Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

We are over the cap


Captain Morgan
 Share

Recommended Posts

Morgan is in a tough spot and I don’t envy him. Tough owner combined with impatient fans and the fans lack of patience is warranted given that we are likely on our 3rd rebuild in 5 years. 
 

Morgan/Beane’s playbook in Buffalo was to free up cap space and aggressively go after players in free agency and especially on the OL and DL. So far we’ve seen this already on the OL. 

Edited by jtm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Jackie Lee said:

 

This should've shaved ~$1.69m off the 2024 cap number, so another ~$4.48m to go. 

They can shave another ~$2.1m by restructuring Dalton (he already has 3 void years on his deal to spread the proration over). After that, the best moves to make IMO would be either restructuring Corbett (saving ~$3.42m) or by extending Hubbard (since it's pretty much a given Sanders will be cut after the season) and Pineiro.

Edited by UNCrules2187
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Extending years of a player near retirement is something I looked at. I did that without really understanding what voidable years are and still don't have that.

What I found though, was a retirement is the same as a cut, cap wise. You take it all that year or spread the dead over 2 years with a post June 1st designation. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, strato said:

Extending years of a player near retirement is something I looked at. I did that without really understanding what voidable years are and still don't have that.

What I found though, was a retirement is the same as a cut, cap wise. You take it all that year or spread the dead over 2 years with a post June 1st designation. 

 

Void years are basically dummy years on a contract for the purposes of spreading out the guaranteed money/signing bonus on the cap. For example, Dalton signed a 2-year, $10m deal last offseason with a $4m signing bonus. The deal was structured as a 5-year contract with 3 voided years tacked on the end to spread out the $4m signing bonus over 5 years rather than over 2 years.

edit: here's an explainer - https://overthecap.com/creating-cap-space-by-extending-players-with-void-years

Edited by UNCrules2187
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, UNCrules2187 said:

This should've shaved ~$1.69m off the 2024 cap number, so another ~$4.48m to go. 

They can shave another ~$2.1m by restructuring Dalton (he already has 3 void years on his deal to spread the proration over). After that, the best moves to make IMO would be either restructuring Corbett (saving ~$3.42m) or by extending Hubbard (since it's pretty much a given Sanders will be cut after the season) and Pineiro.

If we extend Chubba I'll lose the benefit of doubt I've been giving this new front office

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, UNCrules2187 said:

Void years are basically dummy years on a contract for the purposes of spreading out the guaranteed money/signing bonus on the cap. For example, Dalton signed a 2-year, $10m deal last offseason with a $4m signing bonus. The deal was structured as a 5-year contract with 3 voided years tacked on the end to spread out the $4m signing bonus over 5 years rather than over 2 years.

It's just kicking the can, basically. Accounting loophole. 

But the cap hits will keep coming. The Saints were exceptional at this for a long time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, UNCrules2187 said:

Void years are basically dummy years on a contract for the purposes of spreading out the guaranteed money/signing bonus on the cap. For example, Dalton signed a 2-year, $10m deal last offseason with a $4m signing bonus. The deal was structured as a 5-year contract with 3 voided years tacked on the end to spread out the $4m signing bonus over 5 years rather than over 2 years.

Thank you. So how does that reconcile with a cut or release policy that allows a single hit, or splitting it over two years? I see that as going like: 

4 million over 5 years is what they structured, right? So 800k per. If he retires next year then he has 2.4 million to account for. I believe that would have to all go on the table. So take a 2.4 mil hit one time, or 1.2 mil two times. 

Barry Sanders, I read somewhere, had to give signing bonus money back when he retired early. 

The moral is, you can get some relief doing that if the player performs at your acceptable level for two seasons, and don't make those voidable years so heavy that you don't like the bill if they retire. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I see Moton  being an effective RT for another 3-4 years.  If you extend him for 2 years, you should be able to cover costs.  He is only guaranteed (through 2025) what he has already been paid in signing bonus.  So in terms of new guaranteed money with the Panthers, that number is only $3m starting this year, $0 next year.  I think we could drop his salary to $22m and guarantee most of it through 2027, when he is 33-34 years old. That would increase his guaranteed money from $3m to about $40m, add 2 years, and save the Panthers about $8m per for 2024 and 2025.  I normally do not get into the tall grass with money etc. because I do not know enough about it, but this seems like an offer a 30-year might consider, especially if he wants more security and to retire a Panther.

Why Moton?  He is pretty dependable and you can count on his professionalism and consistency--like Ryan Kalil when we kept reworking his deal

 

 

Edited by MHS831
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, strato said:

Thank you. So how does that reconcile with a cut or release policy that allows a single hit, or splitting it over two years? I see that as going like: 

4 million over 5 years is what they structured, right? So 800k per. If he retires next year then he has 2.4 million to account for. I believe that would have to all go on the table. So take a 2.4 mil hit one time, or 1.2 mil two times. 

Barry Sanders, I read somewhere, had to give signing bonus money back when he retired early. 

The moral is, you can get some relief doing that if the player performs at your acceptable level for two seasons, and don't make those voidable years so heavy that you don't like the bill if they retire. 

When you get up to the void year, you either have to extend the player and replace the void years with real years, or (more commonly), the contract automatically voids and the entire remaining cap charge accelerates onto the cap the year the contract voids. So in the Dalton example, his contract is set to void after the season, and the remaining amount of the prorated bonus ($2.9m) will hit the 2025 cap. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MHS831 said:

 I see Moton  being an effective RT for another 3-4 years.  If you extend him for 2 years, you should be able to cover costs.  He is only guaranteed (through 2025) what he has already been paid in signing bonus.  So in terms of new guaranteed money with the Panthers, that number is only $3m starting this year, $0 next year.  I think we could drop his salary to $22m and guarantee most of it through 2027, when he is 33-34 years old. That would increase his guaranteed money from $3m to about $40m, add 2 years, and save the Panthers about $8m per for 2024 and 2025.  I normally do not get into the tall grass with money etc. because I do not know enough about it, but this seems like an offer a 30-year might consider, especially if he wants more security and to retire a Panther.

 

 

 

Even if he was to agree to that, and I seriously have my doubts, maybe the panthers dont want to pay TM $22 million per season.  And adding the guaranteed aspect seems insane.    Moton is an aging slightly above avg RT that is currently being paid way too much all things considered.  Like we said earlier, the front offices actions seem to dictate that they are just going to bite the bullet this year and re-access next off season where they have more options.  But I can promise you morgan and tillis do not want to give him a guaranteed deal for the next 3 years.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right, UNCrules.. okay.Pretty much what I said.

I thought about playing some kind of game like that with a retiring guy's deal. But it doesn't offer a lot.

Maybe a guy we wouldn't be keeping after next year (Sanders ?).

Edited by strato
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, strato said:

Right, okay.Pretty much what I said.

I thought about playing some kind of game like that with a retiring guy's deal. But it doesn't offer a lot.

Maybe a guy we wouldn't be keeping after next year (Sanders ?).

Sanders we're kinda stuck with this year unless we could trade him. Next year we just cut his ass post June 1 and save almost $7M. No need for any funny business w that one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Not one single pick that is asking me why we drafted a guy in the first place. It was a guy we needed and/or a guy that had certain traits making them stand out. Best of all, I feel everyone we drafted are capable of stepping onto the field this year and have a meaningful role (even Kuwatch on special teams). Obviously, nothing is guaranteed but I'm not seeing any huge flags on guys because they're risky projects or massive overreaches.
    • Here is how Morgan is strategic-He re-signs Scott because he was not going S in round 1--he had the chance, and he did not.  He saw the top of the draft at T and knew none of them would be ready to start day 1, so he signs a veteran to a one-year deal, giving his tackle selection a chance to learn and prepare for what might be LT or RT.  Those two moves suggested, perhaps ironically because they contradict each other, what he was going to do, based on the talent pool.  He never brought in a Robinson replacement at DE/NT, and then moves up to draft one.   I almost wonder if the intent was to draft DT/DE all along at some point, maybe with a trade back, but then Freeling dropped to them.   Of course, we felt that they were looking WR, and wonder if the plan was to draft a WR in round 2 if you traded back in round 1.  However, when Freeling was there, the trade back fell apart.  Then we traded up for Hunter.  We could stick with XL and hope Metchie steps up, so we sat still in round three and took Brazell II, a 1000 yard speedster and perfect Z WR.  What a break. At that time, CB and Center were our biggest needs, and with several possible centers on the board and a good fit for our defense at CB, we grabbed Will Lee III.  Lee and Thornton have people in front of them, but I think Morgan knew we needed a guy who can play the outside and press--and probably step in as Jackson's replacement in 2027.    After making trades to get back into the fifth round, where we grabbed one of the best centers in the draft.  This is significant because we signed Fortner to a one-year deal; maybe Morgan saw what some of us saw--the center position is strong in this draft--on day 3, and day 3 players need a year, in most cases.  Moments later, a safety they had been talking to whose skill set matched what we are looking for in a FS.  As stated, Scott was signed,  but the fact that the Panthers were talking to Wheatley and not Theiemann means that they might have known they were not going FS early, but would need a developmental FS later--which explains why we signed Scott.  So if you pay attention to the one-year, vet deals, you can tell where we planned to sign later-round, developmental players.  What positions did we draft early that did not have 1-year veterans signed in front of them:  DL (Hunter) and WR (I don't count Metchie because I count starting-level players). I would not be surprised to learn later that the plan was DT and WR in rounds 1 and 2--then Freeling fell.  Notice that Freeling--from Mt Pleasant SC, did not come in for a visit.  Most of the other OT candidates had short arms or were certain to be gone. I don't think Freeling was in their plans.  I think a trade back and Hunter and maybe Boston was the vision.  I am guessing that CB was also high on their list.   So in this draft, we got 
    • This is one area I think that is not getting enough exposure in the midst of all the optimism. I like Chuba a great deal from a personal standpoint but he has largely proven nothing on a consistent basis yet. He's had the one season of production but before that most people pegged us as moving on. And last year injuries or not he just did not have that juice. The rest of the guys are completely unproven. I don't see anyone among the group having a game or a handful of games worth of high level production the way Rico Dowdle did last year. And yeah he dropped off and yeah he got an attitude about our incompetent handling of the touches which was honestly justified on his part and he moved on but he did legitimately save our season. That's what it is going to take to seize control of the NFC South. We all know that we will not be passing all over defenses. It is what it is. So who amongst this RB group is capable of doing that? And if we are struggling to run the ball AND pass are we going to revert to making excuses for our coach and QB again? That is definitely getting old.
×
×
  • Create New...