This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Why? Kinda' getting late in the game here. What's the holdup?
LOL Norris. New offense? Don't think so.-QG
![[scooter]](/data/avatars/m/22/22287.jpg?1659477690){kind=avatar}
There is no minimum until 2013.
Against all odds, I've been thinking the same thing. There's always a whole lot of posturing going on, and he's got an agent looking for a paycheck.
Yes and no. The NFL has promised to spend 99% of the overall salary cap in 2011, but individual teams will not be penalized if they fail to spend the minimum amount. Any leftover money will be redistributed to existing players.link'Truman said:
While he's horrible as an owner, Mikey's pretty adroit at contract law it seems. I'm sure that the answer is probably "yes". I mean the guy actually voted "yes" for a CBA!-QG
The cap and floor actually have nothing to do with the 99% spend - the deal for 2011 and 2012 is that the NFL teams must collectively spend at least 99% of the cap in cash - but that includes upfront money paid in signing bonuses (like Charles Johnson and DeAngelo Williams), not the individual team's cap figures. In essence, Mike Brown/CIN, K.C., and other low-salary teams can go as low below the cap during 2011 and 2012 as they like with no penalty. Then in 2013 all teams must spend at least 89% of the cap on their franchises' payrolls, instituting a hard "floor" as well as a hard cap that year.
Yes, Brown can be as low below the cap as he likes with no penalty, see my post #14. I know it's hard to believe, but the way the math works out on the 99% spend (of the total cash spent by all 32 teams each year), the Bengals can be WAY WAY below the cap for the next two years and the league will still hit the 99% average. I suspect that Brown will sell the team prior to the 2013 season when the hard floor comes in - after he's milked 40-50 million out for his retirement.
So what happens if the league ends up at 98%? Who is responsible for redistribution of the 1%? Does it come from just the owners who were under the cap? Or would every team pay an equal share?
My understanding is that in that unlikely instance, the league itself would make up the difference out of league revenues (so all 32 owners would take a slight hit in revenues, if I got those nuances correct). But with the way Jerry Richardson has handed out signing bonuses this year (for example), the league should hit the 99% total cash spend of the salary cap requirement easily.
Sadly, I think the Bengals are so far under the cap that Palmer's salary wouldn't affect the cap either way.
Carson Palmer is gonna be like 90 years old "As soon as the Bengals climb to within $11.5 million of the hard salary cap". President Kuchinich will get reelected before this happens.-QG
Ha ha. But seriously, he was the #13 fantasy QB last season and had a higher passer rating than Sam Bradford, Mark Sanchez, or Kevin Kolb, despite playing with arguably the worst supporting cast in the NFL.
Oh I know. It was just a poor attempt on my part of being a smart ###
that would be quite an argument. whitworth is a universally lauded lt. pff rated him the 2nd best pass blocker for his position. then they went ahead and rated guard bobbie williams the best pass blocker at his position. ocho, TO, shipley, gresham, benson dont seem near the worst combo either.carson's skills clearly diminished over the last few years. its a shame mike brown wasnt willing to ship him for a 2nd to some team desperate to overpay for an overrated primadonna weirdo (watch hard knocks for his eccentrics)
They won't trade him. They'll just pay him. He'd be deactivated for every game, since he doesn't know the new play book.It doesn't matter what Carson's goal is at this point. Mikey won't trade him.-QG
