Started By
Message

re: Brees a bargain compared to Flacco if #s I'm hearing are correct...

Posted on 3/2/13 at 4:01 pm to
Posted by monroesaintsfan
monroe
Member since Feb 2010
309 posts
Posted on 3/2/13 at 4:01 pm to
quote:

By that logic why wouldn't they sign them to 100 percent guaranteed contracts?


Right again. It's the players who shoot for the guaranteed money. Say Joe Blow signs a 100 million contract for 5 years with 50 million guaranteed and the rest in salary. For the next 5 years Joe gets 10 million automatically in Bonus money. But the contract is backloaded so that his 1st yrs. salary is only 1 million. Well after 1 year the team doesn't want Joe anymore so they cut him. Well the team paid him 11 million for that 1 year but they only have the 10 million a year (dead money) for 4 more years due from the original bonus left to pay him. So the 100 million contract Joe signed actually becomes 51 million altogether.

:edit:
I said they paid him 11 million that 1st year. They actually paid him 51 million the 1st year. But only 11 million counts against the cap for the 1st year.
This post was edited on 3/2/13 at 4:07 pm
Posted by wildtigercat93
Member since Jul 2011
112372 posts
Posted on 3/2/13 at 4:09 pm to


Knew i wasnt crazy
Posted by landrywasbeast30
Member since Nov 2011
4904 posts
Posted on 3/2/13 at 4:10 pm to
But wouldn't that team take a massive cap hit if they let that player go? The more there is in guaranteed money, the less the cap hit when they do decide to let that player go right? That's the point of doing these kinds of contracts now. If the player doesn't work out, but you gave him a ton of up front guaranteed money, the owner has to pay up, but it doesn't hurt the team as much cap wise.
This post was edited on 3/2/13 at 4:12 pm
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram