ICanSleepWhenI'mDead

The link below has a pro-Patriots bias, but it raises an interesting question. It concerns which teams benefited from a 2011 CBA provision that supposedly eliminates "dead money" from applying against the salary cap, but ONLY for players cut during a three week period just before the NFL lock-out started. I'm not vouching for its accuracy, but thought it was an interesting read. If it has the facts right, (1) the Jets will NEVER have to count $8 million they actually paid to certain players against the Jets' salary cap, and (2) the Bills may also get some benefit, but to a much lesser extent - - I don't know if cutting Pierre Woods, Mike Balogun and Marcus Stroud would have created much "dead money" to be counted against the 2011 cap in the absence of the rule the Pats fan is complaining about. http://atp.patsfans.com/2011/07/26/dead-cap-money-clause-jets-conspiracy-or-innocent-oversight/

Turns out there IS a provision in the 2011 CBA that changes how "accceleration" works, at least for the 2011 League Year. See post #12 here: http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/133173-updated-cap-space-for-all-32-teams/page__gopid__2216460

Under the old 2006 CBA, some of the previously pro-rated signing bonus money paid to both Evans and Maybin would have been "accelerated" (when Evans was traded and when Maybin was cut) and applied against the Bills' 2011 salary cap. But it turns out the new 2011 CBA has a provision that delays the impact of any "accelerated" cap hit until the 2012 season. Not entirely certain, but this may be why the Bills were previously reported as being roughly $23 million under the 2011 salary cap, but an even greater amount under the cap now. The remainder of the pro-rated signing bonus money, previously being amortized against the cap over multiple years for both players, will apparently now count against the Bills' 2012 salary cap. http://www.bizoffootball.com/docs/Article%2011%202011%20Transition%20Rules-1.pdf Article 11 [Transition Rules For The 2011 League Year], at section 5(f):

This seems like a credible source for what the rules were for practice squad eligibility under the 2006 CBA. Don't know if the 2011 CBA changed things. http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/27027/a-review-of-practice-squad-rules

Do you think they should devote less scouting resources to the West Coast, and more to the South and Southeast? http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/130198-reorganizing-the-scouting-department/page__hl__%2Bchannel+%2Bbuddy

Davis signed a 1 year contract with the Bills. I'm no expert on all the ins and outs of putting somebody on IR, but if he's gonna be a free agent after the 2011 season anyway, why would you put him on IR for 2011? Even if Nix thinks he's the second coming of Andre Reed, how would putting Davis on IR enable Nix to keep him off the free agent market after the 2011 season ends? http://www.sfexaminer.com/sports/nfl/2011/08/wr-davis-seeking-fresh-start-buffalo-bills-0 Or was Davis injured so often during 4 seasons in San Diego that he currently lacks the 4 seasons of accrued service necessary to become an unrestricted free agent after the 2011 season? If so, and if Davis went on IR this year, would he still be only a restricted free agent after 2011?

I prefer "wave Wang" simply for the illiteration.

I don't think the Evans trade clears as much cap space this year as everybody seems to assume. Evans signed a 4 year contract extension in the 2008 season: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3622918 To figure out the effect of the trade on 2011 cap space, you need to understand how any signing bonus previously paid to Evans gets counted towards the salary cap. Here's how it worked under the old 2006 CBA, and I have no reason to think it has changed under the 2011 CBA: http://www.askthecommish.com/salarycap/faq.asp So what does all this mean? According to the unidentified "source" in John Clayton's 2008 article, the contract extension Evans signed during the 2008 season contained $18.25 million in guarantees. Worst case for 2011 salary cap would be if ALL $18.25 million got pro-rated over 5 years (the 2008 season in which the extension was signed and the 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012 seasons added to the contract by the extension). So under the worst case scenario, $18,250,000/5 = $3,650,000 of the guaranteed money gets counted against the Bills' salary cap for EACH of the 2008 through 2012 seasons. Then when Evans gets traded, the $3,650,000 that would have been counted against the salary cap in each of the 2011 and 2012 seasons gets accelerated, and the combined $7,300,000 all counts against the Bills' salary cap in 2011. On the other hand, any non-guaranteed money that Evans would have been paid by the Bills during the 2011 season will now be paid by the Ravens, who inherited his existing contract, and will count against the Ravens 2011 salary cap rather than against the Bills 2011 salary cap. Bottom line is that Evans' non-guaranteed base 2011 salary falls off the Bills cap accounting, but as much as $3,650,000 gets accelerated onto the Bills salary cap for 2011. And the Bills will still have the same number of players on the final roster, so you have to remember to add in the minimum 2011 salary ($375,000) of the lowest paid player who gets that last roster spot after Evans is gone. Where's the big 2011 cap savings that everybody is assuming the trade will cause? Seems to me like most of the cap savings from the trade don't get realized until the 2012 season.

a a a a a ...... a a...... Dang! a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a. Plan B: A.A A A A A A...... A. A. A. A. Plan C: _t . _t. _ t. _t. _t. Plan D: ar . . ay . . . af . . . ag. . . (thought maybe if I bracketed the target on the keyboard) FLASH OF GENIUS!!!!! Ask Whitner to spell cat on twitter, but don't spot him the "C" - - - he'll tweet about anything . . . . @LilDonteitwasn'tmyfaultIgotpicked#8overall// [editorial note - sorry, I don't tweet] "C@" Oh well, it was worth a shot - - maybe if I asked McKelvin the same question: @LeodisifIhadittodooveragainIwouldstillreturnthekickoffagainstNEbecauseI'mathrettoscoreeverytime// "@" Thought I had it. Don't know where my head's at.

I realize that the part of your post that I bolded above is based on what Joe Buscaglia wrote at the web site you linked. There is reason to believe, however, that Buscaglia might be wrong about the effect of trading Maybin on the Bills salary cap. The information below is based on the 2006 CBA, so it is always possible that the rules have changed under the 2011 CBA. But FWIW: http://www.askthecommish.com/salarycap/faq.asp If Maybin gets traded, I think his new team would be responsible for any future non-guaranteed salary he is paid, even if that salary is paid at a rate determined by the remainder of his pre-existing contract with the Bills. But the Bills were the ones who paid him the upfront signing bonus, and the Bills will have to eat the remaining $9 million cap hit even if he gets traded. As far as I know, if the Bills pay an upfront signing bonus to any player, 100% of that signing bonus must eventually be charged against the Bills' cap. If the player gets cut or traded before his contract expires, the salary cap hit gets accelerated. So for Maybin, the question is WHEN you want to take the $9 million salary cap hit, not IF you want to take the $9 million hit. Again, the 2011 CBA could have changed the salary cap rules about this, but it seems logical that the team that forks over the actual cash is the one that must, sooner or later, count that cash against its own salary cap. My guess is that the 2011 CBA did not change that philosophy, but I suppose it's possible.

Hey Jim - - your release point is a little high.

My theory about how Maybin got drafted - - the Bills organization did not yet have GPS, got lost, and robbed the wrong train.

We don't know what Wang can do yet, but if this was the regular season, I think they might switch Levitre to LT and replace him in the starting line-up with their best interior line back-up (Hangartner?). I vaguely recall that Levitre pulled some LT duty as an emergency regular season injury replacement somewhere along the way, and did OK. Can't remember who it was against, though. In the preseason, when you are trying to build cohesion of the OL, and if you expect Bell to be back soon anyway, you don't make the double switch. You see what Wang can do - - because sooner or later you have to see if he can play OT. Just my 2 cents.

Update on status of the proposed (but far from approved) new downtown LA stadium: http://www.dailynews.com/ci_18632387?source=most_viewed

Hey Beerball! Just read this thread. Thanks for all the good links you provide. The following info might help answer your question. The links below address comparative state income tax rates from the perspective of retirees, but they still contain info about the range of marginal state income tax rates for each state - - but for a precise answer you would need to look at the tax rate tables for each state and not just the ranges. I haven't done that, but it is highly likely that most of Clabo's salary would be taxed at any state's highest marginal rate. Georgia: http://www.kiplinger.com/tools/retiree_map/index.html?map=7&state_id=11&state=Georgia'>http://www.kiplinger.com/tools/retiree_map/index.html?map=7&state_id=11&state=Georgia New York: http://www.kiplinger.com/tools/retiree_map/index.html?map=7&state_id=33&state=New York The answer may not be that straightforward, though. It turns out that professional athletes pay income taxes in all of the states where they play their games. If you really want to get into the details, check out these articles: http://articles.latimes.com/2009/apr/12/sports/sp-jock-tax12 Finally, there may be ways for an athlete to arrange the timing of his signing bonus so that it is taxed by a state with a lower or no state income tax - - Bills' players may have an incentive to maintain their permanent off-season residence in a lower tax state (Schobel comes to mind; TX has no state income tax). See: http://zzrllp.com/28.htm [this article appears to be fairly old but also has a more comprehensive analysis of how athletes are taxed] Probably way too much information, but hey, be careful what you ask for! P.S. If any fellow Bills fans are interested in the relative tax burden (of all kinds) imposed by various states, you can click on any state in the USA map at the link below and see a detailed breakdown - - updated as of 6/11. It's especially useful for anybody thinking about leaving the cold Buffalo winters after retirement. http://www.kiplinger.com/tools/retiree_map/index.html?map=7

Thanks for the info. Consistent with the post by BillsVet above, I think the key phrase in the Sullivan article is "on their own books." Like any business, the Bills are required to calculate their profits for tax purposes. So it makes sense that they would want to treat the full amount of any signing bonus paid in year 1 as a business expense on the Bills' own books for tax purposes - - they reduce their taxable income in year 1 that way. But consistent with the comments by BillsVet above, the official salary cap accounting is maintained by the League office, and has nothing to do with a team's business profits or losses. So after reading the Sullivan article, I still think my tentative understanding about this is correct. Even if the Bills always spend less total cash on player compensation than what the NFL salary cap would allow for a given year, any signing bonus they pay up front that year on a multi-year player contract is still pro-rated over the full term of the contract for NFL salary cap purposes. I would be more confident that I'm right about this, though, if I had a link from a reputable source confirming it. Seems like it would be more fair for the NFL to give a team the option to avoid pro-ration of the signing bonus for salary cap purposes if the team spent less total cash in year 1 than the salary cap would allow. Why should a team that was under the cap in year 1 anyway have less money to spend in year 2?

Sadly, it's my tentative understanding that even in any year when the Bills pay less actual cash for player compensation than what the salary cap allows, the NFL league office still requires any signing bonus, paid that year as part of a multi-year contract, to be pro-rated over the entire length of the contract. I think the League office prorates all signing bonuses the same way, whether or not a team spends actual cash less than the permitted cap amount for the year in which that signing bonus is paid. If (1) the league let the Bills apply a signing bonus "to the cap all at once," and (2) the Bills consistently spent less actual cash on player compensation than what the salary cap allows, then there would be no salary cap hit when the Bills released a player before his contract expired. But I periodically read about the cap hit that the Bills would take if they cut so and so mid-contract. Doesn't seem fair. Why should some of the signing bonus cash that the Bills spend in year 1 reduce the amount of cash they can spend in year 2, when they already spent less total cash than the salary cap would allow in year 1 anyway? But I think that's how it works. If anybody has a link showing I'm wrong about this, please post it. I didn't see the Sullivan article you referenced - - did it actually say that any signing bonus the Bills pay as part of a multi-year deal gets allocated in full to the salary cap in year 1 rather than being pro-rated over the life of the contract?

That's a nice story but it's not quite what really happened. According to Matt Hand, the Bills' scout: http://www.buffalobills.com/news/article-2/NT-Jasper-brings-gigantic-intrigue/1441bfd2-c3b5-4aae-a893-c2872093c105 It's premature to make decisions about active roster spot vs. practice squad for anybody right now. I hope he plays great, but let's see how he does in preseason.

Tried to multitask It turned out I could not count. I have fixed it now.

The Stadium Wall Donte Whitner good or bad? Frisco's question now!

A change in the DC's priorities. When you know early in the 2010 season that you have the worst run defense in the entire NFL [see link below], and it's so bad that you start changing your basic defensive scheme less than half way through the season, and you are coming off a 2009 season where your secondary had a huge number of INTs, you will start your best run-support strong safety. That was Whitner. http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2010/10/11/1743000/bills-run-defense-ranked-dead-last-in-nfl For 2011, with Dareus, Barnett and a reportedly bigger and stronger Troupe, the DC will be less desperate to stop the run, and is more likely to play his best all-around strong safety. Reasonable people can differ about whether that's Whitner or Wilson, but it gives Wilson a better chance to start even if Whitner returns.

Some people say the Bills can improve if they practice addition by subtraction. I was always dubious, but then I found this spy cam video of a Patriot player workout during the lockout. It was organized by the players while Brady was off pursuing his antitrust suit against the NFL, and they were left to their own devices to get ready for training camp. Turns out the Patriots are real masters of addition by subtraction. Who knew?

How so?

I loved the Wesley Snipe cameo appearance in that movie. He's a great actor. I bet if you were hunting for an audio clip of him from a movie instead of Van Miller's call of Johnson's drop, you'd probably get lots of people to help look - - even if he doesn't pay his taxes. They even talk about movies more than the Bills on WGR these days. I wonder if Stevie pays his taxes?

Here's how it worked under the recently expired 2006 CBA - - don't know if it will be any different under the 2011 CBA but have no reason to think it has changed: http://www.askthecommish.com/salarycap/faq.asp