Quote:
Originally Posted by jason j  Two contentions I'd make to that would be:
1.) Front loading the contract doesn't relieve the organization from paying the money. It's not the cap, it's the money. You're not going to front load $40 million or $50 million of a $80 million contract for the purpose of end-arounding the salary cap system. Especially a guy with a very real, very recent injury history.
You can't do it in signing bonus, because the NFL has very strict rules on how much of a contract can be designated as "signing bonus" in relation to salary.
NFL owners aren't interested in beating the system when it comes to the salary cap. They like it. The only thing they like more than the salary cap, is dead cap space. Money they don't have to pay out in the current year that is being tied up contractually to monies that have been accounted for in prior fiscal years.
2.) I can't for a minute believe that if you throw a rookie quarterback out there (which in today's NFL, you'll have to do), and get this team to 8-8 or 9-7 - in deference to your draft position of 14-20. More often than not, teams that draft in the top 10 and take a quarterback, return to the top ten in the subsequent season.
My thinking is, if the Browns can get up to #1 by giving up a 2nd in 2011... I won't blow a gasket. I wouldn't do it. I wouldn't touch Bradford with the proverbial 10 foot pole. Not in the top 10 anyway. But that's just me. I don't think Holmgren, Heckert, and Mangini want to rest their jobs and reputations on the rickety right shoulder of a guy who hasn't played a meaningful game in more than a year. I wouldn't do it. But they don't ask me these things.
-jj |
Thanks Jason!
1) YOU did cover the one question I meant to ask. Can it be in "signing bonus" or would it have to all be in first year salary. IF it's all in first year salary I can see that being a bigger issue because you are then somewhat setting a precedent for what a guy is paid.
I get your point that the owners like the cap. But given Clevelands history. I could see Holmgren convincing Lerner to do it just this once to really make a huge
PR splash type move. But I get where you are coming from.
2) I think you misunderstood. Moving to15-20 next year was assumed we DIDN'T draft Braddford and let Delhome play this year in hopes of drafting a guy next year. I 100% agree with you that if you draft Braddford he HAS to play this year, likely week 1. and that likely means this team is drafting in the top 10 again.
On your last point. That's the other thing I don't claim to understand. Could you do it for only a second next year? How about our highest 3rd this year with a "conditional" 3rd next year based on Bradfords stats or something? or two 3rds this year?
and yeah like I said. I'm not sure I would do this either. It's just something I thought of driving into work this morning listening to Greenberg talk about how the Rams may not want to pay a QB that much money, and it hit me about the cap implications of an "uncapped" year and hwo it might affect contracts. Which then led me to this draft scenario