Money is not an issue and we will be fine.

Thank you.

Some people say my posts are too long. Some people say, "Hey Bone, tl;dr."

Well I got something else that's too long and it made your momma's scream. Because I'm Big Sexy and I'm just too sweeettttt!

You must be taking about your penis.

Long enough; read it


Love

quote:

---

With people wigging out about this and that I figured I'd post something to show how easy it is to get enough cap space to get almost any player we want.

---

Thanks for posting this, but I pretty much knew this to be the case, even though I haven't sat down and figured it out like you have. It needed to be said though.

I'm wondering if Jimmy's camp is preparing to field offers today. Maybe it's a calculated move by both sides, and that's why the grievance hasn't been filed. We might have told Graham how high we're willing to go, so they both agreed to see what the market would yield. Afterall, a long term deal is what he wants.

If we do strike a long term deal with Jimmy, it'll most likely give us cap space for this year.

I'm not clicking that

quote:

---

Cutting our top run stopper while Jenkins is only in his second season to me isn't a good idea. He restructured last year didn't he?

---

I agree I don't like the idea of cutting our best interior run defender(Jordan was our best overall).

BUT he only played 25% of the snaps last year and is making not only starter money but very good starter money.

If he is willing to take a pay cut to stay I'd love to keep him, but his contract this year and the next 2 after is way too large for his role.

This is the exact reason Moore, Sproles, and Harper got cut(though out of all of them Harper was being used far more per game).

quote:

---

I think we did enough restructuring last year to keep us in a mess for the next couple years.

---

If you fully understand how the cap and contracts work then you know that back loading and restructuring are key to running a successful franchise when you are paying a top QB(or any extremely high priced guy(s)).

We are actually in pretty damn good shape next year and my point was to show how little of the cap we lose in the future vs. the extreme amount of restructures.

I think more realistically you do the 2 or 3 guys that you know are in your future plans because we need the cap more this year than next year, especially with the cap ballooning up in the coming years.

And the back loading helps with this because it allows you to pay really good players less than their per year number really is because they usually don't see the final year or two as originally structured.

That means just when it seems we are in cap hell we easily pull our way out by cutting guys that are too old and expensive for their contracts. It's necessary. Don't be surprised if Colston is gone next year for instance(unless he takes a pay cut).

As long as you keep the restructures within reason(definitely don't want to push $10m+ forward into each year every year) like my example of only Evans and Lewis(puts($2.8m on next year's cap) we'll be fine.

Bone bone bone bone bone bone bone bone....so tell me what you gonna do

quote:

---

That means just when it seems we are in cap hell we easily pull our way out by cutting guys that are too old and expensive for their contracts. It's necessary. Don't be surprised if Colston is gone next year for instance(unless he takes a pay cut).

---

Can you explain the restructuring a little bit.

Let's say hypothetically Colston signed a 5 year 35 million dollar deal. Yet we backloaded year 4 & 5 with 20 million of that.

We can just cut him with no repercussions in year 4? How much of that 20 million would be dead money?

TIA