MattM Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 According to this link (muchas gracias, senor Steely Dan): http://www.rotoworld.com/content/clubhouse...amp;majteam=BUF the Bills have 37 players under contract for a total 2009 compensation of $57 million, give or take. Add in 5-6 E/RFA (I'd guess Ellison, Digi, Freddie, Schoman perhaps and Wilson) for a total of $3 million or so and we have 42 under contract for $60 million. Let's take another $12 million for our rookie class (the number 11 pick will garner the bulk of that in bonus). That leaves us a whopping $51 million based on this year's cap of $123 million. Even if we use $15m or so to do extensions (Reed and Peters, for ex. and perhaps McGee) that still leaves us $35 million under Ralph's own cash to cap. If they're serious about this, that's some serious coin to be throwing around in FA, certainly enough for 2-3 major (by major, I mean just about anybody) acquisitions and 3-4 journeyman-type deals (like bringing back Preston and Chambers as backups). Worth noting is that we could also save an additional $4.5 million on top of all this by jettisoning Royal and Kelsay. What am I missing here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsWatch Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 Where did they get their data from? Many sites make up figures like drawing lottery tickets. There are many, many bonuses which need to be figured in which many of these cap experts are unaware of. Even clump who had best knowledge in business (he used to be cited by Buffalo News) said it is very hard to get a handle on cap figures now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsVet Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 Peters is under contract for 09 (and 2010 for that matter) but I can't see Buffalo ignoring him this off-season. Fred Jackson is an ERFA, but it would behoove the front office to give him a 3-4 year contract. Both of those deals would impact their cap hit. Another factor is what won't be happening this season. Guys like Edwards and Posluszny have contracts through 2010, but good front offices will re-up their solid players before they enter their final season. And lastly, they must plan for existing veterans like McGee and Reed who have contracts through 2009. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted February 8, 2009 Author Share Posted February 8, 2009 You may be right, but (a) I figured in extending Peters and Reed and (b) escalators are probably still a small portion of the total. If these numbers are anywhere near right, the Bills have a ton of money to spend, even under "cash to cap"..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwws9999 Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 You may be right, but (a) I figured in extending Peters and Reed and (b) escalators are probably still a small portion of the total. If these numbers are anywhere near right, the Bills have a ton of money to spend, even under "cash to cap"..... cmon, ralph just made the hof, he's a genius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 According to this link (muchas gracias, senor Steely Dan): http://www.rotoworld.com/content/clubhouse...amp;majteam=BUF the Bills have 37 players under contract for a total 2009 compensation of $57 million, give or take. Add in 5-6 E/RFA (I'd guess Ellison, Digi, Freddie, Schoman perhaps and Wilson) for a total of $3 million or so and we have 42 under contract for $60 million. Let's take another $12 million for our rookie class (the number 11 pick will garner the bulk of that in bonus). That leaves us a whopping $51 million based on this year's cap of $123 million. Even if we use $15m or so to do extensions (Reed and Peters, for ex. and perhaps McGee) that still leaves us $35 million under Ralph's own cash to cap. If they're serious about this, that's some serious coin to be throwing around in FA, certainly enough for 2-3 major (by major, I mean just about anybody) acquisitions and 3-4 journeyman-type deals (like bringing back Preston and Chambers as backups). Worth noting is that we could also save an additional $4.5 million on top of all this by jettisoning Royal and Kelsay. What am I missing here? I don't understand the question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
todd Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 You are missing the fact that we need 53 players. 35 million under Ralph's fake cap isn't that much when you still have roster spots to fill. According to this link (muchas gracias, senor Steely Dan): http://www.rotoworld.com/content/clubhouse...amp;majteam=BUF the Bills have 37 players under contract for a total 2009 compensation of $57 million, give or take. Add in 5-6 E/RFA (I'd guess Ellison, Digi, Freddie, Schoman perhaps and Wilson) for a total of $3 million or so and we have 42 under contract for $60 million. Let's take another $12 million for our rookie class (the number 11 pick will garner the bulk of that in bonus). That leaves us a whopping $51 million based on this year's cap of $123 million. Even if we use $15m or so to do extensions (Reed and Peters, for ex. and perhaps McGee) that still leaves us $35 million under Ralph's own cash to cap. If they're serious about this, that's some serious coin to be throwing around in FA, certainly enough for 2-3 major (by major, I mean just about anybody) acquisitions and 3-4 journeyman-type deals (like bringing back Preston and Chambers as backups). Worth noting is that we could also save an additional $4.5 million on top of all this by jettisoning Royal and Kelsay. What am I missing here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwws9999 Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 You are missing the fact that we need 53 players. 35 million under Ralph's fake cap isn't that much when you still have roster spots to fill. what you're missing is that ralph would rather stick that 35 million in his pocket rather than eat juarons contract or pay his good players like jackson what they are worth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillnutinHouston Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 The small print in Ralph's "cash to cap" states that COACHES salaries are included. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted February 8, 2009 Author Share Posted February 8, 2009 You are missing the fact that we need 53 players. 35 million under Ralph's fake cap isn't that much when you still have roster spots to fill. If you do the math above (and assuming our 7 draft choices make the team), we'd have a handful of spots to fill to get to 53 and $35-40 million to spend on them. And in response to the other poster, for coaches (if that is indeed the case) you'd add at most $4 million more, so that doesn't explain it either. The point of my question is that holding Ralph at his word on all of this "cash to cap" it looks to me like we have a ton of money to FA shop this offseason. Using the $35 million number, let's assume we spend $5 million to land 3-5 lower to mid-tier FA's (older guys, special teams aces, quality vet backups, etc.) That leaves $30 million to spend on decent FAs. I'd wager that should land us at least 4 starter quality players (avg. 2009 pay of about $7.5 million). Personally, I suspect it would be $3-5 million on a backup QB and then $8-9 million on three other decent players. For that kind of money I suspect we could land Jason Brown ©, Bo Scaife or LJ Shelton (TE) and certainly at least re-sign Crowell or a better player at OLB, leaving only DE and potentially WR (and I bet under all this money we could squeak in a vet like Amani Toomer for about $3-5 million in 2009 cash) as potentially glaring needs and at WR you'd have Johnson and hopefully Hardy getting better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillnutinHouston Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 I agree with you - I have not understood this either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Fong Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 What you have missed is the Bills have become the Cincinnati Bengals and the cap no longer matters because they will ALWAYS spend under it. As a matter of fact they have to be aware of the league minimum spending limit more than the maximum limit. It's sad because they really could make a splash in free agency and make a solid run at the playoffs this year. But like others have pointed out Ralph would rather take the paycheck. After all a bus trip to Canton costs a lot of money these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted February 8, 2009 Author Share Posted February 8, 2009 All I'm saying is that by the standards that this FO has set for itself they have plenty of money to spend (again, unless I'm missing something)--whether they will or not, who knows, but if history is any guide, we shouldn't count on it..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
todd Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 All I'm saying is that by the standards that this FO has set for itself they have plenty of money to spend (again, unless I'm missing something)--whether they will or not, who knows, but if history is any guide, we shouldn't count on it..... No, there are still things you must account for that aren't in your logic. There are workout bonuses, there are roster bonuses, etc. that you've gotta pay that aren't counted in base salary. $35 million to sign 3 impact FAs using the cash to cap method? Yeah, right. Not possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 what you're missing is that ralph would rather stick that 35 million in his pocket rather than eat juarons contract or pay his good players like jackson what they are worth What most are also missing is that you need to have actual money to back up those deals to pay those guys. It isn't like a video game where you are just given a number to spend to. And just because the leagues cap is set at a number, that doesn't mean that the teams have that much actually money to spend on players and can go and spend freely every dime without worry. Thats the way you get into financial trouble, spending money you don't have as if you actually have it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbfan54 Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 Doesn't cash to cap also mean that all the signing bonus counts against year 1 because that is when it is paid. Moreover, if they made another signing like Dockery who had a $17 or 18 million signing bonus that in and of itself would cancel out about half of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted February 9, 2009 Author Share Posted February 9, 2009 No, there are still things you must account for that aren't in your logic. There are workout bonuses, there are roster bonuses, etc. that you've gotta pay that aren't counted in base salary. $35 million to sign 3 impact FAs using the cash to cap method? Yeah, right. Not possible. That said, if you cut Kelsay and Royal, you get about $40 million free. Roster bonuses and workout bonuses can't be much more than $5-8 million, tops, IMHO. that still leaves $30 million or more to spend on FA's under "Cash to Cap" accounting. Good point above re: signing bonuses--I'd forgotten how huge Dockery's was, but I suspect that many good FA's can be had for bonuses of $10 million or so, again allowing us to pick up 2 quality starters in FA, plus 2-3 other tier 2 players (like a backup QB). Doesn't mean they will do that, but it looks to me like they can..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsVet Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 What you have missed is the Bills have become the Cincinnati Bengals and the cap no longer matters because they will ALWAYS spend under it. As a matter of fact they have to be aware of the league minimum spending limit more than the maximum limit. It's sad because they really could make a splash in free agency and make a solid run at the playoffs this year. But like others have pointed out Ralph would rather take the paycheck. After all a bus trip to Canton costs a lot of money these days. That's right. C2C doesn't mean sh** to the NFL, but is an accounting trick designed to make fans think the team is spending like the big boys. The only figure the NFL cares about is spending the minimum of 86.4% of 123M in cap dollars, or a minimum of 106.27M. Cap hit and money spent are two entirely different things. I dare say the Bills will be closer to the league minimum than the maximum. And one adverse effect has been a lack of depth on both sides of the ball, namely having guys like Keith Ellison as your primary backup at LB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robkmil Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 Cash to Cap--We will always have lower salar cap numbers in upcoming seasons due to Cash t teh cap. We don't push bonuses into the next year's cap. If a player is cut--there bonus money is still on the cap. however if you put it in the first year when yu cut it doesn't hurt the cap as much. If there is no bonus owed to that player when cut then there will be no cap hit. I like cash to the cap--gives excess room to make moves, but now we need to spend it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lv-Bills Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 That's right. C2C doesn't mean sh** to the NFL, but is an accounting trick designed to make fans think the team is spending like the big boys. The only figure the NFL cares about is spending the minimum of 86.4% of 123M in cap dollars, or a minimum of 106.27M. Cap hit and money spent are two entirely different things. I dare say the Bills will be closer to the league minimum than the maximum. And one adverse effect has been a lack of depth on both sides of the ball, namely having guys like Keith Ellison as your primary backup at LB. It's not an accounting "trick". The Bills announced they would be doing this when Marv came aboard. Ralph Wilson didn't try to fool anyone. We all knew it kind of meant that we would be out of the big name free agency players, but he never tried to "trick" anyone into thinking we will spend like the big boys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts