Cap Space-7 Teams in Best Shape-Why are we not on this list?

[loudnproudcolt]

Just read an interesting article from CBS which profiles the 7 teams with the most cap space to spend the off year when it comes to free agency. We have discussed this before, I know Over The Cap has us at 32M under the cap, plus many on this forum have said we have an additional 14M I believe was the figure, which we did not use that will roll over to next year. I seem to remember the number most people had was around 45M before cuts are made. Is this agent wrong or have our calculations been wrong. The only think I can figure is he has Seattle at 7 and we would be just a little under that, but OTC has us at 32.4M without rollover. Please a little help on why we are not on this list?

 

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24900492/agents-take-seven-nfl-teams-with-cash-to-burn-in-free-agency

[Larry Horseman]

I wondered the same thing when I read it this morning. I think the Colts will have ~ $9.7 mill in rollover. Total 2015 Cap space is currently projected at about $31 million on Spotrak...little higher on OTC (and more if you only count the top 51). 

 

From what I can tell, the Bucs should also be on the list. 

 

That said, perhaps it is these factors that dropped the Colts below his threshold: 

 

"Here's a look at the seven teams projected to have at least $30 million of cap space in 2015 assuming the salary cap comes in at $142 million. Unlike most projections of cap room (which usually only include carry over amounts), the fourth-year proven performance escalators earned by third through seventh round picks under the 2011 Collective Bargaining Agreement's rookie wage scale, tenders for restricted free agents and exclusive rights players with expiring contracts, voidable contract years and futures contracts for practice squad players are taken into account to give a more complete picture. These projections include 51 players unless noted otherwise."

[loudnproudcolt]

I really did not notice it too much, since he said the escalators are not too much. I did not notice also he does not take into account rollover from the previous year. Regardless, I use OTC, and they have us at 32.3M under the cap. Now they don't take into account rollover either, but you can find out the numbers on the site if you look a little deeper.

[Larry Horseman]

I really did not notice it too much, since he said the escalators are not too much. I did not notice also he does not take into account rollover from the previous year. Regardless, I use OTC, and they have us at 32.3M under the cap. Now they don't take into account rollover either, but you can find out the numbers on the site if you look a little deeper.

 

Yeah, without the factors he laid out, and including rollover, the Colts have over $40 million in cap from what I can tell. I'm not a cap expert, so could be wrong, but am pretty good at math. Ha.

 

Would be interesting to know what he is using as his source(s). 

[12isthenew18]

We unlike the others have money to spend on franchise quarterbacks and others in future unlike them

[Flash7]

I think, 6 of the 7 teams mentioned are AFC teams, with Jacksonville and Tennessee from the AFC South. Couple that with both teams from the  AFC South will have high draft picks, we may have a somewhat legitimate conference next year? Houston is already good and will have a few defensive contributors back next year that were on IR. It will be interesting.

[dgambill]

Not sure if he is discounting the fact that we have major contributors that will likely have to be re-signed or not...but we will not be major players in the free agent market like we were the last couple years.

[Gavin]

I think, 6 of the 7 teams mentioned are AFC teams, with Jacksonville and Tennessee from the AFC South. Couple that with both teams from the  AFC South will have high draft picks, we may have a somewhat legitimate conference next year? Houston is already good and will have a few defensive contributors back next year that were on IR. It will be interesting.

The real question is.....Will the Texans have them a good QB. Things will get interesting if they can either develop one or pull a rabbit out of a hat and find one.....Otherwise I don't think they will be much better record wise

[dw49]

Not sure if he is discounting the fact that we have major contributors that will likely have to be re-signed or not...but we will not be major players in the free agent market like we were the last couple years.

 

 

Cap room is always figured on the salaries of players under contract for that year. So the answer to the first part of your post is no.

[crazycolt1]

I don't know what the cap figure will be after taking care of the players they want to keep already on the roster. I counted 24 players who will become free agents. Freeman, Howell, Overton and Shipley are RFAs. Johnson, McNary and Pendleton are ERFAs. The others are Adams, Bradshaw, Anderson, Butler, Cribbs, Gordy, Hasselback, Herron, Jackson, Moala, Nicks, Phillips, Price, Redding, Reitz, Studebaker and Wayne. It will be interesting to see who they keep and at what price.

[John Dee]

If they can get Cutler or maybe another decent QB then they could be in business..     BUT, Clowney is a HUGE if going forward,  A Foster is another year older, same for Andre J, ....      Houston has a really good D but...     ????

 

I personally think Jax is the team to look out for.     They have drafted well lately.

The real question is.....Will the Texans have them a good QB. Things will get interesting if they can either develop one or pull a rabbit out of a hat and find one.....Otherwise I don't think they will be much better record wise

[John Dee]

Cap wise Indy has Costanzo, Luck, Fleener, Allen, and TY all coming up in the next year or 2?    These all need and most likely will get done.    And that is going to suck up a lot of cheez..

[keverton]

Cribbs. Is. Here on 2yr contract. And we have first option on phillips second year

[Dark Superman]

Maybe after we cut a few players we might be up three? I thought I read something about the way our GM was structuring contract was genius.

[Dark Superman]

Cribbs. Is. Here on 2yr contract. And we have first option on phillips second year

we have Cribbs through next year?

[Dark Superman]

Cap space is generated from year to year, so you need a GM who really knows what he's doing. Grigson has done a phenomenal job keeping us in great shape with our cap numbers and space.

[Superman]

Author says these are the 7 teams that will have $30m+ after the performance escalators are applied, after RFA and ERFA tenders, and after futures contracts bring the roster to at least 51 players.

 

I'm not sure how the performance escalators work, but Allen, Hilton, Chapman, Moncrief, Newsome and Hughes probably qualify, and possibly Thornton. I also think there are bonuses paid to UDFAs; Jerrell Freeman has received a big bonus after each of the last two seasons. So the Colts cap situation will probably be affected by the performance escalators, but I have no idea by how much.

 

RFA and ERFA tenders will probably around $10-11m, assuming we tender everyone that qualifies, and assuming the tenders increase the maximum 10%.

 

That would put the team at 50 players. One more contract at minimum puts you to a 51 man roster projection.

 

As of right now, both OTC and Spotrac project the Colts cap number for 2015 at just under $108m (they differ by less than $200K). Add in the $11m for tenders, and one minimum contract at $500K, that gives the Colts a top 51 projection of about $119.5m in 2015. That's without performance escalators, because I don't know how much those will be, and I don't care to figure it out right now. If you want to read about it: http://www.thephinsider.com/2014/1/18/5321168/dolphins-proven-performance-escalator-earned-by-charles-clay-jimmy

 

The article projects a 2015 cap of $142m. Spotrac has the Colts with $9.7m in cap space in 2014. Assuming we roll that over, that would give the Colts a projected cap of $151.7m in 2015. Subtract the top 51 cap projection of $119.5m, and that gives the Colts a projected $32.2m in cap space. If this guy assumes our performance escalators are more than $2.2m, then it explains why he left us off this list.

[dgambill]

Regardless we have about 30 million but most of that should be going to re-sign guys....so we aren't going to be making any splashes.

[Coffeedrinker]

Maybe after we cut a few players we might be up three? I thought I read something about the way our GM was structuring contract was genius.

He structures the contracts just like every other GM in the league.

[NewColtsFan]

He structures the contracts just like every other GM in the league.

 

Can you elaborate on this?

 

I don't think all GM's structure contracts the same way.    If that was so you'd never have a team in cap trouble.   And there are lots of teams in cap trouble every year.

[Superman]

Can you elaborate on this?

 

I don't think all GM's structure contracts the same way.    If that was so you'd never have a team in cap trouble.   And there are lots of teams in cap trouble every year.

 

I don't think it's differing contract structure that gets teams into cap trouble. There are a lot of factors there.

 

But every GM doesn't structure contracts the same way. Some don't use signing bonuses (Buccaneers). Some keep their signing bonuses to a minimum (Grigson mostly falls into this category, so far, as does Elway). Some use bigger signing bonuses (Saints). Some use future guarantees and trigger bonuses (option bonuses, roster bonuses, large convertible salaries, etc.) Some use all of these strategies on a case by case basis.

 

So it's not true to say that all GMs structure contracts the same way. They don't.

 

I don't think that Grigson is a genius for structuring contracts the way he does. He's not the only one who does his contracts that way. But he's also not just doing what everyone else does. 

[Coffeedrinker]

Can you elaborate on this?

 

I don't think all GM's structure contracts the same way.    If that was so you'd never have a team in cap trouble.   And there are lots of teams in cap trouble every year.

Yes,  Agents are not going to accept a deal that is vastly different of other teams or structured in such a way that would not benefit their client.  The only thing a team really changes are; guaranteed money, salary amount and incentives.  Grigson has done a good job of signing some free agents and not hurting the long term salary cap space of the Colts but he's done that because of the type of free agents he's signed not because he structures the contract so it's more friendly for the Colts than other teams manage.

[Superman]

Yes,  Agents are not going to accept a deal that is vastly different of other teams or structured in such a way that would not benefit their client.  The only thing a team really changes are; guaranteed money, salary amount and incentives.  Grigson has done a good job of signing some free agents and not hurting the long term salary cap space of the Colts but he's done that because of the type of free agents he's signed not because he structures the contract so it's more friendly for the Colts than other teams manage.

 

Sorry, but that's just not accurate.

 

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/tampa-bay-buccaneers/alterraun-verner/

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/indianapolis-colts/vontae-davis/

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/miami-dolphins/brent-grimes/

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/new-york-giants/dominique-rodgers-cromartie/

 

That's four CBs who were all unrestricted free agents this season. Four significantly different contract structures, in terms of signing bonuses, accelerating cap hits, future guarantees, etc. (I didn't even bother with Revis' contract, as it's clearly an outlier, but that further demonstrates how contract structure can differ.)

 

The differences from one structure to the next don't necessarily make the contract more friendly for the team or less friendly for the player. But what Grigson has done, with several different structures, is keep cap hits from ballooning in later years. That way, as the cap grows, the slightly increasing cap hits aren't suddenly choking the team's payroll. No one's cap hit is jumping from $4m to $11m, for instance.

 

Again, I'm not trying to suggest that Grigson is a genius for structuring contracts this way. But there are differences in practice from one contract structure to the next. 

[JPFolks]

I have to say this is one of the most impressive collective discussions I have seen here in a long time!  Great job gang! 

[Coffeedrinker]

Sorry, but that's just not accurate.

 

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/tampa-bay-buccaneers/alterraun-verner/

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/indianapolis-colts/vontae-davis/

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/miami-dolphins/brent-grimes/

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/new-york-giants/dominique-rodgers-cromartie/

 

That's four CBs who were all unrestricted free agents this season. Four significantly different contract structures, in terms of signing bonuses, accelerating cap hits, future guarantees, etc. (I didn't even bother with Revis' contract, as it's clearly an outlier, but that further demonstrates how contract structure can differ.)

 

The differences from one structure to the next don't necessarily make the contract more friendly for the team or less friendly for the player. But what Grigson has done, with several different structures, is keep cap hits from ballooning in later years. That way, as the cap grows, the slightly increasing cap hits aren't suddenly choking the team's payroll. No one's cap hit is jumping from $4m to $11m, for instance.

 

Again, I'm not trying to suggest that Grigson is a genius for structuring contracts this way. But there are differences in practice from one contract structure to the next. 

I'm not seeing how what you posted is showing what I' saying as inaccurate.  The differences in their structures are what I said the GM controls.  And I stated the differences are based on the type of free agents Grigs has gone after.  For example, let's say three teams offered Davis a contract... all of them would be structured roughly the same.  One may have a bit more guaranteed, one may have a bit more incentive but they will all be similar.