Salary Cap/Restructuring

[JayhawkMike]

It feels like about every team is doing funky salary cap voodoo but us. Am I wrong on that? Can we not do what they are doing or choosing not to for some reason?

I see no restructures/little cap space and few draft picks to complete the teams needs so keep waiting to hear about our cap voodoo though it’s too late on a lot of the available talent.

 

[AgentDib]

It's not free money, restructuring is taking future win probability and spending it this season instead.

It can make sense if your team has a particular window of opportunity (QB on rookie contract, bad division) but I haven't seen any compelling arguments for why the Seahawks should sacrifice the future for wins in 2021. We are in the toughest division in the NFL with our best players on expensive contracts.

 

[chris98251]

It's not free money, restructuring is taking future win probability and spending it this season instead.

It can make sense if your team has a particular window of opportunity (QB on rookie contract, bad division) but I haven't seen any compelling arguments for why the Seahawks should sacrifice the future for wins in 2021. We are in the toughest division in the NFL with our best players on expensive contracts.

Our particular window of opportunity. This year or Wilson is probably gone without a push in the playoffs.

Push in the playoffs is not wild card invite to sit at the Kiddie table and then be sent to your room.

This year or next and Pete could be retired and or gone based on performance.

This year we have our players, we start losing them with no depth this and next year and will be in rebuild mode with a QB if Wilson stays making 40 million a year plus and little resources to build with.

NFL just got a 10 billion a year TV contract, one could bet that the cap will be 195 to 200 million next year.

 

[AgentDib]

Most of those arguments could justify going for it this year if you really feel the situation is as dire as some around here do.

The cap going up isn't a good reason for spending future dollars. What matters is how we compare to other teams, and having less money in the future compared to them is still a comparative disadvantage. Conversely, if other teams are going for it in 2021 but we are being savvy with our cap then that gives us a comparative advantage in future years where we aren't paying for previous bad contracts.

 

[mikeak]

To NOT move money to the future this year is plain stupid. No discussion about it

We have a reduced cap due to Covid. This will go away and cap will jump up

We will have a doubled TV revenue deal for NFL. This makes attendance money a smaller percentage and insulates the NFL from future shutdowns.

The cap will be going up massively. Pushing money to the future during this and next year is a no-brainer to remain competitive

Every team moves money around. Saints have been competitive for 6+ years doing this. Not saying to be that extreme, but this year is an anomaly

 

[jammerhawk]

In order to do the Pocic deal the team had to move around about $1.5 million as according to OTC.com they only had about just less than $1.5 million available cap remaining when the deal was reached. There are going to be many other deals made as well including signing their rookies made with borrowed cap.

They’re moving money yet it doesn’t get talked about. Carry on with your constant negativity though.

The renewed TV deal and the reduced cap points sharply at the greed of the owners to make the players eat the revenue loss although the losses and cap levels were discussed and the level cap set by agreement with the players union. The owners get a huge financial windfall and that isn’t a factor in this year’s cap. The cap this year should be $210 mil plus and next year based on the original formula greater than $220, but it won’t be and the owners will benefit greatly.

 

[JayhawkMike]

A lot of smart backloaded deals with guaranteed money in year 2/3 with other teams. Our deals are mostly the one year variety if I’m reading things right.

 

[mikeak]

In order to do the Pocic deal the team had to move around about $1.5 million as according to OTC.com they only had about just less than $1.5 million available cap remaining when the deal was reached. There are going to be many other deals made as well including signing their rookies made with borrowed cap.

They’re moving money yet it doesn’t get talked about. Carry on with your constant negativity though.

The renewed TV deal and the reduced cap points sharply at the greed of the owners to make the players eat the revenue loss although the losses and cap levels were discussed and the level cap set by agreement with the players union. The owners get a huge financial windfall and that isn’t a factor in this year’s cap. The cap this year should be $210 mil plus and next year based on the original formula greater than $220, but it won’t be and the owners will benefit greatly.

This doesn't make sense

The split is percentage based and tied to prior year. Covid losses were split out on 3 years. Next year's cap will have the increase tied to the TV revenue.

Players this year doesn't see the money, but they do next year. Completely confused why you think owners are getting a financial windfall that doesn't get distributed over upcoming years per the labor agreement

 

[mikeak]

A lot of smart backloaded deals with guaranteed money in year 2/3 with other teams. Our deals are mostly the one year variety if I’m reading things right.

Agree 100% with this

As the cap goes up dramatically longer term deals now have good value later. Players know this so they push for shorter term

We should be doing 2-4 year deals like many other teams. We have been on the 1-year deal plan for several years now and it kills comp picks and getting value in the future.

 

[Jville]

The Pete Carroll / John Schneider program is navigating thru free agency very well.

Today's published OTC number of $426,987 under the cap sure discredits the forum "Too Cheap" accusers of 24 and 48 hours ago. :lol: Gives real meaning, for the rest of us, to that posted VMAC advisory to "ignore the noise".

 

[FlyingGreg]

Restructures are kind of like paying on a credit card - you get what you want for now but that bill comes due. It can be tricky.

The Seahawks have about 60% of their cap tied up in just seven players (Wilson, Wagner, Lockett, Reed, Brown, Adams, Jackson). Wilson ($32m) and Wagner ($17.15m) alone account for a roughly $50 million cap hit for 2021.

Wilson and Wagner are really the only restructure candidates that would make a dent. The others will have to be extensions, which is also a bit tricky.

Also, keep in mind, there are MASSIVE deals looming for Metcalf and Adams.

Cap management is not just what's going on now - they have to look long term, and work projections, plans and contingencies accordingly many years down the line. Lots of moving parts.

This isn't a Super Bowl roster, so the other points about the "window" are accurate. I think the front office knows that, and they won't admit it - but they are budgeting for the future.

 

[AgentDib]

Every team moves money around. Saints have been competitive for 6+ years doing this. Not saying to be that extreme, but this year is an anomaly

I'm surprised you are using the Saints as a reason to borrow money from the future. They haven't been more successful than the Hawks have, particularly if you consider how much weaker their division has been. And while the Hawks have largely avoided these moves the Saints have spent liberally and have lost a big part of their roster this season paying the price.

The cap will be going up massively. Pushing money to the future during this and next year is a no-brainer to remain competitive

I think this notion of an increased cap justifying borrowing stems from comparisons to household spending and government spending and neither are good analogies. The question isn't how the Hawks can manage their own finances in an insular view, but how they compare in every year going forwards to competitors in a winner take all competition.

It's also not like the relative value of players changes that quickly; $10m is going to be the price of a good guard in 2023 just like it is in 2021 and if you spend that money now then you won't have it then.

Deficit spending works (to the extent it does) largely because governments inflate away debt. The Saints didn't get to choose to raise their own salary cap this season but were fixed to the same level as every other team.

Or to put it another way, imagine if we had restructured these contracts last year to go even more all in but had still not won the Super Bowl as a result. We could have $20m+ less to spend than we already do this season.

 

[onanygivensunday]

In order to do the Pocic deal the team had to move around about $1.5 million as according to OTC.com they only had about just less than $1.5 million available cap remaining when the deal was reached. There are going to be many other deals made as well including signing their rookies made with borrowed cap.

They’re moving money yet it doesn’t get talked about. Carry on with your constant negativity though.

The renewed TV deal and the reduced cap points sharply at the greed of the owners to make the players eat the revenue loss although the losses and cap levels were discussed and the level cap set by agreement with the players union. The owners get a huge financial windfall and that isn’t a factor in this year’s cap. The cap this year should be $210 mil plus and next year based on the original formula greater than $220, but it won’t be and the owners will benefit greatly.

This doesn't make sense

The split is percentage based and tied to prior year. Covid losses were split out on 3 years. Next year's cap will have the increase tied to the TV revenue.

Players this year doesn't see the money, but they do next year. Completely confused why you think owners are getting a financial windfall that doesn't get distributed over upcoming years per the labor agreement

Exactly.

I recently read that the cap this year, by the CBA formula, should have been close to $160M per team but the agreement between the owners and the NFLPA set it at $182.5M... the conclusion being, the owners are working with the players to prop up the league's finances.

 

[sutz]

Isn't one of the reasons that the dead cap hit on Russ's deal because we re-structured him already to sign Dunlap? They pushed money to the back end of his deal last year, thus his dead money is $39 mill over the last two years.

 

[hinton]

The Pete Carroll / John Schneider program is navigating thru free agency very well.

Today's published OTC number of $426,987 under the cap sure discredits the forum "Too Cheap" accusers of 24 and 48 hours ago. :lol: Gives real meaning, for the rest of us, to that posted VMAC advisory to "ignore the noise".

Preach! Say it louder for the overreaction brigade

 

[jammerhawk]

I read somewhere that RW has a roster bonus of $10 mil that could be restructured, and of course part of his $35 mil salary could be converted to bonus. Sutz is right though the team has been borrowing against RWs bonuses or salary as his contract allows it’s all guaranteed money for him if structured as bonus.

My point above is while the union (players) and the owners agreed to and shared the COVID losses with the owners taking the bigger share, the owners knew this big deal would happen for TV and that deal likely was finished in the last season and could have been calculated in the annual cap calculations. It provided a huge financial benefit to the owners and ought to have been factored notwithstanding the agreed upon formula for calculation. This cap decrease screws teams that try to spend up to the cap and not be cheap. Most of them have all done forward planning based upon the calculations of an approximate 10% increase in revenue per year. If the TV deal was even partially factored in nobody would have been screwed.

Given the large clawback where will the owners have the cap start at next season for the cap increase for the 2022 season? Will the base amount be $182.5 million or the appropriate $198.4 mil? Bet on the former. When billionaires make billions everyone other than them gets worked over to the advantage of the rich guys. So we now have a season where the appropriate to cap spenders are punished for not being cheap to the advantage of the cheaper teams. To me the owners finally through a situation which hurt everyone including them financially to a degree, they worked over their employees instead of being bigger and taking the loss (?was it actually a loss?) and writing it off. Instead half the teams in the league or more to some degree or another have their options for next season limited by this situation and the assured money is there, the greed creates an uneven playing field.

So in terms of the deal my comment is technically wrong, but in reality the owners will benefit and we will see where the cap starts next season.

Cap calculation is complicated and arcane and the team is pretty good at staying close to the competitive line. Of course the usual bottom feeders don’t and now to the disadvantage of the players are rewarded with rather ability to buy a good roster, in all likelihood it will just hurt those who were living to the spirit of the agreement, planned ahead, then got caught by an unexpected cap drop.

 

[jammerhawk]

The restructuring is ongoing with the re-upping of Carson that money came from another deal. No drama and an interesting team friendly Carson deal as well.

Let's now see if the team can get some DLine and CB help.

 

[Jville]

As of this moment, OTC now lists the Seahawks cap number as ($1,413,013) over the cap.

This is a most interesting off season.

 

[jammerhawk]

OTC.com just hasn’t caught up.

 

[mikeak]

Jammerhawk - no copying your big post, but still completely lost

2020 cap is based upon 2019 financials

The future TV deal is irrelevant to prior years cap. Completely irrelevant.

The revenue is shared based on percentages. So this year's cap was artificially INCREASED to not have the huge swing from last year's covid impact.

Everyone knew the TV deal was coming, but that gain gets paid out in the future

It is how the cap was designed and probably how it will always be. It is the best way for both sides

There is literally nothing one-sided about it