FanGM

We won't get to voting or asking for feedback on a specific cap number for us yet, but in general looking to see if more GMs favor continuing with the system simliar to what we've had before with a salary cap figure, or including some of the extra "exceptions" and provisions for prerformance based pay, etc. that you read about possibly part of the new CBA.

We could set our cap to a basic summation of the exceptions and other provisions (say $126.88M from the article below, thanks for the link Ben) in total and have all that built in for all teams for simplicity, or we could go strict $120.375M and try to build some of those other cap mechanisms into our system.

From: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... a-nutshell

Salary cap: The salary cap is set for $120.375 million in 2011. That’s actually about $6 million less than the salary cap was back in 2009, the last year the cap was in place. It’s important to note the cap will rise with revenues. (Future television deals.)

2011 salary cap flexibility: Even though the salary cap was ostensibly scaled back, teams were given two avenues to make it easier to retain high priced veterans this year. Teams can “borrow” $3 million against future salary caps to pay for veterans. They can also use another $3.5 million in what would otherwise be performance-based pay to use for veterans.

So the cap really isn’t $120.375 million. It’s basically $126.88 if teams want it to be. An extra $6.5 million won’t save guys that truly deserve to get cut, but it will make life easier for teams near the cap limit.

My default position would be that it's more efficient and less confusing (especially in this shortened first season under new rules) to go with the all-encompassing cap as the basic figure for all teams, and then address other exceptions/provisions as they seem important to do so in future seasons depending upon how big a part of the NFL team-building experience they seem to be in future seasons.

I think just adding all of the exemptions into the overall pot would be the easiest way to do it plus it would still be realistic.

I would probably be in favor of just the hard $120.375 million cap. The issue I see is that the $3 million exemption is actually borrowed from a future year. If people want the option to use it, that's fine, but I think we should make sure to take it out their cap in the future (which might get difficult to keep track of). Maybe not every teams wants to borrow $3million from a future cap year.

My understanding is these exemptions are short term just to deal with the cap for the next year or two, so I don't think we should just plug them into the total cap value.

Also, I have seen people talk about the ~$140 cap for salary + benefits. I would be strongly against using this number for our cap. In theory, the benefits package for a unionized player shouldn't really be negotiable. Maybe we should remove or change the 3million for workout, reporting bonuses, etc. I think the contracts we sign players to need to meet the 120 million salary number though.

It looks like we have a consensus to go with the all encompassing figure.

Will we still be subjecting teams to the $3,000,000 fee for workout bonuses?

As I've been able to get the Salary cap under the minimum for the last few seasons I believe we should stick with the 120 million dollar cap. I've taken alot of garbage for my salary cap manipulation the last seasons but still have managed to get under. If you can't get under 120 million than that's the GM's fault. I have no sympathy in that regard!

Shagg wrote:As I've been able to get the Salary cap under the minimum for the last few seasons I believe we should stick with the 120 million dollar cap. I've taken alot of garbage for my salary cap manipulation the last seasons but still have managed to get under. If you can't get under 120 million than that's the GM's fault. I have no sympathy in that regard!

Agreed, all the people that voted for the higher number are the ones who will have to make decisions to get under the cap. We want to mirror reality and the $120 does that. You guys can't mirror some stuff and not other things just to benefit yourself.

How is using a figure that takes into account the tools available to real teams not following reality?

Nathan S. wrote:

Shagg wrote:As I've been able to get the Salary cap under the minimum for the last few seasons I believe we should stick with the 120 million dollar cap. I've taken alot of garbage for my salary cap manipulation the last seasons but still have managed to get under. If you can't get under 120 million than that's the GM's fault. I have no sympathy in that regard!

Agreed, all the people that voted for the higher number are the ones who will have to make decisions to get under the cap. We want to mirror reality and the $120 does that. You guys can't mirror some stuff and not other things just to benefit yourself.

How do you know which teams voted a certain way? Big leap in my opinion.

tkienast wrote:

Nathan S. wrote:

Shagg wrote:As I've been able to get the Salary cap under the minimum for the last few seasons I believe we should stick with the 120 million dollar cap. I've taken alot of garbage for my salary cap manipulation the last seasons but still have managed to get under. If you can't get under 120 million than that's the GM's fault. I have no sympathy in that regard!

Agreed, all the people that voted for the higher number are the ones who will have to make decisions to get under the cap. We want to mirror reality and the $120 does that. You guys can't mirror some stuff and not other things just to benefit yourself.

How do you know which teams voted a certain way? Big leap in my opinion.

This applies to AFFL only. I've had numerous comments about my salary cap and everytime I got under the cap. People who didn't take into account a new CBA and the ramifications that could come into affect should be accountable now! I am well under the cap and most aren't or are in danger of not being under. It's hypocritical imo and we should go exactly as the NFL goes.

tkienast wrote:

Nathan S. wrote:

Shagg wrote:As I've been able to get the Salary cap under the minimum for the last few seasons I believe we should stick with the 120 million dollar cap. I've taken alot of garbage for my salary cap manipulation the last seasons but still have managed to get under. If you can't get under 120 million than that's the GM's fault. I have no sympathy in that regard!

Agreed, all the people that voted for the higher number are the ones who will have to make decisions to get under the cap. We want to mirror reality and the $120 does that. You guys can't mirror some stuff and not other things just to benefit yourself.

How do you know which teams voted a certain way? Big leap in my opinion.

I'm speaking AFFL and it's just a guess and I may be wrong, but i'll stick with my initial thought.