PDA

View Full Version : Per PfoFootballTalk: Broncos are $26.7 million below the cap



Tned
08-02-2011, 07:09 AM
Well, @Ted_Sundquist was one of the first to say that the Broncos were well below the cap and that the issue was cash. If PFT's list is correct, then he appears right:


One week into the 2011 spending spree under the new $120.4 million salary cap, 11 teams still have more than $20 million available for the coming season. A source with knowledge of the numbers has shared them with PFT.

...

the Broncos (more than $26.7 million)

...

While the league as a whole must spend cash in 2011 that equates to 99 percent of the cap, there’s no minimum requirement for each team until 2013. Thus, neither the Bengals nor any other specific team is required to spend another dime — as long as all 32 teams cuts checks this year that equal at least $3.814 billion

Read the full article here: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/08/02/11-teams-still-have-20-million-or-more-in-cap-room/

dogfish
08-02-2011, 07:18 AM
pfft! lies, damned lies and propoganda!

dogfish
08-02-2011, 07:19 AM
broncos have no cap room. . .

FanInAZ
08-02-2011, 07:38 AM
How many of our draft choices have we signed? I'm sure that their salaries come out of that same $26.7 million pot.

MileHighCrew
08-02-2011, 07:40 AM
I saw this too, but I don't see the Broncos spending 26M more this offseason

Tned
08-02-2011, 07:46 AM
I saw this too, but I don't see the Broncos spending 26M more this offseason

Nope. If true, it goes along with what some have been saying about the Broncos being more frugal this year, whether due to being cash strapped, or simply taking a disciplined approach, knowing they aren't one or two high priced free agents away from a Super Bowl run.

MileHighCrew
08-02-2011, 08:00 AM
And IMO they shouldn't spend all that money this year. This is not the make superbowl or bust year for the Broncos, the team is young and building.

MOtorboat
08-02-2011, 08:04 AM
I'm so confused.

LordTrychon
08-02-2011, 08:15 AM
I'm so confused.

Me too...

The league as a whole is required to spend 99% of the total cap, but teams don't have to individually?

How does that work, really? At most, half of your teams would have to spend 100% and the other half spend 98%.

If the teams aren't required to spend a specific floor, and the league doesn't meet the requirement... who gets punished?

As for the Broncos, I've also heard that they plan on making some pickups on the waiver, too... but it's hard to think that would be the expensive part of FA for them.

MileHighCrew
08-02-2011, 08:19 AM
IT was on PFT the Broncos were one of 5 teams interested in Osi. But they can't give up their 1st and that is what the Giants are asking for, they said possible 2nd round pick. He has a cap hit of 10mil per season. Add in the DJ for Asanti possible trade and the caps space is eaten up quickly.
http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/giants/2011/08/five-teams-in-the-hunt-for-osi?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+nydnrss%2Fblogs%2Fgiants+%28B logs%2FThe+Blue+Screen%29

BigDaddyBronco
08-02-2011, 08:24 AM
Ok, I get it now. I was wondering if several teams were 90% of the cap how could you get the whole NFL to be 99% of the cap. It's not the cap it's cash flow. So the signing bonuses that are prorated for the cap are not prorated when it comes to cash flow, they count the year the player is signed. With that taken into account, there should be no problem for the league to spend the $3.85 billion on the player salaries.


Also, if I remember correctly, Bowlen last year didn't want to spend a lot of money although it was an uncapped year due to the labor uncertainty. Maybe Bowlen has money problems and is just trying to make sure he is going to get a certain profit. I don't have a huge problem with that, but it makes a systematic rebuild harder if you don't get some FA's or can't resign some talent as back-ups or depth. Say you sign Mebane to a 4 yr deal and you know you will be rebuilding the next 2 years. That gives you 2 more years with him as a contender and lets you draft his replacement 2 or 3 years after you sign him. The way we are going is that they bring in a bunch of scrubs to get through this year, hope at least one of them pans out, and then draft a bunch of guys next year. Then they wait 2 or 3 years for them to develop. Seems like we have a few more years of mediocrity.

BroncoStud
08-02-2011, 09:32 AM
Save the money THIS year but you had better damn well spend it to get us talent next year. We need to put ourselves in a position to move up in the draft and grab and elite QB, unless Tebow or Quinn impresses this year, which we may or may not get a chance to see.

Softskull
08-02-2011, 09:49 AM
They should be spending like sailors in the red light district.

tomjonesrocks
08-02-2011, 09:51 AM
IF this is true, why the HELL did Bowlen agree to Orton's extension in the first place?

Lancane
08-02-2011, 10:00 AM
IF this is true, why the HELL did Bowlen agree to Orton's extension in the first place?

He didn't have to agree, once McDaniels chose that route all he had to do was get Xanders to sign off on it as acting general manager. Bowlen said he wanted to pretty much draft a quarterback, then McDaniels drafted Tebow...but I don't think that's what Bowlen had in mind either.

slim
08-02-2011, 10:29 AM
Operating your team like a small market club is no way to win championships.

silkamilkamonico
08-02-2011, 10:37 AM
Operating your team like a small market club is no way to win championships.

i understand the sentiment, but again, bowlen has allowed this organization to spend like bandits for the better part of 12 years now, and all hes recieved in return is 1 division championship, 1 playoff win, and a millions upon millions thrown out to players who arent even on the team anymore.

from his business standpoint i can very well see why he is strapping the organization, and imho ut would be foolish to not consider his viewpoint considering.

slim
08-02-2011, 10:41 AM
i understand the sentiment, but again, bowlen has allowed this organization to spend like bandits for the better part of 12 years now, and all hes recieved in return is 1 division championship, 1 playoff win, and a millions upon millions thrown out to players who arent even on the team anymore.

from his business standpoint i can very well see why he is strapping the organization, and imho ut would be foolish to not consider his viewpoint considering.

Fair point.

But a little short sighted in my opinion. Bowlen can't hold this FO accountable for the sins of the past. If you don't believe in them, then hire someone you trust to make FO decisions.

I would also add that this FA period is unlike any we have seen before (or will likely see in the future). If there was one year to spend money on FA, this was it.

Lancane
08-02-2011, 11:48 AM
i understand the sentiment, but again, bowlen has allowed this organization to spend like bandits for the better part of 12 years now, and all hes recieved in return is 1 division championship, 1 playoff win, and a millions upon millions thrown out to players who arent even on the team anymore.

from his business standpoint i can very well see why he is strapping the organization, and imho ut would be foolish to not consider his viewpoint considering.

Let's be honest Silk, there are about twenty-four other teams that have spent as much and seen even less in the same span of years. When you consider the top teams of the past decade - you notice the deficiencies. The best build the core of your team through the draft and then add a veterans as needed to stay competitive, but continue to draft well. If you go too much one way or another then it's seems you fail more then succeed, I think Shanahan left a lot of the fandom with a bad taste in their mouths regarding free agency.

WARHORSE
08-02-2011, 11:52 AM
So..........we can eat Ortons number in a trade or keep him, and all the media corn cobbing about Denver having to trade Orton due to cap constraints was just that.......corn cobbing.



:coffee:

NightTerror218
08-02-2011, 12:00 PM
Me too...

The league as a whole is required to spend 99% of the total cap, but teams don't have to individually?

How does that work, really? At most, half of your teams would have to spend 100% and the other half spend 98%.

If the teams aren't required to spend a specific floor, and the league doesn't meet the requirement... who gets punished?

As for the Broncos, I've also heard that they plan on making some pickups on the waiver, too... but it's hard to think that would be the expensive part of FA for them.


no they are not, I believe this year is 75%, next year is 90% and then the 95%. So 3 yrs down the road.

Dont forget they are still paying shanny and mcD

Superchop 7
08-02-2011, 12:06 PM
Ummm not buying it. .....The Pat Bowlen we knew for 20 years wanted winning above all else.....then Pats mind turns to spaghetti......enter....Joe the liar Ellis.....since then WE have watched the team go south.....you cant tell me there are cash flow problems when the franchise is worth a billion and only spent 178 million of "their" money for a stadium. Pretty sure a bank would cover a cash flow problem.....basic business 101......however......what Joe has been doing is buying out shareholders .......pretty sure that takes money. Its a smokescreen people....actions speak louder than words.

Lancane
08-02-2011, 12:24 PM
Ummm not buying it. .....The Pat Bowlen we knew for 20 years wanted winning above all else.....then Pats mind turns to spaghetti......enter....Joe the liar Ellis.....since then WE have watched the team go south.....you cant tell me there are cash flow problems when the franchise is worth a billion and only spent 178 million of "their" money for a stadium. Pretty sure a bank would cover a cash flow problem.....basic business 101......however......what Joe has been doing is buying out shareholders .......pretty sure that takes money. Its a smokescreen people....actions speak louder than words.

The Pat we know wouldn't have allowed the Cutler-McDouche saga to get to the point it did, he wouldn't have allowed a little puke trade a franchise quarterback because he wanted to prove he and not some quarterback was the face of the franchise. The Pat we know wouldn't have allowed McDouche to draft a project quarterback when he told the media he wanted to draft a quarterback. The Pat we know wouldn't have allowed his snot-nosed coach to give a certain quarterback...'Horton' nearly 9 million for a season through an extension.

Let's face it, Pat may not be the same Pat we knew and respected.

Slick
08-02-2011, 12:32 PM
Pat is still liking his wounds from the Shanahan and McDaniels contrats, along with the other failed FA's of both coaches.

He's not rich.

Lonestar
08-02-2011, 12:41 PM
Save the money THIS year but you had better damn well spend it to get us talent next year. We need to put ourselves in a position to move up in the draft and grab and elite QB, unless Tebow or Quinn impresses this year, which we may or may not get a chance to see.

each year we will get better as the foundation is built via the draft and a couple of 4-5 year players are added to the team via FA..

old enough to mentor and add depth not to old to play plus by year 4 we should be able to see if they are worth a crap in the NFL.

I beleive the days of signing washed up aging vets to extraordinary contracts are finite..

Lonestar
08-02-2011, 12:47 PM
Let's be honest Silk, there are about twenty-four other teams that have spent as much and seen even less in the same span of years. When you consider the top teams of the past decade - you notice the deficiencies. The best build the core of your team through the draft and then add a veterans as needed to stay competitive, but continue to draft well. If you go too much one way or another then it's seems you fail more then succeed, I think Shanahan left a lot of the fandom with a bad taste in their mouths regarding free agency.

I know he did me, he spent money on questionable character guys and blew I'd bet 100 mil on dead cap money during his last 10 years.

and that is not even to mention the extra coin we had to give out to get the good guys to re-do their contracts..

I believe that was one of the BIG reasons mikey was fired and why we did not open the pocket book the past 3 years so far..

You blow that kind of money that could have been spent better and you get gun shy..

HORSEPOWER 56
08-02-2011, 02:22 PM
I know he did me, he spent money on questionable character guys and blew I'd bet 100 mil on dead cap money during his last 10 years.

and that is not even to mention the extra coin we had to give out to get the good guys to re-do their contracts..

I believe that was one of the BIG reasons mikey was fired and why we did not open the pocket book the past 3 years so far..

You blow that kind of money that could have been spent better and you get gun shy..

In all fairness, McDaniels' FA moves were just as awful. We shelled out a ton of guaranteed money (like $30 mil) to 3 aging D-linemen, one of whom never even played and the other two were the cornerstones of the WORST rushing defense in the league last year...

FanInAZ
08-02-2011, 02:45 PM
How many of our draft choices have we signed? I'm sure that their salaries come out of that same $26.7 million pot.

Still waiting for an answer to this question that could explain a lot as to why the Broncos FO is doing/not doing what they are doing/not doing.

slim
08-02-2011, 02:51 PM
All of the Bronco's draft picks have been signed.

Stargazer
08-02-2011, 03:43 PM
I would also add that this FA period is unlike any we have seen before (or will likely see in the future). If there was one year to spend money on FA, this was it.

Agree. Unfortunately, the organization picked the wrong year to be cheap.
:tsk:

silkamilkamonico
08-02-2011, 04:06 PM
Anyone want to pull out the years where Pat Bowlen was spending 20% of our entire cap on players not currently on the roster, mostly due to failed free agents who eventually get released.

On top of that, the current regime has not earned the opportunity to show that they will make good decisions in free agency spending.

But hey, when it isn't your money being thrown around, who cares right?

silkamilkamonico
08-02-2011, 04:08 PM
Still waiting for an answer to this question that could explain a lot as to why the Broncos FO is doing/not doing what they are doing/not doing.

All the draft picks are signed.

MOtorboat
08-02-2011, 04:11 PM
I'm starting to think the Salary Cap is a figment of our collective imaginations.

Dzone
08-02-2011, 04:29 PM
Ya I can understand Bowlens reluctance after throwing money away on Travis Henry, Daryl Gardner, Dale carter, etc etc ...But it still sucks to have a miserly owner now. Bowlen's penuriousness is wearing thin.
Parsimonious Pat. Thats his new nickname. LOL..
Its becoming apparent that Pat is behaving Niggardly!!!!!Hahaa
This years draft could be a bigger difference maker than anything from FA, thats our only hope.

Clipworthy
08-02-2011, 06:35 PM
a lot of that money is being saved for Clady and Lloyd contract extensions

hamrob
08-02-2011, 11:03 PM
I think we will still sign a few more guys for quality depth. Probably another RT, LB, DT.

Their plan has to be:

Keep room to resign vets to extensions
Allow young players time to improve
Keep adding quality depth next year
Be competetive in year 3.

To be honest, we'll be competetive this year if we stay healthy. Our problem is depth. we are not strong along the 2nd and 3rd strings. It will take next years draft, improve play from young ones, and quality free agents to shore up our depth...so that we can truly be a playoff quality team.

Stargazer
08-03-2011, 12:01 AM
a lot of that money is being saved for Clady and Lloyd contract extensions

I can see Clady. Lloyd? Not sure I would throw good money at him at his current age.

Lonestar
08-05-2011, 09:45 PM
In all fairness, McDaniels' FA moves were just as awful. We shelled out a ton of guaranteed money (like $30 mil) to 3 aging D-linemen, one of whom never even played and the other two were the cornerstones of the WORST rushing defense in the league last year...

IIRC there were not a lot of options in FA last year..

I really thought that J Willaims should have been rested after not playing for much of the previous year..

But wehn there is not much to paly with you take what you can..

We shoudl have found more in EACH draft..

But then mikey fubared that also..

MAybe the air in Dove valley screws up their thinking..

Look at the day one picks for DL since almost forever..



1968 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
2 31 Curley Culp DT Arizona State

1970 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
2 37 Alden Roche DE Southern University


1973 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
2 36 Barney Chavous DE South Carolina State
3 70 John Wood DT Louisiana State



1978 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
1 27 Don Latimer NT Miami (Fla.)
2 55 Bill Gay DE USC

1979 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL

3 77 Bruce Radford NT Grambling State

1980 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
2 42 Rulon Jones DE Utah State

1984 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
2 46 Andre Townsend DE Mississippi

1988 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
1 26 Ted Gregory NT Syracuse

1989 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL

2 47 Warren Powers DE Maryland


1992 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL

2 54 Shane Dronett DE Texas

1993 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
1 11 Dan Williams DE Toledo

1997 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
1 28 Trevor Pryce LB Clemson


1999 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
2 58 Montae Reagor DE Texas Tech

2001 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
2 51 Paul Toviessi DE Marshall

2002 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
3 96 Dorsett Davis DT Mississippi State

2007 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
1 17 Jarvis Moss DE Florida
2 56 Tim Crowder DE Texas



Pretty pathetic folks

Chidoze
08-05-2011, 11:05 PM
Nope. If true, it goes along with what some have been saying about the Broncos being more frugal this year, whether due to being cash strapped, or simply taking a disciplined approach, knowing they aren't one or two high priced free agents away from a Super Bowl run.
Another possibility might be that they have been offering contracts to the high priced free agents, but the players just dont want to play for a loser.

Chidoze
08-05-2011, 11:08 PM
IIRC there were not a lot of options in FA last year..

I really thought that J Willaims should have been rested after not playing for much of the previous year..

But wehn there is not much to paly with you take what you can..

We shoudl have found more in EACH draft..

But then mikey fubared that also..

MAybe the air in Dove valley screws up their thinking..

Look at the day one picks for DL since almost forever..



1968 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
2 31 Curley Culp DT Arizona State

1970 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
2 37 Alden Roche DE Southern University


1973 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
2 36 Barney Chavous DE South Carolina State
3 70 John Wood DT Louisiana State



1978 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
1 27 Don Latimer NT Miami (Fla.)
2 55 Bill Gay DE USC

1979 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL

3 77 Bruce Radford NT Grambling State

1980 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
2 42 Rulon Jones DE Utah State

1984 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
2 46 Andre Townsend DE Mississippi

1988 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
1 26 Ted Gregory NT Syracuse

1989 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL

2 47 Warren Powers DE Maryland


1992 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL

2 54 Shane Dronett DE Texas

1993 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
1 11 Dan Williams DE Toledo

1997 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
1 28 Trevor Pryce LB Clemson


1999 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
2 58 Montae Reagor DE Texas Tech

2001 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
2 51 Paul Toviessi DE Marshall

2002 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
3 96 Dorsett Davis DT Mississippi State

2007 - Denver Broncos
RD SEL # PLAYER POSITION SCHOOL
1 17 Jarvis Moss DE Florida
2 56 Tim Crowder DE Texas



Pretty pathetic folks
Wow, incredibly pathetic! :tsk:

Jsteve01
08-05-2011, 11:14 PM
Ya I can understand Bowlens reluctance after throwing money away on Travis Henry, Daryl Gardner, Dale carter, etc etc ...But it still sucks to have a miserly owner now. Bowlen's penuriousness is wearing thin.
Parsimonious Pat. Thats his new nickname. LOL..
Its becoming apparent that Pat is behaving Niggardly!!!!!Hahaa
This years draft could be a bigger difference maker than anything from FA, thats our only hope.

wow, because we're killing dead money and signing 3 high number ones to short contracts at positions of need, he's a miser? Because we're stockpiling a little cash for one of the best LT in the league. Sheesh i lived in Philly for a few years and some of the crap I hear around here is starting to remind me of fickle Philly fans.

I was pissed myself and then we resigned Thomas, and picked up Harvey Bunkley and warren all of whom have talent and will help immensely in the run game, which again was our biggest a number one problem on both sides of the ball last year.

MOtorboat
08-06-2011, 12:42 AM
Sweet. JR is listing draft picks with no context. I thought this thread was about the salary cap this season? Who knew?

NightTrainLayne
08-06-2011, 04:32 PM
Sweet. JR is listing draft picks with no context. I thought this thread was about the salary cap this season? Who knew?

What? So you're saying that posters should strive to stay on topic within each thread? Who knew? I'm sure JR will change now that this has been brought to his attention.

Lonestar
08-06-2011, 05:15 PM
Wow, incredibly pathetic! :tsk:

It is so scary to see the total apathy towards DL in DEN forever..

When most of the real quality teams have had super studs on the DL and for that matter OL and got them as draft choices... we flat have not..

Not sure why no one gets this..

Maybe now with Fox in town we will see expending a few top choices over the coming years. We will see better results..

Although I think I see another LB first mentaility lurking in there..

yet he had some super studs at CAR for awhile.. Not sure..

Lonestar
08-06-2011, 08:37 PM
Sweet. JR is listing draft picks with no context. I thought this thread was about the salary cap this season? Who knew?

This sounds like context to ME..

Maybe you did not read it..

"We should have found more in EACH draft..

But then mikey fubared that also..

Maybe the air in Dove valley screws up their thinking..

Look at the day one picks for DL since almost forever.."

I'll splain it to you lucy .

This franchise has never went for the gusto on DL types on day one and that was up to 3 picks up to a couple of years ago.

lots of chances to up grade yor team..

ANd way back we were getting our asses handed to us by those teams with great DL's .

Back then we did not get it, WHy should I have been surprised that mikey never did..

is that clear enough for you?

It must be something in the air..:laugh::laugh::laugh:

Lonestar
08-06-2011, 08:39 PM
What? So you're saying that posters should strive to stay on topic within each thread? Who knew? I'm sure JR will change now that this has been brought to his attention.

In your fondest dreams..

I bring to light why things are the way they are..

In this case historically we have sucked at spending prime picks for players that other teams did..