Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Indy 500: 'Greatest Spectacle In Racing' Set For Sunday

New CBA Rule Could Boost Bears Activity in Free Agency

We're still a ways off from the Free Agency Period kicking in, but this weekend I saw something that could help new General Manager Phil Emery in his first offseason at the helm of da Bears. One of the wrinkles in last year's new CBA allows for teams to carry over their remaining cap space from one year to the next; we'll call it the Cap Carryover Clause, or triple C if you want, but regardless, this new method for circumventing the salary cap ceiling could help the Bears get the guys they need in free agency to round out an already solid roster. Let's jump to look at the details of the new rule and how it could affect Chicago and our NFC North rivals.

Star-divide

The Cap Carryover Clause essentially states that teams can use any cap space that remains from the previous season and spend it this year. The beauty of the CCC is that the cap amount carried over does not fall under the current year's cap limit, so a team could in essence spend well above and beyond the cap limit for the current year without having to do a lot of renegotiating with current players and pushing back balloon payments.

A simplified way to look at this is how it could affect the Bears. The Bears have $7.74 million remaining from the 2011 cap limit. If the Bears chose to, they could request to carry over that money and use it this year, without that money factoring into the 2012 cap limit. The 2011 cap limit was $120.375 million, and the 2012 limit isn't expected to be drastically different, so if the 2012 limit ends up at $122.26 million, the Bears could spend up to $130 million in cap dollars for 2012.

How would this be beneficial? Well, obviously, having more money to spend than your opposition is a huge factor. The Bears $7.74 million left from the 2011 cap is a tad more than the Packers ($5.48 million) and way more than the Lions ($1.47 million) and Vikings($1.95 million). The Bears, strictly from a divisional standpoint, would be at a huge advantage over two teams and have a slight advantage over the Packers in free agency. The Lions can regain large chunks of cap space by extending Stafford and Megatron, but the Bears have the simplest route to gaining an advantage in free agency by using the CCC.

The Bears are also in an enviable position to use the CCC when compared to a majority of NFL teams. Five teams have over $20 million in cap space left from 2011, making them unlikely to go from penny-pinchers to Pacman Jones in a year's time by using the CCC. An additional six teams have between $10-20 million dollars in 2011 cap space, which means that they could use the CCC to their advantage, but they may just utilize the space they have available. Eleven teams have less than four million in 2011 cap space, making the CCC a minor help to them. That makes twenty-two that either have so much 2011 cap space left that they probably wouldn't use the CCC, or have so little space left that the CCC wouldn't help them much. That leaves ten teams with between $4-10 that could realistically use the CCC and have it benefit them.

The main reason to carry over the cap space: if you are a team on the brink of a playoff berth or Super Bowl run looking for an edge (i.e. the Bears). Out of the ten teams that could carry over four to ten million dollars, only six teams (Bears, Pats, Ravens, Saints, Packers, and Jets) fall into that category. Obviously there are a multitude of factors that can impact a team's cap space: the Steelers are already clearing space for next year by renegotiating contracts and releasing players (they have the least 2011 cap space at $506,000), the Lions can extend guys to reduce cap numbers, and the Vikings can part ways with some of their aged big money players as they rebuild their roster. Regardless, an opportunity exists with the CCC for the Bears to splash into the Free Agency pool and round out their roster or go big (Nicks, Mario Williams, Bowe, Colston... oops, drooled on my keyboard). And if you are thinking the dollars spent don't matter: the top-five biggest spenders last year all made the playoffs. Just sayin'.

The Cap Carryover Clause is not automatic: a team must submit their written request to exercise the clause fourteen days prior to the start of the new league year, meaning that February 28th will be the last day to request the CCC. The McCaskeys have suffered from a penny-pinching image, rightfully or not, but they could signal to Phil Emery that they believe in him by giving him some extra dollars for free agency. And before you act like an Extreme Couponer at a Black Friday sale, that $7.74 million that the Bears could carryover? It could solve offseason issue #1, since that amount is almost exactly the same number that Forte is likely to be franchised at.

Comment 57 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Good point, basically that carryover will cover Forte's salary next year

Wouldnt it be funny if we had another DE with the last name Salters!

by fortefan09 on Feb 14, 2012 3:09 PM CST reply actions  

Seifert posted that yesterday

I think the 25 mil includes the Ccc.

by TJ Shouse on Feb 14, 2012 3:15 PM CST via Android app up reply actions  

I keep reading these figures, yet I never see one person back it up.

I went through and took every reported contract (everyone on our roster but EWill actually) and just did the math in a spreadsheet. It wasn’t difficult and we have way more than $25M.

These reporters claim a figure then back it up with nothing. Meanwhile taking an hour you can look up every contract as the final details come out, use the salary/bonuses/pro-rated signing bonus and get the cap hit for each player. Add it up. Done.

I even emailed a couple of the journalists (including Seifert who reported this rollover story being referenced) with no response. I even listed EVERY cap hit for him to verify. Nothing.

I would take these salary cap numbers with a HUGE grain of salt.

by IOftenPanic on Feb 14, 2012 3:19 PM CST up reply actions  

thats what i did

though i think was u panic that did the cap space post and thought it was very good.

by chiguy8506 on Feb 14, 2012 3:22 PM CST up reply actions  

Thank you. Yes I did that post.

I went to several Bears sites (including here) and vetted the spreadsheet. Anyone and everyone could challenge the info (and many did, some valid, some not) and I then re-looked up and re-verified every number on there. I can’t see where these journalists are taking on nearly $20M in current cap salaries.

by IOftenPanic on Feb 14, 2012 3:26 PM CST up reply actions  

yeah i think the bears website had 49-50 mil

if thats the case i’d make a push for Mario and maybe Wayne i want Vjax but some how i think he could be a FA bust

by chiguy8506 on Feb 14, 2012 3:37 PM CST up reply actions  

To be fair

Wading thru cap numbers is arduous and I did read your cap breakdown, but I’m just going with the commonly accepted numbers provided by PFT and ESPN. Could be right or wrong; its hard to fully understand all the cap rules and loopholes. Someone get Cliff Stein on the Bear Phone for a final answer.

by TJ Shouse on Feb 14, 2012 3:27 PM CST via Android app up reply actions  

Understood. But to be fair ESPN is terribly inaccurate on a lot of these...

…and commonly accepted vs. blindly repeated are two different things. As soon as I see one ESPN or similar outlet report a breakdown to backup their numbers I’ll believe it more.

You can get all the CBA/Cap rules online, too… they aren’t that difficult to get your head around. The two most difficult things are any time something is deferred to a certain date, and the proration/start of signing bonuses.

by IOftenPanic on Feb 14, 2012 3:39 PM CST up reply actions  

Couldn't agree more.

They are more interested in 3000 Jeremy Lin or New York Yankee stories… or making up racism stories… or anything that gets page views/TV watchers vs. accurate reporting.

They have to appeal to the broadest audience so they use the broadest brush strokes in the majority of their reporting.

by IOftenPanic on Feb 14, 2012 4:17 PM CST up reply actions  

I don't think anyone really knows.

It isn’t just the cap carryover, the last CBA included approximately $20m of benefits due to players into the cap and now it has been removed from cap calculations (I think the idea was to stop owners claiming they were generously spending money they were actually obliged to spend). As far as I could work out from what was released about the new CBA the real money due to the players (including benefits) was supposed to increase slightly. The way the online or media sources seem to be calculating the cap ignores the fact that cap money should have been freed up as the benefits went off the cap balance sheet.

I haven’t the time or the resources to find this stuff out but the way the cap figures are currently being reported doesn’t make sense in the light of what was announced about the new CBA.

by weepingbear on Feb 14, 2012 4:56 PM CST up reply actions  

This is the real answer.

My claim isn’t I know, but that my numbers seem to be closer (confirmed the last three years I’ve done this and double-confirmed by how close I was to the cap rollover vs. unspent money) than most outlets which continually claim one number and then change it repeatedly down the line.

There are tons of things that are adjusted in the cap that are minor overall… reading either Larry Coon or for an overall synopsis something like this page helps:

Ask the Commish

Basically it’s about $20M in cap space that some sources claim are on the books that I just don’t see anywhere. And NO ONE from any kind of “major” media source will break it down or explain where they get the number from.

by IOftenPanic on Feb 15, 2012 8:17 AM CST up reply actions  

That is a very helpful page, cheers.

It confirms my thoughts about the benefits. Just about every talking head is screeching that the cap has shrunk whe it has done nothing of the sort. If the cap was still reported the way it was under the old CBA then the cap figure would be $142m which should leave the Bears with loads of space.

by weepingbear on Feb 15, 2012 10:07 AM CST up reply actions  

Yes, that seems about right.

My continuing theory is that it’s easier for someone in the media to repeat something (just like every Tweet get re-reported as fact these days) than to do the research themselves.

by IOftenPanic on Feb 15, 2012 10:21 AM CST up reply actions  

Now let's just hope that

A) they’re willing to spend it, and
B) they spend it on the right players.

by oripunk3485 on Feb 14, 2012 3:19 PM CST reply actions  

Well...you never want to waste good money

Lets see if George McCaskey and Phil Emery will team up this year and present themselves in a far more aggressive image, losing the “cheap” image while presenting a “winning” image.

Jay Cutler is our QB, and I for one am proud of that

Follow me @EDuerrwaechter

by Erik Christopher Duerrwaechter on Feb 14, 2012 3:29 PM CST reply actions  

Not to beat my point to death...

…or pat myself on the back too much (my point is that their current 2012 cap numbers are wrong more than the ones I sourced are much more accurate)…

…but the 2011 Bears spreadsheet where I did the same thing I am doing for 2012 shows (rounded) $7.7M in unused space from 2011. Amazing how that worked out.

My question is how it took all these “journalists” so long to get there and ask where they are getting their current 2012 cap number which seems way off to me.

My belief is they don’t dig into every team’s numbers, they see a number somewhere and re-report it. That gets re-reported. And so on.

by IOftenPanic on Feb 14, 2012 3:48 PM CST reply actions  

How much do you have in 2012

Cap space for us? Just curious.

by TJ Shouse on Feb 14, 2012 3:55 PM CST via Android app up reply actions  

Using just the 53-man roster and rounding...

…19 open roster spots.

~$81.9M in current cap space used (this is where reports are way off)
~$7.7M rollover (doesn’t have to be used)

~$120M cap (until final number is official)

That leaves ~$45.8M if we choose to use it all (front load/restructure deals to hit this year).

~$38.1M with just the cap.

EVERY year ESPN is off with their numbers. Without fail. EVERY year. I see no reason why this is any different this year and they never respond to anything that asks them for where they get their numbers and to refute what I (and others) have sent them. Then they magically adjust as they learn they are wrong.

by IOftenPanic on Feb 14, 2012 4:05 PM CST up reply actions  

that sounds awesome

though i think we should bring back Jennings and possibly Davis and Graham if possible. i dont think they will make a huge hit. then a push for Mario Williams and an actual target for JC.

by chiguy8506 on Feb 14, 2012 4:09 PM CST up reply actions  

Keep in mind what it can cost to get players, especially in an ultra-competitive market.

Just as a wild guesstimate on guys:

Forte – $7M/year cap hit
Top-tier WR – $10M/year cap hit
Backup QB – $3M/year cap hit

There’s $20M. 16 roster spots to fill (at a minimum near $400K per slot).

Adds up quick.

by IOftenPanic on Feb 14, 2012 4:14 PM CST up reply actions  

Cool, thanks,

Now quit your day job and give us the cap numbers for the rest of the league, lol.

If its free, take two.

by T.J. Shouse on Feb 14, 2012 4:12 PM CST up reply actions  

:)

I imagine that’s why most of the numbers are estimates. You can actually probably find fans that will have closer numbers than journalists.

by IOftenPanic on Feb 14, 2012 4:15 PM CST up reply actions  

True

Why spent the extra time doing, you know, research, when you can rehash numbers from some other guy and just write about Jay not smiling.

If its free, take two.

by T.J. Shouse on Feb 14, 2012 4:17 PM CST up reply actions  

He's not tough! He doesn't smile! More yelling!

And to be fair… if anyone who posts other numbers would respond to my inquiry and prove me wrong, I’d be fine with it. My ultimate goal as a fan and loving sports’ offseasons/roster management… is accuracy… not just being right.

But apparently ESPN has to keep answering questions like, “why don’t the Bears trade their 1st round pick and Knox to move up to pick 2 and get Blackmon!?!?!?!?!” only with more words misspelled.

by IOftenPanic on Feb 14, 2012 4:34 PM CST up reply actions  

One small thing

it is the top 51 salaries that make up the cap (I have no idea why).

by weepingbear on Feb 15, 2012 8:08 AM CST up reply actions  

Only in the offseason...

…during the regular season all 53 count.

by IOftenPanic on Feb 15, 2012 8:14 AM CST up reply actions  

Ah

When does that come in?

by weepingbear on Feb 15, 2012 8:15 AM CST up reply actions  

Not 100%. Both of the articles I read that stated that don't specifically say.

I’m guessing the official NFL start to the season whatever date they set? Here’s the passage I am referring to:

“Who falls under the Salary Cap?

Answer: The “Team Salary” falls under the Salary Cap. Team salary includes the amount a team must pay its current or former players under their player contracts. Notice emphasis on the word PLAYERS. The salary cap does not apply to coaches, assistants, trainers, and other personnel. Only the top 51 player salaries for a team count against the salary cap in the offseason. (Outstanding tenders apply.) During the season, all player salaries count toward the salary cap."

I’ll have to re-read Larry Coon’s stuff and see if he answers that. He’s the best source for cap info I’ve found.

by IOftenPanic on Feb 15, 2012 8:29 AM CST up reply actions  

I hear you, I just think there's going to be a team that overpays Colston

to the tune of extra years and extra guaranteed money in future years outside of what I’d be comfortable giving him.

by Mike Mueller on Feb 15, 2012 8:50 AM CST up reply actions  

You could be right.

I don’t think half of the FA WRs hit the market that we are hoping for… and usually the FA process is pretty much overpaying to get top/proven talent. So I think we’ll likely overpay any WR… but at this point… I just want to get one of these guys!

by IOftenPanic on Feb 15, 2012 9:04 AM CST up reply actions  

This changes things

I now want Mario Williams and Bowe. Big Wr for Cutler and Elite End to pair with Peppers. Changes the whole dynamic of the team on both sides of tha ball. Pair that with a solid draft and we’re in the Super Bowl business next year

See me on Twitter follow me @ EddieCheeze, Catch me on FB friend me Eddie Cheeze, See my group on youtube listen to us Hood Platinum, want me ta kill a track email me Cheeze2k11@gmail.com....Im errwhere

by EmmCeee on Feb 14, 2012 3:51 PM CST via Android app reply actions  

not to mention

they are both young so if we could get some years from them then who know

by chiguy8506 on Feb 14, 2012 3:54 PM CST up reply actions  

Sorry.

Steve Jobs killed off the last unicorns to use their horns to make the iPad. There might be enough magic sparkle dust left to create iTV but no one knows.

You can still get the unicorn meat here though!

Cacti are prickly.

by crackedcactus on Feb 14, 2012 6:36 PM CST up reply actions  

Lol
Excellent source of sparkles

"I'm sore and I'm pissed off. I'm a baller. I want to feel the leather. I love thumb wars. 6-8 weeks? 6. follow me for healing, Jay Cutler does" - Jaysthumb twitter acct

by propheteer on Feb 14, 2012 11:28 PM CST up reply actions  

I think I may

spontaneously combust if this were to happen.

"I'm sore and I'm pissed off. I'm a baller. I want to feel the leather. I love thumb wars. 6-8 weeks? 6. follow me for healing, Jay Cutler does" - Jaysthumb twitter acct

by propheteer on Feb 14, 2012 5:23 PM CST up reply actions  

I'm married

so I never hold in my gas. I just go to an unoccupied room to release the pressure :)

"I'm sore and I'm pissed off. I'm a baller. I want to feel the leather. I love thumb wars. 6-8 weeks? 6. follow me for healing, Jay Cutler does" - Jaysthumb twitter acct

by propheteer on Feb 14, 2012 5:35 PM CST up reply actions  

nice

but i hope u got the south park refeerence

by chiguy8506 on Feb 14, 2012 5:36 PM CST up reply actions  

No I didn't

I have to start watching that show more.

"I'm sore and I'm pissed off. I'm a baller. I want to feel the leather. I love thumb wars. 6-8 weeks? 6. follow me for healing, Jay Cutler does" - Jaysthumb twitter acct

by propheteer on Feb 14, 2012 5:41 PM CST up reply actions  

ill have to find that episode

alot of the characters start spontaneously combust.

by chiguy8506 on Feb 14, 2012 5:45 PM CST up reply actions  

The Bucs are going to be players:

RT @TBBuccaneers Mark Dominik confirmed today that the Bucs have rolled over their 2010 cap space & intend to be more active in FA this year

LINK

by Mike Mueller on Feb 14, 2012 4:39 PM CST reply actions  

If the Chiefs tag Bowe

I can see the Bucs go hard after Brandon Carr.

"Brian Urlacher, coasting down the right sideline. A Sunday stroll into the endzone."

by DutchBear on Feb 14, 2012 5:47 PM CST up reply actions  

Mario Williams and an elite WR

Maaaaaan that would be beyond fantastic. I’m hoping for Bowe out of the current available crop.

"You have a young group and if they start feeling too good about themselves, that’s not a good thing. So it’s my job not to let them. So probably they will hate me. But that’s OK too. My wife hates me and she’s still married to me." - Mike Tice

by badsamaritan on Feb 14, 2012 8:22 PM CST reply actions  

I'd rather take the better individual than the best cog in a great system.

Since we desperately need a WR endzone threat.

"You have a young group and if they start feeling too good about themselves, that’s not a good thing. So it’s my job not to let them. So probably they will hate me. But that’s OK too. My wife hates me and she’s still married to me." - Mike Tice

by badsamaritan on Feb 15, 2012 1:50 AM CST up reply actions  

I want Bowe way more than Colston

and i don’t think anyone is gonna change my mind

by TR MacReady on Feb 15, 2012 7:32 AM CST reply actions  

I agree.

Colston is older and has had microfracture surgery on his knee. Not interested in anything more than a 3 year deal, which isn’t realistic. Someone will give him 5 or more. I wouldn’t go that far.

by Mike Mueller on Feb 15, 2012 8:13 AM CST up reply actions  

To play devil's advocate... length of contracts in the NFL aren't nearly as important.

It’s the guaranteed money, signing bonus, and yearly cap hits that matter. Most free agent players sign contracts that are likely longer than when they’ll be with the team.

I hesitate to say “most”, but I’d say a large amount of FA contracts have most of their guaranteed money paid by the end of year 3 of the contract, and after that if a player is cut it’s really just the pro-rated signing bonus remaining that hits your cap as dead space (which all teams have year-in and year-out).

by IOftenPanic on Feb 15, 2012 8:32 AM CST up reply actions  

Correct me if I'm wrong

but this post states that “Five teams have over $20 million in cap space left from 2011, making them unlikely to go from penny-pinchers to Pacman Jones in a year’s time by using the CCC. An additional six teams have between $10-20 million dollars in 2011 cap space, which means that they could use the CCC to their advantage, but they may just utilize the space they have available. Eleven teams have less than four million in 2011 cap space, making the CCC a minor help to them. That makes twenty-two that either have so much 2011 cap space left that they probably wouldn’t use the CCC”.

The new CBA implemented a minimum amount that all teams must spend on player’s salaries and I beleive it takes effect this year. That would mean that those 22 teams all must spend the majority of their open cap space. That is not good news for our Bears because it means competition for these free agents should be even more cutthroat than it has ever been. Landing two big free agent signings (aka Mario Williams and Bowe)seems like a pipe dream to me.

by HasClothesLikeaDickhead on Feb 15, 2012 8:12 AM CST reply actions  

Teams must hit the cap floor

as an average number over a 3 year period, not immediately.

If its free, take two.

by T.J. Shouse on Feb 15, 2012 8:15 AM CST up reply actions  

Here's an explanation:

“Is there a Minimum Salary?

Answer:Yep. Under the new CBA, The cap for 2011 is $120.375M per team. Each team must average $119.2 M. That is a league-wide average not an individual team minimum. League-wide, teams must spend 99% of the cap in 2011 and 2012. In 2013 and beyond, they must spend 95% of the cap. In the event that player costs are less than this overall league minimum, then, on or before April 15 of the next League Year, the NFL shall pay an amount equal to such deficiency directly to the players.

In terms of minimum salary for each team, the salary floor is 89% of the cap. However, that does not start until 2013. Hence, there is in essence no salary floor in 2011 or 2012. (Note this point, as there is plenty of misinformation about this running rampant in the press!)

More specifically, beginning in 2006 each team had to pay a guaranteed Minimum Team Salary of 84% of the Salary Cap. Each year that percentage goes up by 1.2%, which means that it is 86.4% this season. However, the Minimum Team Salary cannot extend beyond 90% of the Salary Cap. Any shortfall in the Minimum Team Salary at the end of a league year has to be paid, on or before April 15 of the next league year, by the team(s) having such shortfall, directly to the players who were on that team’s roster at any time during the season."

by IOftenPanic on Feb 15, 2012 8:20 AM CST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Windy City Gridiron is the best independent site on the internet for breaking news, in-depth analysis, and hardcore discussion about the Chicago Bears

Community Guidelines

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Images-8_small
Why the Offensive Line will be fine.

Recent FanPosts

029_small
Solving a Crisis: Redzone Edition
Windycityflyer_small
SMD's Bottom 5
Images-8_small
Yahoo Fantasy Football Sign-up. Need contact info soon
Small
We may not know DT Nate Collins but the Chicago Bears do.
029_small
Is it time for a contract? Oh no, not another Matt Forte post...
Burlacher2_small
Is Winning Games a Specialty?
Burlacher2_small
Apparently, Defense Wins Championships...
Fox_small
Bad start for AJ Jenkins
Burlacher2_small
What's It Take to Win?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Windycity_small Adam T

189886_210123485665309_100000029768895_888721_5830650_n__1__small Dane Noble

Editors

Sackwatchcutler_small Lester A. Wiltfong Jr.

535321_3734130120778_1501804679_3253247_588486681_n_small David Taylor

Orange_shy_guy_small Steven Schweickert

Capture_small Kev H

Contributing Writers

Lincoln_small Sam Householder

Leprechaun_small Spongie

Polishsausage_small Steve Ronkowski

Icothgmts_small T.J. Shouse

Joe_20mantegna-bill_20swerski_small Superfans

P981d5c2_reasonably_small_small DaveGilbertNFL