What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Cap adjustments for all 32 Teams (1 Viewer)

fridayfrenzy

Footballguy
Cap adjustments take place for a variety of reasons, but most often result from "Likely to be earned" incentives from the previous year that weren't actually earned. Often, teams manipulate player incentives in order to deliberately push money from one year to the next. Thus, a negative cap adjustment

Here is the list of the cap adjustments for all 32 NFL teams.

CREDITS (Cap limit raised above $94.513 million)

Minnesota $7,460,698

Philadelphia $6,954,540

Cleveland $3,554,178

Kansas City $3,436,422

Arizona $3,057,829

St. Louis $2,517,558

Jacksonville $2,123,433

New Orleans $2,058,846

Houston $2,000,000

Green Bay $1,737,071

N.Y. Giants $1,208,123

Seattle $844,249

Chicago $666,000

San Diego $600,765

N.Y. Jets $499,344

Atlanta $321,879

Indianapolis $250,000

Washington $176,427

Cincinnati $73,615

Dallas [body]

CHARGES (Cap limit lowered below $94.513 million)

San Francisco $17,824

Denver $133,276

Baltimore $171,787

Buffalo $223,089

Carolina $242,117

Tampa Bay $308,890

Tennessee $587,234

Detroit $1,526,251

Pittsburgh $1,772,794

New England $2,026,060

Oakland $2,540,695

Miami $9,529,790
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Are these numbers included in the current numbers or in addition to them?
Well, in addition, but there is also a terciary set of numbers missing.For example, the Dolphins now have $9M less cap room because they released Sam Madison, Stockar McDougle, Junior Seau, etc.

But they have saved X amount of cap room.

So, you add those three numbers together to get the new cap number.

It's kind of tricky, but that's the best I can really do in explaining without having all three sets of numbers.

Basically, if you are completely lost: All of the teams in the top list... that's good. For the teams in the bottom list, it may be bad, but doesn't have to be. While that is dead money, it may have effectively saved more than it killed.

Take a player like Derrick Brooks. He was scheduled to make $12.5M this year. The Bucs coud have cut him and saved $5M, but on here it would have shown $7.5M in dead money (lower cap space). Instead, Brooks took a $5M pay cut. He was never expecting to earn $12.5M and the Bucs were never expecting to pay him. But by structuring his contract like that, it makes the Bucs look good when they make $5M in cap space, and it makes Brooks look even better, since he is "taking one for the team, yet again".

Sorry if that confused anyone more. :bag:

 
Last edited:
Doesn't the article state that all the numbers will be significantly better if a new CBA is reached and the cap goes up????

 
Doesn't the article state that all the numbers will be significantly better if a new CBA is reached and the cap goes up????
The credits and charges are unchanged with the new agreement.Say a player ran for 1200 yards in '04 and had a contract option to earn $5M in '05 if he topped 1000 yards. This would be considered a "Likely to be Earned" incentive (LTBE) since it was accomplished the previous year. As such, the team had to reserve the cap space in expectation of paying that money. But say the player only ran for 500 yards in '05. The team didn't pay that money, yet had been forced to use the cap space. Therefore they get a credit of $5M towards the following season to make up for it.

So if the official cap had been $94M, the Vikings would have had 94+7.5 or ~ $101.5M. Since the cap has increased to $102M, the Vikings now get 102+7.5 or ~ $109.5 million.

 
Doesn't the article state that all the numbers will be significantly better if a new CBA is reached and the cap goes up????
The credits and charges are unchanged with the new agreement.Say a player ran for 1200 yards in '04 and had a contract option to earn $5M in '05 if he topped 1000 yards. This would be considered a "Likely to be Earned" incentive (LTBE) since it was accomplished the previous year. As such, the team had to reserve the cap space in expectation of paying that money. But say the player only ran for 500 yards in '05. The team didn't pay that money, yet had been forced to use the cap space. Therefore they get a credit of $5M towards the following season to make up for it.

So if the official cap had been $94M, the Vikings would have had 94+7.5 or ~ $101.5M. Since the cap has increased to $102M, the Vikings now get 102+7.5 or ~ $109.5 million.
So I'm reading this all right, the Viking should have about $39 million to spend with the adjustment and now the new CBA.
 
Doesn't the article state that all the numbers will be significantly better if a new CBA is reached and the cap goes up????
The credits and charges are unchanged with the new agreement.Say a player ran for 1200 yards in '04 and had a contract option to earn $5M in '05 if he topped 1000 yards. This would be considered a "Likely to be Earned" incentive (LTBE) since it was accomplished the previous year. As such, the team had to reserve the cap space in expectation of paying that money. But say the player only ran for 500 yards in '05. The team didn't pay that money, yet had been forced to use the cap space. Therefore they get a credit of $5M towards the following season to make up for it.

So if the official cap had been $94M, the Vikings would have had 94+7.5 or ~ $101.5M. Since the cap has increased to $102M, the Vikings now get 102+7.5 or ~ $109.5 million.
So I'm reading this all right, the Viking should have about $39 million to spend with the adjustment and now the new CBA.
Possibly. But I think what's more likely is that the reports about how much money the Vikes had to spend against the cap had already taken into account their large cap credit being carried over to this year.
 
Doesn't the article state that all the numbers will be significantly better if a new CBA is reached and the cap goes up????
The credits and charges are unchanged with the new agreement.Say a player ran for 1200 yards in '04 and had a contract option to earn $5M in '05 if he topped 1000 yards. This would be considered a "Likely to be Earned" incentive (LTBE) since it was accomplished the previous year. As such, the team had to reserve the cap space in expectation of paying that money. But say the player only ran for 500 yards in '05. The team didn't pay that money, yet had been forced to use the cap space. Therefore they get a credit of $5M towards the following season to make up for it.

So if the official cap had been $94M, the Vikings would have had 94+7.5 or ~ $101.5M. Since the cap has increased to $102M, the Vikings now get 102+7.5 or ~ $109.5 million.
So I'm reading this all right, the Viking should have about $39 million to spend with the adjustment and now the new CBA.
Possibly. But I think what's more likely is that the reports about how much money the Vikes had to spend against the cap had already taken into account their large cap credit being carried over to this year.
Still the best I gather Vikings will be the only time this year with 30+ Mill in cap room.That's a ton of $$ If Wilf spend it all the vikings would end up with 3 of top 10 FA of this year and still have ton of room.

 
Possibly. But I think what's more likely is that the reports about how much money the Vikes had to spend against the cap had already taken into account their large cap credit being carried over to this year.
Still the best I gather Vikings will be the only time this year with 30+ Mill in cap room.That's a ton of $$ If Wilf spend it all the vikings would end up with 3 of top 10 FA of this year and still have ton of room.
And can pay those FA ROSTER bonuses instead of signing bonuses, and therefore not tie up any cap money besides salary's going forward.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top