Sisyphean Bills Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 Are the Bills still going to be using their cash-to-cap system? How does this affect their coaching search? What are Russ Smithers and Waylon Overdorf going to do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeastMode54 Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 I'm hoping in an uncapped year that Ralph might actually spend some money to get some players in here. There was a rumor in a previous thread that Cowher needs assurance we will spend money on players as well. Whether this is true or not, this idea is right. If we spend big money on a coach, we definitely need money for the players, and not this cash to cap BS especially in an uncapped year. I really hope Ralph opens the wallet for both the coach AND the players Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan89 Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 Are the Bills still going to be using their cash-to-cap system? How does this affect their coaching search? What are Russ Smithers and Waylon Overdorf going to do? What exactly is the cash to cap system? I keep hearing about this system especially during the Peters saga but I was never fully explained to what exactly was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malazan Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 What exactly is the cash to cap system? I keep hearing about this system especially during the Peters saga but I was never fully explained to what exactly was. It's a system employed by many teams in the NFL where the actual player salaries don't exceed the league cap. There are various ways that a player can count against the cap for a different amount then he is paid. So if the Bills have a player that counts for 1 million against the cap, but is paid 2 million then the Bills count him as a 2 million dollar player. So if the cap was "130 million" then the Bill would spend 128 million after that player's salary is taken into account despite being technically able to spend 129 million. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurlyBurly51 Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 What exactly is the cash to cap system? I keep hearing about this system especially during the Peters saga but I was never fully explained to what exactly was. It basically means whatever cash outlay there is for the year they count against the cap, even though league rules allow you to amortize it (signing bonuses) over the life of the contract. So we sign a top 10 draft pick, and say one big name free agent, you could easily have 20 million in bonuses. The Bills count that 20 mil against their cap spending for the year, whereas under cap rules if you amortized it out over say 5 years it would only be 4 million towards the cap. Makes a big difference if you're trying to assemble a roster with playmakers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan89 Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 It's a system employed by many teams in the NFL where the actual player salaries don't exceed the league cap. There are various ways that a player can count against the cap for a different amount then he is paid. So if the Bills have a player that counts for 1 million against the cap, but is paid 2 million then the Bills count him as a 2 million dollar player. So if the cap was "130 million" then the Bill would spend 128 million after that player's salary is taken into account despite being technically able to spend 129 million. Ok I get it its the idea of spending in real dollars. So if the cap is 130 million you spend up to 130 million including things that don't count against the cap like signing bonuses. Makes sense from a business perspective I guess but thats the way Ralph runs his teams he runs it in a fiscally responsible manner. I don't think Ralph is cheap but he has moments where he can be penny smart and dollar stupid. Ralph picks his spots to save money (Coaching hires/resigning players) and not only does it not save him all that much money but that little extra is worth the big improvement to his product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zazie Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 Ok I get it its the idea of spending in real dollars. So if the cap is 130 million you spend up to 130 million including things that don't count against the cap like signing bonuses. Makes sense from a business perspective I guess but thats the way Ralph runs his teams he runs it in a fiscally responsible manner. I don't think Ralph is cheap but he has moments where he can be penny smart and dollar stupid. Ralph picks his spots to save money (Coaching hires/resigning players) and not only does it not save him all that much money but that little extra is worth the big improvement to his product. Yes his depression era upbringing does not allow him to push liabilities into the future. Good for him. Bad for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malazan Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 Good for him. Bad for us. Actually, it's not a "cheap" way of operating. Most teams do it to avoid "problems" down the road of not being able to sign their players. If you want to argue Ralph hindering the franchise because he's cheap, Cash to Cap is not the policy to use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zazie Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 Actually, it's not a "cheap" way of operating. Most teams do it to avoid "problems" down the road of not being able to sign their players. If you want to argue Ralph hindering the franchise because he's cheap, Cash to Cap is not the policy to use. Isnt RW typically about 20 mill below the cap? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvermike Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 According to USA Today, the Bills' total expenditures on payroll this year (salary, bonuses, etc) was about $112 million, good for 12th in the league. That's more than the Patriots, Bengals, Ravens, Colts, Eagles, Cowboys, and Vikings - e.g. half the playoff teams in the league. We don't suck because we're not spending enough on players. We suck because we choose the wrong players. And so far, there's nobody new in the front office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBillsMagic1 Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 It is not in RW's DNA to spend whatever we can to make this team great. He will only do what is basically minimum enough for us to believe we have a chance to improve and make playoffs to sell tix. RW is cheap , basically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 It is not in RW's DNA to spend whatever we can to make this team great. He will only do what is basically minimum enough for us to believe we have a chance to improve and make playoffs to sell tix. RW is cheap , basically. Did you not read Silvermikes post above yours? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed83HOF Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 According to USA Today, the Bills' total expenditures on payroll this year (salary, bonuses, etc) was about $112 million, good for 12th in the league. That's more than the Patriots, Bengals, Ravens, Colts, Eagles, Cowboys, and Vikings - e.g. half the playoff teams in the league. We don't suck because we're not spending enough on players. We suck because we choose the wrong players. And so far, there's nobody new in the front office. This is very true, considering we handed out large contracts on the OL that did not pan out well at all. The cash to the cap way of accounting for players salaries is the best way to make sure you don't end up in salary cap hell like we did back in 2001 with our roster purge...IIRC the Bills have been in the top 1/3 of the league when it comes to yearly player expenditures each season... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papazoid Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 here's a simple example: Let's say the Bills signed an unrestricted free agent to a five-year deal for $20 million total, that included a signing bonus of $10 million and a base salary of $2 million for each season of the contract. In salary cap terms, the Bills are charged only $4 million per year, arrived at by prorating the signing bonus over five years and then adding the base salary. But in real dollars expended, or payroll, that player cost the Bills $12 million for the first year. That's a difference of $8 million between what the player was actually paid (cash to cap) and what his official league cap charge was for the initial season of the contract. The Bills had a serious "cash flow" issue , which played a heavy role in their 5 year deal with Rogers Communications to bring football to Toronto. Rogers paid the full $78 million upfront which gave the bills the cash they needed to operate. here is a Buffalo News article: "Bills cap- economics 101" from last Feb http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/story/579896.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 Are the Bills still going to be using their cash-to-cap system? How does this affect their coaching search? What are Russ Smithers and Waylon Overdorf going to do? I don't see why he would change. Ralph is just going by a fairly reasonable business rule, a rule followed by all but about ten teams in the NFL, that rule being "Don't spend more on player salaries than you get for player salaries." Not a real difficult concept. And since we aren't going to be getting any extra next year for player salaries, capped or not, don't expect him to spend more than he gets for player salaries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 Yes his depression era upbringing does not allow him to push liabilities into the future. Good for him. Bad for us. He tried it fairly recently. It didn't work out well for him or for us. It resulted in an absolute bloodbath among the players and in Tom Donahoe being brought in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 According to USA Today, the Bills' total expenditures on payroll this year (salary, bonuses, etc) was about $112 million, good for 12th in the league. That's more than the Patriots, Bengals, Ravens, Colts, Eagles, Cowboys, and Vikings - e.g. half the playoff teams in the league. We don't suck because we're not spending enough on players. We suck because we choose the wrong players. And so far, there's nobody new in the front office. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 Ok I get it its the idea of spending in real dollars. So if the cap is 130 million you spend up to 130 million including things that don't count against the cap like signing bonuses. Makes sense from a business perspective I guess but thats the way Ralph runs his teams he runs it in a fiscally responsible manner. I don't think Ralph is cheap but he has moments where he can be penny smart and dollar stupid. Ralph picks his spots to save money (Coaching hires/resigning players) and not only does it not save him all that much money but that little extra is worth the big improvement to his product. It's even easier to understand if you realize (and I didn't for an embarrassingly long time) that each year the maximum money available under the salary cap is EXACTLY what the NFL gives to each team as their portion of the TV contract and other money the league recieves. So it's just that your actual cash outlay (for paying players) is less than your actual cash intake from the league (for paying players). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted January 7, 2010 Author Share Posted January 7, 2010 Many teams are fiscally responsible and manage their cap well. They do not all use the exact same accounting practices. The Bills version, which they call "Cash-to-Cap", has been a problem in that it is designed to protect the team (read: disadvantage player) and they don't seem willing to bend their numbers. For example, they could not, under these self-imposed rules, offer a new contract to both Lee Evans and Jason Peters in the same cap year because they would charge both signing bonuses against their cap space in the same cap year. Therefore, they negotiate from a "queue" of players. This leads to Peters being disgruntled and holding out and the Bills eventual decision to rebuild their OL from scratch. Another example, because they count bonuses immediately, they put themselves behind the 8 ball as far as signing veterans that demand a large signing bonus, a financial commitment by the team so they aren't dumped after a few weeks like Edgerrin James was and embarrassed. By following their own cash-to-cap rules, they took themselves out of the running as far as signing a Derrick Brooks type player to fill an obvious hole and really couldn't even sign a second tier free agent at the position. Thus, they go into the season with the exact same, below average front 7 as they had the previous year. Various meanderings: Am I saying the Bills are "cheap"? No. The problem with cash-to-cap isn't as simple as "being cheap" versus "throwing money around". It is an self-imposed set of rules that has had an impact on how the team is built and has therefore had a direct impact on the players on the field, which is the end product we pay for on Sunday afternoons. Have the Bills brought in the "right" players? No. I've never said otherwise. The team devoid of depth, veteran leadership, and superstars for the most part. I don't believe that this is completely coincidental and just bad luck but rather that there are team internal policies that have affected this situation as well. (Saying John Guy and Tom Modrak are stupid is an overly easy, mundane answer.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeastMode54 Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 According to USA Today, the Bills' total expenditures on payroll this year (salary, bonuses, etc) was about $112 million, good for 12th in the league. That's more than the Patriots, Bengals, Ravens, Colts, Eagles, Cowboys, and Vikings - e.g. half the playoff teams in the league. We don't suck because we're not spending enough on players. We suck because we choose the wrong players. And so far, there's nobody new in the front office. where is all that money going? these players? no way they equal that amount alone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts