d_wag Posted March 12, 2012 Posted March 12, 2012 I misspoke - it's fixed. I meant to say it counts 100% towards our cash to cap model(how much we can spend). Obviously the NFL amortizes it over the lifespan of the deal. and the bills "cash to the cap" includes the 2011 rollover to get to the adjusted cap target.......and it includes the fact they haven't spent up to their own "cash to the cap" limit in previous years nfl salary cap of $121M + skins/cowboys penalty of $2M + 2011 carryover of $19M + unknown cash underspend from prior years of $?? = +++$142M less $95M current projected cash spend = over $50M in cash to spend.........that is tons to sign draft picks, extend, sign free agents, and there are certainly players on the roster that could be cut to create even more cap/cash room (for example, doubt dwan edwards will see his $4.5M salary)
QCity Posted March 12, 2012 Posted March 12, 2012 The Buffalo News has them at $20.9 million under the salary cap and $32.8 million under their cap in terms of actual cash spending. This includes the rollover and Johnson signing, but not Chandler and the Dallas/Wash thing.
d_wag Posted March 12, 2012 Posted March 12, 2012 (edited) The Buffalo News has them at $20.9 million under the salary cap and $32.8 million under their cap in terms of actual cash spending. This includes the rollover and Johnson signing, but not Chandler and the Dallas/Wash thing. keep reading......... With past cash surpluses in mind, the Bills easily could spend over the cap again this year in real cash and still be within budget. When you try to factor in rolling four-year windows of cash spending and the fact teams also track the amount of guaranteed money in their budgets, it becomes difficult, if not impossible, to say what the Bills actually consider to be their firm cash-spending limit for this year. Edited March 12, 2012 by d_wag
QCity Posted March 12, 2012 Posted March 12, 2012 and? My point was that they have to allot at least $15M for draft picks in their cash to cap system.
d_wag Posted March 12, 2012 Posted March 12, 2012 and? My point was that they have to allot at least $15M for draft picks in their cash to cap system. and my point was 1) they amortize bonuses and 2) they've got loads to spend, regardless of how much they need to spend on rooks
QCity Posted March 12, 2012 Posted March 12, 2012 and my point was 1) they amortize bonuses and 2) they've got loads to spend, regardless of how much they need to spend on rooks NOOOOOO! A cash to cap system DOES NOT amortize bonuses. Let's say Mario Williams wants 16M a year with a 20M signing bonus. The Bills will count all 36M of that amount against their cash to cap figure this year (of which they have at least $32M, probably a lot more as was stated). Now, the deal will be amortized under NFL rules and can easily be structed to fit under the cap, but that figure is meaningless because we aren't pressed up against the cap. Cash to cap ignores the amoritzation of NFL accounting, and that's the important number because that's what we have to spend.
offyourocker Posted March 13, 2012 Posted March 13, 2012 Hmmmm… the Bills have the 7th most at $30.8 million and the league average is $11.7 million. That right there is a fairly large determining factor. I still don't see us getting Mario Williams or Vincent Jackson but this reaffirms my belief that the Bills will land a significant free agent. I really believe they are going to go after Mario. And I sure hope I am right
d_wag Posted March 13, 2012 Posted March 13, 2012 (edited) NOOOOOO! A cash to cap system DOES NOT amortize bonuses. Let's say Mario Williams wants 16M a year with a 20M signing bonus. The Bills will count all 36M of that amount against their cash to cap figure this year (of which they have at least $32M, probably a lot more as was stated). Now, the deal will be amortized under NFL rules and can easily be structed to fit under the cap, but that figure is meaningless because we aren't pressed up against the cap. Cash to cap ignores the amoritzation of NFL accounting, and that's the important number because that's what we have to spend. there is no "NFL rule" that says bonuses need to be amortized over the life of the deal. the bills choose to amortize bonuses over the life of the deal - they could take them against the current year cap when spent if they choose to (as they do in their cash to the cap system) but choose not to. hence, it is factually incorrect to say the bills don't amortize bonuses because they do. of course they also operate in a cash to the cap environment and count the entire current year payout (signing bonus, workout bonus, salary, etc) as a piece towards their cap to the cash number, but they choose to amortize the bonus over the life of the deal (and create dead cap money if cut early). as well, your example is unrealistic. if mario williams signs for 16M a year he will not receive 16M in salary the first year - it will be significantly less. just because the average value is X doesn't mean he'll be paid X each year. the deal will take in to account the upfront signing bonus and put some hefty numbers on the back end in salary (that can be avoided if he doesn't perform). doesn't take much to see a recent example of this - stevie's contract is backloaded as his salary the first two years is much lower then the last two. Edited March 13, 2012 by d_wag
QCity Posted March 13, 2012 Posted March 13, 2012 there is no "NFL rule" that says bonuses need to be amortized over the life of the deal. the bills choose to amortize bonuses over the life of the deal - they could take them against the current year cap when spent if they choose to (as they do in their cash to the cap system) but choose not to. hence, it is factually incorrect to say the bills don't amortize bonuses because they do. of course they also operate in a cash to the cap environment and count the entire current year payout (signing bonus, workout bonus, salary, etc) as a piece towards their cap to the cash number, but they choose to amortize the bonus over the life of the deal (and create dead cap money if cut early). Yes, and the cash to cap number is the one we use!!! This is the number that determines if we can sign free agent X. This is how much we have to spend. And when we determine if can sign free agent X, we consider 100% of all bonuses applied toward this year, NOT amortized bonuses! See? as well, your example is unrealistic. if mario williams signs for 16M a year he will not receive 16M in salary the first year - it will be significantly less. just because the average value is X doesn't mean he'll be paid X each year. the deal will take in to account the upfront signing bonus and put some hefty numbers on the back end in salary (that can be avoided if he doesn't perform). doesn't take much to see a recent example of this - stevie's contract is backloaded as his salary the first two years is much lower then the last two. It's just a simple example to illustrate the point of how bonuses are handled.. If you want a better one, look at Peppers' contract. He got like 1M his first year and 19M in bonuses. That would require 20M in free cash to cap space this year if we offered Mario the same deal. Whew, discussing the cap is tiring.
Danny Posted March 13, 2012 Posted March 13, 2012 Yes, and the cash to cap number is the one we use!!! This is the number that determines if we can sign free agent X. This is how much we have to spend. And when we determine if can sign free agent X, we consider 100% of all bonuses applied toward this year, NOT amortized bonuses! See? It's just a simple example to illustrate the point of how bonuses are handled.. If you want a better one, look at Peppers' contract. He got like 1M his first year and 19M in bonuses. That would require 20M in free cash to cap space this year if we offered Mario the same deal. Whew, discussing the cap is tiring. Im tired just from reading the discussion
billnutinphoenix Posted March 13, 2012 Posted March 13, 2012 Darkhorse...Carl Nicks This is who I think we'll be a player for...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted March 13, 2012 Posted March 13, 2012 This is who I think we'll be a player for... I think the chances of us pursuing Carl Nicks are a bit lower than the chances of us drafting David DeCastro. I don't think we'll draft David DeCastro.
BuffaloRebound Posted March 13, 2012 Posted March 13, 2012 Nicks, Jackson, Williams... any guy who is a difference maker I'm all for. Don't care what position he plays. If we have to overpay free agents to come here, might as well swing for the fences and overpay All Pro's.
T master Posted March 13, 2012 Posted March 13, 2012 You can get a lot of things in this world with $......pay the men, they'll come. That simple. Ya pay them but just remember we have a few other contracts coming due next year , so we better not get to carried away or we will wind up losing some of our own good players b/c of bad money management , then we'll be like the Cowboys , redskins , & Steelers & have to dump a bunch of good players just to get under the cap !!!
BuffaloBillsMagic1 Posted March 13, 2012 Posted March 13, 2012 Cash to Cap is our way(excuse) so as not to have the money to sign bigtime players. Teams liek the Jets re-do contracts all the time to create space now for future year's expenses. We limit ourselves as much as we can to keep longterm comittments down in terms of salary.
DocLawless Posted March 13, 2012 Posted March 13, 2012 Garçon and wimbley please!!!! Garçon will probably command about 7-7.5 mil per year and wimbley probably around 11-12 mil per year. Save the rest for our own player signings next year while at the same time filling two very big needs. That's just what I want to see happen anyways!
BillsfaninFl Posted March 13, 2012 Posted March 13, 2012 the bills use the cash to the cap as an excuse to pay out less money to free agents on a year to year basis, but they still prorate the bonuses over the life of the deal. You are right. Cash to the Cap is a convenient way to make it look like you are spending more than some other teams. However, even using this accounting method, the Bills have not actually spent up to the salary cap. So next year it will be cash to about 89% of the cap.
bowery4 Posted March 13, 2012 Posted March 13, 2012 The Buffalo News has them at $20.9 million under the salary cap and $32.8 million under their cap in terms of actual cash spending. This includes the rollover and Johnson signing, but not Chandler and the Dallas/Wash thing. Thanks for posting that I wondered if the roll over was included. They have enough to do a few things. I really believe they are going to go after Mario. And I sure hope I am right And this is one I would like quite a lot!
Recommended Posts