- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message

Why is the Saints cap situation so bad?
Posted on 12/24/24 at 7:12 am
Posted on 12/24/24 at 7:12 am
For a casual fan. I mean at least other struggling teams like Raiders and Patriots will have a ton of money to spend. Hard to see the Saints improving dramatically anytime soon with the cap situation.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 7:15 am to Allthatfades
Should have fully embraced the tank without signing so many older players.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 7:21 am to Allthatfades
Do you remember a few seasons ago when we were like $80-100M over the cap? We "kicked the can" and spread out those overages over future years.
Just a basic primer on NFL signing bonuses. The player gets the money up front but the cap impact is spread over the life of the deal. If you cut a player prior to the end of that deal, the cap impact that hadn't affect your cap accelerates.
So, just an easy example. 4 year contract with $20M signing bonus. The cap impacts are:
Year1: $5M
Year2: $5M
Year3: $5M
Year4: $5M
If you cut the player prior to year 3, then year 3 will have that $10M pro-rated portion that hadn't yet hit the cap, accelerated onto the cap of year 3. This $10M is called "dead money".
So to apply this to the saints, when we were $80-100M over the cap, we had a ton of large base salaries. These are counted 100% against the cap in the year when they are received. What "Loomising" is, was converting that base salary into a signing bonus, spreading the impact of that money over more years. This is the "kicking" (spreading of impact) of the "can" (monetary impact on our cap).
The problem is if you do this over and over, you end up with HUGE balls of dead money, where it becomes prohibitive to get rid of a player. You can't cut them and save money, and you need to save money to get under the huge holes dug in ($80-100M over the cap scenarios).
So Loomis compounded the situation by using void years. So that 4/20 scenario above becomes 5/20. The 5th year is a void year, so it counts to spread out the cap impact, but there is no salary. So now it's $4M/year and that 5th year requires either extending the player or eating a large dead cap (which is difficult to do if we're *$80-100M over the cap). We extended Cam Jordan to an insane deal this offseason because we didn't want to eat his void year (although admittedly we did let Peat walk and ate his, so they're trying to nibble when they can).
The contracts of Lattimore and Ramczyk have been our "cookie jar" and the injury to Ramczyk and the issues with Latt have caused us to accelerate the plan. Signing Carr to that deal is utterly insane given the scenario involved.
Just a basic primer on NFL signing bonuses. The player gets the money up front but the cap impact is spread over the life of the deal. If you cut a player prior to the end of that deal, the cap impact that hadn't affect your cap accelerates.
So, just an easy example. 4 year contract with $20M signing bonus. The cap impacts are:
Year1: $5M
Year2: $5M
Year3: $5M
Year4: $5M
If you cut the player prior to year 3, then year 3 will have that $10M pro-rated portion that hadn't yet hit the cap, accelerated onto the cap of year 3. This $10M is called "dead money".
So to apply this to the saints, when we were $80-100M over the cap, we had a ton of large base salaries. These are counted 100% against the cap in the year when they are received. What "Loomising" is, was converting that base salary into a signing bonus, spreading the impact of that money over more years. This is the "kicking" (spreading of impact) of the "can" (monetary impact on our cap).
The problem is if you do this over and over, you end up with HUGE balls of dead money, where it becomes prohibitive to get rid of a player. You can't cut them and save money, and you need to save money to get under the huge holes dug in ($80-100M over the cap scenarios).
So Loomis compounded the situation by using void years. So that 4/20 scenario above becomes 5/20. The 5th year is a void year, so it counts to spread out the cap impact, but there is no salary. So now it's $4M/year and that 5th year requires either extending the player or eating a large dead cap (which is difficult to do if we're *$80-100M over the cap). We extended Cam Jordan to an insane deal this offseason because we didn't want to eat his void year (although admittedly we did let Peat walk and ate his, so they're trying to nibble when they can).
The contracts of Lattimore and Ramczyk have been our "cookie jar" and the injury to Ramczyk and the issues with Latt have caused us to accelerate the plan. Signing Carr to that deal is utterly insane given the scenario involved.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 7:32 am to Allthatfades
At the end of the Brees era, we were extending contracts (see SFP’s post above) trying to win.
After Brees retired we kept trying to win and extended guys like Carr, Jordan, Kamara, Peat, Lattimore, etc. this is the opposite of what some of the teams like the Raiders and Patriots did. That’s why they are worse than us, but better financially.
We need to let Carr play out his contract, draft well the next two years and start building a good core of players. Build around guys like Fuaga and Breese.
After Brees retired we kept trying to win and extended guys like Carr, Jordan, Kamara, Peat, Lattimore, etc. this is the opposite of what some of the teams like the Raiders and Patriots did. That’s why they are worse than us, but better financially.
We need to let Carr play out his contract, draft well the next two years and start building a good core of players. Build around guys like Fuaga and Breese.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 7:42 am to Allthatfades
Chasing a championship run where the window clearly shut several years prior.
Loomis is an addict for that drug.
Loomis is an addict for that drug.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 7:49 am to Suntiger
The strategy kind of worked as long as the salary cap kept going up. But, the salary cap went down for the first time ever in the COVID year, which threw a wrench into the gears of Loomis’ untraditional system. We were playing with fire and got burnt.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 7:53 am to Allthatfades
quote:
Why is the Saints cap situation so bad?
Posted on 12/24/24 at 9:16 am to geauxtigers87
So as a Saints fan, we have to bite the bullet for likely 4 more seasons before a serious championship run can commence.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 10:02 am to Klingler7
quote:
we have to bite the bullet for likely 4 more seasons
at least... could be longer, if we don't hit on pretty much every single draft pick
quote:
serious championship run
there's no guarantee that we will even have that after the "biting the bullet" approach... we all hope that's the end result, but the only thing it would guarantee would be we are more in line with the salary cap going forward
Posted on 12/24/24 at 11:02 am to Geauxldilocks
quote:
Arrogance.
Yep.
It's called being Arrogant and unaware of your own incapabilities. It's called thinking that you are smart and competent, but, really, you are not smart and rather incompetent. It's called having a "bean counter" run the player personnel analysis and acquisitions and being too arrogant to realize that you need a TRUE "football personnel" guy as your GM.
This is the stuff that crashes Empires, my friends, and, rest assured, it will crash the New Orleans NFL franchise, which indeed was never close to any kind of "empire" or "dynasty", unless one can achieve a Dynasty of Failure.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 11:04 am to Allthatfades
Many on this board said the “cap is a myth”. Loomis took them seriously.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 11:22 am to Allthatfades
Drew Bree$
Tom played for Super Bowls.
Drew played for money.
Tom played for Super Bowls.
Drew played for money.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 11:32 am to Friendly Satan
quote:
Drew Bree$ Tom played for Super Bowls. Drew played for money.
You can argue this case. Drew famously forced the Saints to franchise tag him and ended up getting $20M annually vs $19M offered at the time for 5 years.
Carl Nix was exposed to FA when he could’ve been tagged and the team suffered through 3 straight 7-9 seasons in Brees’ prime.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 11:39 am to Friendly Satan
Drew played for many years below what he could have been payed.
A real source of our cap issues are due to trading draft picks to draft or sign one player. And those players didn’t reach potential.
A real source of our cap issues are due to trading draft picks to draft or sign one player. And those players didn’t reach potential.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 11:58 am to Allthatfades
Wasted moves with lack of foresight.
Posted on 12/24/24 at 3:21 pm to Allthatfades
(no message)
This post was edited on 12/25/24 at 2:05 pm
Posted on 12/24/24 at 4:32 pm to Geauxldilocks
quote:
You can argue this case. Drew famously forced the Saints to franchise tag him and ended up getting $20M annually vs $19M offered at the time for 5 years. Carl Nix was exposed to FA when he could’ve been tagged and the team suffered through 3 straight 7-9 seasons in Brees’ prime.
Drew earned every penny and probably more. Front office overpaid several bad free agents during his years, and bad drafting. Spent alot of stupid money on free agent defensive players that were total busts.
Jarius Byrd, Jason David, Kevin Kaesvihorn, Brandon browner, Kurt Coleman, nick fairly. CJ Spiller, Colby Fleener. All bad signings that cost a ton of money.
This post was edited on 12/24/24 at 4:33 pm
Popular
Back to top

17








