Post 6/1 designation was significantly more, over $16 million. New contract terms aren't out yet.

All you are doing then is just pushing dead cap to more years down the road.  It hasnt been reported there is a restructure yet, Rap just tweeted a couple days ago we are closing in on one.

The only one that makes sense is Cam.

---

A new broom always sweeps clean.

Post 6/1 designation was significantly more, over $16 million. New contract terms aren't out yet.

All you are doing then is just pushing dead cap to more years down the road.  It hasnt been reported there is a restructure yet, Rap just tweeted a couple days ago we are closing in on one.

That's your opinion, for what it's worth.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

All you are doing then is just pushing dead cap to more years down the road.  It hasnt been reported there is a restructure yet, Rap just tweeted a couple days ago we are closing in on one.

That's your opinion, for what it's worth.

What is my opinion?

---

That's your opinion, for what it's worth.

What is my opinion?

That it's "only" pushing it down the road. For what it's worth.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

What is my opinion?

That it's "only" pushing it down the road. For what it's worth.

Its not my opinion, thats what it is.  The extra money "saved" counts against the cap the following year.  Its just a bandaid is all it is for teams with cap issues.

---

What is my opinion?

That it's "only" pushing it down the road. For what it's worth.

Here you go

Explaining the Post June 1 Designation | Over the Cap

---

That it's "only" pushing it down the road. For what it's worth.

Its not my opinion, thats what it is.  The extra money "saved" counts against the cap the following year.  Its just a bandaid is all it is for teams with cap issues.

---

That it's "only" pushing it down the road. For what it's worth.

Here you go

Explaining the Post June 1 Designation | Over the Cap

No, it gives teams the option to have additional cap room in the current year by placing it against the cap in future years for players no longer on the team. It's the amortization of salary like the signing bonus but at the end of the contract rather than at the beginning. So, no, it's not "only" pushing money out, it's giving current year flexibility by allowing them to create rookie and seasonal cap space without having to hold that in the pre-June 1 period. There you go. A simple explanation of your opinion and why it's only an opinion, no link required.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Its not my opinion, thats what it is.  The extra money "saved" counts against the cap the following year.  Its just a bandaid is all it is for teams with cap issues.

---

Here you go

Explaining the Post June 1 Designation | Over the Cap

No, it gives teams the option to have additional cap room in the current year by placing it against the cap in future years for players no longer on the team. It's the amortization of salary like the signing bonus but at the end of the contract rather than at the beginning. So, no, it's not "only" pushing money out, it's giving current year flexibility by allowing them to create rookie and seasonal cap space without having to hold that in the pre-June 1 period. There you go. A simple explanation of your opinion and why it's only an opinion, no link required.

You are still pushing the dead cap out to the following year lol.  The money you say you are "saving" just cost you the following year.  It doesn't disappear

---

I don't consider that saving money when it's just pushed to the future lol

---

The savings of cutting Scherrf would be more than the savings of cutting Williams

---

With the restructure I can see it, he's reliable even when constantly dinged and they like what he gives in pass pro. I'd rather they move on but it's not like they kept him at that horrid number he had two days ago.

No it wouldnt.  Scherff would have been almost 15 mil in dead cap if cut and a savings of just over 9 mil.  The Williams cut is only 500k in dead cap and we save 10 mil

I'm sorry, but you are actually the one who doesn't understand the salary cap and Scherff's contract.  The 9 million figure you are quoting is AFTER factoring the dead cap.  His salary cap for this year is $24 million.  If we cut him pre-June first, it gets lowered to $15 million (aka "dead cap").  That is $9 million in additional salary cap space. However, that's not all.  The $15 million in dead cap figure you are citing includes accelerating $7.5 million from next year's cap to this year's cap.  In other words, we would save an additional $7.5 million next year over what we would otherwise pay.  It IS a total of $16.5 million in savings over the two years.  Alternatively, the Jags could opt to designate him a post-June 1st cut.  If we do that, we enjoy the entire $16.5 million in 2024, but no savings in 2025.  To summarize, if we cut him, we have two options:

Option A:

2024:  $9 million in savings
2025:  $7.5 million in savings

Option B:

2024:  $16.5 million in savings
2025:  $0 in savings

With Darious Williams, he was in the final year of his contract, so if you cut him, there was only one option:

2024:  $10 million in savings

Scherff would save us more.

I see many people get confused on the salary cap.  You have to remember that dead money is money already spent and if you spend money in the NFL, it will count against your cap at some point.  As such, it's a sunk cost.  The decision whether to keep a player comes down to the "new" money.  If we keep Scherff in 2024, the sunk cost remains.  However, in terms of new money, we now would also incur $15 million in salary, $500K in workout bonus, and assuming he plays in all games, $1 million in roster bonus.  That's $16.5 million in new money that will get added to the Jaguars' cap that wouldn't if he was cut.  I don't think he's worth $16.5 million for one year of his services.

In regards to the restructure, we'll have to wait and see.  If he agrees to a major salary cut, maybe I'm fine with it.  However, it's uncommon for players to agree to real salary cuts.  Most likely, we're just pushing some of that $16.5 million into future years.  It does help this year's cap, but only at the expense of future years and it doesn't make him any less overpaid.  Scherff should have been first on our cuts list.

---

No it wouldnt.  Scherff would have been almost 15 mil in dead cap if cut and a savings of just over 9 mil.  The Williams cut is only 500k in dead cap and we save 10 mil

I'm sorry, but you are actually the one who doesn't understand the salary cap and Scherff's contract.  The 9 million figure you are quoting is AFTER factoring the dead cap.  His salary cap for this year is $24 million.  If we cut him pre-June first, it gets lowered to $15 million (aka "dead cap").  That is $9 million in additional salary cap space. However, that's not all.  The $15 million in dead cap figure you are citing includes accelerating $7.5 million from next year's cap to this year's cap.  In other words, we would save an additional $7.5 million next year over what we would otherwise pay.  It IS a total of $16.5 million in savings over the two years.  Alternatively, the Jags could opt to designate him a post-June 1st cut.  If we do that, we enjoy the entire $16.5 million in 2024, but no savings in 2025.  To summarize, if we cut him, we have two options:

Option A:

2024:  $9 million in savings
2025:  $7.5 million in savings

Option B:

2024:  $16.5 million in savings
2025:  $0 in savings

With Darious Williams, he was in the final year of his contract, so if you cut him, there was only one option:

2024:  $10 million in savings

Scherff would save us more.

I see many people get confused on the salary cap.  You have to remember that dead money is money already spent and if you spend money in the NFL, it will count against your cap at some point.  As such, it's a sunk cost.  The decision whether to keep a player comes down to the "new" money.  If we keep Scherff in 2024, the sunk cost remains.  However, in terms of new money, we now would also incur $15 million in salary, $500K in workout bonus, and assuming he plays in all games, $1 million in roster bonus.  That's $16.5 million in new money that will get added to the Jaguars' cap that wouldn't if he was cut.  I don't think he's worth $16.5 million for one year of his services.

In regards to the restructure, we'll have to wait and see.  If he agrees to a major salary cut, maybe I'm fine with it.  However, it's uncommon for players to agree to real salary cuts.  Most likely, we're just pushing some of that $16.5 million into future years.  It does help this year's cap, but only at the expense of future years and it doesn't make him any less overpaid.  Scherff should have been first on our cuts list.

You just said exactly the post you quoted.  Scherrf is in the final year of his deal as well.

---

I'm sorry, but you are actually the one who doesn't understand the salary cap and Scherff's contract.  The 9 million figure you are quoting is AFTER factoring the dead cap.  His salary cap for this year is $24 million.  If we cut him pre-June first, it gets lowered to $15 million (aka "dead cap").  That is $9 million in additional salary cap space. However, that's not all.  The $15 million in dead cap figure you are citing includes accelerating $7.5 million from next year's cap to this year's cap.  In other words, we would save an additional $7.5 million next year over what we would otherwise pay.  It IS a total of $16.5 million in savings over the two years.  Alternatively, the Jags could opt to designate him a post-June 1st cut.  If we do that, we enjoy the entire $16.5 million in 2024, but no savings in 2025.  To summarize, if we cut him, we have two options:

Option A:

2024:  $9 million in savings
2025:  $7.5 million in savings

Option B:

2024:  $16.5 million in savings
2025:  $0 in savings

With Darious Williams, he was in the final year of his contract, so if you cut him, there was only one option:

2024:  $10 million in savings

Scherff would save us more.

I see many people get confused on the salary cap.  You have to remember that dead money is money already spent and if you spend money in the NFL, it will count against your cap at some point.  As such, it's a sunk cost.  The decision whether to keep a player comes down to the "new" money.  If we keep Scherff in 2024, the sunk cost remains.  However, in terms of new money, we now would also incur $15 million in salary, $500K in workout bonus, and assuming he plays in all games, $1 million in roster bonus.  That's $16.5 million in new money that will get added to the Jaguars' cap that wouldn't if he was cut.  I don't think he's worth $16.5 million for one year of his services.

In regards to the restructure, we'll have to wait and see.  If he agrees to a major salary cut, maybe I'm fine with it.  However, it's uncommon for players to agree to real salary cuts.  Most likely, we're just pushing some of that $16.5 million into future years.  It does help this year's cap, but only at the expense of future years and it doesn't make him any less overpaid.  Scherff should have been first on our cuts list.

You just said exactly the post you quoted.  Scherrf is in the final year of his deal as well.

And that saves you the $15 million he was to be paid this year, which is the money we saved not paying Williams this year. When they book the dead cap is immaterial to that as both I and Duke are telling you. Eat it now or eart it later, they're eating that.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

https://twitter.com/_John_Shipley/status...38035?s=20

---

https://twitter.com/_John_Shipley/status...38035?s=20

Anti-Baalke crowd in shambles right now.

---

https://twitter.com/_John_Shipley/status...38035?s=20

Anti-Baalke crowd in shambles right now.

I've not had issues with his work in free agency, his strength has always been in pro personnel. Where he struggles is the more important (imo) draft, that's where he needs the help.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Williams was right. He got cut. However they did him a favor cutting him early so he could find a home prior to FA beginning. #respect

---

A new broom always sweeps clean.

Anti-Baalke crowd in shambles right now.

I've not had issues with his work in free agency, his strength has always been in pro personnel. Where he struggles is the more important (imo) draft, that's where he needs the help.

Exactly. 

"In shambles" ... over the team getting better? Oh no!! Whatever will I do! I shall clutch my pearls and poo poo anything he does. Such a weird perspective, as if criticizing one aspect of someone is a complete condemnation.

---

https://twitter.com/_John_Shipley/status...38035?s=20

Anti-Baalke crowd in shambles right now.

Baalke still sucks at drafting. If we could just push Baalke into handling FA while someone else handles the draft I'd be all for it.

---