1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
  2. Big Announcement Coming for 2015 Football Season!!

    Be on the look out for a big Packer Forum announcement when the schedule is released. Full details coming soon...

Future salary cap situation

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by captainWIMM, Apr 12, 2014.

  1. NOMOFO

    NOMOFO Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2014
    Messages:
    1,105
    Ratings:
    +394
    I just think these are all giant leaps you are taking. I'm fine with using some logic and looking more closely at all of the facts... but ... c'mon. Had we been healthy all year, had so many starters not gone down and/or been playing hurt, it's really not all that hard to understand that the defense would have been a hell of a lot more like they were in the first half of the year than the second. Again...with all of the real issues and question marks about the team... why the need to try so hard to make certain things look worse than they are? I really don't get that.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    4,873
    Ratings:
    +2,043
    Absolutely agree that injuries played a huge part in the defense not playing well in the second half of the season. The pass defense wasn´t great all year though.

    I started this thread to point out that the team doesn´t have as much cap space as many of you think, there was no intention to make things look worse than they are, just to present some facts. IMO a lot of you guys make up their opinion because of things that happened in the past, trying to make things look better than they are while ignoring facts that are provided by someone else.
     
  3. NOMOFO

    NOMOFO Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2014
    Messages:
    1,105
    Ratings:
    +394

    Andrew Brandt was on some sports talk show a few months ago talking about the NFL cap. He mentioned by name Ted and a few others around the NFL. It was a great interview. He said point blank..."Look, these guys really know what they're doing and they have a much more detailed plan than fans will ever know".

    This is absolutely no different than any management position in that people always question management without having a fraction of the facts.

    So, fine...OK... the Packers don't "have as much cap space as many think". Not sure what most think, but...OK. All I know is that I follow spending and cap issues pretty closely in the NFL... and even with some bumps in the road and some less than ideal signings, Thompson has not shown any signs of taking the team down the wrong road over time. It's not blind faith. It's applying common sense logic.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    4,873
    Ratings:
    +2,043
    I would agree if this quote would be about player evaluation, but understanding the salary cap isn´t that hard and it´s possible for fans to analyse a team´s current and future cap situation.

    Well, so let me ask you a question. It´s a fact the Packers have $118 million in cap space already invested in the 2015 squad (without the Flynn deal as no details are currently known). According to some reports the cap is expected to go up to $140 million for next season. With the Packers being able to roll over approximately $5 million from this season they could start next offseason somewhere close to $27 million in cap space.

    That sounds like a lot of money, but $10 million of it will go towards draft picks, practice squad guys and inury replacements, leaving the Packers with $17 million to work with. This means that re-signing Nelson, Cobb and Bulaga will eat up nearly all of the available cap space and the team would have to release some players (which normally doesn´t improve the team) if they want to go in a different direction during next offseason.

    So, don´t you think this sounds like the cap situation could be more tense next season than it has been in years???
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. Carl

    Carl Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2013
    Messages:
    1,610
    Ratings:
    +900
    Percentage wise, Rodgers will take up less cap space in future seasons than they do now.

    Rodgers:
    13.2% this season
    12.6 to 13.0% in 2015 (cap $140-145 million)
    12% in 2016.

    Clay's will increase, but only slightly.
    Clay:
    8.2% this season
    8.8 - 9.1 in 2015
    8.6 in 2016

    In reality, with the increasing cap, their cap numbers are either decreasing or only slightly increasing.

    To compare if the contracts were not backloaded as you've suggested, Rodgers would have been 14.3 - 15.7% of last years cap and Clay would have been 8.9 - 11.2 of last years cap (using their 2014, 2015, and 2016 cap hits).

    Plus, both contracts only have a significant jump for one season (this offseason, could be a reason why TT left so much space for this offseason) and then increase slowly the rest of the way, which can be accounted for.


    It's easy to look at a stat or two and say that a defense was good or bad at certain time. The bottom line is the month before Rodgers injury, the team was very good. They beat up three not good teams and beat the Ravens on the road. Rodgers alone does not attribute to how well the team was playing. You could argue that winning against the bad teams doesn't mean much, but good teams dominate those games, which is what the Packers did.

    Also, are you trying to say we don't have as much money as we think or trying to say we will have cap issues? Seem to be switching.

    Other reports say a cap of $ 145 million Having $17 million to $25 million in space is not a problem, even with free agents to resign. Say they have $17 million and resign those three and use most of it, you've already accounted for everything they'd need in the $17 million. What else would they even need the money for?

    Besides, as I've shown above, back loading a contract can work in favor of a team and they could do the same for Nelson, Cobb, and Bulaga and not use all $17 million.

    Finally, it's also a fact that many of the guys who contribute to the $118 million will not make the team and be replaced with younger, cheaper guys. The money on the cap is for SIXTY EIGHT PLAYERS. More than a few of these of these guys won't make the team. With at least 9 more draft picks for a total of at least 77, even with IR and the practice squad, there are nowhere near enough room roster spots. Just bringing the team down to the required roster size will create more room.
     
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2014
  6. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    4,873
    Ratings:
    +2,043
    Nice job to withhold information that you don´t want to share. While the numbers you posted are correct, it´s also worth mentioning that Rodgers only account for 9.8% and Matthews for only 5.5% of the cap last season. The huge increase in their cap hits this season oddly will go hand in hand with the Packers not being able to roll over a huge amount of cap space into next season.

    While the percentage would have higher last year if the contracts would not have been backloaded those numbers would have decreased over the rest of their contracts, which IMO would have made a lot of sense as nobody expects one of them to be released.

    I think the Packers are headed towards some issues with the cap although a lot of people don´t believe that as they think the team has way more cap space available.

    There are some other guys becoming free agents after next season as well and maybe the Packers want to bring back some of them, could be hard though without any cap space.


    Backloading another three huge contracts next offseason would lead to serious cap issue by 2016.

    The current cap number is for the top 51 contracts, not for all players currently on the roster, so this number will be even higher by the start of the regular season.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,705
    Ratings:
    +2,127
    We'll also have to pay or replace Tramon Williams. #2 cover corners don't come cheap, House has not proven himself to be heir apparent, and Heyward and Hyde are slot/safety types.

    Raji will be gone or need to be resigned; maybe Flynn too will need to be replaced with another vet backup...that's two more chunks of change not included in the $118 mil cap space without any clear replacements on the bench.

    We should be looking at drafting a WR, a cover corner and a NT in the mid-to-upper rounds.

    2014 is a fish-or-cut-bait year for all the accumulated youth on this roster. If we don't see the step forward from guys like Perry, Boyd, House, Barrington, Tretter, Hyde and Burnett, or unless we see several impactful rookies step over them to starting caliber for 2015, we'll still be relying on crappy Divisional competition to stay in the playoff hunt.
     
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2014
  8. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,705
    Ratings:
    +2,127
    Indeed. Maybe some folks will start to get the gist of my repeated assertion over the last few months that we won't be able to sign both Nelson and Cobb, with Nelson being the odd man out as he hits age 30.
     
  9. Carl

    Carl Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2013
    Messages:
    1,610
    Ratings:
    +900
    I wasn't withholding information. I just calculated those numbers. My point about Rodgers and Matthews was that they have the same or more cap hit now as they will in upcoming seasons and as of right now, there are no cap issues. The can have this big, increasing contracts without any problems.


    K. Thanks.

    As I just pointed out, the two big contracts right now on their roster will not be leading to any serious cap issues by themselves as again, they have them now without issues. Just backloading by itself is not a bad thing when the cap is going up and the future cap hit will be about the same or less.

    My bad. I thought it included everyone.
     
  10. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    4,873
    Ratings:
    +2,043
    Don´t forget that Boykin will be a free agent after next season as well (though a restricted one). That means Myles White is the only WR currently under contract for 2015 with at least one career reception.
     
  11. Carl

    Carl Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2013
    Messages:
    1,610
    Ratings:
    +900
    Not being able to resign all the talent isn't a cap issue. It's how the NFL works.
     
  12. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,705
    Ratings:
    +2,127
    While I like Boykin as a #3 (which gets a lot of work in this offense) and White as a stretch-the-field option, I don't see either as a bonafide #2, especially without a Finley-like threat at TE.

    I suppose we could go the New England route and have Cobb in the slot and a bunch of "just guys" playing the other spots. Not.
     
  13. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    4,873
    Ratings:
    +2,043
    It´s fine to backload one or two contracts, but if a team does it a lot it will lead to cap issues, especially if the biggest increase occurs in the second year.
     
  14. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,705
    Ratings:
    +2,127
    Yeah, so? Then you agree with me that Nelson's re-signing should be considered in doubt? You'd be the first in these pages.

    What is also a truism is draftees are dirt cheap relatively speaking through their rookie contracts. If you go 3 or 4 years with B- or worse drafts, as I would judge these last 3 drafts, there's not a lot of hope in staying at the top of the heap.

    That's why those aforementioned guys need to step up and make those draft grades subject to revision.
     
  15. Carl

    Carl Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2013
    Messages:
    1,610
    Ratings:
    +900
    Not saying it's in doubt. I think TT will find a way to keep him. He's got a plan to keep the cap healthy and I'd bet Jordy is a part of it.

    Just saying that if they don't resign a talented player, that doesn't mean they have cap issues (like Captain seems to think). No NFL team can keep every body.

    With Lacy, Hyde, Bahktiari, and Boyd making some late season impact, I have to completely disagree that last year's class is a B- at best. I'm not going to dig into the rest of the league, but I'd bet it was one of the best classes in terms of immediate impact.
     
  16. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,705
    Ratings:
    +2,127
    Nobody thought we'd let Jennings go when I predicted that a year in advance; nobody thought we'd pass on a big contract for Raji when I predicted that a year in advance. So, while your argument is based on your faith in Thompson, mine shall be based on the players and the numbers vis a vis Nelson.

    You obviously have a higher opinion of Boyd and Bahktiari than I do. While Bahktiari performed admirably for a rookie LT, a position many 1st. round rookie tackles are not cast into, objectively his performance was below the NFL average for the position. Like the other aforementioned need-to-step-up guys, without progress he'll end up being a disappointment. As for Boyd, I've not seen the motor or the flash plays. My grade stands for now.
     
  17. NOMOFO

    NOMOFO Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2014
    Messages:
    1,105
    Ratings:
    +394
    Yes...I think "the cap situation could be more tense next season than it has been in years". Would not disagree with that. I'm sure however that Ted Thompson has way more of a plan than you can even think of.

    It's just a tad bit annoying, to say the least, that we went from Ted being an idiot for never spending, right into this Ted is an idiot for spending too much! Don't we have at least some grace period in between that we can enjoy?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  18. Carl

    Carl Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2013
    Messages:
    1,610
    Ratings:
    +900
    I didn't give my rational behind keeping Jordy. I just said I bet he'll be back. The rational is because the depth behind him is not near the level it was behind Jennings and therefore, he's more meaningful to this offense. Also, he's older and although very good, I don't see him getting a huge contract in free agency due to his age.

    I'm assuming the players and numbers justifications are posted above as I can't say you predicting two other contract situations correctly stands as any good at all in an argument.

    We can disagree on the rookie class.
     
  19. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,705
    Ratings:
    +2,127
    I agreed with the substance of CaptainWIMM's take on the numbers. I don't see any reason to repeat them.

    Depth is surely lacking at the WR position sans Nelson. That's why expect a WR to be taken in the first 2 rounds, 3rd. at the latest.

    As for predictions, while past performance is no guarantee of future returns as they say in the financial world, it's better than having made no successful predictions at all. "Thompson will do what Thompson does" doesn't count.

    Here's another prediction for you: we will not be picking a safety in the first round for the reasons stated above.
     
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2014
  20. HardRightEdge

    HardRightEdge Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2012
    Messages:
    4,705
    Ratings:
    +2,127
    I trust that's the royal "we".
     
  21. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    4,873
    Ratings:
    +2,043
    This is the one thing about Thompson fans that I will never understand. Pointing out a problem the Packers could face over the next few years doesn´t mean that I think Thompson is an idiot (I´ve never said any in that direction in the entire thread). I´m tired of the people complaining about every move he makes or doesn´t do as well, but you have to understand he isn´t right all the time and it´s fine to criticize him when someone has a valid point.
     
  22. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    4,873
    Ratings:
    +2,043
    Maybe you should try using rational thinking insteading of trusting what you think just for once. Greg Jennings was four months younger than Jordy will be next offseason and got a five-year, $45 million deal after missing 11 games over the last two season with the Packers because of multiple injuries. So if Nelson puts up only decent numbers next season I expect him to sign a huge contract next offseason.
     
  23. Carl

    Carl Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2013
    Messages:
    1,610
    Ratings:
    +900
    I clearly used age as rational... I've also backed up everything else I've said in this topic.

    Just because you disagree doesn't mean I didn't use rational.


    Enviado desde mi iPhone con Tapatalk
     
  24. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    4,873
    Ratings:
    +2,043
    If that´s the case, would you please take the time to explain why you don´t think Nelson will receive a contract close to the one Jennings signed last year???
     
  25. Carl

    Carl Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2013
    Messages:
    1,610
    Ratings:
    +900
    I was thinking Jordy will be a few years older than Jennings at the time. Just looked it up though and that's not the case, so yeah he could get a similar contract.


    Enviado desde mi iPhone con Tapatalk
     

Share This Page