Will The NFL "Cash Over Cap" Salary Cap Loophole Change The NFL Forever? | Pat McAfee Reacts
Vložit
- čas přidán 8. 06. 2022
- There is a loophole that some teams are using to COMPLETELY stack their teams. Why isn't every team doing it?
If you aren't on FanDuel, what are you doing? Go to www.fanduel.com/mcafee to get started.
Become a #McAfeeMafia member! / @thepatmcafeeshow
SUBSCRIBE:
/ @thepatmcafeeshow
MERCH: store.patmcafeeshow.com
Subscribe to the Pat McAfee Show(s)!
@Hammer Dahn
@Thats Hockey Talk
@The Pod
@The Pat McAfee Show
MERCH: store.patmcafeeshow.com
SPONSOR THE SHOW: www.patmcafeeshow.com/partner...
#PatMcAfee #NFL - Sport
Pat learned about cash over cap yesterday and now that’s all he talks about😂 I’m here for it tho I still have no idea how the cap works. It’s fugãze
Man for real. He hasn't shut up about it yet
@@jordanharrison3196 it's a big deal and nobody else really talks about it
@@THIS---GUY oh I agree that it is important. It's something that needs to have a lid put on. It's just funny/ironic he didn't know what it was before yesterday and now he's saying it every 5 words as if he's an expert with it
He needs to keep talking about it. The nfl is great because of the hard salary cap. Any unfair advantage needs to be minimized as much as possible.
It’s not fugazi. If it was unreal there wouldn’t be loop holes to work around it, and teams wouldn’t be underwater if they cut cash over cap players early
Normal sports shows- ‘how does lebron drinking coffee with Splenda effect his legacy’
AJ on PMS- ‘can the bengals use their team as loan collateral’
Food stamps basically paid for the Denver broncos 😆 🤣 😂
which means it was you and me... wage earner. Thanks Uncle Sam
This is the most depressing thing I've ever heard today
Maybe the Waltons will figure out a way to give players 34 hours a week and not have them count against the cap.
*corporate tax breaks
Considering that 75% of the cost of the broncos stadium was paid for by tax payers capitalism is wild.
"We have to sign AD to 30 million and Kupp to 25 million..... only way we can do that is to cut this special teams linebacker and free up 2.5" lmao
Ye, that attempted rational was completly wack
While Matthew Stafford makes basically a 50 million dollar cash bonus it’s a joke
Honestly, being a european NFL fan, the whole idea of a salary cap made the league interesting to me, as you couldn't have just a few rich super teams like in soccer that run the whole sport. I really hope some measures are taking to ensure that this trend doesn't continue. Parity through salary cap and the draft are what makes the NFL the most exciting league in the world.
The NHL is the only American professional league with anything approaching parity
@James Black the salary cap doesn't exist in the playoffs, Kucherov, Lightning star, was also injured the entire season until the playoffs and was placed on IR. He didn't count against the cap during the season, so they were able to go "over" the cap during the season while he was injured and since he only came back for the playoffs it didn't matter that their roster was over the cap.
@James Black think the nhl is gonna investigate that?
soccer is great the only problem in the sport is that the biggest event is every 4 years that`s how the super league almost started
@@fadercreek Nah, it used to be more competitive at the elite level, it's now the same rich clubs that can afford the best players for like 70+ million every year mostly competing for major trophies.
I’m worried that without a hard salary cap the nfl will become similar to the nba. Super teams in warm weather places like LA, Tampa, Miami, etc. I really don’t want to see the same teams in the superbowl every year
Like the Patriots winning every other year?
@@affgrim6449 Patriots also don't seem to sign many players to these mega deals like you're seeing around the league.
@@affgrim6449 lol Tom Brady is the super team.
@@affgrim6449 yes that’s exactly my point. It’s sucks seeing the same teams every year. If there’s no salary cap then we’re just gonna see more of it. There won’t be any parody in the regular season either
@@DM-bu6to like in soccer overseas. Manchester City used to stink and then they got more backing, and now they’re one of the best teams in the world
This show makes it incredibly entertaining and interesting to learn about salary cap and the finances of the NFL. I knew nothing really about contracts and how they worked over time until watching this show. Just another way Pat and the boys are killing it.🍺
I'm going to need more Cash cap lessons on the pat show cause I'm trying to learn but I don't understand it but im paying attention so hard 🤣
Think about it this way. Every owner gets a certain allowance they are allowed/required to spend on players (salary cap). They fill out their spreadsheet and turn that into the league. BUT some owners are willing to pay their players over and above that level because their bank accounts are deeper than just that budget.
Everybody has been looking at Rams bank account spending more than the spreadsheet and asking “How?!” One is numbers on a page (Salary Cap) and the other is the transactions in their bank account (cash over cap). The budget spreadsheet and the bank account aren’t the same thing and don’t tell the same story.
If I give you a 100m over 5 years, but it’s not guaranteed, I have to give you paychecks that equal 20m/yr as long as you stay healthy and keep playing. If I give you 100m guaranteed up front in cash, you don’t care when I say I paid you. So if you play for 5 years, you’re still making 20m a year, so if I make it a 100m 10yr deal, I can call it 10m/yr towards the cap. Gives me 10m more a year to pay other guys, and I can pay it off incrementally once you’re gone. And since the cap continuously increases, I’ll miss 10m less in a decade than I’ll miss it building a team now.
I’m sure there’s a little more complexity to it but it feels like that’s basically the idea
Pat calling liquid money “fluid” is the reason this show is great
I'm money fluid and cashsexual
Keep talking about this Pat! This issue needs addressed! The reason why the NFL is great is because of the salary cap. Any unfair advantage needs to be minimized as much as possible.
I agree, I'm happy the Rams won but they have made all their key players the highest paid at their positions in history. It's kinda making the NFL look like the NBA and that is horrible.
everyone can do it so it is not an unfair advantage.
@@420247paul the thing is this shouldn’t be a problem to begin with. When teams shove all the cap hit to years when the player more then likely won’t play @von miller that becomes a problem because eventually teams @rams will figure out how to exploit it. All it takes is a small crack for it to grow
@@420247paul they literally can’t. Every team isn’t owned by a billionaire oil tycoon. Teams like the Bengals Steelers and Packers are small market teams that don’t have 1/4 of a billion dollars on hand to put into escrow for guaranteed contracts.
This is not a loophole. The San Francisco 49ers were doing basically this exact thing back in the mid-90s when the salary cap was first implemented, front-loading contracts with big signing bonuses to keep players under the cap in the short-term, only to end up gutted by pro-rated money coming due later. That's part of why they were so bad in 99 and 2000.
One can think of bonuses being spent in this way as more like borrowing from future years in order to make the doorway wider for this year. In general, I'm not a big fan of the concept, as we've seen teams heavily burned by going out and trying to get big-money free agents (whose contracts are often substantially larger than their play on the field actually justifies) and ending up with piles of dead money in a churn of mediocrity. However, with a handful of smart teams actually able to put together Super Bowl teams by pulling so much future value into the present year that no one can compete if they're thinking only in terms of pay-as-you-go, it does seem that this will be the way of the immediate future.
After all this time Rap finally explains how dead money works and I get why the NFL refutes Pats theory lol
isn't the nfl built on parity? the more the cap is softened, made to do with as whomever pleases, the less that becomes the case. i think it is a slippery slope for the next 5-10 years.
It’s not sifted, guaranteed money is mainly in the form of a signing bonus. The teams are front loading the contracts and upping the signing bonuses, and are turning non guaranteed years into signing bonuses later for an extension. The money still will be due, and dead money will eventually arise. It’s like a balloon payment, win now, think about the negative consequences later.
@@introvertedextrovertedtraver I think the point they were making is the cap is only going to get bigger. If done correctly, like the Rams, it doesn't have a huge negative impact. Another option teams can do is acquire high priced players in cycles. When for instance an expensive QB contract is no more because that QB retired a team can acquire a rookie from the draft and hardly pay them much and use that opportunity to play catch up with the cap. There is great opportunity here and I imagine some teams will take advantage and have an edge doing so.
The Rams were successful once. Everyone needs to chill out.
I think Pat started to actually understand around 7:50... that's what pushing it out into the future means -> it's not just the cap hit being less in year 1 and more in year 5, but literally moving the cap hit to 10 years down the road or something like that... this is just like the economy, Fed, loans, money printing, can just keep pushing paying debt into the future, maybe sure in 50 years you let it come due, or you keep pushing it lol... I DON'T LIKE IT if it's unfair for some teams, it's why I don't watch baseball
Baseball actually has a slightly different problem. A handful of their owners aren't trying to win and just use the teams to generate more money for themselves. MLB needs to institute a salary cap floor to force owners to spend a minimum amount of money that's comparable to the rest of the league. No one wants to root for a team whose owner spends the same amount for the whole team as other teams do for one player. And yeah, some teams go over the cap. They need harsher penalties on that as well.
My understanding of the cap is that you can’t push the money further than the players time with your team. Am I wrong?
@@DemonofLight80 yea there is a certain limit. But you can always push different money among other things
@@DemonofLight80 no you can most definitely pay for a player no longer on your team
Which is why the team has to do these types of transactions in cycles. If you have a legitimate shot at a SB then it might be a good year to acquire high priced talent this way. When you are in a rebuild year/ years it's a good time to play catch up on the Cap. That or teams can do things similar to the Rams and spread it out well.
Think about it this way: Player X signs for Team A. 10 year deal, $100m with $50m signing bonus. If the player were to play for all 10 years, that's $15m/year ($10m/year salary + $5m signing bonus) against the cap. However, if the player is released/traded/retires after five years, what happens? The team DOES NOT have to account for $10m/year in salary but DOES have to account for the remaining five years of $5m/year in signing bonus, as this is spread over the length of the contract. What does that mean? They have $5m/year in dead cap for five years. 'Voidable years' in the contract mean the team get out of accounting for the salary against the cap, but DO NOT get out of accounting for the signing bonus against the cap. Ultimately, if you're betting that the salary cap is going to go up in the future (historically, it goes up about $10m/year) then taking a cap hit of $5m/year in five years' time (when the cap may have gone up $50m/year) to secure an elite player in a window to win right now, makes some sense.
Well it’s not quite like that. With the signing bonus thing once the player is a free agent or traded that money u spread out accumulates and becomes dead cap for the year after they are gone. If 5m/year of the signing bonus was there for 5 years once the player leaves then u would have to pay 25 million that year. It doesn’t get spread out anymore. The point is you can keep re-signing the player and push that dead cap out even further. If u sign a 10 year with 5 spread out, once u hit the end of that 5 u can sign again the cap hit is still just 5m/year. But obv if the player ends up stinking u don’t do that and just take the hit.
It’s not necessarily about winning for the owners. Just because they have the cash doesn’t mean they’ll spend it. It’s entertainment for us. It’s a business for them.
Haha. @3:45 I feel the same way about my trucker hats.
If tartt catches that interception the league would be so much different lol
I think it makes things more interesting when a team sacrifices their future for a chance to win now. the ' cash over cap' is really no different than an NFL team trading away future draft picks for a high draft pick this year. They aren't cheating, they are just borrowing money from the future to get a guy this year. Aside from the Rams last year, the vast majority of the time a team does it, it doesn't work out and then they just screw their future a little bit. I mean look at Deshawn Watson and Albert Haynesworth(Redskins). Offseasons also will be much less exciting if teams can give signing bonuses that take them over the cap.
Pat and AJ, keep banging this drum. I've yet to hear a good explanation as to WHY the cap isn't BS. Would love a deep dive on the Drew Brees contract that Rapsheet was talking about.
But, with the cap growing every year, the percent of total cap the static number represents is effectively lower.
right! its like kicking 10 mill into the future when the future holds a 25mill growth.. No problem!!
The missing piece is the void years. It's years that count against the cap for a contract for a player who is now not on the team.
Yep, the player either plays according to what he's paid and plays out the contract or else the team will have dead money on future cap years.
@James Black It's a void year after the fact. Some players get extensions, some play it out or renegotiate. Some cases, like Brady in his last NE year and likely in 2023, will almost certainly act as "void" years. But, most of the time, whether it's truly a void year or not is decided by the future, not necessarily in the now. Either way, it's not hurting the league. Or most other players. If the cap stops growing, maybe certain players will get hurt. Then it will adjust. There is no issue here.
Im glad someone is talking about it
There are changes I'd like to see. No pushing money out beyond the end of the contract. No restructuring or renegotiating deals after they've been signed. It keeps players from crying about their contracts and holding out for a new deal. And it keeps teams from playing games to manipulate the cap. Honor the deals you signs. I would also like to see a player based salary cap. We have a rookie contract cap and we should have a veteran contract cap. Three to four players shouldn't be taking home 50% of the cap. It takes a team to play this game. Clean this mess up before it causes serious damage to the league. These television contracts are not sustainable. Consumers are going to get tired of paying higher and higher prices for their cable service just to turn around and get inundated with advertisements during the game. It is bad enough that game play had to be altered because of commercials.
"Putting a lean on the bengals" Pat with his arms crossed 🤣🤣🤣 I'm dead 🤣🤣🤣
They’re borrowing money from the future but why teams don’t care about cash over cap is cap will continually grow so when the future comes, they’ll still have more money to spend because of these new tv deals and international interest in nfl too
Love the PLL hat.
This has been around for 25 years. It's what led to "cap hell" in the past. Maybe now the year to year rise in the cap will cover those problems.
salary cap is fake
Salary cap is an excuse for teams to not try and win
Birds aren’t real
@@PeterRockyVietnam government drones 💯
Am I dumb or hasn’t the cap always been like this?
Have watched a few videos on how salary cap works and I still don’t get it idk 😂 reminds me of the world economy. Money just getting printed
I need to see a diagram...!!! Lol
Pat and the boyz/AJ Hawk are the most compelling men in sports commentary history!!
Cash over cap hurts parity and is cheating I understand it is good for players salaries and I am happy for players but it is bad for everybody else
Love the PLL hat on Rapsheet!!!
Best "cap" video so far by a longshot! Good job today boys
The hat thing, where Ian says it’s always a bit to the left, is an eye dominance thing. People look up and center it based on their field of vision. Mine is always slightly to the right, for the same reason. Your dominant eye will push it a touch to one side or the other.
So is the Bree’s situation like baseball & how they some times prorate big contracts but it starts in certain years?
"Does he own a soccer team? He must have tons of cash"
Lol
So Brees was under contract for one more year.
Technically he's under contract for 2 more years. 22 and 23 are dummy/voidable years for cap/signing bonus proration only - there's no base salary for 22 and 23. His last cap hit is this coming season but still has prorated signing bonus in 23.
Signs Cooper Kupp to massive deal. "Gotta pay the piper, and that came yesterday when they cut a 2.5 mil guy." 80 million covered by 2.5 mil guy. Yep. Math checks out.
Haha. I was thinking the same thing
It isn't 2.5 vs 80 million. It is 2.5 vs 30 million for the next 3 years.
👍😅
@@PeterSedesse so, 2.5 v 10 mil? Either way that doesn’t check out lmao
Thyere not suppose to cancel out in that way, you're just taking this to much at face value
I am surprised a special teams guy is so dismissive of a special teams player just losing his job.
Salary cap is real but cash allows teams to borrow money from future years salary cap.
Restructure and kick the can is the strategy now. Just wait until the owners figure out that a charitable organization could be formed and accept tax free "donations". Then turn around and hire players for "endorsement" deals, as long as no "collision" occurred and their "nonconnected" to the owners. Similar to dark money and political pacs.
All Andrew Brandt or Rappoport needs to point to is the Saints. They kicked the can down the road so much they were like $70m over the cap to start this off season. They lost a ton of good players because they couldn't re-sign them. They also had to restructure and kick the can again for some other players to be able to sign their rookies.
The Rams will experience this issue in some way.
Love that AJ brings the Bengals in the conversation all the time. No way our owner could keep up with that he isn’t very rich compared to other owners
I think the thing everybody seems to ignore is that this ONLY works because the cap keeps going up significantly every year. If the cap for some reason stalls out for a few years, some of these teams are going to be in trouble.
Rapsheets lefty pitcher reference is spot on. I always try putting on a hat and it never stays on straight, Im not sure why.
How’s that work for the pack??
Pushing the cash into the future isn’t in the ‘spirit’ of the cap, but the loophole sure makes things exciting!
Guarantee you the competition committee will be addressing this very soon... lol
"It was up and it wasn't." -Capology Chapter 1, probably
Rap sheet would never tell the truth about this. He’d get fired so fast
Pat and folks look at this like a cheat code, but Rap puts it best when he compares it to a credit card.
You get your bill this month. Now, what you SHOULD do is pay it off in full. But some folks look at other guys at work and see that everybody has been getting big raises and big bonuses every year.
So, maybe you don't pay it all off this month. Maybe you pay the minimum and use the extra cash to buy some awesome stuff that wouldn't be in your budget if you paid your bill in full. After all, you can pay it back once that bonus comes in.
And everyone at work has been very, VERY consistent in getting these raises and bonuses. A couple of the guys keep paying their bills in full, but they're missing out on the extra stuff you can buy.
What Ian is warning about is what happens if the bonus comes in, but it's less than you expected. Or maybe you don't get a raise. Or even, worst case scenario, they ask you to take a pay cut.
Now, you've been robbing 2030 to pay for 2028 and you have to sell your car to pay for your mortgage.
THAT is what the game is.
Good analogy
Except those tv contracts are guaranteed and the salary cap is going to get larger... it would be like your credit limit going up every year so it never maxes out. and your bonuses getting bigger every year so the % of money you make on a minimum payment never changes and you have all this extra fun stuff forever. the league needs to make it a hard cap and close the converting to signing bonuses and voided years bull crap.
Bill Bellichek has been doing this for 20 years, minus paying the players what they are worth LOL
you get it.:Belichick did this Brady..people were mad because he’s not paying other players because they don’t worth the money
It will absolutely turn the NFL into the MLB. Once a salary cap doesn't really matter anymore, you can buy a championship and the fair playing field goes out the window. Small market teams will have no chance.
These are billionaires fighting with their multimillionaire colleagues over the salary cap rules. I shed no tear for them.
Homie the Rams won last year it's already occured
Rams already bought a twam and the NFL even rigged the SB to boost the LA market.
I'd be ok with it without the voidable years/prorating ability. Everyone knows the cap grows substantially and $20 million now hurts a lot more than $20 million in 5 years
The question is why don’t ESPN and other networks talk about this???
Pat is right.
Hahahaha Pat has literally only known about cash over cap for about 24 hours ago and has been running with it.
What is Jerry Jones going to do that man is loaded
How long before the crew notices that snot line rollin down his upper lip…no noise yet???
This spending insanity is guaranteed to incur a change. Or they just get rid of the salary cap because at this rate, it genuinely doesn't seem to matter.
It's strictly because league revenues are exploding. New TV deals and international attention is driving up earnings. If the salary cap stops expanding(see 2020), this trend will slow down. If it continues to thrive as the league thrives, it's easy to kick the can. But the money spread out still must be paid eventually and be on the books, eventually. It's simply buy now, pay later. There is no loophole...
I’m not sure how cap works but i think if they remove it all together, the smaller teams that can’t afford it will still get fucked. Teams like the rams that are cash rich are the only ones that can abuse this method while smaller ones with owners not as rich still can’t compete. I think enforcing a harder method would be better
It does matter. If a team gives a player a huge signing bonus, that means that for the X amount of years, they will have less salary cap than a team that gives a modest salary cap. The Cleveland Browns are screwed for 5 years. They are going to have substantially lower SC space than other teams.
@@Tim_Weng Every single team makes much more than enough money to pay the salary cap plus a ton more. The cap is tied to league revenues and the teams share pretty much everything. Small markets don't mean a thing. There are owners who won't mind paying a $75M bonus up front. There are some who won't. There is also a cap floor which is very close to the cap that teams have to spend to. Some owners just aren't motivated to throw money around, especially if their GMs tend to overspend on marginal talent.
There is no team(owner) that can't afford to pay a player big money. That bonus money always ends up on the cap, whether it's this year or 5 years down the road. It's not a loophole and no team is getting screwed, no matter how small the market. No matter how "poor" the owner...
It’s like Bobby Bonilla day, right ?
All teams are not doing this because either:
1. It will get fixed soon and there will be penalties or teams will have to gut their team and release a lot of players.
2. Not every team(owners) is in it to win it. They are getting richer by owning team.
Here's a question. Does cash over cap/voidable years negatively impact players when it comes to calculating the franchise tag amount? Hand Stafford $61.5 million does all that money get included into the average for QBs?
The exclusive deal is based on the average of the average annual value of the top 5 highest contracts at the position. Which rn for QBs would be worth around 46-47 million. Stafford annual average is 40 million. But yes the signing bonus is included. They take the whole deal into account. Non-exclusive has more to do with the rising price of the salary cap
Rapoport tries to sound too smart all the time and ends up losing everybody and making no sense lol
I’ve been doing this on madden for years
BIIIIG finance show.
One important aspect that we are missing in this debate is that NFL franchises, due to their owner based system, are not disconnected from economic principle. Franchises are incredibly valuable assets that are being held by businessmen and women. If they overinvest into their franchise with these big money contracts, it might not directly affect the franchises success in the future, but it lowers the overall value that it holds, unless it can expand in a way that will balance out these debts, that franchises basically hold to their owners and that will never be paid back.
You can look at the european soccer market to make it clearer: Chelsea was "in debt" to Roman Abramovic by more than 3 billion €. His bet on his Asset was that Chelsea was, in the long run, going to be a successfull and sustainable franchise that would increase its overall value by more than the debt that it took from Abramovic. Now that he had to sell it, Abramovic lost billions on his investment. Apart from the political reasons for his loss, the other big reason was competition: When Abramovic moved into Soccer, so did American, Asian and Arabian investors that overinvested in similar capacities, effectively forcing Chelsea to delay their profitablity phase further to stay relevant in international competitions.
Pushing money into the future is not only a risk for future competivity, it is a gamble on sustainable expansion of market value.
The Rams' potential of market Value is much higher than that of lets say Carolina, therefore the amount of debt that they can (and have to, to stay competitive in California) take on is much higher than that of smaller market teams.
In a sense, its not really that important how rich your owner is, it is important how far you can push the ceiling on your assets total value, not only for owners but for the nfl overall, because if one or two owners overinvest and have to sell for red numbers, it can quickly destabilize the bubble of present unrealized potential market value.
Anyways, im rambling.
Look for Teams in big markets (LA&NY), European expansion teams (Jags, Pats, Bucs) and historically liked franchises (GB, SEA, Saints and Broncos) to overinvest, but dont expect this trend to become the norm. All of these teams NEED to be profitable sooner than later to be able push prizes on their assets, but also TV deals etc.
Ah yes, the new COC rule I’ve been hearing about
NFL like the MLB atp😂😂😂
need to get Ballard on here and have it broken down in to "hey look" terms so we can understand.
What ever happened about taysom hills 7 year 140M extension all voidable?
Should be an incentive on building trough the draft and not FA. Like cap hits are less for players payed by the team who drafted them, and bigger for players aquired trough FA or trades. Reward good scouting and player development.
They have no big contracts from offensive lineman’s
NFL much like gaming is going pay to win now
Poor AJ lol
Sure, the bill comes due eventually for high priced contracts but if for instance a team signs a high priced QB and is still paying that "dead money" after that QB has retired it's not that big of a deal for a team to play catchup when they are back in "QB limbo" if you will, and sign a rookie QB for next to nothing while they pay off cap debt It can work out well if it comes in cycles. When a team has a good shot at a Super Bowl maybe it's the year to sign high priced players.
The mafia has entered the chat
interesting how the rams and the chiefs have opposite approaches and have both been successful in recent years.
Except the only difference is Kansas City had to trade their WR star while the Rams were able to pay big.
@@chasecampbell6496 It is all a matter of how much you are willing to screw your future to win today.
@@chasecampbell6496 KC did the right thing by trading Hill. And KC will end up having not just a better offense without Hill. But the defense has been upgraded/retooled with young players on Rookie deals. KC has just kept their window, for competing for a Superbowl. Open for the next 10yrs. The Rams are literally in a win now mode. Only their window, is only open for 2-3 more years
@@chasecampbell6496 that’s exactly what i meant by “opposite approaches”
Why would the NFL ever change this? Seems like a good system to ensure big spenders lay out frontloaded contracts to star players in an effort to build superteams. The league doesn't seem to be suffering from a parity issue and you can get a bunch of stars on one team to win a SB in a big market like LA. Why would they change anything to accommodate any potential competitive balance concerns?
They need to just use the NHLs Salary Cap System. If you pay a guy $80 million for 3 years, he should just have a $26.6 million cap hit every year for the 3 years. The cap hit changing per year, and having a cap hit during 2025 for a player who’s contract end at the end of the 2024 season is simply insane
But that mean the team is screwing themselves in 2025.
@@PeterSedesse They’ll just move that money during the 2024 season, probably by restructuring the contract or other cap shenanigans. Look at what Green Bay is doing, that cap penalty never comes
Being the last standing rams fan, i feel as tho i have the best feeling about the cap situation over anybody. Either my team gets big name free agents and keeps our good players, or theyll force em to pay and stan kroenke is gonna have to pay outta pocket for all that guaranteed money he gave out😂LOVE FREE AGENCY😂😂
Eventually those teams like the Rams, are going to be over leveraged.
Suddenly, Seattle being unable to build around Russ and go all in whilst re-signing both Russ, Bobby, and DK AAAAAND signing FAs to go for broke in 22... A trust owns the team, and I've heard Jody Allen is looking to sell the team...
I am with Ian Rapoport here. Eventually the teams that are working the cap will be bad for many years, because they will run out of cap room/space. Eternal growth is a fiction as there are finite resources on this planet.
Eventually the cap will go down and those owners and GMs who have opted to "pay the piper later" will be screwed. Is that 10yrs from the start of their folly, a la the Rams/Saints, or 20yrs?
Who honestly knows, but eventually the tab will be do. Either that is true or let's just have a true guaranteed salary cap and let the chips fall where they may.
The Fords are pretty rich with the Lions but barely pull moves. I guess we will see if they're asset rich or cash rich.
asset most likely
Does cash over cap have to be paid out of the owners pocket or is it paid through the team’s revenue?
I hope I'm not alone here, but the cap was confusing enough. These last few days talking about this loophole have really made my head hurt 🤷♂️
Well the NFL wants to save they're rating dominance in the 30 years, they will have to Ensure that the cap is back.
Other wise half the league is just going be equivalent to MLBs farmer teams that just will never have a chance
SO there is a real cap.
Ian could not explain why Drew still has dead money on the cap.
The Drew Brees situation, isn’t that just a deferred payment which counts against future cap? Or is there a better/different explanation
For a signing bonus, all the money is paid up front, but the team gets to split up and choose when that money counts against the salary cap over the duration of the deal. Pushing money into the future is having some of the cap hit be put in years after the deal is over, like how there is still cap hit in New Orleans for Brees
@@Sixsince-dd2eu right but was Drew already payed his entire salary ?
@@MontenegrinIcon He was paid his entire signing bonus up front, even though the cap hit is spread out. For his yearly salary, I'm pretty sure it isn't fully guaranteed so he would have to play at least 1 game to receive it
Cash over cap has been around since 1993.
You push money into the future where the salery cap is larger, so a 5% hit to the cap today might be a 3% hit in two years. It's a good investemt for teams in which a SB win might mean a 50% increase in revenue for the following10 years...l
I understand that a weak salary or no salary cap is great for the players. God bless them.
But why is it so hard to understand that without a salary cap what you will get is European soccer. Only a handful of teams with any hope of winning the league title? Do you think this is good for any sport?
Soccer without relegations
I wonder what would happen if Pat didn't interrupt his guests
I really miss the old setup