
Capco
Community Member-
Posts
2,385 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by Capco
-
Here's a hypothetical contract structure which shows how this move can make cap sense: Extension value: $68m Guaranteed total: $45m Signing bonus: $25m Salary total: $43m Cap Hits (by year; amortized signing bonus listed first) $5m + $1m = $6m (creating $4m in cap space) $5m + $8m = $13m $5m + $11m = $16m $5m + $11m = $16m $5m + $12m = $17m Total Cash Paid (by year) $25m + $1m = $26m $26m + $8m = $34m $34m + $11m = $45m (guaranteed total met) $45m + $11m = $56m $56m + $12m =$68m
-
But if Oliver lives up to his potential and blows it out of the water, then we have a top 10 DT on a very reasonable contract. If he doesn't, then we still have a decent DT and can probably move on in 3 years. The risk-reward balance is a factor. If you have a crystal ball and know with absolute certainty that Oliver will never get any better, then it would seem obvious that this wasn't a good move.
-
This move: keeps the DT position foreseeably stable might free up some cap space this year the guaranteed money is always what you look at, not the total salary does the $45mil figure include the $10mil from his rookie contract since that was already fully guaranteed? how much much of the guaranteed money is from the signing bonus? probably gives us an manageable out in 3 years, so think of it more as a 2 year extension gives us some off-season entertainment
-
Hopkins released by Arizona (7/16: signed by Titans)
Capco replied to HappyDays's topic in The Stadium Wall
I'm not 100% sure myself, but I think he's at least in the ballpark. As I understand it, the concept of dead money is simply that every dollar paid to a player has to be allocated against the salary cap eventually, one way or another, even if that player is no longer on the roster. For example, a deal can be structured so that a player gets paid $10 million in real, actual dollars in Year 1, but his Year 1 cap hit is only $5 million. If that player gets cut after Year 1, the team will have $5 million in dead money. That is because the player was already paid $10 million, but only $5 million has been counted against the cap so far. The other $5 million has to be accounted for, and so the team will carry a $5 million dead cap hit in Year 2. The player doesn't actually have to receive any real, actual dollars from the team in Year 2 for there to be dead money counted against Year 2's salary cap. -
He was one of the linemen that I had my eyes on in this draft. I think the pick is great value and also fills a position of need. A+ grade on this pick in my book!
-
This is how I understand it as well. The idea is that every dollar a team pays a player must be allocated to the salary cap. By converting salary into a signing bonus, the total dollars spent on the player remains the same, but the allocation towards the salary cap changes. The catch is that the team has to have the cash now to pay the player now, as opposed to future payments being paid with future income streams. I'm not sure on this next part, but I believe this also helps create some roster flexibility later on when it comes to trading or releasing a player still under contract. The more money that has already been paid, the more of the guaranteed money requirements have been met, and hence the less that still needs to be paid upon their departure and counted as dead cap.
-
And I assume nothing is complimentary with the Club seats? Granted, idk why I'm even asking. If I ever bought them, I'd probably just resell most of tickets to friends and go once or twice a year. But writing this post did remind me that I'm due for a teef cleaning, so there's that I guess.
-
How did the Patriots maintain a top team for 17 years?
Capco replied to Success's topic in The Stadium Wall
Don't forget their mastery of the compensatory draft selection process. Not only were they fine with letting almost anyone walk per the next man up mentality, they managed to get extra draft picks for doing so. Taking no-name players on cheap deals and plugging them into their system allowed this to happen year after year. Those players would produce for the Patriots and this garnered other teams' interests in those players as potential free agents. And if those plug-and-play players wanted a new deal before their contract was up, the Patriots would still usually get something out of it by trading those players away and letting someone else overpay them. By increasing their number of draft picks, they were able to find more plug-and-play players to fill their ranks, which meant they didn't need to sign as many free agents. Fewer free agents means you're more likely to get a compensatory draft pick, and more draft picks mean fewer free agents. It's a brilliant strategy but requires a discipline that a front office can only afford when they are a perennial winner on the field already. -
$120mil over 7 years (roughly 17 per season) with $50mil guaranteed means flexibility after year three (or four if the contract is more backloaded). That leaves the option for a cut or a team-friendly restructure (additional guaranteed money in exchange for a lower per-year cap hit). I'd be happy with that. But something like 120/6/60 feels like overpaying.
-
I'm confident. I think McBeane have done a great job together and still have their best days ahead. It was a crazy year where a lot of things didn't go our way and we still won the division. Take away just a few injuries and critical turnovers from the equation, and the Bills could have been 1st seed and in the Superbowl. I want to see some investment in the offensive line in particular this offseason.
-
Saffold said guys were "exhausted" this week and "out of gas"
Capco replied to Einstein's topic in The Stadium Wall
Oline is the safest position to select in the first round (in terms of the rate of busts). If the value is right, a guard at 27 would be an excellent place to start. A center in the mid-rounds to develop for a year as the eventual replacement for Morse would also work out nicely. Time in the pocket puts pressure on defensive backs. Even mediocre WRs can get open against top tier DBs after a few seconds, and a good pass rush nullifies the best WRs in the game when the QB can't get the ball to them in time. -
I'm a little disappointed that no one bit on this after almost 4 pages I swear it's an excellent way to improve your mood! 😄
-
There's 8 games left. Our secondary has been banged up. Josh is injured. The last two losses have been competitive. This team is still stacked with talent. I know that was a crushing loss and a heartbreaking game to watch just now. But I still believe in this team and this coaching staff. Go for a walk. Grab another beer. Throw your kid in your pool. Do whatever you need to blow off some steam. But next week, you'll be right back here rooting for your Bills. And you know it.
- 85 replies
-
- 16
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
NFL Week @10 - Vikings at Bills - 2nd half game thread
Capco replied to BuffaloBill's topic in The Stadium Wall
Can the twilight zone leave this team alone for one freaking season?! -
NFL Week @10 - Vikings at Bills - 2nd half game thread
Capco replied to BuffaloBill's topic in The Stadium Wall
You can't be serious rn... -
NFL Week @10 - Vikings at Bills - 2nd half game thread
Capco replied to BuffaloBill's topic in The Stadium Wall
Holy cow that is a hell of a way to end a game. GO BILLS! -
NFL Week @10 - Vikings at Bills - 2nd half game thread
Capco replied to BuffaloBill's topic in The Stadium Wall
I am in utter disbelief. -
NFL Week @10 - Vikings at Bills - 2nd half game thread
Capco replied to BuffaloBill's topic in The Stadium Wall
Rush 2 and drop 9 back in coverage. Fly to the ball. Gang tackle the receiver. That's all ya gotta do, D! -
NFL Week @10 - Vikings at Bills - 2nd half game thread
Capco replied to BuffaloBill's topic in The Stadium Wall
Second timeout burned because of the 12th man. -
The only way that happens is if the GOP completely relinquishes the current cult of personality around Trump and gets back to governing. Governing requires effective policy, and the Republicans have knowledgeable and creative minds in the party. It's boring and not very flashy, but even a politician who believes in less government still needs to govern and serve the public good while in office. That would be good for the country, imo. I'm so tired of this dysfunctional partisanship... so, so tired of it.
-
This thread is full of the crazy kind of stupid that I remember PPP for. It's just the beginning of the Red Wave of Tears, too. If the Dems miraculously manage to hold the House, these tears will only get sweeter.
-
@Backintheday544 Are you a lawyer? If so, you're wasting your energy trying to explain the nuance of the law to people who don't know how to think like a lawyer. I'd assume almost anyone would be able to understand that the question of constitutionality is often not an easy one; if it was, then every judicial vote on the question would be unanimous and we wouldn't even need judicial review for it. It's a basic conclusion. Unfortunately, like someone said earlier, we have a dumb electorate... so even the basics can be hard to convey.
-
Right on, Tim. I didn't mean to sound patronizing; I was honestly just trying to help. You clearly have a good handle of the situation. It's just a shame that, for whatever reasons, he isn't getting what he needs while simultaneously bringing down the rest of the class that he has no choice but to be in. On a fundamental level, it's not fair for the rest of the class when his behavior ruins their learning environment. I feel the frustration you must have from having your hands tied behind your back because of the red tape.
-
I see both Peterman and Chef Jim beat me to the obvious answer: Correct me if I'm wrong, but you two seem to be on different sides of the spectrum and yet still came to the same rational conclusion. If so, that's very reassuring to me (look... it's 2022 and the bar for optimism is low atm lol). And to the specific point on the availability of various options, you also have to consider the overhead costs associated with collecting those zero-percent loan payments over years and years. It's far simpler and more cost-effective to slash student loan balances outright. At the same time, options are generally a good thing to have and certain situations might be better suited to the suggestions, a) and b), that were provided.