Taylor Mays To Bengals

[Sheepdog]

@Hillis-iz-Boss, you couldn't have said it any better. They lost Ochocinco, lost Palmer and now they trade for Mays...I guess they are trying to get Andrew Luck next year in the draft.

[hoorta]

@sheepdog said:

@Hillis-iz-Boss, you couldn't have said it any better. They lost Ochocinco, lost Palmer and now they trade for Mays...I guess they are trying to get Andrew Luck next year in the draft.

That is the plan in Bungle Land. But they really didn't "lose" Plamer. Mike the a-hole Brown decided he'd rather get nothing for Palmer instead of the draft pick they certainly could have gotten for Carson. Dalton has looked terrible in preseason. Of course Luck can decide to sit out another season and re-enter the draft in 2013. Oh wait- the Bengals will be drafting first then too.

[choco]

its sooooo premature to say we're 2-0 already. thats why they play the games....

[Mr. T]

I see the Bengals are spending money to get over the mininum and still grabbing garbage off the street.

[WRREBEL]

The bengals don't care about getting over the minium.

Listen to those like choco and tim couch pulls out who honeslty don't understand how the new cba works.

teams like bengals, cheif, bills and bucs will get a so called free ride until 2013 when the cap minimun hits individual.

So what ever money they are under the cap they will pocket. I would not expect them to get to the league minimun until 2013 when its mandatory.

[Tim Couch Pulls Out]

I never finished pooping, hence the lack of a posted link.

[WRREBEL]

Zombo, I agree with you one the aspect of those teams could be doing that setting themseelf up for years. But the bucs, cheifs bills and bengals are notoriuos for being cheap.

I read that the bucs could basically resign josh freeman if the wanted to 5 years 50 milion and have 25 million against the cap this year. I will post the article.

Does anyone know if joe thomas contract how much goes against the 24 million we have to spend this year??

The Minimum Myth

In evaluating the new CBA and determining the “winners and losers” that we love to do, many—including this writer—evaluated the cash minimum spending requirements of the NFL and its teams to be important “wins” for the Players. I thought the key for the Players was to require the under spending teams to spend up to higher floors, making the league more competitive and the players more evenly compensated.

Looking further into the details, I still think it’s a “win” for the Players, but not to the extent I had thought. Here’s the rub: there are no team spending requirements in this CBA until 2013!

There are league spending requirements, which is definitely a good thing for player spending, but it does not have the teeth were the requirement on an individual team basis.

The league spending requirement for 2011 and 2012 mandates that league wide cash spending reach 99% of the Cap, or approximately $3.8 billion of player spending. As shown above, teams can routinely spend more cash than Cap, with teams like the Panthers and Colts spending $30 million each on one player.

Thus, I don’t anticipate the minimum spending requirement being an issue in 2011. The NFL teams—collectively—will spend.

On the team level, however, there are no requirements this year and next. That allows teams—pick your favorite target franchise not spending in this recent frenzy (Bengals, Buccaneers, Bills, Chiefs, etc.)—to “free-ride” off of the higher spending teams while the league as a whole meets the spending requirement.

Even in the now-expired CBA—the one that the Bills and Bengals voted against—there were Cap minimum spending requirements, although no cash minimums. It is hard to know why at least Cap minimums were not included in the new CBA for this year and next. I know that tougher team minimums are coming in 2013, but that is for then to discuss, not now.

Time will tell if player spending on the team level is what the NFLPA hoped it would be for the next two years, but nothing is in place to mandate that. Cash over Cap lives, but not necessarily everywhere in the NFL….

Follow me on Twitter at adbrandt.

[WRREBEL]

Zombo here is a good article regarding your point..

http://www.businessinsider.com/nfl-these-11-teams-must-spend-300m-just-to-reach-salary-floor-2011-7

NFL: These 11 Teams Must Spend $300M Just To Reach Salary Floor

Cork Gaines | Jul. 22, 2011, 12:57 PM | 1,810 | A A A

x Email ArticleFrom To Email Sent!You have successfully emailed the post.

inShare.3

See Also:

We’re Paying Attention To The NFL Preseason So You Don’t Have To: Takeaways From Week TwoSPORTS CHART OF THE DAY: Titans Would Be Crazy To Give Chris Johnson A Huge ContractWhat It's REALLY Like To Tailgate For A Meaningless NFL Preseason Game

Eleven teams are at least $30 million under the NFL's proposed salary cap of $120 million.

The Tampa Bay Buccaneers lead the way at a whopping $59.2 million and will need to spend $47.2 million just to reach the new salary floor ($108M).

But will these teams spend all the money in free agency? Not necessarily.

If a team has a solid core of young players and has a ton of space under the cap, this may be the year to sign those guys to long-term deals.

Take Josh Freeman of the Bucs. Freeman has three years left on his five-year, $36 million contract, and is coming off one of the best seasons ever for a young quarterback. Now let's say the Bucs want to lock him up through his peak years and give him a five-year, $50 million deal.

But, what if the Bucs give Freeman $25 million of that contract up front, and instead of making it a signing bonus, the Bucs make that his 2011 salary.

Freeman would love this because he gets a ton of guaranteed money up front in 2011 dollars. And the Bucs would love it because they have their franchise QB locked up long-term. And because he is taking $25 million this season, their franchise quarterback will only count $5 million against the cap each of the next five seasons giving the Bucs cap flexibility for years to come.

Or maybe the Bucs will just go out and give Nnamdi Asomugha $20 million.

There is a great deal of money out there to be spent. And with the free agent frenzy set to begin next week, some of it will be thrown in that direction. But don't be surprised if several of these 11 team hold some money back to keep their teams strong for years to come.

Please follow Sports Page on Twitter and Facebook.

Follow Cork Gaines on Twitter.

Ask Cork A Question >

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/nfl-these-11-teams-must-spend-300m-just-to-reach-salary-floor-2011-7#ixzz1VuH4UNUQ

[choco]

you say i dont understand it....yet you think teams just get to pocket....POCKET....the unspent money? you muct really like looking at your colon with as much time as you spend with your head up your ass....

lmao.....thats rich!

[WRREBEL]

@choco said:

you say i dont understand it....yet you think teams just get to pocket....POCKET....the unspent money? you muct really like looking at your colon with as much time as you spend with your head up your ass....

lmao.....thats rich!

hahaha einstein, they do get to pocket the money... Ok so tell me when the Bengals dont spend up to the cap max every year, where does that money go????

Your an idiot if you dont understand the concept of the salary cap and the salary cap floor..

You tell me, why wouldnt you spend to the max every year if you were the bucs, bengals cheifs and Bills. Here is a link that will help you understand why the Bengals rake in money despite losing.

http://bengals.enquirer.com/2002/10/20/ben_bengals_rake_in.html

Why Choco, whatever do you mean? Maybe math's just not your game Choco. I know! Let's have a spelling contest!

[hoorta]

@wrrebel said:

Zombo here is a good article regarding your point..

http://www.businessinsider.com/nfl-these-11-teams-must-spend-300m-just-to-reach-salary-floor-2011-7

NFL: These 11 Teams Must Spend $300M Just To Reach Salary Floor

Cork Gaines | Jul. 22, 2011, 12:57 PM | 1,810 | A A A

x Email ArticleFrom To Email Sent!You have successfully emailed the post.

inShare.3

See Also:

We’re Paying Attention To The NFL Preseason So You Don’t Have To: Takeaways From Week TwoSPORTS CHART OF THE DAY: Titans Would Be Crazy To Give Chris Johnson A Huge ContractWhat It's REALLY Like To Tailgate For A Meaningless NFL Preseason Game

Eleven teams are at least $30 million under the NFL's proposed salary cap of $120 million.

The Tampa Bay Buccaneers lead the way at a whopping $59.2 million and will need to spend $47.2 million just to reach the new salary floor ($108M).

But will these teams spend all the money in free agency? Not necessarily.

If a team has a solid core of young players and has a ton of space under the cap, this may be the year to sign those guys to long-term deals.

Take Josh Freeman of the Bucs. Freeman has three years left on his five-year, $36 million contract, and is coming off one of the best seasons ever for a young quarterback. Now let's say the Bucs want to lock him up through his peak years and give him a five-year, $50 million deal.

But, what if the Bucs give Freeman $25 million of that contract up front, and instead of making it a signing bonus, the Bucs make that his 2011 salary.

Freeman would love this because he gets a ton of guaranteed money up front in 2011 dollars. And the Bucs would love it because they have their franchise QB locked up long-term. And because he is taking $25 million this season, their franchise quarterback will only count $5 million against the cap each of the next five seasons giving the Bucs cap flexibility for years to come.

Or maybe the Bucs will just go out and give Nnamdi Asomugha $20 million.

There is a great deal of money out there to be spent. And with the free agent frenzy set to begin next week, some of it will be thrown in that direction. But don't be surprised if several of these 11 team hold some money back to keep their teams strong for years to come.

Please follow Sports Page on Twitter and Facebook.

Follow Cork Gaines on Twitter.

Ask Cork A Question >

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/nfl-these-11-teams-must-spend-300m-just-to-reach-salary-floor-2011-7#ixzz1VuH4UNUQ

Gee thanks for making our point for us, pointless. What did the Browns just do? Lock Joe Thomas into a long term contract? DUH And they have a truckload of cap room to do the same for Colt and Peyton next year if they have monster seasons?

Furthermore, unlike cheapskate Mike Brown- Randy Lerner has proven time and time again he's more than willing to spend whatever it takes to field a winner. Sorry if unlike you, some of us feel that scraping washed up whale shit off of the bottom of the ocean to the tune of $24 million to win an extra game or two this year isn't worth blowing our cap space when we can really compete next year- just isn't worth it.

[choco]

Wow....as hoorta pointed out....ur little articles illustrate the opposite point ur trying to make. Notice...for example....how it says Freeman should benefit from a new deal? Did u miss that?

Stick with Madden son....

[WRREBEL]

Hoorta and choco, I'm a little concerned that you guys maybe on strong pain killers.

I was posting an article that supported zombos point.

My question again is how much is joe thomas signing bonus hit against this years cap number.

Please try to read, choco I'm not sure what to tell u other than u appear to have a 5th grade education. Its never to late to go back to school

[WRREBEL]

choco. I love the way you argue it brings back memories of 3rd grade.

You and tim couch poops out, called me out for not knowing how the cap works. I have posted articles supporting my stance and asking you to provide any information u have supporting your argument.

Face it I'm right and your wrong. Maybe it was my madden playing that gave me such good knowledge of the cap. I would crush u in madden

[choco]

Ur flip flopping a bit here......

Ur on record as whining because we don't waste our current cap on rental players. Then u post some articles explaining exactly why we are not blowing all that money....for long term stability of the franchise. Do u understand that we are using the new CBA rules to our advantage?

Sounds like ur saying that we should just waste cap because it's there even tho we are not required to....even if doing so compromises our ability to lock up our core players. Ur deluded in thinking its because of greed in every case rather than smart management. Furthermore ur using Mike brown as evidence that Randy Lerner is doing exactly that....ignoring the fact he makes no personnel decisions like brown and al Davis do. If Lerner was cheap, wouldn't he forego firing yet another entire front office and wait till the contracts expired? Try taking ur "logic" to its final conclusion....

Notice those teams u cite as greedy have been struggling the past several seasons? I wonder why they'd be gearing up to have cap flexibility....

Greed is the conclusion u reached cause frankly.....ur not smart enough to come up with anything else.

[marcus]

@sheepdog said:

@Hillis-iz-Boss, you couldn't have said it any better. They lost Ochocinco, lost Palmer and now they trade for Mays...I guess they are trying to get Andrew Luck next year in the draft.

I'm willing to bet that San Fransisco will be worse. Harbaugh is obviously throwing this season so he can get that golden arm wonderboy back with the ol' ball coach.

[WRREBEL]

@choco said:

Ur flip flopping a bit here......

Ur on record as whining because we don't waste our current cap on rental players. Then u post some articles explaining exactly why we are not blowing all that money....for long term stability of the franchise. Do u understand that we are using the new CBA rules to our advantage?

Sounds like ur saying that we should just waste cap because it's there even tho we are not required to....even if doing so compromises our ability to lock up our core players. Ur deluded in thinking its because of greed in every case rather than smart management. Furthermore ur using Mike brown as evidence that Randy Lerner is doing exactly that....ignoring the fact he makes no personnel decisions like brown and al Davis do. If Lerner was cheap, wouldn't he forego firing yet another entire front office and wait till the contracts expired? Try taking ur "logic" to its final conclusion....

Notice those teams u cite as greedy have been struggling the past several seasons? I wonder why they'd be gearing up to have cap flexibility....

Greed is the conclusion u reached cause frankly.....ur not smart enough to come up with anything else.

again apparently you have a hard time reading. I posted something that supported what ZOMBO was saying. If you have read any of my posts it would be, that we dont leave any money unspent this year. So of that 24 million if they spend it on current players I would be ok with. Yes I would have rather them sign some players this year. I have made that crystal clear.

Just because an article goes away from how i feel, if it supports some one else's post i still post it.,

You have never answered my question, where does the money goto if the owners dont meet the cap??? Maybe you dont want to answer cause u know im right>

[Tim Couch Pulls Out]

@wrrebel said:

again apparently you have a hard time reading. I posted something that supported what ZOMBO was saying. If you have read any of my posts it would be, that we dont leave any money unspent this year. So of that 24 million if they spend it on current players I would be ok with. Yes I would have rather them sign some players this year. I have made that crystal clear.

Just because an article goes away from how i feel, if it supports some one else's post i still post it.,

You have never answered my question, where does the money goto if the owners dont meet the cap??? Maybe you dont want to answer cause u know im right>

I did answer your question. It goes to the organizations. Not the owners. The owners do not pocket left over money, imbecile. It goes to the millions of upgrades stadiums have every year to improve the game day experience of you, the fan.

All of the money goes to the Browns. At the end of the day, are you really upset over that?

You just refused to acknowledge my answer because it doesn't fit in with your argument.

[WRREBEL]

@tim-couch-pulls-out said:

I did answer your question. It goes to the organizations. Not the owners. The owners do not pocket left over money, imbecile. It goes to the millions of upgrades stadiums have every year to improve the game day experience of you, the fan.

All of the money goes to the Browns. At the end of the day, are you really upset over that?

You just refused to acknowledge my answer because it doesn't fit in with your argument.

Again show me?? where does it say this??

read!!! can you read?? You do understand owners do make money?? Right?? Look what it said we are in the bottom 5 for spending.. So yes Lerner blows as much as you do

You do understand what operating income is??

http://bizoffootball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=700:nfl-teams-making-money-by-not-spending-on-players&catid=44:articles-and-opinion&Itemid=61

NFL Teams Making Money By Not Spending on Players

Written by Matthew Coller

Monday, 23 August 2010 03:10

Make money by not spending money. It’s a theory capitalism says shouldn’t work. Better products rise to the top and are profitable. Well, some NFL teams’ lack of spending to improve their product while seeing profits grow would bring Adam Smith to tears.

The Buffalo News reported Sunday that the Buffalo Bills rank 26th in the NFL in the overall value of contracts thus far in 2010 and ranked 32nd in cap spending in 2009, yet the team reported near $40 million in operating income. To give you an idea where they stand, the Green Bay Packers had less than $10 million in operating income.

Many have criticized Major League Baseball’s gap between the big and small spenders, but the Bills total contracts pre-season are $458 million, compare that to Minnesota’s $728 million or Carolina’s $353 million. The average, says The News, is $535 million.

The actual salary payouts will be near $108 million for the Bills, which is $20 million below the 2009 salary cap (there is no salary cap in 2010). What could $20 million buy? The pass rusher the Bills severely need? How about a quarterback?

The Bills aren’t the only team using these spending methods, in fact, they aren’t even in the bottom five of spending. Carolina, Kansas City, Tampa Bay, St. Louis and Cleveland are the bottom of the barrel. What do all those teams have in common: lack of on-field success.

The News notes that many teams manipulate salary cap numbers through signing bonuses, even so the bottom teams in cap spending are Tampa Bay, Kansas City and Jacksonville, falling more than $27 million short of last year’s salary cap, a cap which would have increased in 2010. It has been predicted that several teams will spend less than $90 million on players this season.

The Bills and Bucs, despite abysmal seasons in 2009, filled more than 95 percent of their stadium’s capacity. However, the spend-less-save-more-and-still-draw didn’t work for everyone, the Jaguars, Rams and Chiefs filled less than 90 percent of their stadiums.

If you are in the Buffalo area, you know the Bills have been rumored to be a team on the move, it seems they have manipulated their fans into thinking if they do not support the team, they will become the Los Angeles Bills. The numbers indicated a different story.

*The Bills ranked 33rd among most valuable franchises

[WRREBEL]

more info for you timmy boy!! Keep millions in there pockets, what do you think that refers to? Seat warmers hhahaha

your such a tool, u just got served!!!

With no salary floor, Bucs, Chiefs, Jags keep millions in their pockets

Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on September 18, 2010, 12:24 PM EDT

As the first season without a salary cap since 1993 enters its second week, a trio of teams have taken full advantage of the disappearance of a salary floor.

Per a league source, the Buccaneers, Chiefs, and Jaguars each have committed less than $90 million to player compensation in 2010.

Last year, the spending minimum exceeded $110 million per team. Some believe that a salary cap for 2010 would have approached $135 million. If so, the spending minimum would have been in the neighborhood of $120 million.

At the lowest are the Bucs, with only $80.8 million committed as of Friday, per a league source. The Chiefs have spent $84.5 million. The Jaguars are at $89.5 million.

The development translates to millions in savings — and thus additional profit — for these teams. The bigger question is whether it’s hurting them on the field.

Each of these three mattress-stuffing teams won in Week One.