I think my math is right?

[SouthernIndianaNDFan]

Don't the Colts have to spend like 66 million more dollars to hit the 89% mark? 

[shasta519]

They have next offseason as well. They can easily give out signing bonuses or frontload contracts with gtd money (like roster bonuses) to get the cash spend up.

[Flash7]

The whole "We have to spend 89% by a certain time" argument is overblown. Ballard is on top of it and it's really a non-issue.

[lollygagger8]

I'm 69% sure that this is 99.9% correct

[Kyle]

60% of the time, it works every time

[DraftMaster]

72.6% of stats are made up... This is one of them.

[Nesjan3]

seriously do people actually think its possible Ballard wont hit the mark? Would it be like an insta-fire if he didn't? 

[NewColtsFan]

22 minutes ago, Nesjan3 said:

seriously do people actually think its possible Ballard wont hit the mark? Would it be like an insta-fire if he didn't? 

 

No...   it would not be insta-fire if he didn’t.

 

If a team doesn’t hit the mark, they write a check to the NFLOA fir the difference and that money is divided up among all the Colts players.  

 

This may not be entirely accurate,  but it’s oretty close.   If anyone had mire accurate info, please post here.

 

Ballard has publically said he’s nit at all worried about this.   Not at all. 

[Steamboat_Shaun]

1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

No...   it would not be insta-fire if he didn’t.

 

If a team doesn’t hit the mark, they write a check to the NFLOA fir the difference and that money is divided up among all the Colts players.  

 

This may not be entirely accurate,  but it’s oretty close.   If anyone had mire accurate info, please post here.

 

Ballard has publically said he’s nit at all worried about this.   Not at all. 

 

There's really not much of a penalty for it, so calling it a fireable offense is definitely an overreaction, but at the same time, no team has missed the salary cap floor since that rule has been introduced, so if Ballard were to come up short on spending, the Colts would be the first team ever to not hit the 89% mark.

 

[our_dbs_rock]

I'd be more concerned with them spending the rollover before its lost.

[LJpalmbeacher2]

Will we or can we have more cap room going into next offseason than we had for this offseason?

 

I know we signed Funchess for $10 mil plus we'll add some 2nd/3rd tier FA's but wondering if it will be around same ballpark?

 

Darn, that Funchess & Desir contracts really hurt. 

[hoosierhawk]

By early next week CB will have signed at least 3-4 more free agents. Signing period doesn't start for 40 more minutes.

[SouthernIndianaNDFan]

1 hour ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

There's really not much of a penalty for it, so calling it a fireable offense is definitely an overreaction, but at the same time, no team has missed the salary cap floor since that rule has been introduced, so if Ballard were to come up short on spending, the Colts would be the first team ever to not hit the 89% mark.

 

 

They need to spend 250 million more!? Why are they not signing people?? Lol geeez

[Steamboat_Shaun]

50 minutes ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

 

They need to spend 250 million more!? Why are they not signing people?? Lol geeez

 

In my mind the real question is what's a better use for that money: giving bonuses to players on your roster that earned it, or spending a bunch of money in free agency just to hit some silly 89% cap floor by next offseason? I honestly don't know.

[SouthernIndianaNDFan]

5 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

In my mind the real question is what's a better use for that money: giving bonuses to players on your roster that earned it, or spending a bunch of money in free agency just to hit some silly 89% cap floor by next offseason? I honestly don't know.

 

I'd be lying to you if I said I knew the ins and outs of who's due what, or when...but I have to believe that there's more than enough cap space to keep anyone of relevance and still splurge a little? 250 mil goes a long way

[Steamboat_Shaun]

5 minutes ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

 

I'd be lying to you if I said I knew the ins and outs of who's due what, or when...but I have to believe that there's more than enough cap space to keep anyone of relevance and still splurge a little? 250 mil goes a long way

 

Their current 3 year total is $401,069,662

Total needed to hit 89% over 4 years is $651,836,000

Amount they need to spend this & next offseason is $250,766,338

 

They average about $133mil spent each year, so if Funchess hits his incentives, that alone would put us a little over $133mil for the year. 

[throwing BBZ]

3 hours ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

Will we or can we have more cap room going into next offseason than we had for this offseason?

 

I know we signed Funchess for $10 mil plus we'll add some 2nd/3rd tier FA's but wondering if it will be around same ballpark?

 

Darn, that Funchess & Desir contracts really hurt. 

 

 The three second round tenders added over $9M.

[throwing BBZ]

2 hours ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

 

They need to spend 250 million more!? Why are they not signing people?? Lol geeez

 

 Do you actually read many posts. I have seen this clarified 50 times here since the season is over. 

 Ballard has tried to simplify it for the HARDEST HEADS.
 Do you ever look at Spotrac for  ____ sake? 
 Do you spend all of your paycheck every week? Ever plan and save ahead for future Expenses?
  Before YOU know it, we will be close the the Cap Limit and have to let players you EXPECT to keep, leave because we can't afford them.
 Do you Not see this happening Every Day all around the NFL?
  Ever heard of Dee Ford?  Good Grief!
 

[Valpo2004]

1 hour ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

Their current 3 year total is $401,069,662

Total needed to hit 89% over 4 years is $651,836,000

Amount they need to spend this & next offseason is $250,766,338

 

They average about $133mil spent each year, so if Funchess hits his incentives, that alone would put us a little over $133mil for the year. 

 

To get an accurate number one would have to subtract from the 250 mil the amount we are contracted to spend next year on players correct?

[ColtsAC]

Could I just have 20 bucks till payday? What will that do to the cap????

[Valpo2004]

2 hours ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

 

I'd be lying to you if I said I knew the ins and outs of who's due what, or when...but I have to believe that there's more than enough cap space to keep anyone of relevance and still splurge a little? 250 mil goes a long way

 

I don't know for certain but I believe that 250 mil might not include what we are already scheduled to spend this year and next.  I don't think we have to create a great deal of new spending to meet it.

 

 

 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

2 hours ago, SouthernIndianaNDFan said:

 

I'd be lying to you if I said I knew the ins and outs of who's due what, or when...but I have to believe that there's more than enough cap space to keep anyone of relevance and still splurge a little? 250 mil goes a long way

 

No. We need every penny. In 3 or 4 years from now we will have to give Leonard & Nelson $1 Billion Dollars.  

[Steamboat_Shaun]

15 hours ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

To get an accurate number one would have to subtract from the 250 mil the amount we are contracted to spend next year on players correct?

 

That $250mil figure includes roughly $120mil of this year's money, which will continue to increase through this current free agency period, signing draft picks, waiver wire pickups, UDFAs, etc. After all of that, the leftover total will be the number we have to spend in order to hit 89% & comply with the salary cap floor. In other words, we're basically already halfway there, with a lot more signings on the horizon.

[Valpo2004]

42 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

That $250mil figure includes roughly $120mil of this year's money, which will continue to increase through this current free agency period, signing draft picks, waiver wire pickups, UDFAs, etc. After all of that, the leftover total will be the number we have to spend in order to hit 89% & comply with the salary cap floor. In other words, we're basically already halfway there, with a lot more signings on the horizon.

 

So we have to create about $130M in new spending?  

 

I will note that with the FA's that the Colts have coming up for the next offseason, a good chunk of that will probably be spent in bringing those guys back.  

[Steamboat_Shaun]

Just now, Valpo2004 said:

 

So we have to create about $130M in new spending?  

 

I will note that with the FA's that the Colts have coming up for the next offseason, a good chunk of that will probably be spent in bringing those guys back.  

 

Essentially yes.

 

$250mil - $120mil = amount we need to spend next offseason to hit 89%.

 

The $120mil from this year could feasibly hit $140mil by the time we sign all of our draft picks, assuming we make a handful of moves in free agency.

[Valpo2004]

6 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

Essentially yes.

 

$250mil - $120mil = amount we need to spend next offseason to hit 89%.

 

The $120mil from this year could feasibly hit $140mil by the time we sign all of our draft picks, assuming we make a handful of moves in free agency.

 

And the 120 Mil is cash spending right?  Because I know our total cap spending right now is like 150 M.  

[Steamboat_Shaun]

3 minutes ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

And the 120 Mil is cash spending right?  Because I know our total cap spending right now is like 150 M.  

 

That's where I get a little confused. Differentiating those 2 kind of throws me for a loop.

[Valpo2004]

4 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

That's where I get a little confused. Differentiating those 2 kind of throws me for a loop.

 

Do you not know the difference between cash and cap spending or do you have a hard time looking it up?

[Steamboat_Shaun]

17 minutes ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

Do you not know the difference between cash and cap spending or do you have a hard time looking it up?

 

Both.

[Valpo2004]

Well the difference is mainly that cap is theoretical but important for who a team can pay.

 

Consider a signing bonus of 4 million on a 4 year contract.

 

On the cap it's counted at 1 million per year (unless the player is traded or released).  But it's a SIGNING BONUS.  So in reality the player was handed that 4 million all up front.

 

So the difference looks like this

 

Year 1:  Cap Hit: 1 Million, Cash: 4 Million

Year 2: Cap Hit: 1 Million, Cash: 0

Year 3: Cap Hit: 1 Million, Cash 0

Year 4: Cap Hit: 1 Million, Cash 0

 

Salaries, workout bonuses, and roster bonuses the cap and the cash are the same.  The difference is I believe almost entirely based on signing bonuses.  

 

Of course if a player is released after year 2 than the remaining 2 million on the cap comes as "dead money" in year 3 counting against the cap.

 

Cash is a bit harder because 90% of the time when we talk about these things we care about cap.  

 

The only thing I can really find on cash spending on the team level is this.

 

https://overthecap.com/cash-spending/