Debbie Downer alert: Seahawks growing dead cap number!

Debbie wanted me to pass along that with the Chris Clemons release, the Seahawks have already exceeded their final 2013 dead cap number. That 2013 dead cap number was $8,380,713. With Clemons release, the 2014 number as of March 12 has already climbed to $8,474,035.

Just a heads up.

Dead money is a simple fact of life in the NFL, every team has some every year, and it's always budgeted in. More important is how much space you have not how much you've eaten, and the Hawks now have quite a bit, with very few holes and their top FA already re-signed.

Ask the Cowboys about dead cap money.

Dead money happens. Always compare it to the cost of keeping those players.

I don't care about our dead money this year.

Much more interesting is the guaranteed / dead money for upcoming year. That is where you hamstring yourself in committing to much that you can't recover.

The dead money this year being incurred to free up cap space still is a part of freeing up cap space. We shouldn't need to much more money this year. I don't really see any deals made yet just to create cap space - such as converting contracts to signing bonus etc. Once you go down that route you start knowing you are in trouble

Debbie says John Idzik did a great job with the cap while in Seattle. So ..... she is keeping an eye on the cap in the still early post John Idzik era. Monitoring for a possible change or trend.

San Francisco continues to do a great job. Arizona ..... not so much. Would not like to see Seattle mimic Arizona.

dead money this year is better than dead money next year.

Jville":2o8hhl7a said:

Debbie says John Idzik did a great job with the cap while in Seattle. So ..... she is keeping an eye on the cap in the still early post John Idzik era. Monitoring for a possible change or trend.

San Francisco continues to do a great job. Arizona ..... not so much. Would not like to see Seattle mimic Arizona.

Click to expand...

I'm not quite sure I'm following what you are saying here. Seattle has been managing its cap just as well as San Fran.

What's the difference between us and San Fran that makes them great and us potentially becoming the cardinals?

amill87":1rxu970s said:

Jville":1rxu970s said:

Debbie says John Idzik did a great job with the cap while in Seattle. So ..... she is keeping an eye on the cap in the still early post John Idzik era. Monitoring for a possible change or trend.

San Francisco continues to do a great job. Arizona ..... not so much. Would not like to see Seattle mimic Arizona.

Click to expand...

I'm not quite sure I'm following what you are saying here. Seattle has been managing its cap just as well as San Fran.

What's the difference between us and San Fran that makes them great and us potentially becoming the cardinals?

Click to expand...

Both San Francisco and Seattle have had good recent track records. But, Idzik's departure signals a potential change .... thus the interest. Exceeding last years number this early in 2014 is note worthy ..... that's all.

The general rule of thumb is that the current "dead cap number" should never exceed 10% of the league's designated cap number for the year. Ideally, the annual team goal is to keep the dead cap number as low as possible.

Jville":3lc532k1 said:

Both San Francisco and Seattle have had good recent track records. But, Idzik's departure signals a potential change .... thus the interest. Exceeding last years number this early in 2014 is note worthy ..... that's all.

The general rule of thumb is that the current "dead cap number" should never exceed 10% of the league's designated cap number for the year. Ideally, the annual team goal is to keep the dead cap number as low as possible.

Click to expand...

The dead cap is just year to year though correct?

Is it feasible to take more dead cap in a year where you don't need to spend as much money in order to free up more cap space the following year?

I could see the plan being to eat some dead cap this year in order to open up the books next year for all the core players coming up.

I actually regard a significant "dead" money amount for this season as a good thing. Why? because that's cap room that will automatically free itself for the next season and that's when we start to really have to make some expensive extensions and descisions. Just my somewhat positive take.

I refuse to talk about it any further. That money is dead to me! :177692:

amill87":1ehu0dz3 said:

Jville":1ehu0dz3 said:

Both San Francisco and Seattle have had good recent track records. But, Idzik's departure signals a potential change .... thus the interest. Exceeding last years number this early in 2014 is note worthy ..... that's all.

The general rule of thumb is that the current "dead cap number" should never exceed 10% of the league's designated cap number for the year. Ideally, the annual team goal is to keep the dead cap number as low as possible.

Click to expand...

The dead cap is just year to year though correct?

Is it feasible to take more dead cap in a year where you don't need to spend as much money in order to free up more cap space the following year?

I could see the plan being to eat some dead cap this year in order to open up the books next year for all the core players coming up.

Click to expand...

Yes
Yes before June 1st
& Yes

However surplus cap (i.e. unused cap money) can be rolled into the next year.

Dead cap write offs do reduce a team's cap space for a given year.

SonicHawk":z1nvsm8d said:

Ask the Cowboys about dead cap money.

Click to expand...

How bout them Raiders ....... holy smokes ...... dead cap money destroyed them. They opted to get it over as quickly as possible and are now starting over from scratch.

The way NFL contracts are structured, all dead money amounts to is money we once borrowed against the future. The $8 million in dead money isn't being wasted, it's money that was used to help lure players in previous offseasons, money that helped us win a SB. There will be even more dead money in 2015 and 2016 to help us win a SB in 2014. It's just accounting tactics, not wasted money.

$8 million for an entire team seems like a small amount anyway.

Yes, the dead cap figure is charged against the current cap and reduces the cap space for the current year.

Plus, by your 10% number, we can still cut Miller and be right around 13.3 million in dead cap space which was your chosen panic button.

CurryStopstheRuns":a7mqbjkg said:

Plus, by your 10% number, we can still cut Miller and be right around 13.3 million in dead cap space which was your chosen panic button.

Click to expand...

No panic button here. Just following and relaying the numbers.

Ehhh means that much opens up next year. Not really a big deal. Essentially even though our dead cap has gone up we have more cap room, albeit less players. Cost of doing business.

forget the dead number. we have opened up space to rollover.