to resign the people we have over the next two years.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by UberBroncoMan

Mays will free up $4 million. Porter frees up nothing since he had a 1 year deal. DJ gets $6 million next year and is then a FA.

I don't really see us going after anyone in FA other than someone who is cheap as hell. We're going to be in cap trouble just trying to resign the people we have over the next two years.

We'll make plenty of value signings, but you're right, we almost certainly won't sign any big name FAs.

[Drunken.Broncoholic]

Originally Posted by lonestar

I'm guessing many on here have no business experience. Some may still live at home or in a dorm, still on an allowance withnavaaialibaily to call home and ask for more money.

Or they live on a credit card and do not pay the thing off each month. It is a sign of the times. Not living within a budget spend every dime live week to week.

Businesses are not like that they have to plan and budget for their revenue stream. In this case live under self imposed salary caps.

While I would love to have a roster of 20 pro bowlers you jut can not afford them all, a simple fact of life many FF owners will never get.

It's not entirely the same though. A private small business doesn't have the same rules as a sports team facing new cap rules. A budget is a bit harder for a sports team when there's a set amount the owners have to spend. The old CBA sure. But rules now state a team MUST spend up to 98% of the cap. No longer can teams hover millions below.

But I agree about not bringing in high priced talent. This team doesn't need to. They have homegrown players that have stepped up. Just full in the small holes here and there.

Philly bought the dream team and laid out a turd. Buffalo signed the highest rated D FA that resulted in nothing.

[Drunken.Broncoholic]

Originally Posted by BroncoMan4ever

Only spending I worry about with the Broncos isn't how much or how little we spend but rather how we spend. If it is how Elway has spent money I have no issues. Solid players at good value. My issue would be Shanahan style spending. Big money for a big name useless player

Sullivan > Bluem

I got alot of faith in Mike Sullivan to advise Elway.

[lonestar]

Originally Posted by Kaylore

No, I'm not talking about player salaries. I'm talking about the per team allotment awarded after the draft to sign rookies each year. The league gives each team an amount of money just to sign their picks each year based on how many picks they had. It's usually in the range of 3-5million. The league wouldn't let a cash-strapped team not be able to sign any of their draft picks. They get that money in cap space after the draft.

So you are saying that this money does not fall under the total salary cap. Did I get your post correct.

Or are you saying they only allot 3-5 million per rookie class..

[lonestar]

Originally Posted by Drunken.Broncoholic

It's not entirely the same though. A private small business doesn't have the same rules as a sports team facing new cap rules. A budget is a bit harder for a sports team when there's a set amount the owners have to spend. The old CBA sure. But rules now state a team MUST spend up to 98% of the cap. No longer can teams hover millions below.

But I agree about not bringing in high priced talent. This team doesn't need to. They have homegrown players that have stepped up. Just full in the small holes here and there.

Philly bought the dream team and laid out a turd. Buffalo signed the highest rated D FA that resulted in nothing.

Pretty sure the CBA says 89% which is still a chunk of change. 98% would not allow for small teams to be profitable.

[Drunken.Broncoholic]

Originally Posted by lonestar

Pretty sure the CBA says 89% which is still a chunk of change. 98% would not allow for small teams to be profitable.

You are right it is 89%. Factor in the TV deal in 2014 and the cap will sky rocket. So even though its 89% that cap limit might be huge.

[DBroncos4life]

Originally Posted by Drunken.Broncoholic

You are right it is 89%. Factor in the TV deal in 2014 and the cap will sky rocket. So even though its 89% that cap limit might be huge.

League wide is 95 percent and per team its 89 for the 2013 seasons and beyond.

[NickStixx]

Clady is going to get Joe Thomas type money, maybe a little less so around 9 to 9.5 million a year. So there goes half of it right away...
I do also think they will release DJ and Mays which free's up just about that much to pay Clady.
So I think we will actually have some room to do some in FA. I'm not sure what Chris Harris is going to do next season if we don't give him a better contract. He's making peanuts right now compared to his production on the field. So look for there to be a bigger deal for him.
I also do not want them to spend it on Amendola or Welker, especially Welker actually. We don't need them. If they had to do one, I would choose Amendola.
But I think we are finally going to become like the elite teams that constantly build their team in the draft as opposed to Free Agency. That is how you build a team, and now that we have some positions solidified for a while that only helps us to grow in the draft.
Hopefully it all doesn't fall apart post Manning...

[Hamrob]

Originally Posted by lonestar

I'm here and frankly I stand by what I have said all along, there maybe lots of money under the cap but Pat has a budget.

Where do you think the $11,500,000.00 carry over come from?

Yep this years salary cap, that was not spent.

I have no reason to think Pat will allow John to go mikey on him and spend every dime.

I also beleive that as states before those three money hogs will be cut. Or restructured for a lot less

Mikey was't getting playoff game revenue for Patsy. John....has been and will continue to. How much do you think Pat gets out of 2 additonal home playoff games Hmmm?

[lonestar]

Originally Posted by Hamrob

Mikey was't getting playoff game revenue for Patsy. John....has been and will continue to. How much do you think Pat gets out of 2 additonal home playoff games Hmmm?

Frankly I do not think it matters. About playoff revenues. While it is nice to have it is not something they can budget against each year.

I suspect that most of that extra revenue will go to incentives given out to some players and mostly coaches and John not to mention Pat.

If yoi budget against it and overload the cap for next year and we take a dump then something else has to go. ..which means player get cut.


Here are the facts. We had 11.5 mil left over from 2012. Why? Because Pat does not want to spend every dime of income coming in. *

We have only 35 current players under contract. Which means that is the only money so far accounted for with that total cap space (not Pats budget, but cap space )..

We have to hire via the draft, UFA, trades and UDFA atleast 18 more bodies to fill out the 53 man roster. We will most likely have 8-10 players hit IR so those salaries have to be accounted for also.

We will most likely cut DJ and Mayes which will save us about 8mil (after dead cap hits for bonus money owed).

Which now means we have to hire 18+8 (ir)+2 (dj and Mayes) or 28 guys for under about 15.5 mil (assuming Pats budget is about the same as this year).

Not counting resigning Clady if we do. Frankly I think he will walk for more money. As unless there is something hidden under the sofa seats we do not have 9 mil a year salary plus probably another 1.9 per year or more as bonus money hit for the duration of the contract. Frankly I would think it closer to 2.5 a year for five or so years

So folks where do we get the money, for all these expensive UDFA?

[lonestar]

Originally Posted by DBroncos4life

League wide is 95 percent and per team its 89 for the 2013 seasons and beyond.

You know that WAS, DAL, NOL, SFO, OAK and a few more teams that are all ready over the cap will bring those few 89% teams right up to 95% on average.

Those teams will be at max values like they almost always are.

I suspect we will be somewhere in the low nineties. 91,92 or so. About where we have been since mikey was fired and the cap hell was dug out from under.

[Beantown Bronco]

Originally Posted by lonestar

So you are saying that this money does not fall under the total salary cap. Did I get your post correct.

Or are you saying they only allot 3-5 million per rookie class..

It definitely falls under the total salary cap. It's not "in addition to" the overall cap number.

[Kaylore]

Originally Posted by lonestar

So you are saying that this money does not fall under the total salary cap. Did I get your post correct.

Or are you saying they only allot 3-5 million per rookie class..

It isn't counted against the cap. That way teams that are up against the cap or going through a cap dump can sign their players. They look at your draft class and give you cap to sign your players. The cap doesn't go up, but that money isn't counted against the cap.

[Kaylore]

Originally Posted by Beantown Bronco

It definitely falls under the total salary cap. It's not "in addition to" the overall cap number.

No. Well sort of no:

http://www.eagles24x7.com/columns/NF...lary-Cap-Works

The Rookie Salary Cap is often referred to as “a cap within a cap” because it limits the amount that teams can allocate to their rookies in the year they were drafted. But, beyond that, there is a lot of confusion about the Rookie Salary Cap and exactly how it works.

Even some in the media do not fully understand the mechanics of it. Some have been heard to say that it’s a totally separate pool of money that is not included in the team’s overall Cap. Others think the entire amount of the rookie Cap is included in the team’s overall Cap, meaning that teams will need that much overall Cap space to sign their rookies.

Both of those characterizations are incorrect.

The rookie Cap IS NOT a separate, distinct pool, but rather, a separate calculation and there is not a dollar-for-dollar correlation between the rookie Cap and the overall Cap. So, while all of the Salary Cap numbers of a team’s draft picks (and prorated bonus money paid to undrafted rookies) must fit under their Rookie Salary Cap, not all of that amount will impact the team’s overall Cap.
The reason for these misconceptions revolves around the Rule of 51, which dictates that, from the beginning of the league year in early March until the beginning of the season, only the top 51 “salaries” (including base salaries, roster bonuses, likely to be earned incentive, etc) and all pro-rata shares of bonus money of all players – including those outside of the top 51 - count toward the team’s overall Cap. All “dead money”, i.e. amounts that count against the Salary Cap for players who are no longer on the roster, counts as well.

This rule is necessary because, during the offseason, team rosters can number up to 90 players. As such, it would be impossible for teams to fit all of those players under the Cap. So, to counter this problem, the NFL has instituted the Rule of 51.

So, how then does the Rookie Cap actually work?

First, as way of explanation, under the CBA of 2011, all rookies receive 4-year contracts, generally with a signing bonus and often with minimum base salaries set for each year of the deal. While 1st and 2nd round picks may have base salaries of more than the minimum in years 2 through 4 of their deals, even those players will almost always receive the rookie minimum base salary during their first year. For 2012, the minimum base salary for a rookie is $390K. For Salary Cap purposes, the bonus received by the player is prorated over the 4 years of the deal and that prorated amount is added to the base salary to create the player’s Cap number.

By way of example, in 2011, let’s assume that a Team X had a rookie pool of $4.578M for their 8 draft picks. This is the team’s “rookie salary pool” and is based on the number of the team’s draft picks and where those picks were drafted.

However this doesn’t mean that Team X needed $4.578M in Cap space in order to fit their rookies under the overall Salary Cap.
Once again this is where the Rookie Cap and the Rule of 51 become intertwined – and where most of the misunderstanding regarding the Rookie Cap comes from. Since each of the 2011 draft picks had a base salary of only the 2011 rookie minimum of $375K (which is the lowest possible base salary for any player), none of the draft picks’ base salaries will actually count against the team’s overall Salary Cap under the Rule of 51 guidelines.
As such, it is only the amortized portions of the draft picks’ signing bonuses that counted against the team’s overall Salary Cap.

So, to calculate the actual impact of Team X’s 2011 draft picks on their overall Salary Cap, the Rookie Cap of $4.578M is reduced by $3M ($375K x 8), leaving an amount of only $1.578M in overall Cap space needed to accommodate the signing of rookies within the Rule of 51.

So, that is how the Year One Rookie Allocation, a.k.a Rookie Salary Cap – the “cap within a cap” – actually works and demonstrates the actual impact of the Rookie Cap on the team’s overall Salary Cap.

Once the season starts, however, the entire Cap Numbers of the rookies who make the team must be fit under the team’s overall Cap. The impact of that, though, actually operates to save the team a little bit of Salary Cap space, since the rookies are making the rookie minimum base salary and replacing players on the roster who were making more in base salary.

[Mountain Bronco]

Originally Posted by lonestar

Unlike some I'm facing facts. I have a business background, that required budgets and P&L statements.

Not negative at all just facing the hard truth. This is not fantasy football where ther is not salary cap.

It is the nfl and Pat since mikey blew hundreds of millions of turds and one year rental the last decade, now has a budget for John. we carry over from last year 11.5 mil which I'd guess was the limit of his budget, or it would have been spent.

As far as the ride is concerned I'm enjoying Manning and his success, just not acting like an irresponsible 5 year old telling mommy I want I want everything I see in the FA store.

Frankly I do not see loads of money to spend there.

You assume a lot for having a "business" background. You assume that John would have spent 11.5 million because he had a budget. There could be a multitude of reasons why they didn't spend that money, but you assume just one. It could have been allocated to this year because they foresaw a better FA crop. They could have determined that the pieces they could have signed with that money were not worth the long term risk versus reward (my most likely scenario as Bunkley not getting resigned signals this type of thinking).

Not all businesses and especially successful businesses spend the maximum amount that they possibly can each year. Really only in sports, which are often the worst run businesses on the planet and only successful because of the popularity, does this happen.

I do agree that there are a ton of posters on here that want want want and have unrealistic expectations of what the Broncos can do in free agency draft, trades etc... but the fact remains that the Broncos have a high degree of flexibility in the upcoming year of FA compared to other teams cap situation, which in any business is a good situation. Whether they use it effectively remains to be seen.

[lonestar]

Originally Posted by Mountain Bronco

You assume a lot for having a "business" background. You assume that John would have spent 11.5 million because he had a budget. There could be a multitude of reasons why they didn't spend that money, but you assume just one. It could have been allocated to this year because they foresaw a better FA crop. They could have determined that the pieces they could have signed with that money were not worth the long term risk versus reward (my most likely scenario as Bunkley not getting resigned signals this type of thinking).

Not all businesses and especially successful businesses spend the maximum amount that they possibly can each year. Really only in sports, which are often the worst run businesses on the planet and only successful because of the popularity, does this happen.

I do agree that there are a ton of posters on here that want want want and have unrealistic expectations of what the Broncos can do in free agency draft, trades etc... but the fact remains that the Broncos have a high degree of flexibility in the upcoming year of FA compared to other teams cap situation, which in any business is a good situation. Whether they use it effectively remains to be seen.

I do not you understood my position. I do not necessarily think John would go up to the limit if he could, just as I rarely hit the roof on my personnel budget over +40 years in business. It does happen but I beleive that Pat gave him and Josh during his time in DEN, a hard ceiling that was lower than the cap ceiling, if for no other reason to recoup sme of the loses that mikey incurred each year he was IN CHARGE..

Pat surely was telling them to spend wisely but to get the best players they could. I also,suspect they were given an editic to draft better as those players are cheaper atleast for the first four years on their contracts.