Salary Cap expected to be higher than $132 million

Per PFT: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... 2-million/

Honestly I think this hurts our chances at retaining Bennett. Nothing to stop some team like GB that already had a ton of cap room from overpaying on the first couple years of a deal.

Woooooooooooow...that's ridiculous

I think our FO is great with the cap space given. This is great news for us

There is no way that teams are just going to offer way bigger contracts now because of the cap increase. The last thing teams want to see is across the board increases in the market values of various positions. It could come into play if there is a genuine bidding war for a player, but otherwise they will continue to look to pay people as little as they can get away with.

Missing_Clink":2bw37pgy said:

There is no way that teams are just going to offer way bigger contracts now because of the cap increase. The last thing teams want to see is across the board increases in the market values of various positions. It could come into play if there is a genuine bidding war for a player, but otherwise they will continue to look to pay people as little as they can get away with.

Click to expand...

Bidding wars will happen with undisciplined FOs. Good thing we don't have that. Plus we get first crack to re-sign our guys that we want to keep before they hit the open market.

Beer Hawk":2b93rca9 said:

Per PFT: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... 2-million/

Honestly I think this hurts our chances at retaining Bennett. Nothing to stop some team like GB that already had a ton of cap room from overpaying on the first couple years of a deal.

Click to expand...

Every team gets the extra 2-3 Million, so how does that help teams like GB and not teams like Seattle? It's the same, if GB can now offer more, so can we.

Sgt. Largent":14v8ksxn said:

Beer Hawk":14v8ksxn said:

Per PFT: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... 2-million/

Honestly I think this hurts our chances at retaining Bennett. Nothing to stop some team like GB that already had a ton of cap room from overpaying on the first couple years of a deal.

Click to expand...

Every team gets the extra 2-3 Million, so how does that help teams like GB and not teams like Seattle? It's the same, if GB can now offer more, so can we.

Click to expand...

True... I just don't think that's our style. I think they have a number for certain players/position groups and they're going to stick with it. I could be wrong, just seems like they're not going to offer Bennett 10 mil a year no matter what. However, this increase might lead another team that already had room to toss in a couple extra million a year just to pull him away.

Sac":df5ae5ty said:

At least 100 times that when the new TV deal money kicked in the cap wouldn't be an issue

Click to expand...

Why yes, yes I did.

Bennett has just said he doesn't want to take a discount. He has also said he wants to be a Seahawk.

So if this allows us to pay him what he thinks he is worth (around $10 million) then I don't see him going elsewhere even if another team offers slightly more.

Beer Hawk":1h47xb4o said:

Sgt. Largent":1h47xb4o said:

Beer Hawk":1h47xb4o said:

Per PFT: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... 2-million/

Honestly I think this hurts our chances at retaining Bennett. Nothing to stop some team like GB that already had a ton of cap room from overpaying on the first couple years of a deal.

Click to expand...

Every team gets the extra 2-3 Million, so how does that help teams like GB and not teams like Seattle? It's the same, if GB can now offer more, so can we.

Click to expand...

True... I just don't think that's our style. I think they have a number for certain players/position groups and they're going to stick with it. I could be wrong, just seems like they're not going to offer Bennett 10 mil a year no matter what. However, this increase might lead another team that already had room to toss in a couple extra million a year just to pull him away.

Click to expand...

What you're saying is a team like GB might OVERPAY for Bennett, but I also think that theory is false.

Sound cap management is sound cap management, so teams like GB aren't going to overpay for any player, even if they have more cap space. Every team does what you're saying, they place a value on a player, and they stick to it.

Now maybe other teams have a higher value on Bennett, that's a possibility. But IMO we value Bennett more than ANY team, because we already know he fits our system and schemes...........other teams don't have that assurance at their disposal.

Beer Hawk":2vist9gl said:

Sgt. Largent":2vist9gl said:

Beer Hawk":2vist9gl said:

Per PFT: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... 2-million/

Honestly I think this hurts our chances at retaining Bennett. Nothing to stop some team like GB that already had a ton of cap room from overpaying on the first couple years of a deal.

Click to expand...

Every team gets the extra 2-3 Million, so how does that help teams like GB and not teams like Seattle? It's the same, if GB can now offer more, so can we.

Click to expand...

True... I just don't think that's our style. I think they have a number for certain players/position groups and they're going to stick with it. I could be wrong, just seems like they're not going to offer Bennett 10 mil a year no matter what. However, this increase might lead another team that already had room to toss in a couple extra million a year just to pull him away.

Click to expand...

Yes every team gets the 2-3 million extra, but it's not about every team. It's about our own position vs. the cap in regard to the contracts that are already locked up. Break it down into smaller numbers. Pretend the cap is $10. We have $9 locked up in existing contracts. That leaves us with $1 to re-sign players, rookies, etc. Now say the cap goes up to $12. The $9 we had locked up in existing contracts doesn't change, so NOW we have $3 dollars to re-sign players where we only used to have $1.

It's a big deal. It's not going to let us re-sign everyone plus FA's and rookies, but it gives us a lot more wiggle room. This is good news!

There were already plenty of teams with loads of cap room if someone wanted to overpay the option was already there. What this does is give us some room to keep guys like Bennet and Tate. No way is this a bad thing for us. Could it drive up their value? Maybe a little but I doubt much especially for Tate with such a strong receiving class this year in the draft.

This might be better news for contract extensions than for new deals per se.

Sgt. Largent":10lekmvu said:

Beer Hawk":10lekmvu said:

Sgt. Largent":10lekmvu said:

Beer Hawk":10lekmvu said:

Per PFT: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... 2-million/

Honestly I think this hurts our chances at retaining Bennett. Nothing to stop some team like GB that already had a ton of cap room from overpaying on the first couple years of a deal.

Click to expand...

Every team gets the extra 2-3 Million, so how does that help teams like GB and not teams like Seattle? It's the same, if GB can now offer more, so can we.

Click to expand...

True... I just don't think that's our style. I think they have a number for certain players/position groups and they're going to stick with it. I could be wrong, just seems like they're not going to offer Bennett 10 mil a year no matter what. However, this increase might lead another team that already had room to toss in a couple extra million a year just to pull him away.

Click to expand...

What you're saying is a team like GB might OVERPAY for Bennett, but I also think that theory is false.

Sound cap management is sound cap management, so teams like GB aren't going to overpay for any player, even if they have more cap space. Every team does what you're saying, they place a value on a player, and they stick to it.

Now maybe other teams have a higher value on Bennett, that's a possibility. But IMO we value Bennett more than ANY team, because we already know he fits our system and schemes...........other teams don't have that assurance at their disposal.

Click to expand...

Yeah, exactly. I could see some team overpaying for a key piece of the defending Super Bowl champion. He is more valuable to us, though, that's definitely true. Hopefully this means we get something worked out w/him and Tate BEFORE they hit the market.

This helps us because there are players that want to play here and if we can be atleast in the ballpark with what other teams can offer, then perhaps we can get some guys at a bargain like we did last year (ie Bennett, Avril, etc)

HELPS US

Well, you don't overpay just because the cap went up, but there is huge thing this does for us:

If we stick to our guns and give out fair contracts (with value to the team), this makes it more of a reality to sign Thomas, Sherman and Wilson to long term deals.

If the cap keeps increasing, those contracts start to have more value, and we can afford it easier, plus maybe some more weapons on offense/OL.

I don't think we over pay big name players as much as able to bump a few 100 thousand to players that are depth players that we may have had to release for cap considerations. You can retain a lot of core guys that are not as celebrated. The big name players are going to get theirs anyway.

You don't overpay but part of the CBA was the idea that the average amount of real money spent by the NFL clubs had to be over some percentage (I want to say 98%) which was supposed to happen by the second year of the CBA. Still you had clubs like the Bengals that were $52M under the cap. They supposedly have to spend that money somewhere but I am not sure how all that works out. Just odd to me that there were clubs during the year that were below the minimum cap spending per club.

I am sure it was all within the CBA so just goes to show me how little I understand how the cap works in reality. All I know is you cannot be over the cap, just not sure how low you can go (or maybe all the Bengals contracts had tons of NLTBE bonuses or roster bonuses or ???).

This helps teams who are up against the cap and have key decisions to make immediately. This is less helpful for teams that have loads of cap space and no crucial FAs/extension decisions. For example, this bump is a lot more helpful for us now than it would've been two years ago.

Contract values are generally set by similar players who signed their deals last year. Eventually, those values will go up since there's more money to spend, but I feel there will be a one-to-two year lag in which that really takes effect. Average salaries probably won't balloon until 2016. Hopefully, by then, we'll have all our key guys locked up on multi-year deals.

This helps us.

Sgt. Largent":3fmwae35 said:

Beer Hawk":3fmwae35 said:

Per PFT: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... 2-million/

Honestly I think this hurts our chances at retaining Bennett. Nothing to stop some team like GB that already had a ton of cap room from overpaying on the first couple years of a deal.

Click to expand...

Every team gets the extra 2-3 Million, so how does that help teams like GB and not teams like Seattle? It's the same, if GB can now offer more, so can we.

Click to expand...

That is going to help New Orleans a ton.