Bills #6 on List of Best Cap Situations

[Kirby Jackson]

 

 

Linemen yes. If N.O. is dumb enough to let Graham talk to Buffalo they should give him Gronk money with more guaranteed.

 

There is no chance that Graham hits the market. They will clear the cap space with Vilma, Will Smith and Harper. I follow them pretty closely living in NOLA and despite his free agency status he has zero chance of being available. In fact, I would say that there is a better chance of him being on the Saints than of Peyton being on the Broncos. I think Peyton is more likely to retire than Graham to be available. Not that either is going to happen but that tells how Graham is viewed within that organization.

[BuffaloBill]

So, it appears the real offseason question mark is Byrd and whether he is worth the money it will take to sign him. I love the guys play but if the Bills can score a late first rounder or early second rounder for him after tagging him i think they let him walk. The Bills don't absolutely need him and they can plug more meaningful holes through the draft.

 

I know they are different positions but A Williams has played very well. This makes Byrd expendable. Having two firsts or two seconds in this draft could situate the Bills to do some very interesting moves.

[BADOLBILZ]

I didn't realize that I was arguing anything, merely discussing cap stuff.

 

I have never claimed that there is an advantage to rolling the dead money into 2014......I don't know where you got that from. I have always stated that it made no difference to the 2014 cap either way.......and it is always in response to somebody stating that the 2014 cap is worse off for the Bills to put it there rather than in the 2013 cap(which is simply incorrect).

 

 

The 89% minimum spend(which will be going up to 90% starting next season if I recall correctly) really isn't much of an issue at all. People may really want to perceive the Bills as being cheap.....but there is no likelihood at all that the Bills wouldn't cover the minimum spend in 2014 even without the $7m Fitz hit.

 

Assuming the 2014 cap will be $126m, this means the minimum spend will need to be $113.4m. The Bills have already committed to $98m plus $5m in dead cap hit(having removed the $7m Fitz money). This makes $103m. Add to that the Branch hit....no idea....let's say a simple $4m.....brings us to $107m. Byrd? If we sign him for an $8m 2014 cap hit we are now over the minimum spend......plus we will need further money for rookies, punter, re-signing Carrington maybe.....and hopefully reworking of the 4 young players that I mentioned earlier.

 

To somehow think that the Bills handled the Fitz money the way they did in order to spend as little as possible in 2014 is not only illogical but smacks of overt pessimism.

 

 

Essentially, the low increase in the 2013 and 2014 caps has made the 2014 cap year very tight. Had the Bills spent over the cap this season(going into 2012s rollover money), we would be in a very rough cap situation next year.

 

To highlight this, let's say that all the Bills did differently was to sign Levitre to the Titans deal......and sign Byrd to 9m/year.....we should now also chuck the $7m Fitz money into 2013 as well(as it would now make sense to do it as we do not expect any rollover monies for 2014).

 

This would reduce the 2013 cap space from the current $18m down to $4.3m(minus any branch factor).

There would now be no rollover so the cap for us in 2014 would be the base $126m.

We have $98m committed...

plus $5m dead = $103m

plus $8.6m for Levitre = $111.6m

plus $9m for Byrd = $120.6m

plus $4m(?) for Branch = 124.6m

 

Now we have only $1.4m to pay the rookies and a punter......and have no money left to re-sign anybody else(Carrington) nor do some early reworking of Dareus, Spiller, Hughes or A.Williams.

 

Like I said......IMO the Bills have been extremely wise in how they have managed the cap situation this year.

 

 

Dibs.......I'm not going to argue with you about why you created your motive deprived premise.

 

But perhaps if you understood the "cap floor" rule you could understand why the only financial reason to push Fitz' cap figure into 2014 was to assure that money became a cap credit in the next 4 year period.

 

The cap floor is 89% of the cumulative salary caps over THE FOUR YEAR PERIOD of 2013-2016.

 

After that it resets and another 4 year period begins.

 

It's not year to year and you don't have to spend at least 89% each year etc..

 

The motivation behind this is to prevent what teams like the Bengals and Bills did in the 2000's.........simply not spending money.

 

Yes, the Bills were routinely more than 10% below the cap in the decade and I am certain their argument was that they didn't have talented enough players to pay that well.

 

Of course, you can go back 60 years in sports to the year the Pirates traded NL HR champion Ralph Kiner because they could quote "finish last without him".

 

That kind of attitude exists. Teams often gut rosters and make outrageous profits by fielding horrible teams....and then slowly increase their payroll as they rebuild. Check out last years Houston Astros.

 

The NFLPA's perspective.....and probably that of big spending owners like Jerry Jones and Dan Snyder...... is that your inability to draft well shouldn't be a license not to spend/pocket the profits from the hardwork of the rest of the league.

 

Make no mistake.......not having a cap floor has made a big difference to the Bills bottom line the past 14 years.

 

A cap floor probably prevents some of the player losses the Bills had in that decade. Whether Pat Williams or Jason Peters is worth what they are asking for has an entirely different angle when you have to spend that money one way or another.

 

As for re-signing players in the future.......if they were that worried about having enough space to do THAT.......they would have ate Fitz cap hit this year and would be getting deals done em masse between now and the start of free agency to take advantage of all that 2012 rollover money that is about to vanish.

Edited December 25, 2013 by BADOLBEELZ

[Dibs]

Dibs.......I'm not going to argue with you about why you created your motive deprived premise.

 

But perhaps if you understood the "cap floor" rule you could understand why the only financial reason to push Fitz' cap figure into 2014 was to assure that money became a cap credit in the next 4 year period.

 

The cap floor is 89% of the cumulative salary caps over THE FOUR YEAR PERIOD of 2013-2016.

 

After that it resets and another 4 year period begins.

 

It's not year to year and you don't have to spend at least 89% each year etc..

 

The motivation behind this is to prevent what teams like the Bengals and Bills did in the 2000's.........simply not spending money.

 

Yes, the Bills were routinely more than 10% below the cap in the decade and I am certain their argument was that they didn't have talented enough players to pay that well.

 

Of course, you can go back 60 years in sports to the year the Pirates traded NL HR champion Ralph Kiner because they could quote "finish last without him".

 

That kind of attitude exists. Teams often gut rosters and make outrageous profits by fielding horrible teams....and then slowly increase their payroll as they rebuild. Check out last years Houston Astros.

 

The NFLPA's perspective.....and probably that of big spending owners like Jerry Jones and Dan Snyder...... is that your inability to draft well shouldn't be a license not to spend/pocket the profits from the hardwork of the rest of the league.

 

Make no mistake.......not having a cap floor has made a big difference to the Bills bottom line the past 14 years.

 

A cap floor probably prevents some of the player losses the Bills had in that decade. Whether Pat Williams or Jason Peters is worth what they are asking for has an entirely different angle when you have to spend that money one way or another.

 

......

 

I've looked it up now(the 4 year cap floor).....thanks for the heads up on it(I'm on the same page with you in regards to that now).

 

With the 4 year period being 2013-2016 though.....the Fitz money being put into 2014 rather than 2013 makes even less difference.

 

The rule is:

A team can be under the floor in one or more seasons in a cycle without violating the CBA, as long as its total spending during the four-year period reaches the required percentage of the cap.

 

The $7m for Fitz is going to count towards the 2013-2016 cap floor period regardless of what year it is placed into(2013 or 2014), as either year will count towards the total spending during that four year period.

 

You would have had a point had the cap floor period been from 2014-2017 as the Bills would have been moving money into that cap floor period that could have been left out.....but as 2013 and 2014 are both inside the cap floor 4 year period, I really don't understand what point you are making.

 

 

.....

As for re-signing players in the future.......if they were that worried about having enough space to do THAT.......they would have ate Fitz cap hit this year and would be getting deals done em masse between now and the start of free agency to take advantage of all that 2012 rollover money that is about to vanish.

 

Aside from the concept that you can't rework a contract within the first 3 year(effects Dareus & Williams)......at the start of this season we likely had no idea if we would want to rework Branch, A.Williams, Hughes and likely Dareus & Spiller too.

 

It really seems like you are desperately straining to find a way to show how the Fitz money was bad. Is it ever possible for you to see information that you hadn't fully factored previously and change your mind on something? This is getting crazy. To suggest that we should rework player contracts 2 years before needed when we haven't fully assessed their worth is madness.

Edited December 25, 2013 by Dibs

[simpleman]

If you are going to lose cap space money because you can't re-roll it, wouldn't it be better to extend/rework a few player contracts before this season ends so you don't loose it? Or does that not make economic cap sense?

[uncle flap]

If you are going to lose cap space money because you can't re-roll it, wouldn't it be better to extend/rework a few player contracts before this season ends so you don't loose it? Or does that not make economic cap sense?

 

In one sense that could be a good idea if they are absolutely certain that player works into the team's future plans. However, it's risky for a couple reasons; The player could get seriously hurt, or his play could decline substantially for some other reason, and then the team is one the hook for a player worth less than they had hoped. It's hard to quantify "motivation," but as we have seen in contract years, players step their game up. Paying a guy early *might* lead to him not playing as hard as he would if there's no proverbial carrot on a stick.

 

It also takes two to tango. A player may feel he stands to earn more money shopping his services in free agency- or at least drive his price up with competing suitors. There's no way to truly know how much another team would pay until they make an offer, so many players are reluctant to re-sign early with out testing the waters around the league.

[Dibs]

If you are going to lose cap space money because you can't re-roll it, wouldn't it be better to extend/rework a few player contracts before this season ends so you don't loose it? Or does that not make economic cap sense?

 

To add to uncle flap, it also depends on the current player contracts and the cap situation for the following season.

 

As it happened, we have/had very few players hitting FA next season that we would want to give significant contracts to(namely Byrd, Branch and Wood). As you likely know, we extended Wood & Branch....and we can't deal with Byrd till after the season. We are then looking at players who have 2 years left on their contract(viewed from the start of this season). The only time a team will rework a contract 2 seasons prior to its conclusion is if they are woefully underpaying a star, or they are endeavoring to free up cap space. Also, the new CBA precludes the reworking of contracts within the first 3 seasons which meant that the only players eligible to do this with was Spiller, Hughes and A.Williams. Neither Hughes or Williams would have been considered worthy of extension at the start of this season......and Spiller....I would think that neither party would have wanted to extend him at that point.

 

Essentially all of the players that we have been able to rework(and it made sense to rework), we have reworked.

 

 

The other aspect is the tight 2014 cap. Any contract extensions or new contracts would have placed a chunk of new money onto the 2014 cap numbers. Branch for instance has a new contract, therefore will be taking whatever that amount is($4?) off of the 2014 cap.

 

A quick glance at the situation had we tried to spend the 2012 rollover....and placed the $7m Fitz money into the 2013 cap instead.....

 

We have $17m left(I've removed $1m for the assumed Branch Signing Bonus).

Minus $7m for Fitz.

Now we hit the rollover($10m)

How do we spend it? Sign Levitre by matching the Titans contract?

$4.6m cap hit ($5.4m left)

Sign Byrd to $9m/year? Lets pay him $12m to try to lower the 2014 cap hit ($0.3m left)

 

Now we hit 2014. The cap is likely only $126m next season.

We have $98m committed....plus $5m dead = $103m

Plus Branch $4m, plus Levitre $8.6m, plus Byrd $6m = $121.6m ($4.4m left)

Now we can't rework Spiller or Hughes or Williams or Dareus....and have to do some cap work to sign a punter and our new rookies.

 

As it stands with how the Bills have managed things, we go into next season with around $19m(as far as I can figure it). If we sign Byrd to a similar structure that I just mentioned(the 2015 cap will be greatly increased, plus we will have $12m extra from the dead cap)......that means we will have $13m after signing Byrd to his #1 safety contract. This also means that we could bring in a top FA or 2(in a buyers market)......and rework our players throughout the year.

 

I know which situation I would rather be in.

Edited December 25, 2013 by Dibs

[machine gun kelly]

 

 

And the Bills will add more dead money, if they chose to cut/trade Stevie Johnson.

 

The SJ part is short sighted not from this poster, but others. He's been very successful for us on a bad team beating Revis those three years. He's had two undrafted free agents throwing to him for almost half the season, and a rusty EJ twice. You don't roll talent now. He's under contract. You pick up a talented TE and a talented big WR, and watch how things change. We can pick up serviceable guard if needed for less, agreed a stud ILB, to stop the run along with Alonso.

 

We need to wrap up guys early so we can get them cheaper. An example is to wrap up CJ cheaper now as he had an off year, while still a year left on his contract. Cincy is doing a nice job of wrapping up players early which will make them better for a long time as they gain continuity.

[BarleyNY]

 

Though I am fairly certain that a team cannot re-roll rollover monies into subsequent years, I am still uncertain on this....

 

 

Teams can roll additional cap space forward indefinitely. They must request the amount they want to roll forward every year. The unadjusted cap maximum is adjusted by the amount approved from the previous year giving an adjusted cap maximum. The amount of the adjusted cap maximum unspent for that year can be requested for the following year. Cap floors are calculated on unadjusted cap maximums so there is no incentive to waste unspent dollars.

[BADOLBILZ]

I've looked it up now(the 4 year cap floor).....thanks for the heads up on it(I'm on the same page with you in regards to that now).

 

With the 4 year period being 2013-2016 though.....the Fitz money being put into 2014 rather than 2013 makes even less difference.

 

The rule is:

A team can be under the floor in one or more seasons in a cycle without violating the CBA, as long as its total spending during the four-year period reaches the required percentage of the cap.

 

The $7m for Fitz is going to count towards the 2013-2016 cap floor period regardless of what year it is placed into(2013 or 2014), as either year will count towards the total spending during that four year period.

 

You would have had a point had the cap floor period been from 2014-2017 as the Bills would have been moving money into that cap floor period that could have been left out.....but as 2013 and 2014 are both inside the cap floor 4 year period, I really don't understand what point you are making.

 

 

 

 

Aside from the concept that you can't rework a contract within the first 3 year(effects Dareus & Williams)......at the start of this season we likely had no idea if we would want to rework Branch, A.Williams, Hughes and likely Dareus & Spiller too.

 

It really seems like you are desperately straining to find a way to show how the Fitz money was bad. Is it ever possible for you to see information that you hadn't fully factored previously and change your mind on something? This is getting crazy. To suggest that we should rework player contracts 2 years before needed when we haven't fully assessed their worth is madness.

 

 

I am not sure how many times I need to repeat this to you to make it clear:

 

Pushing Fitz' dead money into 2014 essentially ASSURED that the team would WASTE the 2012 cap rollover money.

 

2012 rollover money is not part of the 4 year "salary floor" equation.

 

With the rollover 2012 money available there was a WEALTH of cap space available to sink that dead money into this year.......so why DIDN'T they do it this year?

 

That is the question you have no answer for. There is always a reason a decision like that is made.

 

What is frustrating is to see the team let a quality player like Levitre go because they don't want to overpay him...........and then just not use the rollover cap space from 2012 AT ALL.

 

I mean that unused rollover space could have been applied toward a front and backloaded deal with Levitre.

 

If you take that guaranteed amount away from the deal with the Titans....which was essentially only a two year deal anyway.........then he is CHEAP.

 

That basically tells you as a fan that 13 years into an epic losing streak......cash in hand and profit still trumped putting the BEST possible team on the field in 2013. Dollars in the pocket are worth more than cap space.

 

This is not the case with every team. Some aggressive organizations value cap space more than the ADDITIONAL profit they are relinquishing.

 

There are other winning teams who might do the same thing as the Bills........I will grant that.........but the criticism is because AFTER 13 YEARS OF NOT REACHING THE PLAYOFFS the team owes it to their fans to turn this mess around.

 

At some point, the team owes some tangible give-back to the fans for their support of the brand that Ralph/Russ spent the last 14 years tarnishing.

 

Call it: A COMMITMENT TO WINNING

 

*As for your constant attempts to add up cap figure hypotheticals to prove that the Bills have JUST ENOUGH cap room to sign this or that player..........there are a number of creative ways to get deals done..........including bonuses, guaranteed portions of the contract and backloading.

 

Bottom line: In the event that in 2-3 years from now they feel the Bills feel they have a window to win a Super Bowl they have a wealth of ways to turn zero cap space into a lot of cap space in the short term.

 

What the Fitz' decision tells us is that they are also leaving their options very much open on whether they care to spend to the salary floor over the next 4 years.

 

That has been the beef that I as an objective fan have with the organization with regard to the Fitz' dead money issue. And even those that don't understand the cap have a reason to question the decision as well. It simply doesn't make sense to push that money forward a year when you had far more cap space than you were going to use in 2013.

 

Your attempts to rationalize it lack any motive on the Bills part. They reflect the Fitz' move as nothing more than a random, objectiveless decision. That simply isn't how a business is run.

[KRT88]

we should have more cap room after releasing Stevie Johnson. Hopefully they can sign Byrd for something like 5 years 39M with 20M guaranteed.

[Dibs]

Teams can roll additional cap space forward indefinitely. They must request the amount they want to roll forward every year. The unadjusted cap maximum is adjusted by the amount approved from the previous year giving an adjusted cap maximum. The amount of the adjusted cap maximum unspent for that year can be requested for the following year. Cap floors are calculated on unadjusted cap maximums so there is no incentive to waste unspent dollars.

 

This isn't definitive(at least in my nor many others eyes). Unfortunately I cant find the sprortrac link that states that the rollover cap dollars do not work like cell phone credit.

 

The last line of the appropriate area in the CBA also states:

The amount of Room carried over will be adjusted downward based on the final room available after the year-end reconciliation.

 

 

I hope you are correct though & we can move $17m into 2014 instead of $7m. (It also would give Badol nothing to complain about which would be an absolute treat). We'll find out soon enough now.

 

I am not sure how many times I need to repeat this to you to make it clear:

 

Pushing Fitz' dead money into 2014 essentially ASSURED that the team would WASTE the 2012 cap rollover money.

 

2012 rollover money is not part of the 4 year "salary floor" equation.

 

With the rollover 2012 money available there was a WEALTH of cap space available to sink that dead money into this year.......so why DIDN'T they do it this year?

 

That is the question you have no answer for. There is always a reason a decision like that is made.

 

What is frustrating is to see the team let a quality player like Levitre go because they don't want to overpay him...........and then just not use the rollover cap space from 2012 AT ALL.

 

I mean that unused rollover space could have been applied toward a front and backloaded deal with Levitre.

 

If you take that guaranteed amount away from the deal with the Titans....which was essentially only a two year deal anyway.........then he is CHEAP.

 

That basically tells you as a fan that 13 years into an epic losing streak......cash in hand and profit still trumped putting the BEST possible team on the field in 2013. Dollars in the pocket are worth more than cap space.

 

This is not the case with every team. Some aggressive organizations value cap space more than the ADDITIONAL profit they are relinquishing.

 

There are other winning teams who might do the same thing as the Bills........I will grant that.........but the criticism is because AFTER 13 YEARS OF NOT REACHING THE PLAYOFFS the team owes it to their fans to turn this mess around.

 

At some point, the team owes some tangible give-back to the fans for their support of the brand that Ralph/Russ spent the last 14 years tarnishing.

 

Call it: A COMMITMENT TO WINNING

 

*As for your constant attempts to add up cap figure hypotheticals to prove that the Bills have JUST ENOUGH cap room to sign this or that player..........there are a number of creative ways to get deals done..........including bonuses, guaranteed portions of the contract and backloading.

 

Bottom line: In the event that in 2-3 years from now they feel the Bills feel they have a window to win a Super Bowl they have a wealth of ways to turn zero cap space into a lot of cap space in the short term.

 

What the Fitz' decision tells us is that they are also leaving their options very much open on whether they care to spend to the salary floor over the next 4 years.

 

That has been the beef that I as an objective fan have with the organization with regard to the Fitz' dead money issue. And even those that don't understand the cap have a reason to question the decision as well. It simply doesn't make sense to push that money forward a year when you had far more cap space than you were going to use in 2013.

 

Your attempts to rationalize it lack any motive on the Bills part. They reflect the Fitz' move as nothing more than a random, objectiveless decision. That simply isn't how a business is run.

 

So you understand that you made a mistake when you wrote....

 

"But perhaps if you understood the "cap floor" rule you could understand why the only financial reason to push Fitz' cap figure into 2014 was to assure that money became a cap credit in the next 4 year period."

 

As you stated that it was the only financial reason I assumed that we were finished. Apparently not.

 

 

Though you seem to word things placing a causal emphasis upon the Fitz money......I agree with what you said. The Bills didn't intend on spending the 2012 caryover......therefore they then placed the Fitz money into the 2014 year. At least give them credit for not being total morons. They wouldn't have blindly put the Fitz money into 2014 & then turn around a bit later saying "Damn....that now makes it impossible for us to spend into the rollover. What silly sausages we are. "

 

 

I don't know how much clearer I can make the tightness of the 2014 cap look for you.

I'll cut and post the response I gave to simpleman as it was after my response to you(you may not have read it). In it I spend the 2012 carryover....and front load Byrd as much as possible. You seem to always miss the concept that any contract extensions or new contracts in 2013 would have placed a chunk of new money onto the 2014 cap numbers......a cap that will only minimally rise....after a cap that only minimally rose.....after a cap that only minimally rose.

 

We have $17m left(I've removed $1m for the assumed Branch Signing Bonus).

Minus $7m for Fitz.

Now we hit the rollover($10m)

How do we spend it? Sign Levitre by matching the Titans contract?

$4.6m cap hit ($5.4m left)

Sign Byrd to $9m/year? Lets pay him $12m to try to lower the 2014 cap hit

($0.3m left)

 

Now we hit 2014. The cap is likely only $126m next season.

We have $98m committed....plus $5m dead = $103m

Plus Branch $4m, plus Levitre $8.6m, plus Byrd $6m = $121.6m ($4.4m left)

Now we can't rework Spiller or Hughes or Williams or Dareus....and have to do some cap work to sign a punter and our new rookies.

 

 

If you are so sure that the Bills have been trying their best to not spend money.....instead of simply stating it in response to actual numbers.....why not open up your calculator and show us how we would have been able to spend into the 2012 rollover and still maintain a healthy amount of 2014 cap room to work with. (Using reasonable contract numbers).

 

It seems you just want the Bills to spend money because they can. It made no sense to overspend on players this year as it would necessarily mean that they could not spend it on better players next year.

 

The Bills management of the cap in my eyes(this year) shows a firm Commitment to Winning by setting us up to not only be able to retain our budding young stars but to be able to take advantage of a good buyers FA market if we so chose. If the unlikely happens and J.Graham becomes a FA......we will now be able to easily make him a Bill. We wouldn't be able to do that had we spent all of our available money this year.

 

Edit: I think there is a way they could have done it while only effecting the 2014 by only $2-4m.

We could have signed Byrd and frontloaded it to around a $16m 2013 cap hit.....and having it fall to minimal salary in 2014.

The problem I think was that the Bills were not convinced that he was worth the money he was asking for. Perhaps if they were convince, this is the exact sort of contract that we would have seen. As we didn't give Byrd his huge contract though.....there wasn't any other reasonable way to do it as far as I can see.

 

we should have more cap room after releasing Stevie Johnson. Hopefully they can sign Byrd for something like 5 years 39M with 20M guaranteed.

 

Only minimal extra cap room for the 2014 cap unfortunately.(25K).......but it would mean an extra $8.85m cap room in 2015 & $8.95m cap room in 2016.

Edited December 26, 2013 by Dibs

[BarleyNY]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/12/new-cba-gives-teams-the-right-to-carry-over-cap-space-automatically/

 

This article cites the league rule. They read it the same as I did.

 

If you are going to lose cap space money because you can't re-roll it, wouldn't it be better to extend/rework a few player contracts before this season ends so you don't loose it? Or does that not make economic cap sense?

 

This is exactly what the rule was meant to eliminate the need for. No more BS mechanisms to bring cap dollars forward. Just ask for it.

[BarleyNY]

One more thing: Adjustments are always made to the league base salary cap. IOW it works like this example:

 

Year 1 for team A: League salary cap: $125M, carryover from previous year: $15M, equals adjusted team salary cap of $140M.

Team spend is $120M.

Year 2: LSA: $128M, c/o from year 1: $20M ($140M-$120M), atsc=$148M.

Team spend is $130M.

Year 3: LSA: $131M, c/o from year 2: $18M. Atsc=$149M

 

The mistake some make is that they keep adding unspent cap space to the adjusted cap number from the previous year. That is incorrect. The carryover is added to the unadjusted team salary cap as determined by the league.

 

It can be misleading especially when a team has a big carryover. You'll hear things like "So-and-so has $30M in salary cap space!" But that can be the result of a wide range of things. A team with no carryover might have very low obligations moving forward whereas a team with a huge carryover would probably already be spending at the league limit moving forward. Or a team could be in between.

 

I try to think of carry over in terms of that being an effective contract that could be spent on a player, not an amount that could be spent annually moving forward.

[uncle flap]

Can a team carry excess/unused cap space into the next year?

Yes. Unused cap space from a team's previous year cap can be added to the following year. The team must notify the league of their intent to rollover cap money at least 14 days prior to the start of the next season's league year.

 

Does it continue to rollover like cellphone minutes?

No. Rollover money from 2012 into 2013 is treated as "adjusted cap". Any unused "adjusted" money in 2013 cannot be rolled over again into 2014.

 

http://www.spotrac.com/terms/nfl/can-a-team-carry-excessunused-cap-space-into-the-next-year-295/

[BADOLBILZ]

This isn't definitive(at least in my nor many others eyes). Unfortunately I cant find the sprortrac link that states that the rollover cap dollars do not work like cell phone credit.

 

The last line of the appropriate area in the CBA also states:

The amount of Room carried over will be adjusted downward based on the final room available after the year-end reconciliation.

 

 

I hope you are correct though & we can move $17m into 2014 instead of $7m. (It also would give Badol nothing to complain about which would be an absolute treat). We'll find out soon enough now.

 

 

 

So you understand that you made a mistake when you wrote....

 

"But perhaps if you understood the "cap floor" rule you could understand why the only financial reason to push Fitz' cap figure into 2014 was to assure that money became a cap credit in the next 4 year period."

 

As you stated that it was the only financial reason I assumed that we were finished. Apparently not.

 

 

Though you seem to word things placing a causal emphasis upon the Fitz money......I agree with what you said. The Bills didn't intend on spending the 2012 caryover......therefore they then placed the Fitz money into the 2014 year. At least give them credit for not being total morons. They wouldn't have blindly put the Fitz money into 2014 & then turn around a bit later saying "Damn....that now makes it impossible for us to spend into the rollover. What silly sausages we are. "

 

 

I don't know how much clearer I can make the tightness of the 2014 cap look for you.

I'll cut and post the response I gave to simpleman as it was after my response to you(you may not have read it). In it I spend the 2012 carryover....and front load Byrd as much as possible. You seem to always miss the concept that any contract extensions or new contracts in 2013 would have placed a chunk of new money onto the 2014 cap numbers......a cap that will only minimally rise....after a cap that only minimally rose.....after a cap that only minimally rose.

 

We have $17m left(I've removed $1m for the assumed Branch Signing Bonus).

Minus $7m for Fitz.

Now we hit the rollover($10m)

How do we spend it? Sign Levitre by matching the Titans contract?

$4.6m cap hit ($5.4m left)

Sign Byrd to $9m/year? Lets pay him $12m to try to lower the 2014 cap hit

($0.3m left)

 

Now we hit 2014. The cap is likely only $126m next season.

We have $98m committed....plus $5m dead = $103m

Plus Branch $4m, plus Levitre $8.6m, plus Byrd $6m = $121.6m ($4.4m left)

Now we can't rework Spiller or Hughes or Williams or Dareus....and have to do some cap work to sign a punter and our new rookies.

 

 

If you are so sure that the Bills have been trying their best to not spend money.....instead of simply stating it in response to actual numbers.....why not open up your calculator and show us how we would have been able to spend into the 2012 rollover and still maintain a healthy amount of 2014 cap room to work with. (Using reasonable contract numbers).

 

It seems you just want the Bills to spend money because they can. It made no sense to overspend on players this year as it would necessarily mean that they could not spend it on better players next year.

 

The Bills management of the cap in my eyes(this year) shows a firm Commitment to Winning by setting us up to not only be able to retain our budding young stars but to be able to take advantage of a good buyers FA market if we so chose. If the unlikely happens and J.Graham becomes a FA......we will now be able to easily make him a Bill. We wouldn't be able to do that had we spent all of our available money this year.

 

Edit: I think there is a way they could have done it while only effecting the 2014 by only $2-4m.

We could have signed Byrd and frontloaded it to around a $16m 2013 cap hit.....and having it fall to minimal salary in 2014.

The problem I think was that the Bills were not convinced that he was worth the money he was asking for. Perhaps if they were convince, this is the exact sort of contract that we would have seen. As we didn't give Byrd his huge contract though.....there wasn't any other reasonable way to do it as far as I can see.

 

 

 

Only minimal extra cap room for the 2014 cap unfortunately.(25K).......but it would mean an extra $8.85m cap room in 2015 & $8.95m cap room in 2016.

This isn't definitive(at least in my nor many others eyes). Unfortunately I cant find the sprortrac link that states that the rollover cap dollars do not work like cell phone credit.

 

The last line of the appropriate area in the CBA also states:

The amount of Room carried over will be adjusted downward based on the final room available after the year-end reconciliation.

 

 

I hope you are correct though & we can move $17m into 2014 instead of $7m. (It also would give Badol nothing to complain about which would be an absolute treat). We'll find out soon enough now.

 

 

 

So you understand that you made a mistake when you wrote....

 

"But perhaps if you understood the "cap floor" rule you could understand why the only financial reason to push Fitz' cap figure into 2014 was to assure that money became a cap credit in the next 4 year period."

 

As you stated that it was the only financial reason I assumed that we were finished. Apparently not.

 

 

Though you seem to word things placing a causal emphasis upon the Fitz money......I agree with what you said. The Bills didn't intend on spending the 2012 caryover......therefore they then placed the Fitz money into the 2014 year. At least give them credit for not being total morons. They wouldn't have blindly put the Fitz money into 2014 & then turn around a bit later saying "Damn....that now makes it impossible for us to spend into the rollover. What silly sausages we are. "

 

 

I don't know how much clearer I can make the tightness of the 2014 cap look for you.

I'll cut and post the response I gave to simpleman as it was after my response to you(you may not have read it). In it I spend the 2012 carryover....and front load Byrd as much as possible. You seem to always miss the concept that any contract extensions or new contracts in 2013 would have placed a chunk of new money onto the 2014 cap numbers......a cap that will only minimally rise....after a cap that only minimally rose.....after a cap that only minimally rose.

 

We have $17m left(I've removed $1m for the assumed Branch Signing Bonus).

Minus $7m for Fitz.

Now we hit the rollover($10m)

How do we spend it? Sign Levitre by matching the Titans contract?

$4.6m cap hit ($5.4m left)

Sign Byrd to $9m/year? Lets pay him $12m to try to lower the 2014 cap hit

($0.3m left)

 

Now we hit 2014. The cap is likely only $126m next season.

We have $98m committed....plus $5m dead = $103m

Plus Branch $4m, plus Levitre $8.6m, plus Byrd $6m = $121.6m ($4.4m left)

Now we can't rework Spiller or Hughes or Williams or Dareus....and have to do some cap work to sign a punter and our new rookies.

 

 

If you are so sure that the Bills have been trying their best to not spend money.....instead of simply stating it in response to actual numbers.....why not open up your calculator and show us how we would have been able to spend into the 2012 rollover and still maintain a healthy amount of 2014 cap room to work with. (Using reasonable contract numbers).

 

It seems you just want the Bills to spend money because they can. It made no sense to overspend on players this year as it would necessarily mean that they could not spend it on better players next year.

 

The Bills management of the cap in my eyes(this year) shows a firm Commitment to Winning by setting us up to not only be able to retain our budding young stars but to be able to take advantage of a good buyers FA market if we so chose. If the unlikely happens and J.Graham becomes a FA......we will now be able to easily make him a Bill. We wouldn't be able to do that had we spent all of our available money this year.

 

Edit: I think there is a way they could have done it while only effecting the 2014 by only $2-4m.

We could have signed Byrd and frontloaded it to around a $16m 2013 cap hit.....and having it fall to minimal salary in 2014.

The problem I think was that the Bills were not convinced that he was worth the money he was asking for. Perhaps if they were convince, this is the exact sort of contract that we would have seen. As we didn't give Byrd his huge contract though.....there wasn't any other reasonable way to do it as far as I can see.

 

 

 

Only minimal extra cap room for the 2014 cap unfortunately.(25K).......but it would mean an extra $8.85m cap room in 2015 & $8.95m cap room in 2016.

 

How can you not understand that Fitz' dead money being moved into 2014 does not increase what they will have to spend in 2014?

 

If they had put it in this year instead......they simply wouldn't have that amount to rollover.

 

HOWEVER.......if they had used it this year they would have gotten that much closer to being able to use some of that 2012 rollover cap space that is going to be wasted.

 

You are slightly backpedaling because you didn't understand the rollover rule or the impact of the cap floor.......but you still can't seem to grasp the fact that moving the dead money forward doesn't give them a penny more to spend next year.

[Jason423]

Hey guys. I run the OTC website. This is an interesting discussion so I thought I would chime in. The biggest thing to keep in mind here is salary cap rollover. You can continue to roll over cap space as many times as you would want. Rollover is simply based on excess cap space. It has nothing to do with when it was initially created. So the Bills will carry over around $18 million to the 2014 season following the Branch extension. So their cap will be right around $145 million.

 

Joel is coming up with the cap space projections by primarily adding futures deals and accruing escalators. The Bills had 45 players under contract at the time it was written. There should be 4 ERFAs to bring the number to 49, 1 RFA, and then 1 other deal factored in. That reduces cap space by about $3.5 million. CJ Spiller should earn a pretty hefty escalator and I believe both Eric Wood and Kyle Williams may earn raises. Those players should make up about the rest of the difference he is discussing.

[Dibs]

Hey guys. I run the OTC website. This is an interesting discussion so I thought I would chime in. The biggest thing to keep in mind here is salary cap rollover. You can continue to roll over cap space as many times as you would want. Rollover is simply based on excess cap space. It has nothing to do with when it was initially created. So the Bills will carry over around $18 million to the 2014 season following the Branch extension. So their cap will be right around $145 million.

 

Joel is coming up with the cap space projections by primarily adding futures deals and accruing escalators. The Bills had 45 players under contract at the time it was written. There should be 4 ERFAs to bring the number to 49, 1 RFA, and then 1 other deal factored in. That reduces cap space by about $3.5 million. CJ Spiller should earn a pretty hefty escalator and I believe both Eric Wood and Kyle Williams may earn raises. Those players should make up about the rest of the difference he is discussing.

 

Several posters(myself included) arew not convinced of the ability to re-roll rollover money. The link from uncle flap a few posts earlier has the sportrac website thinking this way.....plus the wording of the CBA looks like it doesn't work this way. I really hope it does......but I'm doubtful.

 

From the CBA: The amount of Room carried over will be adjusted downward based on the final room available after the year-end reconciliation.

Edited December 26, 2013 by Dibs

[....lybob]

Can I mention something that drives me a little crazy- people hear about an 6 year 48 million dollar contract and assume that the player counts as 8million against the cap every year but that not really true for example take a contract set up like this 6 years 48 million, 12 million signing bonus , salary 2013 $3 mil, 2014 $3.5 mil, 2015 $4.5 mil, 2016 $6 mil, 2017 $9mil, 2018 $10mil.

 

cap hit each year 2013 $5 mil, 2014 $5.5 mil, 2015 $6.5 mil, 2016 $8 mil, 2017 $11 mil, 2018 $12 mil- often if a contract is set up like this the player never sees the last two year and is either cut or the deal redone

[Dibs]

Can I mention something that drives me a little crazy- people hear about an 6 year 48 million dollar contract and assume that the player counts as 8million against the cap every year but that not really true for example take a contract set up like this 6 years 48 million, 12 million signing bonus , salary 2013 $3 mil, 2014 $3.5 mil, 2015 $4.5 mil, 2016 $6 mil, 2017 $9mil, 2018 $10mil.

 

cap hit each year 2013 $5 mil, 2014 $5.5 mil, 2015 $6.5 mil, 2016 $8 mil, 2017 $11 mil, 2018 $12 mil- often if a contract is set up like this the player never sees the last two year and is either cut or the deal redone

 

Though I think there is usually still an increase in cap hit as the years progress in a contract, I don't think the type of contract that you are describing is as common today as it was a few(5?) years back......and certainly not with the Bills contracts.

 

Here is a look at the Bills recent major contracts:

Mario: 9.8, 12.4, 18.4, 19, 19.5, 16.5

K.Williams: 5, 6, 6, 5.8, 5.6, 7

Stevie: 4.3, 5.7, 8.5, 8.9, 9

Wood: 5.3, 6, 6.1, 6.3

 

And some other random large contract from around the league....(literally random....not cherry picking)

Romo: 11.8, 21.8, 25.3, 15.1, 19, 19.5, 20.5

Mike Wallace: 3.3, 17.3, 12.1, 13.7, 13.7

Levitre: 4.6, 8.6, 8.6, 8.6, 8.6, 8.6, 5.8

Tamba Hali: 4, 14.5, 15.5, 11.5, 12

N. Suh: 3.1, 11.9, 6.6, 10.5, 21.4, 13.2 (Note here that the dead cap hit for the big 21.4 year is 19.5)

 

I don't know why the practice of doing the sort of contracts you mentioned slowed(or stopped). Maybe players realized that they were ending up with less money? I don't know, but it is quite apparent that those sort of contracts are no longer common.