Everything you need to know about our cap, potential cuts and free agents.

[CRA]

If Gamble was such a sure cut, why havent they done it yet?

I would imagine the new GM is sorting through about 20 slightly different ways to "fix" this mess.

I bet currently the focus is on dealing with agents and once they know who they can restruture and have addressed.....heads then roll. Serves no real purpose to cut him today.

[Happy Panther]

Everyone keeps forgetting that you only count the top 53 contracts during the offseason when determining the salary cap.

The Panthers have $136 million in contracts but only $131 million against the cap. That doesn't include the rollover from this year. At least I don't think it does. My calculations were that with the rollover the Panthers are at about $127 million.

And it is now being reported the cap will be closer to $121.5 million.

Media keeps relying on the $136M number

What worries me most is that the Panthers are about $15 million over the 2013 projected salary cap,

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/01/11/3781095/carolina-panthers-top-priority.html

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/01/11/3781095/carolina-panthers-top-priority.html#storylink=cpy

[Happy Panther]

If Gamble was such a sure cut, why havent they done it yet?

No reason to cut anyone until the plan is figured out. I don't think you can uncut someone.

[rayzor]

I would imagine the new GM is sorting through about 20 slightly different ways to "fix" this mess.

I bet currently the focus is on dealing with agents and once they know who they can restruture and have addressed.....heads then roll. Serves no real purpose to cut him today.

yep. you don't cut anyone until you have a better option.

it's like quitting your job before you've gone out to find a better one. it just puts you behind the 8 ball and limits viable options.

[TylerVagyler]

Well, at least we aren't the only team in cap trouble....

Albert Breer ‏@AlbertBreer

10 Ravens account for $69M in 2013 cap space. And that doesn't acct for Flacco, Reed, Ellerbe, Kruger, Dickson, Pitta

[Stroupe-a-loop]

Well, at least we aren't the only team in cap trouble....

Albert Breer ‏@AlbertBreer

10 Ravens account for $69M in 2013 cap space. And that doesn't acct for Flacco, Reed, Ellerbe, Kruger, Dickson, Pitta

Well, they really timed that win well then. Apparently Bolden is willing to extend to lower his cap number otherwise they'd have to cut him.

[TylerVagyler]

Boldin also said he will retire if he is cut.

[stankowalski]

Nice job. Somebody has plenty of time on their hands it seems.

[Mage]

What you are describing above would be a definite violation of the cap. Not maybe. Definite.

If it was that easy to get around the cap, every club would be doing it.

That is exactly what I said, that it isn't allowed. Hence it not being against the salary cap.

[Mage]

yep. there's no way that would be allowed. huge violation. the team would get into a poo ton of trouble. you can not give players anything beyond what is stated in the contract.

I never said it would be allowed. I'm merely giving an example. The guy said paying for gas money affects the salary cap. It absolutely does not. Outside of the fact that no owner would bother to report that to the NFL, it doesn't go against the cap because it isn't in the contract.

What he was initial talking about was salary cap but that long article he posted was referring to team salary. Stuff like that affects that, I guess. But not salary cap.

I wasn't saying that was allowed. I was giving reasons as to why it isn't allowed. Anything paid to a player outside of the contract or special things like retirement and such do not go against the cap.

[stirs]

Is Stewarts contract equally as restrictive for us?

[Firefox]

That is all nice and all. But no, money paid outside of the contract agreed upon by the player and team does not go against the salary cap. Sure, you can count it as the players salary if you want. But it wouldn't go against the cap.

So, if Jerry Richardson paid Newton $3 million for a new house, it wouldn't go against the salary cap because it wasn't in the contract. It would just be Richardson paying his own money to Newton. If Jerry Jones paid $3 dollars to Romo to pay for gas, it would not go against the cap.

Which is why that isn't allowed or else every big market team would do that (pay more money than they are allowed) to pry players to them.

Though, re-reading your post, I hope you know I'm talking about the salary cap (which is what you said). Not a teams salary (how much the team is making). They aren't the same thing.

Well, your wrong again as usual. Perhaps you need to go read the CBA yourself. It doesn't copy & paste well.

What in the world are you talking about salary cap vs salary ? What do mean they are not the same thing? It's SALARY and it HAS A CAP.

The CBA gives the definition of salary, including that: "Salary means the compensation in money, property, investments, loans or anything else of value..."

Then you say "if Jerry Richardson paid Newton $3 million for a new house, it wouldn't go against the salary cap because it wasn't in the contract."

Well, the CBA just said salary includes property or anything else of value. Well, a new house is "property" and you even put a "value on it" .... $3 million according to you. So IF that happens it counts as "salary" and does indeed go against the "salary cap".

The CBA when finishing up what counts against the salary cap says "Any other Salary not listed above paid to players shall be included in Team Salary."

Surely your reading comprehension isn't as bad as you make it out to be. Why on earth would the CBA be talking about "salary" in the "salary cap" section if salary doesn't count against the cap ???

[Mage]

And you want to know the key thing you left out of all of that?

Salary, however, does not include benefits.

Also:

The "Team Salary" falls under the Salary Cap. Team salary includes the amount a team must pay its current or former players under their player contracts.

Key word, their contracts. If Richardson gave Newton money outside of his contract, it is not going to count against the salary cap. If every single dime given to a player affected the salary cap, why has the money Richardson gave Olsen for transportation to help his son, TJ, not affected our cap yet?

It was a benefit. Just like paying for gas would be a benefit. Just like Richardson paying for Newton's house would classify as benefits.

So no, I am not wrong. But if you'd like to continue this, go right ahead. However, you are being foolish to think Richardson buying Newton's house actually affects the football teams cap. It's a benefit. It isn't agreed upon in the contract. It doesn't affect the salary cap. Or again, as the example above, the money (how much it was) JR paid Olsen would have affected it. Which it quite obviously didn't, and quite clearly wouldn't.

[Firefox]

And you want to know the key thing you left out of all of that?

Also:

Key word, their contracts. If Richardson gave Newton money outside of his contract, it is not going to count against the salary cap. If every single dime given to a player affected the salary cap, why has the money Richardson gave Olsen for transportation to help his son, TJ, not affected our cap yet?

It was a benefit. Just like paying for gas would be a benefit. Just like Richardson paying for Newton's house would classify as benefits.

So no, I am not wrong. But if you'd like to continue this, go right ahead. However, you are being foolish to think Richardson buying Newton's house actually affects the football teams cap. It's a benefit. It isn't agreed upon in the contract. It doesn't affect the salary cap. Or again, as the example above, the money (how much it was) JR paid Olsen would have affected it. Which it quite obviously didn't, and quite clearly wouldn't.

If you would read CBA section 4(a) you would see it said "but not including Benefits". You would read the exact defination of "benefits" in Article 12, section 2. To summarize it's things like: Pension funding, group insurance, workers' comp., s.s. taxes, per diems, Gene Upshaw Health Account, "88 Benefit" (dementia), the Legacy Benefit, etc. When you say "It's a benefit. It isn't agreed upon in the contract." Do you actually believe these benefits aren't spelled out in the contract?

You would have that found other things "not in a player's contract" like drafted rookies salaries are included as of day of the draft (have they signed a contract that day ???), tenders, offer sheets (and it specifically says "until player is signed to a player contract"), grievances (you think the player is announcing his future grievance in his contract? LOL), and for about the 3rd time "Any other Salary not listed above paid to players shall be included in Team Salary".

You are just making up that money outside a contract doesn't count against the salary cap. I posted the NFL / NFLPA CBA saying it DOES. In fact it says "A player’s Salary shall also include any and all consideration received by the player or his Player Affiliate from a Club or Club Affiliate, even if such consideration is ostensibly paid to the player for services other than football playing services..."

So how 'bout you posting something to prove your point those monies don't count!

You're not worth any more of my time trying to explain it to you. Remember you are the guy saying rookies aren't included in the salary cap. Do you also not see that practice squad players are?

Have fun learning the rules of the league.