NFLPA goofed again.

[darvon]

The NFLPA put a great player-friendly clause in the new CBA. That each club has to spend at least (varying by years) about 89% cash of their salarycap.

Unfortunately they goofed slightly. The should have said the club's total salary cap including rollover.

The Cincinnati Bengals have $55M in rollover of EXTRA salary cap to add to the 2013 salary cap of about 121M.

In other words for 2013 they can just buy the whole Seattle Seahawks Defense and add them in.


And the bengals aren't the only misers. Browns have $49M extra, Miami $36M, Tampa Bay $31M, Jacksonville $22M.

What is it about Ohio and Florida. They aren't even spending to SEC player salary levels....


What happens when Cin rollsover a WHOLE team of $$$$. When are the Bengal fans going to demand some spending???

[edave]

As I recall, it was considered a good idea to exclude the rollover.

Your numbers are a lot higher than the rollover numbers PFT spit out last week.

[hobbes27]

What happens when Cin rollsover a WHOLE team of $$$$. When are the Bengal fans going to demand some spending???

I'm sure Bengals fans have demanded spending and some have come to the realization that Mike Brown is a cheap SOB.

[tubbs1518]

I'm sure Bengals fans have demanded spending and some have come to the realization that Mike Brown is a cheap SOB.

Indeed sir. I do think we need to spend some money, but we also have to save some money to sign Green and Dalton after this season. Both will get big deals. Along with Atkins, Johnson, Smith and Dunlap this offseason. Hopefully Gilberry is brought back too. Same with Adam Jones.

[wxwax]

These large rollover numbers are a one-time thing, though, right?

[darvon]

Cin seems to do this perenially.

Others seem to do it once every few years.

[mikesteelnation1]

Cin seems to do this perenially.

Others seem to do it once every few years.

The "goofing" and underspending ends NOW. Starting in 2013, teams MUST spend 89% of cash towards the cap for the league years from 2013-16. No more being cheap in Ohio, Indy, and Florida. They have no choice to do so, the cba dictates it. No more "being frugal" , you now have to put your money on the barrel. 5 of those teams (Indy excluded) have to wake up and do something most of them have never been forced to do. SPEND MONEY. You can't coast, because you're spending the money either way. Even if they don't hit the minimum, they have to then break up the difference equally between the members of those teams during the '13-'16 period.

It's way more money than these teams normally spend, and now they have to, by cba mandate. Roll the cap forward as you please, but you've gotta spend the cash. That's going to slam a dagger into the additional profits these teams take from the revenue sharing coffers. Those coffers just got a lot taken out of them...

Anyone else leery about the futures of the Bengals, fins, bucs, and Jags being able to weather the spending storm and still be solvent? Given they don't sell out most games? Add the chargers, rams, and raiders, and bills to those who will struggle mightily to balance the books once this rule kicks in.

They all have to spend the money, so I guess they better hope they sell out much better than they have.

I'd expect mike brown to experience the hardest landing here.

Interesting question, but what does the league do when a team becomes insolvent based upon being FORCED to spend the money they normally wouldn't??

[packa7x]

Who do we all think Cincy grabs with that cash? Who is the most appealing FA?

[darvon]

I would have to check, but I think a club can schmear it over a 3 year avg. And they only have to pay cash 89 of the league avg, not the club avail cap. So CIN has to pay 106.

Anyone know what CIN paid in cash in 2012?


Ed note: It's a 4 year avg. With 2 4-year periods. 13-16 and 17-20

[darvon]

http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/a...shSpending.jpg