The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show significantly less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show significantly less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.
|
Jags significantly under the minimum 89 percent cash spending required by next year
|
|
The 89% is a cash spend minimum, which fully credits actual monies paid out in the year it was paid. If the Jags are truly active in free agency, for example, 100% of the signing bonuses will count against this cash spend figure (even if the signing bonus amounts are amortized over the contract length for cap purposes). Also, the penalty for not hitting the 89% cumulative 4-year spend is that the shortfall is paid out to the team's players based on a CBA formula. No draft picks are taken away or something else very punitive, in my mind.
We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!
I'm sure they've taken those timeframes into consideration.
Hurns can be extended now since he was an UDFA. Plus according to this year's calendar, you have to be under the cap by March 9th, which would make me believe the deadline for minimum spending is probably the same.
IT WAS ALWAYS THE JAGS
There are no real consequences to not reaching the limit. If they don't then all they have to do is distribute the difference among the players on the roster.
Looking to troll? Don't bother, we supply our own.
Quote:There are no real consequences to not reaching the limit. If they don't then all they have to do is distribute the difference among the players on the roster. ![[Image: tumblr_n2le2aGTJL1tvyxvwo1_500.gif]](https://45.media.tumblr.com/23f637258b7279b352126f0d9eb20c64/tumblr_n2le2aGTJL1tvyxvwo1_500.gif) “An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato
Quote:There are no real consequences to not reaching the limit. If they don't then all they have to do is distribute the difference among the players on the roster. Those two sentences are contradictory. If they don't reach the limit, they have to give out the money anyway, without getting any particular benefit for giving it out. That's a total waste of money. Money they could have used to acquire players, or to extend contracts. Gone. We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!
As far as the 89% rule goes:
Quote:As to the Jaguars and Raiders, there’s another important reality to keep in mind. The 2016 league year begins in March 2016 and end in March 2017. After Week 17 of the 2016 season, both teams will see key young players become eligible for second contracts — and both teams will have full coffers of earnings from a full season of football, including the new money from the expanded Thursday Night Football package. Whatever the deficit may be at that point, the Jaguars and Raiders can cure it with a stroke of the pen on the inevitable second contracts that Blake Bortles, Allen Robinson, and Allen Hurns and Khalil Mack and Derek Carr, respectively. <a class="bbc_url" href='http://m.nbcsports.com/content/cap-space-minimum-means-much-maximum'>http://m.nbcsports.com/content/cap-space-minimum-means-much-maximum</a> Dave got this thing figured out!
"Before you criticize a man, walk a mile in his shoes. That way, if he gets angry, he's a mile away and barefoot."
Quote:Okay, what Dave said sounds logical, however, as I understand it, by rule we cannot do contract extensions for the 2014 draft class (Blake, Telvin, Allan Robinson) until March 2017, but also by rule, we have to reach minimum spending levels by March 2017. At 12:00 AM, March 1, 2017, we get penalized, but we can't sign Blake's extension until 12:00 AM, March 1, 2017. I don't see how we can beat the clock on the penalty by extending current players. Because outside of our 2014 draft class, whose extension would use up any significant amount of cash? So you're thinking we can't even use the potential extensions for Bortles, Robinson, Linder, Telvin and Coleman to reach the cap floor in time? This is interesting if true, although it directly refutes the report mentioned in the reply directly above this one. Hurns may be in for one fat contract this offseason in lieu of just getting a first round tender RFA contract. Extensions are not, I have to think any answer will involve pricey new free agents. It is starting to look like Alex Mack will opt out, and the Jaguars are being reported as a front runner in the Von Miller sweepstakes. Landing these two with possible league record contracts will go a long ways toward reaching the floor. Hopefully other top free agents, including Miller, are not tagged giving the Jaguars a shot at them.
'02
Quote:As far as the 89% rule goes: My understanding is that players drafted in 2014 cannot sign extensions until 2017. I don't think they can accept any additional contract during the 2016 league year. And the 2016 league year is the end of the measuring period. So I don't see how Dave can extend guys like Bortles and have it count toward the 89%.
Quote:So you're thinking we can't even use the potential extensions for Bortles, Robinson, Linder, Telvin and Coleman to reach the cap floor in time? This is interesting if true, although it directly refutes the report mentioned in the reply directly above this one. There's like a 99.99% chance of Miller getting tagged. I wouldn't even consider him an option
IT WAS ALWAYS THE JAGS
We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today! Quote:My understanding is that players drafted in 2014 cannot sign extensions until 2017. I don't think they can accept any additional contract during the 2016 league year. And the 2016 league year is the end of the measuring period. So I don't see how Dave can extend guys like Bortles and have it count toward the 89%. That's correct, but these figures being bandied about are what needs to be spent to get to the cap floor. They'll find a way to make that happen long before they have to worry about the extensions for Bortles or Robinson. Hurns will probably be a beneficiary of the current situation in helping to spend some of that $28 million since he's not under the same restrictions as the two draft picks. Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9D-QD_HIfjA
"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."
Am I correct in reading this "carryover number" policy to mean we are required to spend 89% of this figure?
<b>Club: Carryover Amount</b> » Arizona Cardinals<span style="color:rgb(34,34,33);font-family:arial, verdana, helvetica;">: $3,031,663 » Atlanta Falcons: $3,905,771 » Baltimore Ravens: $1,633,944 » Buffalo Bills: $4,467,331 » Carolina Panthers: $3,731,200 » Chicago Bears: $867,589 » Cincinnati Bengals: $7,587,902 » Cleveland Browns: $20,734,144 » Dallas Cowboys: $3,571,239 » Denver Broncos: $3,300,000 » Detroit Lions: $862,191 » Green Bay Packers: $6,953,847 » Houston Texans: $1,637,055 » Indianapolis Colts: $4,950,629 » Jacksonville Jaguars : $32,774,928 » Kansas City Chiefs: $2,622,838 » Los Angeles Rams: $933,521 » Miami Dolphins: $9,137,544 » Minnesota Vikings: $2,090,409 » New England Patriots: $1,347,882 » New Orleans Saints: $1,400,000 » New York Giants: $11,193,231 » New York Jets: $2,484,216 » Oakland Raiders: $13,373,617 » Philadelphia Eagles: $7,255,362 » Pittsburgh Steelers: $3,000,327 » San Diego Chargers: $2,287,176 » San Francisco 49ers: $12,206,686 » Seattle Seahawks: $11,587 » Tampa Bay Buccaneers: $7,987,748 » Tennessee Titans: $20,783,801 » Washington Redskins: $5,837,734</span> These are the latest figures ^ according to NFLPA: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000...d-by-nflpa Caldwell must be licking his chops for this FA period to start. Quote:Am I correct in reading this "carryover number" policy to mean we are required to spend 89% of this figure? No, the carryover amount is simply what is added to the Jaguars cap space resulting from money not spent previously. The 89% figure is saying that over the past three years, including this year as in '14, '15 and '16, the Jaguars have to spend 89 percent of their cap total for those years.
'02
We show less advertisements to registered users. Accounts are free; join today!
Quote:Am I correct in reading this "carryover number" policy to mean we are required to spend 89% of this figure? You bet, agents are looking their chops as well. You better believe that the agent representatives for guys like Olivier Vernon, Malik Jackson, Eric Berry etc.. have had active discussions with their clients in regards to the teams with the most cap space, especially the up and coming teams like the Jags & Raiders. The Jags have a significant advantage over the Raiders in the terms of state income taxes.
We need better football players. We have money. Good football players want money.
Dave make it happen/rain/let the reign begin. |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 1 Guest(s) |
The Jungle is self-supported by showing advertisements via Google Adsense.
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Please consider disabling your advertisement-blocking plugin on the Jungle to help support the site and let us grow!
We also show less advertisements to registered users, so create your account to benefit from this!
Questions or concerns about this ad? Take a screenshot and comment in the thread. We do value your feedback.