Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

Quote:I hope you don't mean that just because the cap is going up then its okay to pay Marcedes what we are. His contract is still ridiculous and I hope we can upgrade him in the draft, hopefully with Troy Niklas. Then we can cut/ trade him shortly after or sometime during the upcoming season prior to the deadline. 

Hey if we got to have a minimum average, unless you advocate overspending on other 'okay' free agents we should just keep our decent, but overpaid guys that will come off the books soon enough. I would anticipate with the cap being 6 million more than expected that less of the premium free agents make it out.

 

I don't want to have to overpay a bunch of new guys with longer contracts just cause we need to hit a average. What I mean is that Poz and Lewis contracts end sooner than almost any player we would have to (presumably) overpay now (d/t lack of free agent talent being available). This means in a couple years when some of our actual good rookie contracts are up (also presumably from the 2013 draft and on, cause all the Gene years have almost no one whose gonna break the bank), we will have money to pay them. 

 

I think the minimum spending clause makes the NFL now kind of like the NBA where you have to space out where and when you want to have money, rather than dealing with salaries as much. Its not a logical model, but it is the one that I believe the NFL is creating. We do not need extra cash this offseason. We have basically no one to resign (Henne), and are no where near even the 89%. So why make them restructure?

 

Also consider the average minimum spending. If we are taking the average of the years this year we are somewhere at 55% cap usage going into the season. I got that from 73 million on the rolls and a project 132 million cap. So the question is If we are taking the average of 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016 what would we have to average to even be at 89% over those 4 years, if you have one year with a 55%? Were we at 89% last year? I don't think so (I think we were less), but lets pretend.

 

(89 + 55 + x + x)/4 = 89

(144+ 2x)/4 = 89

144 + 2x = 356

2x =  212

x = 106 %

 

So we would have to average 106% of the cap over both 2015 and 2016. If you can't spend over the cap, it is impossible to average that amount. So we have to sign players to even get this years number up to an area that would even be possible to average 89% over 4 years. You can do that a couple ways, but the important priorities for us is this:

 

1. We want to be above the minimum

2. We want to be able to retain our actual good players when their contract ends

3. We would presumably start needing that space next year.

 

So what do you do when you are in the year before you really needing the money? Do you make your old overpriced signings whose contract expire in a year or two reduce their salary so you have even more cap room?  No, you need that space next year (maybe) not this year.

 

What will you have to do anyway? Go out and pay some players to get another 20 million on the cap, so you don't have to overpay everyone next year to have a chance at making the average (and consequently sabotaging yourself in the future when you need the space for actual important players).

 

Feel free to add more accurate (like our actual payroll right now or our actual percentage use last year), but the general idea holds out. We have to balence spending to the minimium limit, while maintaining space for our new players. This will be a GM's most important role in the future, and I am sure that it will actually end up with a stronger free agency in another 4 years, cause some teams will botch it for sure (Redskins, Cowboys, prob Raiders).

 

And I guess the most important question is: What happens if you don't make the minimum average?

Quote:Hey if we got to have a minimum average, unless you advocate overspending on other 'okay' free agents we should just keep our decent, but overpaid guys that will come off the books soon enough. I would anticipate with the cap being 6 million more than expected that less of the premium free agents make it out.

 

I don't want to have to overpay a bunch of new guys with longer contracts just cause we need to hit a average. What I mean is that Poz and Lewis contracts end sooner than almost any player we would have to (presumably) overpay now (d/t lack of free agent talent being available). This means in a couple years when some of our actual good rookie contracts are up (also presumably from the 2013 draft and on, cause all the Gene years have almost no one whose gonna break the bank), we will have money to pay them. 

 

I think the minimum spending clause makes the NFL now kind of like the NBA where you have to space out where and when you want to have money, rather than dealing with salaries as much. Its not a logical model, but it is the one that I believe the NFL is creating. We do not need extra cash this offseason. We have basically no one to resign (Henne), and are no where near even the 89%. So why make them restructure?

 

Also consider the average minimum spending. If we are taking the average of the years this year we are somewhere at 55% cap usage going into the season. I got that from 73 million on the rolls and a project 132 million cap. So the question is If we are taking the average of 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016 what would we have to average to even be at 89% over those 4 years, if you have one year with a 55%? Were we at 89% last year? I don't think so (I think we were less), but lets pretend.

 

(89 + 55 + x + x)/4 = 89

(144+ 2x)/4 = 89

144 + 2x = 356

2x =  212

x = 106 %

 

So we would have to average 106% of the cap over both 2015 and 2016. If you can't spend over the cap, it is impossible to average that amount. So we have to sign players to even get this years number up to an area that would even be possible to average 89% over 4 years. You can do that a couple ways, but the important priorities for us is this:

 

1. We want to be above the minimum

2. We want to be able to retain our actual good players when their contract ends

3. We would presumably start needing that space next year.

 

So what do you do when you are in the year before you really needing the money? Do you make your old overpriced signings whose contract expire in a year or two reduce their salary so you have even more cap room?  No, you need that space next year (maybe) not this year.

 

What will you have to do anyway? Go out and pay some players to get another 20 million on the cap, so you don't have to overpay everyone next year to have a chance at making the average (and consequently sabotaging yourself in the future when you need the space for actual important players).

 

Feel free to add more accurate (like our actual payroll right now or our actual percentage use last year), but the general idea holds out. We have to balence spending to the minimium limit, while maintaining space for our new players. This will be a GM's most important role in the future, and I am sure that it will actually end up with a stronger free agency in another 4 years, cause some teams will botch it for sure (Redskins, Cowboys, prob Raiders).

 

And I guess the most important question is: What happens if you don't make the minimum average?

 

You only need to hit that 89% number as a 4 year average - not necessarily every year.....and I read somewhere its not even that big of a deal if a team doesn't hit the threshold....they get fined or somthing, but the fine isn't all that big of a deal. 

Quote:You only need to hit that 89% number as a 4 year average - not necessarily every year.....and I read somewhere its not even that big of a deal if a team doesn't hit the threshold....they get fined or somthing, but the fine isn't all that big of a deal. 

 

I explained in my post how it would be impossible for us to hit it as a 4 year average with our current payroll, we would need at least 12% more cap usage. The underlined portion is the important part tho, if all we get is a small fine, who cares about the average. A link on the subject would be nice.

Quote:I explained in my post how it would be impossible for us to hit it as a 4 year average with our current payroll, we would need at least 12% more cap usage. The underlined portion is the important part tho, if all we get is a small fine, who cares about the average. A link on the subject would be nice.

 

I'll try to find it, I read it yesterday or the day before....believe me I was surprised too, based on what we assumed previously - (meaning I thought it was to be a bigger deal if teams didn't hit that 89% number) But yeah, when I read it, it claimed no draft pick loss or anything like that, just a fine. 

One source "Another aspect of the spending minimums that seems to go unnoticed, though, is the lack of penalty for not paying the players. The union got destroyed in their negotiations and to me this was just another prime example of a terrible deal. According to the CBA the penalty for being under the limit is to simply post pay what you owe sometime before September 15, 2017 for the current period. Maybe there is some side agreement about fines or losses of draft picks, but as specified in the CBA that doesn’t seem to be the case. You just pay back what you owe."

 

http://nyjetscap.com/2013_Articles/minimumcash.html

 

Not the clearest but its something.

 

 

I suppose the question would be pay to who? (NFL, NFLPA, etc)

And I would rather still use it on guys who were playing for me if thats the case.

 

If my understanding is correct then yeah, Poz and Lewis should restructure then, unless the money goes back into the big nfl pot, in which case you just leave them alone.

Quote:One source "Another aspect of the spending minimums that seems to go unnoticed, though, is the lack of penalty for not paying the players. The union got destroyed in their negotiations and to me this was just another prime example of a terrible deal. According to the CBA the penalty for being under the limit is to simply post pay what you owe sometime before September 15, 2017 for the current period. Maybe there is some side agreement about fines or losses of draft picks, but as specified in the CBA that doesn’t seem to be the case. You just pay back what you owe."

 

http://nyjetscap.com/2013_Articles/minimumcash.html

 

Not the clearest but its something.

 

 

I suppose the question would be pay to who? (NFL, NFLPA, etc)

And I would rather still use it on guys who were playing for me if thats the case.

 

If my understanding is correct then yeah, Poz and Lewis should restructure then, unless the money goes back into the big nfl pot, in which case you just leave them alone.

 

 

Nice find!....That is similar to what I had read as well. 

As I understood it, you pay our your roster whatever you need to in order to hit the 89% floor.


I.e. If you're at 87% you pay your players a roster bonus (?) that makes your figures hit 89%.

Quote:As I understood it, you pay our your roster whatever you need to in order to hit the 89% floor.


I.e. If you're at 87% you pay your players a roster bonus (?) that makes your figures hit 89%.

Yep this is what it is. No fine or draft pick loss or anything. Extremely minor.

Its just wasting money, so im sure Dave wont allow it to happen. Were going to sign probably two day 1 FAs then a couple contracts similar to last year. That + the draft picks will probably leave us around 80% of the 2014. This allows us to spend big the next 2 years when the roster is more ready to contend ala SEA.