socalfan

the amortized bonuses count against the cap for all players whether or not they are cut.

You are giving 26% of the 109million cap to a corner and 2 guards?

The Bills changed coverage so that Nate was always assigned to the number 1 guy, that's why it looked like Mcgee improved.

What difference does that make? He got himself a DUI.

Yeah, I agree. So do the owners share revenues or do they use cash to cap to fix their problem?

Thank you for clarifying your point.

The problem is that it doesn't all come out in the wash. Both methods are not equally good. Cash to cap limits your ability to compete with teams that will pay high signing bonuses. And I believe it impacts the type of free agent you can atract. And the commish article simply does not explain cash to cap. It's examples are inadequate and do not reflect the reality of NFL contracts. Its simple examples cannot be understood using the commish's explanations.

Exactly. I think at least 75% of the board understands this point. But they don't extend the logic of it. They insist on talking about how much cap room the Bills have to spend....when in fact, the Bills new strategy makes this an irrelevant point because of accounting for the payments twice. The Bills are going to spend some money and only the Bills know how much.

Here is an outlandished example. Suppose the Redskins trade with Oakland for the first pick of the draft. And suppose that the Redskins so love Brady Quinn that they cannot distinguish him from Joe Montana. And suppose that the agent representing Brady Quinn thinks likewise. And suppose that there is no rookie cap. Suppose the contract offered and accept by Brady Quinn is for 110million for 10 years. In this contract the following breakdown of payments is specified. 100million signing bonus and 1million in salary every year for the next 10 years. If the Redskins do not "amortize the future" then for a salary cap this year of 109million dollars the following would happen. The Redskins have to fit all of there other players into the 109-101=8million dollars remaining in cap room. Probably not do-able. If the Redskins "amortize the future" ... the NFL allows for "accounting purposes" the Redskins to treat the 100million signing bonus in 10 equal portions (Quinn however gets all 101milion this year). So this year the NFL allows the Redskins to report that Brady Quinn is costing them 10million in bonus plus 1million salary towards the cap this year. So, the Redskins are allowed to behave as if they have 109-11=98million cap room. Clearly poorer owners can not duplicate this and do not benefit as much as the weathier owners in using this strategy. Personally, I think this strategy should not be allowed. I think the teams should be forced to use cash to cap. That is Brady Quinn would count 101million dollars towards the Redskins cap this year. That would help level the playing field for all teams.

A signing bonus is money you get for signing the contract. If you get a 10million signing bonus, you get all 10million the day you sign the contract. No one pays a signing bonus over the course of a contract. They all pay it up front....that's what it means to be a signing bonus. Guaranteed money means money you will get paid whether or not you complete the contract. So, unless you die between signing the contract and cashing the check....the signing bonus is considered guaranteed money. Finally, the NFL in order to accomodate deep pocket owners, allows a team to amortize the signing bonus for accounting purposes when calculating money spent towards the salary cap. The signing bonus is not literally amortized. It is paid out in one lump sum. The accounting purposes I'm speaking of here are not the standard account purposes that you hear most companies talking about during tax time. This accounting purposes means only that the NFL allows teams to flexibly manage the cap room they have. It makes no difference if a team "amortizes the future", if by "amortize" you mean "pays out a signing bonus in one lump sum and for accounting purposes when calculating free money under the cap". Because it is paid out in one lump sum, the owner just needs deep pockets to do this. The owner does not get to pay it out piecemeal. So the use of the phrase "amortize" is really incorrect in this situation.

This is why Atlanta and the Hawkeyes never allowed Babs to talk to the press.

Apparently, Babs who played his college ball at the Big Ten school Iowa was camping in the upper peninsula of Michigan when he ran across a wolverine. Never having beaten a wolverine offensive tackle for the 4 years he played at Iowa, he immediately flew into a rage and tackled the wolverine. The wolverine suffered a loss of 10 yards on the attack. This greatly displeased the local Michigan game warden and UM alum. Hence the arrest.

Bills say we spent 6 million this year. Next year for this contract what do they say? Do they say we spent 1million or do they say we spent 2million. What does the NFL say next year. Do this say this counts 1million against the cap or 2million against the cap? If the Bills say they spent 1million next year, then the NFL will not let them spend the additional million.....so what does cash to cap mean next year? If the Bills say they spent 2million next year so that it matches the NFL cap number then why the hell are they saying they spent 6million in the first year instead of 2 million? Moreover, why in the second year are they double counting that 1million salary bonus that got amortized. They counted it in the first year and the second year? If so, there is absolutely no way you can estimate what they will spend, because you can't estimate what they will claim to have spent. So my point is still ... only someone in the Bills front office (other than Marv) can tell you what the Bills mean by cash to cap.

You can't really rate him higher than a D. He only performs about 1/3 of the job duties of a typical GM. He doesn't negotiate, he doesn't determine the draft choices, he doesn't take care of non-football management activities, etc. So how could you possibly give him a grade of A-C???

No way! He couldn't spell either.

I've now seen where C Browwn has talked to the Bills' front office and Brown says that bonus from previous contracts are being amortized going forward, but not signining bonuses from this year. This clarifies nothing. It only makes the problem worse for understanding what the Bills' will be spending. If they do not amortize the signing bonuses going forward, but the NFL does for calculating the current level of spending toward the cap number, then just think what that means for next year. In terms of the example above, the Bills will count the 1 million next year against the cap, so far so good...they are in synch with the NFL numbers. A new contract with a signing bonus causes an anomaly next year. Suppose a FA gets a two year deal with a signing bonus of 2 million. The Bills count all 2 million this year, they count none of it for next year....however the NFL counts 1 million of it for next year. So what does cash to cap mean to the Bills next year? Do the Bills get to spend that 1million next year that the NFL says they don't have? No wonder Marv couldn't figure out what the hell they were talking about.

Forget it. The only people that could possibly explain this to anyone is the Bills' front office. No one outside of that office has any idea what it means. It is all guess work on the posters' part. The real problem is no one can tell you all the different ways the Bills could be paying out money and how they will account for it. For example, if you have a running back that received a 5 year contract 3 years ago and the contract looks something like this: year 1- signing bonus 5 million, salary 350k, incentives - 1 million for rookie of the year, 50k for every game started, 20k for every game with more than a hundred yards, 10k for every yard over 1000. year 2- whatever year 3- whatever year 4 (this year)- roster bonus 5ook, salary 725k, incentives - 1 million for probowl, 50k for every game started, 20k for every game with more than a hundred yards, 10k for every yard over 1000. year 5- whatever Apparently if the Bills started this cash to cap last year, then no one can tell you if 1million of the original signing bonus is being counted as part of cash to cap THIS year. The Bills could have decided that anything happening before last year is water under the bridge or they may be pushing it forward....which of course means you have no idea on how they will handle signing bonuses for any contract before this year. No one can tell you if any of the incentives are being counted as part of the cash to cap this year. For calculations will the Bills count the incentives as if they will be totally achieved, do they partially count them based on expected achievement, do they just treat them as cash over cap, do they push them into next year's calculations? And consequently what the NFL calls the Bills cap is not necessarily the limit that the Bills will be spending to. So no one knows except the Bills. Anyone on this board tells you anything differently you can blow them off, they are just talking through their arse.

It is pretty clear that Marv and Ralph don't keep a carp about what willis thinks. and i don't know why anyone other than wgr sports radio would.

The guy is using a straight line to estimate the undercap numbers....so he is off by quite a bit on both ends. The redskins are about 8 million under the cap and the san francisco is about 30 million under the cap. The teams for 10-22 aren't as far off as on the extreme edges.

It's or Its ??

Well, other than for the job market...I agree with you.

Wade? Wow, I wonder if the CBA put a big dent in Jones' pocketbook and this was the best he could do with the limited funds?

No their not from hear. Their from Canada. You can tell because there feelings are hurt. EDITED FOR GRAMMER

4 sideline tics San Deigo prices = $4000.

That's right almost 50 days off, in the cold weather. Then they go down south to play a fast team, and they lose Ginn after he takes the opening kickoff 93 yards for a TD. To all of the posters on this board...all I can say is please do not bring up Smith or Pitcock as possible Bills. It isn't going to happen. And also, the Michigan junior DT is not someone we are going to draft. So please spare the board of the Mel Kiperish comments.