Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Colts 2021 Salary Cap Forecast/Discussion **Updated pg 6**


Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, csmopar said:

Completely agree. IF IF this happens as it stands, then it’s gonna make for one heck of an interesting off season.

 

question, there’s talk of owner converting salaries to cash bonuses to eliminate that cap hit. Are there any penalties in doing that?

 

Do you mean converting part of the salary into a signing bonus?  

 

It reduces the cap in that particular year by taking the converted bonus and pro-rating it over the length of the contract up to 5 years.  (If the contract goes longer than 5 years than the bonus is only pro-rated for the first 5 years.)

 

So it essentially gives some limited cap relief now by leveraging the team to that player further into the future.  

 

Generally I don't think this is a good idea.  Mostly because teams should try to avoid being leveraged heavily and doing that sort of re-structure does exactly that.  Gives one year cap relief but increases the cap hit in the future and leverages it down the road.  

 

To me teams doing re-structures are usually desperate.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 258
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Yep.   When you convert the base salary to essentially a signing bonus it gives cao relief for that upcoming season, but spreads it over the rest of contract, up to 5 years.    

The more you look at it the easier it becomes.     I will say that looking at each team's individual situation closely isn't easy because it's hard to know have valuable each player is to a

Combination of things.   1. Cap is dropping $20m+ 2. Buckner contract($21m) 3. Kelly extension($15m) 4. Grover extension($10m)     Thats $66m flip.

2 hours ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

Do you mean converting part of the salary into a signing bonus?  

 

It reduces the cap in that particular year by taking the converted bonus and pro-rating it over the length of the contract up to 5 years.  (If the contract goes longer than 5 years than the bonus is only pro-rated for the first 5 years.)

 

So it essentially gives some limited cap relief now by leveraging the team to that player further into the future.  

 

Generally I don't think this is a good idea.  Mostly because teams should try to avoid being leveraged heavily and doing that sort of re-structure does exactly that.  Gives one year cap relief but increases the cap hit in the future and leverages it down the road.  

 

To me teams doing re-structures are usually desperate.  

correct. That's been the idea i keep hearing about on all the talk radio and tv talking heads when they bring it up. Converting salary to a bonus. But I wasn't clear if that was a dollar for dollar deal or if there was any penalties or if it spread it out. So the Saints, they, in theory, could convert part of that 93 million over into bonuses for each respective player, but it'd just kick the problem down the road, not fix it. do i have that right?

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, csmopar said:

correct. That's been the idea i keep hearing about on all the talk radio and tv talking heads when they bring it up. Converting salary to a bonus. But I wasn't clear if that was a dollar for dollar deal or if there was any penalties or if it spread it out. So the Saints, they, in theory, could convert part of that 93 million over into bonuses for each respective player, but it'd just kick the problem down the road, not fix it. do i have that right?

Yep.

 

When you convert the base salary to essentially a signing bonus it gives cao relief for that upcoming season, but spreads it over the rest of contract, up to 5 years.

 

 

So an example:

 

Ryan Kelly:

 

Has a base of $10m next season and 4 years left of deal.

 

The base can only drop to vet minimum. We will use $1m for this example, so:

 

Ryan Kelly current contract:

2021 - $10m base, $4.65m roster bonus(which is guaranteed next year) = $14.65m cap hit.

2022 - $7.5m base, = $7.5m cap hit

2023 - $9.125m base, $1m roster bonus(not guaranteed) = $10.125m cap hit

2024 - $11.375m base, $1m roster bonus(not guaranteed) = $12.375m cap hit.

 

So right now, Kelly has no guaranteed money after 2021.

 

Ryan Kelly restructured contract:

2021 - $1m base, $4.65m roster bonus, $2.25m signing bonus = $7.9m cap hit(savings of $6.75m in 2021)

2022 - $7.5m base, $2.25m signing bonus = $9.75m cap hit

2023 - $9.125m base, , $1m roster bonus, $2.25m signing bonus = $12.375m cap hit

2024 - $11.375m base, $1m roster bonus, $2.25m signing bonus = $14.625m cap hit.

 

 

This would give Kelly 6.75m guaranteed money after 2021.

 

 

He would receive a $9m check when he restructures but for cap purposes it would br spread over those 4 years.

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/2/2020 at 5:18 PM, w87r said:

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/cap/2021/

 

 

Here is the link again that really gives a food look at how many players teams have under contract and cap space.

 

Colts figure doesnt include Grover though.

 

 

Again we are high on the list, but our only QB is Eason. If we sign Rivers we drop to 7th/8th with $40m(ish) to spend to fill out 20+ spots.(53 + Practice squad).

 

 

Cap space is short even for us, a team that has done a great job managing our space.

 

Covid really did a number on what we could of did otherwise.

That's the point of the cap.  Or at least what happens when markets drive the prices.  Teams will always push the price, which means you don't really win consistently unless you're near the top of the cap.

 

There is no way around that.  When it matters for a team, the space will always be tight. (unless you catch lightning in a bottle one year)

 

To maximize that...and I'm sounding like a johnny-one note lately....a team has to deploy its capital to the positions on the team that create the most wins.  Pay positions that have less impact, and that prevents you from compensating talented players at the other positions. 

 

Also a team is going to have to get several young draft picks to contribute to the teams success at a level that is much greater than the level they are counting against the cap (like their 3rd or 4th year of their rookie contracts...a near pro bowler).

 

Essentially the cap forces teams to get more value from some players than the level they are being compensated.  The young players that are good enough to earn that fat second contract.  Those are the players that matter and that drive your championships, because the market forces every team to pay the same price for players with the same talent as players on other teams.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, w87r said:

Yep.

 

When you convert the base salary to essentially a signing bonus it gives cao relief for that upcoming season, but spreads it over the rest of contract, up to 5 years.

 

 

So an example:

 

Ryan Kelly:

 

Has a base of $10m next season and 4 years left of deal.

 

The base can only drop to vet minimum. We will use $1m for this example, so:

 

Ryan Kelly current contract:

2021 - $10m base, $4.65m roster bonus(which is guaranteed next year) = $14.65m cap hit.

2022 - $7.5m base, = $7.5m cap hit

2023 - $9.125m base, $1m roster bonus(not guaranteed) = $10.125m cap hit

2024 - $11.375m base, $1m roster bonus(not guaranteed) = $12.375m cap hit.

 

So right now, Kelly has no guaranteed money after 2021.

 

Ryan Kelly restructured contract:

2021 - $1m base, $4.65m roster bonus, $2.25m signing bonus = $7.9m cap hit(savings of $6.75m in 2021)

2022 - $7.5m base, $2.25m signing bonus = $9.75m cap hit

2023 - $9.125m base, , $1m roster bonus, $2.25m signing bonus = $12.375m cap hit

2024 - $11.375m base, $1m roster bonus, $2.25m signing bonus = $14.625m cap hit.

 

 

This would give Kelly 6.75m guaranteed money after 2021.

 

 

He would receive a $9m check when he restructures but for cap purposes it would br spread over those 4 years.

Gotcha thanks

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, DougDew said:

That's the point of the cap.  Or at least what happens when markets drive the prices.  Teams will always push the price, which means you don't really win consistently unless you're near the top of the cap.

 

There is no way around that.  When it matters for a team, the space will always be tight. (unless you catch lightning in a bottle one year)

 

To maximize that...and I'm sounding like a johnny-one note lately....a team has to deploy its capital to the positions on the team that create the most wins.  Pay positions that have less impact, and that prevents you from compensating talented players at the other positions. 

 

Also a team is going to have to get several young draft picks to contribute to the teams success at a level that is much greater than the level they are counting against the cap (like their 3rd or 4th year of their rookie contracts...a near pro bowler).

 

Essentially the cap forces teams to get more value from some players than the level they are being compensated.  The young players that are good enough to earn that fat second contract.  Those are the players that matter and that drive your championships, because the market forces every team to pay the same price for players with the same talent as players on other teams.

I agree with all of this.

 

Just sucks because this was our year to really be able to add some quality to our roster while maintaining our current depth. Covid has really set that back and made money extremely tight. Will lose some depth and wont be able to add much.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, w87r said:

I agree with all of this.

 

Just sucks because this was our year to really be able to add some quality to our roster while maintaining our current depth. Covid has really set that back and made money extremely tight. Will lose some depth and wont be able to add much.

I don’t know. For us, I don’t think it’ll change what we do. Ballard isn’t known for going for big dollar FA anyway. Plus like I said earlier, we’re not the only team with this cap. We’re number 3 with the most cap space and there’s a BUNCH of teams that have between 18-35 million and 1/2 of the league is over the cap or very nearly over the cap. That alone is gonna drive down the market prices for FAs this year. It has too. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, DougDew said:

That's the point of the cap.  Or at least what happens when markets drive the prices.  Teams will always push the price, which means you don't really win consistently unless you're near the top of the cap.

 

There is no way around that.  When it matters for a team, the space will always be tight. (unless you catch lightning in a bottle one year)

 

To maximize that...and I'm sounding like a johnny-one note lately....a team has to deploy its capital to the positions on the team that create the most wins.  Pay positions that have less impact, and that prevents you from compensating talented players at the other positions. 

 

Also a team is going to have to get several young draft picks to contribute to the teams success at a level that is much greater than the level they are counting against the cap (like their 3rd or 4th year of their rookie contracts...a near pro bowler).

 

Essentially the cap forces teams to get more value from some players than the level they are being compensated.  The young players that are good enough to earn that fat second contract.  Those are the players that matter and that drive your championships, because the market forces every team to pay the same price for players with the same talent as players on other teams.


It will be interesting to see how they approach Q. He’s going to get the biggest G deal in history...but I have seen people speculate about making him the highest paid OL player. That was already a dubious proposition...since he’s a G...but in this cap-reduced COVID environment...no way that happens.

 

It’s also going to be interesting in regards to Leonard and Smith. Colts have cap space...but it goes fast when you hand out huge contracts.
 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, csmopar said:

I don’t know. For us, I don’t think it’ll change what we do. Ballard isn’t known for going for big dollar FA anyway. Plus like I said earlier, we’re not the only team with this cap. We’re number 3 with the most cap space and there’s a BUNCH of teams that have between 18-35 million and 1/2 of the league is over the cap or very nearly over the cap. That alone is gonna drive down the market prices for FAs this year. It has too. 

If you take a close look at those teams. I like DougDew, sound like a broken record, in regards to following comments.

 

The majority of those teams have their QB or are in top of draft to draft next QB and will be on rookie contract. So we are kind of caught in between rock and hard place, because we are looking to compete and only have Eason figured onto that cap space.

 

Team cap space/ qb situation.

1. Jacksonville - will draft QB in top 2 picks most likely.

2. NYJ - Have Darnold/ or will likely be drafting QB with top 2 pick

3. Indy - Only Eason(we are actually number 4 behind NE now with Grover deal)

4. NE - similar situation to us,  but already have 4 more players than us locked up next year

5. Washington - QB situation unsettled, but have 5 more players than us locked up.

6. Cincy - Have their QB situation taken care of and on rookie deal.

7. Miami - Have QB situation taken care of and on rookie deal

8. Dallas - will likely have top 5 pick, possibly draft a qb/not sure how they afford Dak, tbh. He would take up most of their cap space(could see him wind up in Jacksonville)

9. LAC - have QB situation taken care of and on rookie deal

10. TB - Have Brady under contract already for next year.

11. Baltimore - QB situation taken care of and under contract

12. CLE - have QB taken care of and under contract

13. Carolina - have QB taken care of and under contract

14. SF - Has Jimmy under contract or could cut him loose and save $24m in cap space next year.

15. Arizona - has QB situation taken care of and on rookie deal

16. Denver - have QB situation taken care of and on rookie deal(imagine they will roll woth Lock for a little bit)

17. NYG - have QB situation taken care of and on rookie deal

18. Seattle - have QB under contract and taken care of

19. TEN - have QB taken care of and under contract.

20. Buffalo - has QB situation taken carw of and on rookie deal

 

 

Only going to list top 20, but only 3 teams other than us dont have QB situation taken care of and 2 of those teams have similar cap space ro is and more players already signed.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, shasta519 said:


It will be interesting to see how they approach Q. He’s going to get the biggest G deal in history...but I have seen people speculate about making him the highest paid OL player. That was already a dubious proposition...since he’s a G...but in this cap-reduced COVID environment...no way that happens.

 

It’s also going to be interesting in regards to Leonard and Smith. Colts have cap space...but it goes fast when you hand out huge contracts.
 

 

Does anyone here think there might be a possibility Q gets moved to LT for good on next year or so(or when AC is gone), to make his new contract meet a more positional value chart?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, w87r said:

I dont think so either, just curious to others thoughts.

Understandable but I just don’t see it for several reasons.

 

one you are just trading one hole for another

 

two we know Nelson is maybe the best guard in the league.  We don’t know if he can play tackle at all.  So why mess with a sure thing?  Especially when you don’t have a replacement at left guard.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Understandable but I just don’t see it for several reasons.

 

one you are just trading one hole for another

 

two we know Nelson is maybe the best guard in the league.  We don’t know if he can play tackle at all.  So why mess with a sure thing?  Especially when you don’t have a replacement at left guard.

Like I said, I don't either. However conventional wisdom says a LT is harder to find than a LG and a LG would be cheaper than paying Q at LG and still having to sign a LT/ or draft and hit.

 

If Q could play LT, which I think he could, it would be very beneficial to the team.

 

I don't think so though. Just a thought outside the box.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, w87r said:

Does anyone here think there might be a possibility Q gets moved to LT for good on next year or so(or when AC is gone), to make his new contract meet a more positional value chart?


I don’t see it happening...but it would certainly solve a big need going forward...if he was able to make the transition. Just seems like one of those things you don’t risk messing up. I do t think there is a huge precedent for Gs moving outside. 
 

They will draft a T either this year or next...and rely upon Q to help with that player’s development...because he will likely start from day one.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see why Ballard or even the coaching staff would want to move Q over to LT.  You could move Smith over and have Q help him learn the left side and go find a RT for cheaper.  Or you just draft a LT this draft and hope they have a year to learn under AC.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, csmopar said:

correct. That's been the idea i keep hearing about on all the talk radio and tv talking heads when they bring it up. Converting salary to a bonus. But I wasn't clear if that was a dollar for dollar deal or if there was any penalties or if it spread it out. So the Saints, they, in theory, could convert part of that 93 million over into bonuses for each respective player, but it'd just kick the problem down the road, not fix it. do i have that right?

 

Pretty much, but I question how much they could actually do that with as leveraged as they are. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

Pretty much, but I question how much they could actually do that with as leveraged as they are. 

right, and from what I understand, that money has to come directly from the owners out of pocket, vs the cap money. so I don't see than happening en masse either.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, shasta519 said:


It will be interesting to see how they approach Q. He’s going to get the biggest G deal in history...but I have seen people speculate about making him the highest paid OL player. That was already a dubious proposition...since he’s a G...but in this cap-reduced COVID environment...no way that happens.

 

It’s also going to be interesting in regards to Leonard and Smith. Colts have cap space...but it goes fast when you hand out huge contracts.
 

 

Here's the dilemma, we also have Leonard and Smith from the same draft (although their contracts expire in different years).  How does positional value factor into all three contracts?  IIRC, all olineman are treated equally for franchise designation, so Gs tend to get their contract value raised by the Ts, IMO.  Do you pay Nelson more than Smith?  What would be the justification?

 

All LBs get lumped together too with the same issue.  Leonard is going to be placed into the pool of OLBs ( and there are sometimes squabbles with OLBs/agents as to whether he is a OLB or a Dlineman....squabbles because it matters come valuation time). 

 

So are we going to have to slightly overpay Nelson and Leonard because they get lumped into a bucket that has higher valued positions in it?  That's not a good thing if you are a good team that's going to be near the top of the cap.

 

As an aside.  It would be best to have those studly young players roll off at different times so you can stagger the contracts going forward.  It would be best if a team can hit on one or two players each draft rather than hit on three players in one draft and whiff on another.  That's also going to make it difficult for us because its looking like no player from our 2017 or 2019 drafts are going to be good enough to really care if we keep around whereas the 2018 and probably 2020 drafts look better for that.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Here's the dilemma, we also have Leonard and Smith from the same draft (although their contracts expire in different years).  How does positional value factor into all three contracts?  IIRC, all olineman are treated equally for franchise designation, so Gs tend to get their contract value raised by the Ts, IMO.  Do you pay Nelson more than Smith?  What would be the justification?

 

All LBs get lumped together too with the same issue.  Leonard is going to be placed into the pool of OLBs ( and there are sometimes squabbles with OLBs/agents as to whether he is a OLB or a Dlineman....squabbles because it matters come valuation time). 

 

So are we going to have to slightly overpay Nelson and Leonard because they get lumped into a bucket that has higher valued positions in it.  That's not a good thing if you are a good team that's going to be near the top of the cap.

 

As an aside.  It would be best to have those studly young players roll off at different times so you can stagger the contracts going forward.  It would be best if a team can hit on one or two players each draft rather than hit on three players in one draft and whiff on another.  That's also going to make it difficult for us because its looking like no player from our 2017 or 2019 drafts are going to be good enough to really want to keep around whereas the 2018 and probably 2020 drafts look better for that.

I think what you will see happen is one of either Q or Leonard extended a year before the other, which, one, I don't know. That would help off set their respective high cap hits so they both aren't on the same season.  I also think Smith will get a contract similar or at least close to that of Q's. But again, it'll be done in different years. Or so I think

 

Q also protects the blindside of the QB, those on the blindside typically get paid more than those on the right side, where Smith is.  Smith's big advantage is he's proven he can play at both the G level and the T so that might put his contract toward the higher sides of Right side OL.   

 

When it comes to the cap and management, that is one area I have no doubt in Ballard's ability on. He'll make it work and we'll be fine.  Now, when/if he finds our future franchise QB, then things will get really really interesting.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, csmopar said:

I think what you will see happen is one of either Q or Leonard extended a year before the other, which, one, I don't know. That would help off set their respective high cap hits so they both aren't on the same season.  I also think Smith will get a contract similar or at least close to that of Q's. But again, it'll be done in different years. Or so I think

 

Q also protects the blindside of the QB, those on the blindside typically get paid more than those on the right side, where Smith is.  Smith's big advantage is he's proven he can play at both the G level and the T so that might put his contract toward the higher sides of Right side OL.   

 

When it comes to the cap and management, that is one area I have no doubt in Ballard's ability on. He'll make it work and we'll be fine.  Now, when/if he finds our future franchise QB, then things will get really really interesting.

Sure.  I'm pointing out that there are a number of challenges that are going to have to be navigated based upon our current personnel situation, including which players are getting older at which positions.

 

My feeling is that if I'm going to have to pay an olineman Top 5 olineman money, I want him to be a Top 5 OT.  Let my competitors pay a non top 5 OT that kind of money.  

 

But in the end its a game, and things align in ways that are beyond your control.  Like poker, all the strategizing is great, but in the end its still a card game.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, DougDew said:

Sure.  I'm pointing out that there are a number of challenges that are going to have to be navigated based upon our current personnel situation, including which players are getting older at which positions.

 

My feeling is that if I'm going to have to pay an olineman Top 5 olineman money, I want him to be a Top 5 OT.  Let my competitors pay a non top 5 OT that kind of money.  

 

But in the end its a game, and things align in ways that are beyond your control.  Like poker, all the strategizing is great, but in the end its still a card game.

Question. Do u think Bellichek would ever pay Leonard or Nelson the kind of money they r going to ask for based on the postion they currently play? I doubt it. Thats kind of the problem u have when u draft Nelson 6th overall. He becomes a pancake machine and a cult hero. U r kind of stuck with having to pay him. Thats the problem with drafting a guard at #6. I dont mind paying huge money for a DE on his 2nd contract. I am hesitant about paying a guard LT money. Same with Leonard. When he is hurt, I think Walker has filled in admirably. He is going to want probably 20 million. I get hammered, but I pull a Bill and see what there value is. This team has no dynamic skill players.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Question. Do u think Bellichek would ever pay Leonard or Nelson the kind of money they r going to ask for based on the postion they currently play? I doubt it. Thats kind of the problem u have when u draft Nelson 6th overall. He becomes a pancake machine and a cult hero. U r kind of stuck with having to pay him. Thats the problem with drafting a guard at #6. I dont mind paying huge money for a DE on his 2nd contract. I am hesitant about paying a guard LT money. Same with Leonard. When he is hurt, I think Walker has filled in admirably. He is going to want probably 20 million. I get hammered, but I pull a Bill and see what there value is. This team has no dynamic skill players.

Maybe Nelson plays LT this week and balls out, then the problem is resolved, LOL. 

 

IDK, depends on how the draft goes towards filling the pricey players at LT, DE, WR, and QB.  We might have to let one of Nelson or Leonard go.  We might get a 3rd round comp pick for Nelson's contract, 4th for Leonard's contract, and we could find a ILB in that round.  Don't have to make that decision for a while, and if Ballard can hit on those pricey position draft picks, we could pay both while the youngsters are playing on their rookie deals.

 

No, I doubt BB would pay either....and would take the comp picks.  But I don't think he is a great drafter given the number of picks he has had over the years.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Question. Do u think Bellichek would ever pay Leonard or Nelson the kind of money they r going to ask for based on the postion they currently play? I doubt it. Thats kind of the problem u have when u draft Nelson 6th overall. He becomes a pancake machine and a cult hero. U r kind of stuck with having to pay him. Thats the problem with drafting a guard at #6. I dont mind paying huge money for a DE on his 2nd contract. I am hesitant about paying a guard LT money. Same with Leonard. When he is hurt, I think Walker has filled in admirably. He is going to want probably 20 million. I get hammered, but I pull a Bill and see what there value is. This team has no dynamic skill players.

Do you think Bill Belichick has cornered the market on ideas?   Do you think he does not make mistakes?

 

BB made Dont’a Hightower one of the NFL ‘s highest paid players.  So, poof,  there goes your Leonard argument.  When players perform at a premium level you pay them what they’re worth.   Period.   You’re badly over-thinking this.

 

There is no perfect formula to a championship.   You think Ballard is not aware that when he pays a guard premium money that means he’ll be paying other positions less than premium.   He 100 percent knows that.  
 

It’s always, Always, ALWAYS better to have too much talent than not enough.  Dallas has paid a fortune into its OL for years.   Smith, Martin, used to have Frederick at Center.  Used to have a good guard who left in FA, and then Collins who is now getting paid.   3 of their 5 getting top money and it used to be 4 before Frederick had to retire early.   They had a top 3 OL for years.   They figured out the rest of the roster.  
 

They’re paying big money while a good number of younger players are on their cheaper rookie contracts.   That’s life for GM’s in the NFL.  Too much talent is always a good thing.    You never take a lesser player who plays a premium position over a much better player at a so-called non-premium position.   Never.

 

Do you think it’s a coincidence that the play of the Colts OL dramatically improved when Nelson joined the team?   Come on....
 

Sorry, but your logic is twisted beyond all recognition. 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2020/12/05/how-much-money-are-teams-losing-union-is-curious-to-find-out/

 

 

Hopefully in the next couple weeks, we get some answers regarding next season's cap figures.

 

As stated in the link, most expect the cap to drop all the way to the $175m floor. I do as well since the estimated game day tickets estimated losses($7m/game; $56m + with 2 preseason games added to it), doesn't cover the amount the caps max drop.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Another update.

 

Looks like Grover contract has a 2021 cap hit of $8.25m. So that preserves $1.75m from $10m AAV.

 

https://overthecap.com/player/grover-stewart/5730/

 

 

Over the cap has 2021 Cap space at $67.7m right now. Spotract hasn't updated their site yet.

 

https://overthecap.com/salary-cap/indianapolis-colts/

 

Not sure if that includes the new lower rollover amount or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

Do you think Bill Belichick has cornered the market on ideas?   Do you think he does not make mistakes?

 

BB made Dont’a Hightower one of the NFL ‘s highest paid players.  So, poof,  there goes your Leonard argument.  When players perform at a premium level you pay them what they’re worth.   Period.   You’re badly over-thinking this.

 

There is no perfect formula to a championship.   You think Ballard is not aware that when he pays a guard premium money that means he’ll be paying other positions less than premium.   He 100 percent knows that.  
 

It’s always, Always, ALWAYS better to have too much talent than not enough.  Dallas has paid a fortune into its OL for years.   Smith, Martin, used to have Frederick at Center.  Used to have a good guard who left in FA, and then Collins who is now getting paid.   3 of their 5 getting top money and it used to be 4 before Frederick had to retire early.   They had a top 3 OL for years.   They figured out the rest of the roster.  
 

They’re paying big money while a good number of younger players are on their cheaper rookie contracts.   That’s life for GM’s in the NFL.  Too much talent is always a good thing.    You never take a lesser player who plays a premium position over a much better player at a so-called non-premium position.   Never.

 

Do you think it’s a coincidence that the play of the Colts OL dramatically improved when Nelson joined the team?   Come on....
 

Sorry, but your logic is twisted beyond all recognition. 

 

 

Dallas invested tons of money in their Oline and they have regressed due to injuries. Their defence sucks and they have had to  let players walk. So if I have a different view point then U, my logic is twisted?  

 

 

**Mod edited to remove last sentence**.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive hid a few post and edited 1.

 

 

This thread is to discuss the looming offseason and salary cap implications.

 

Its not to talk about whether Cowboys/Patriots are better organizations than the Colts. Nor, is it to talk about posters relationships.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Dallas invested tons of money in their Oline and they have regressed due to injuries. Their defence sucks and they have had to  let players walk. So if I have a different view point then U, my logic is twisted?  

 

 

**Mod edited to remove last sentence**.

Injuries can happen anywhere.  But the O-line has been Dallas’s bread and butter.   They’ve had success with this formula. 

 

Ultimately,  my point is this...   you take talent over the positional need.  Positional needs win when the players you’re deciding on are roughly equal.   Isn’t Nelson performing at a level that makes him either the best or near the best player in the draft?   I think so.   Then we took the right guy at pick 6. 

 

Ballard always said the weakside outside backer in his 4-3 was the most important LB spot of the three.   He has to be an impact guy.   Then Leonard was the right pick at 36.  
 

Ballard says he and his team look at money every day.   Literally, every day.   They are not caught off guard.   They are not unprepared. 
 

And Ballard can be tough.   We signed Desir to a 3/25 contract.  And after he had a disappointing year — one year — we cut him.  I don’t know if Desir wouldn’t renegotiate and take a cut in pay, and we let him go.  Ballard went out and signed Xavier Rhodes.   Thus is a bottom line business and Ballard can be a tough guy.  Tough, but fair, IMO. 
 

There isn’t a perfect formula.  There isn't one way to build a roster and team.   I don’t know why you don’t have faith in the guy and his team to make correct decisions.   No one is perfect in personnel.  No one.   We could have a monster thread of all of Belichick’s misses in the draft and free agency.  But he’s still the best at what he does.   It’s an inexact science.   Ballard is good at his job.  I don’t lose a minutes sleep worrying over what he has done or will do.   I’m glad he’s our guy.  If you’d been around here during the Grigson years you’d understand why Ballard gets the benefit of the doubt from so many here. 
 

If you want to contact me privately, you’re welcome to do so.  The Mod removed some material, I don’t know what it is?   Otherwise, you can respond here as you like. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/29/2020 at 8:13 AM, w87r said:

Combination of things.

 

1. Cap is dropping $20m+

2. Buckner contract($21m)

3. Kelly extension($15m)

4. Grover extension($10m)

 

 

Thats $66m flip.

Kelley was already being paid $10 million, Buckner was being paid several million as well(don't know the exact number), so it is more along the line of $50 million flip. 
 

You would think with TY's $14 million coming off, & the $66 million in QB money, we would still have a lot more than we do. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Colts1324 said:

Kelley was already being paid $10 million, Buckner was being paid several million as well(don't know the exact number), so it is more along the line of $50 million flip. 
 

You would think with TY's $14 million coming off, & the $66 million in QB money, we would still have a lot more than we do. 

But Kelly wasn't under contract for 2021 so his extension added to the cap, same with Grover.

 

 

Qbs and TY coming off doesn't really matter because it was already coming off the cap and calculated into cap number.

 

Buckner money is more about where the Colts were at without him and his new deal. Before that we were expected to have $110m+. 

 

Also $20m + cap drop isnt all to take into consideration, because once you take what the cap was expected to rise to it more around a $40m+ drop maybe more.(was rumors it would go up to the $230-$240m range.

 

 

Its all a moot point anyway, because bottomline is , we have $67m to spend, and only Eason under contract at the QB position.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/8/2020 at 12:10 PM, DougDew said:

For the record, the Colts oline improved the year Nelson started.

 

But that was also when Smith and Glow started.  Improvements to three positions, IMO.

which is why all 3 will get extended, or should.  The biggest question becomes what to do at LT? I'm thinking we will HAVE to find that replacement in the draft, easier said than done. A trade would be expensive in both draft capital and cap. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I think about it the more I feel like we end up signing Allen Robinson in the offseason. He’s had a rough go in Chicago, and I don’t think he has any plans to return. 
 

Hilton’s resurgence has started to play a part in the story, and if he keeps it up through the end of the season it could certainly change whether or not we would go after him, but if Hilton’s last two weeks were just bright spots for him, and he goes back to the same TY we’ve seen most of this season I wouldn’t be surprised to see us go after Robinson. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/10/2020 at 6:51 PM, John Waylon said:

The more I think about it the more I feel like we end up signing Allen Robinson in the offseason. He’s had a rough go in Chicago, and I don’t think he has any plans to return. 
 

Hilton’s resurgence has started to play a part in the story, and if he keeps it up through the end of the season it could certainly change whether or not we would go after him, but if Hilton’s last two weeks were just bright spots for him, and he goes back to the same TY we’ve seen most of this season I wouldn’t be surprised to see us go after Robinson. 

Id love to have Robinson, but I highly doubt he comes here with the colts having question marks at QB. Pretty sure he wants to go to an offense that has a good qb. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, tweezy32 said:

Id love to have Robinson, but I highly doubt he comes here with the colts having question marks at QB. Pretty sure he wants to go to an offense that has a good qb. 


Problem is I dunno if he’s gonna get that. He hasn’t helped his case in Chicago. He’s had bad QBs and coaching, but even with that he’s been disappointing. 
 

Michael Gallup is another option. He’s fallen off in Dallas this season with Lamb coming on (the Cowboys got that pick right. He’s gonna be big for them.) He’s been a major disappointment this season so he may be able to be had fairly cheaply. At least for a season. And I’d probably be ok with taking a decently priced chance on Gallup for a season. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • w87r changed the title to Colts 2021 Salary Cap Forecast/Discussion **Updated pg 6**

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...