rackemrack Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 Cough... Monday Nighter... Cough that game was lost by 3 int's in the first quarter, without those we would have put up more points, or at least cleveland wouldn't have put us as much... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted January 29, 2009 Author Share Posted January 29, 2009 That goes down as the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen posted here. No matter what, cutting him would be a hit to the cap. It may be significant or not. C2C means nothing as far as the NFL is concerned relating to the salary cap. IIRC, C2C means that there are no amortized bonus'. So cutting him saves money not costs money. I'm pretty sure that's how it works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turn Down For Watkins Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 that game was lost by 3 int's in the first quarter, without those we would have put up more points, or at least cleveland wouldn't have put us as much... I guess you could say that, but it still would have been nice for Lindell to nail that FG. I guess part of the blame could also go on the coaching staff for the playcalling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 IIRC, C2C means that there are no amortized bonus'. So cutting him saves money not costs money. I'm pretty sure that's how it works. Cash to Cap means...... The actual dollars that get given out to players in a given year do not exceed the cap amount. This does not mean that there are no amortized bonuses.....only that they would generally be used less or be of lesser amounts. Even without amortized bonuses, players still want their guaranteed monies. This can come in the form of 2 or 3 years of guaranteed salaries......which means that cutting a player could have a negative cap impact the following year. If used cleverly, C2C can be used to leave a team with a massive amount of money to spend down the road by front loading contracts with star players. Unfortunately the Bills have not done much of this to my knowledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 Cash to Cap means......The actual dollars that get given out to players in a given year do not exceed the cap amount. This does not mean that there are no amortized bonuses.....only that they would generally be used less or be of lesser amounts. Even without amortized bonuses, players still want their guaranteed monies. This can come in the form of 2 or 3 years of guaranteed salaries......which means that cutting a player could have a negative cap impact the following year. If used cleverly, C2C can be used to leave a team with a massive amount of money to spend down the road by front loading contracts with star players. Unfortunately the Bills have not done much of this to my knowledge. Yes, you are right Dibs... not on star player... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 that game was lost by 3 int's in the first quarter, without those we would have put up more points, or at least cleveland wouldn't have put us as much... I remember some QB who had like 4 or 5 ints against us on MNF and his kicker bailed him out by nailing not 1 but 2 53 yards fgs. Everyone after laughed about the QB's game after. I'd like to have a kicker who can win games we don't deserve to win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maverick544 Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 Dump him and bring back Scott Norwood! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 I voted that he would. But we should seriously look for a new strong legged consistent kicker. The miss in the Clowns game was not the only one missed. Especially playing Dick-ball play for the FG and keep it close, we need a great kicker. If you can't find anyone else, sure bring him back. Just because there's bigger needs, doesn't mean this one should be overlooked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted January 29, 2009 Author Share Posted January 29, 2009 Cash to Cap means......The actual dollars that get given out to players in a given year do not exceed the cap amount. This does not mean that there are no amortized bonuses.....only that they would generally be used less or be of lesser amounts. Even without amortized bonuses, players still want their guaranteed monies. This can come in the form of 2 or 3 years of guaranteed salaries......which means that cutting a player could have a negative cap impact the following year. If used cleverly, C2C can be used to leave a team with a massive amount of money to spend down the road by front loading contracts with star players. Unfortunately the Bills have not done much of this to my knowledge. Ok, you know the most about this stuff but, if they are front loading contracts then it would seem there would be very little cost toward the end of a contract. Here are Lindell's numbers: 12/26/2006: Signed a five-year, $9.1 million contract extension through 2011. The deal included a $3.5 million signing bonus. 2008: $1 million, 2009: $1.09 million, 2010: $1.36 million, 2011: $1.45 million, 2012: Free Agent. So if his bonus is evenly amortized over the life of the contract that would mean the bonus would be $700,000 per year. He would have received $700, 000 in 2006, 2007 and 2008. The remaining unamortized cap hit would be $1.4 million. That's if they amortized it evenly. I would believe the brunt of it would be amortized in the front. Especially because the Bills have been under the cap recently but, lets assume $1.4 million is still owed, on the books. Then his salary for 2009 is $1.09 million. It would cost the Bills $310, 000. Not much of a hit at all. I'd be willing to bet dollars to donuts that his bonus has already been wiped off the books and so Buffalo would save $1.09 million by cutting him. Also he's 32 years old and IMO has a fading leg. We'll see, I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 Ok, you know the most about this stuff but, if they are front loading contracts then it would seem there would be very little cost toward the end of a contract. Here are Lindell's numbers: 12/26/2006: Signed a five-year, $9.1 million contract extension through 2011. The deal included a $3.5 million signing bonus. 2008: $1 million, 2009: $1.09 million, 2010: $1.36 million, 2011: $1.45 million, 2012: Free Agent. So if his bonus is evenly amortized over the life of the contract that would mean the bonus would be $700,000 per year. He would have received $700, 000 in 2006, 2007 and 2008. The remaining unamortized cap hit would be $1.4 million. That's if they amortized it evenly. I would believe the brunt of it would be amortized in the front. Especially because the Bills have been under the cap recently but, lets assume $1.4 million is still owed, on the books. Then his salary for 2009 is $1.09 million. It would cost the Bills $310, 000. Not much of a hit at all. I'd be willing to bet dollars to donuts that his bonus has already been wiped off the books and so Buffalo would save $1.09 million by cutting him. Also he's 32 years old and IMO has a fading leg. We'll see, I guess. Cash 2 Cap has no real application to the salary cap. Its a cheap way of the Bills trying to look like they are spending top dollar, without actually doing so. The NFL will amortize any signing bonus over the length of the deal for cap purposes. All that money is paid up front, however. Here's an example of a player who signs a 4 year deal with a 26 million dollar deal with an 8 million signing bonus. Salaries are 3,4,5,6 million. The 8 million is paid up front to the player. The NFL sees this deal as this year 1 - 3 million base + 2 million bonus amortization - 5 mil against the cap year 2 - 4 + 2 = 6 year 3 - 5+2 = 7 year 4 - 6 + 2 = 8 mil against the cap. The Bills mark it on their own books as this year 1 - 3 million base + 8 million signing bonus = 11 million against the cap. Then the Bills claim to be up against their own self-imposed cap, when in fact they technically have 6 million free. The NFL doesnt care about cash to cap and will still charge the Bills 5, 6, 7, and 8 million against the cap. The Bills accounting will count this as 11, 6, 7, 8. This is entirely different than what the vikinks did with antoine winfield. The paid him a roster bonus (which all gets charged to the cap in 1 year) instead of a signing bonus. So, using the same contract as above, with the 8 million being a roster bonus, the NFL counts those cap counts as 11, 4, 5, 6. Thats how you free up future cap space if you have a lot in one season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mularkey Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 We should bring in the Browns kicker who nailed a 56-yarder in mid-November right before our very eyes. Or the Dallas kicker who did almost the same damn thing twice! :wallbash: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 77 for 90 with the Bills, kicking in one of the windiest stadiums in the NFL, and perfect on XPs. Yeah, He's a bum. PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 77 for 90 with the Bills, kicking in one of the windiest stadiums in the NFL, and perfect on XPs. Yeah, He's a bum. PTR Yes, but this year he was 30 or 38 or 78.9%. This after seasons of 88.9% in 2007 and 92.0% in 2006. Off year, or a trend? I'm not saying the guys a bum and should be cut immediately. Just that it is a position that if it an be improved should. Actively pursue it. Sign some guys, bring 'em in and have kicking competition and pick the best guy. Marv in his book says to never overlook the kicking game. It's way too important. More important than a lot of people give credit for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 Yes, you are right Dibs... not on star player... I should have said 'big contract' rather than 'star players'......as most of our big contracts have gone to decent/good players(at best). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 Ok, you know the most about this stuff but, if they are front loading contracts then it would seem there would be very little cost toward the end of a contract. Here are Lindell's numbers: 12/26/2006: Signed a five-year, $9.1 million contract extension through 2011. The deal included a $3.5 million signing bonus. 2008: $1 million, 2009: $1.09 million, 2010: $1.36 million, 2011: $1.45 million, 2012: Free Agent. So if his bonus is evenly amortized over the life of the contract that would mean the bonus would be $700,000 per year. He would have received $700, 000 in 2006, 2007 and 2008. The remaining unamortized cap hit would be $1.4 million. That's if they amortized it evenly....... They have no choice but to amortize it evenly. A signing bonus is always divided evenly by the number of years in the contract......and counted towards each years cap(your figuring of $700,000 was correct). Ramius explained what I meant best in his post above when he said...... This is entirely different than what the vikinks did with antoine winfield. The paid him a roster bonus (which all gets charged to the cap in 1 year) instead of a signing bonus. So, using the same contract as above, with the 8 million being a roster bonus, the NFL counts those cap counts as 11, 4, 5, 6. Thats how you free up future cap space if you have a lot in one season. It baffles me why(particularly with Evans) we don't give as much up front to players as possible(as a roster bonus). When we extended Evans contract, we were well under our cap and C2C levels. Had we done this, it would not only leave little to no cap hit if he leaves(cut, injury) but also frees up both cap and C2C space down the road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted January 29, 2009 Author Share Posted January 29, 2009 They have no choice but to amortize it evenly. A signing bonus is always divided evenly by the number of years in the contract......and counted towards each years cap(your figuring of $700,000 was correct).Ramius explained what I meant best in his post above when he said...... It baffles me why(particularly with Evans) we don't give as much up front to players as possible(as a roster bonus). When we extended Evans contract, we were well under our cap and C2C levels. Had we done this, it would not only leave little to no cap hit if he leaves(cut, injury) but also frees up both cap and C2C space down the road. Here's one explanation of the cap from 2005. An expression that was thrown about repeatedly during the various labor meetings is "cash over cap". Well, these signing bonuses are what insiders were talking about, when they brought up that term. One of the things that held up negotiations amongst the owners with the last CBA extension (back in 2006) was the move to place some kind of cap on the amount of signing bonus money that could be pushed into future years for cap accounting purposes. Although there was no cap on signing bonuses, there was a limit put in place (for 2006) that signing bonuses could only be prorated for up to five (5) years -- but that moved up to six (6) years in 2007. That sounds to me like signing bonus' don't have to be pro-rated evenly. Here's a synopsis of the cap in layman's terms. I have to go out for a little while but when I get back I'll see if I can find more about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rackemrack Posted January 29, 2009 Share Posted January 29, 2009 I remember some QB who had like 4 or 5 ints against us on MNF and his kicker bailed him out by nailing not 1 but 2 53 yards fgs. Everyone after laughed about the QB's game after. I'd like to have a kicker who can win games we don't deserve to win. that would be nice... i actually forgot about that game... even though i was there to watch the clusterf*ck in person... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted January 30, 2009 Share Posted January 30, 2009 Here's one explanation of the cap from 2005. An expression that was thrown about repeatedly during the various labor meetings is "cash over cap". Well, these signing bonuses are what insiders were talking about, when they brought up that term. One of the things that held up negotiations amongst the owners with the last CBA extension (back in 2006) was the move to place some kind of cap on the amount of signing bonus money that could be pushed into future years for cap accounting purposes. Although there was no cap on signing bonuses, there was a limit put in place (for 2006) that signing bonuses could only be prorated for up to five (5) years -- but that moved up to six (6) years in 2007. That sounds to me like signing bonus' don't have to be pro-rated evenly. Here's a synopsis of the cap in layman's terms. I have to go out for a little while but when I get back I'll see if I can find more about it. From the article in your second link..... The signing bonuses do in fact count against the NFL salary cap, under a prorated system. This means it doesn't all got tossed into the team's salary cap for one season, but rather it's spread evenly over the duration of the contract length. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted January 30, 2009 Author Share Posted January 30, 2009 From the article in your second link.....The signing bonuses do in fact count against the NFL salary cap, under a prorated system. This means it doesn't all got tossed into the team's salary cap for one season, but rather it's spread evenly over the duration of the contract length. They seem to conflict don't they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted January 30, 2009 Author Share Posted January 30, 2009 Dibs, you are always 99.99% right but I could swear I've heard teams can amortize as they see fit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts