Broncos opt not to roll over all cap space.

[DenBronx]

I am confused on why we would not do this in a critical year that we will need every penny to keep alot of these free agents. Unless Elway is planning on letting most of them all go?

It's only 3.3 mill but still...



Broncos, Rams, Saints opt not to carry over all cap space
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/02/25/broncos-rams-saints-opt-not-to-carry-over-all-cap-space/

[Ravage!!!]

I'm sure there is a strategic reason.

[Northman]

I guess my question is what is the advantage of not rolling it over? Ive never been totally clear on how the cap space works in its entirety.

[DenBronx]

New report also says Denver close to mega deal with Von Miller. So that means franchise either Brock or Malik? That would suck...15.5 mill for a DE and QB is even higher.

[VonDoom]

I also saw this and can't figure out why we would not have rolled it all over (same goes for the others, especially the Saints who need every penny they can get). PFT says they will report more when they get answers, so I'm sure we'll figure it out.

[Northman]

New report also says Denver close to mega deal with Von Miller. So that means franchise either Brock or Malik? That would suck...15.5 mill for a DE and QB is even higher.

Probably Brock would be franchised.

[DenBronx]

So after reading a bit more into it they only left 247k on the table. Not sure why they just didn't roll it ALL over but oh well...

[VonDoom]

ProFootballTalk ‏@ProFootballTalk 28m28 minutes ago

Per source, Saints didn't carry over $42K in cap space from 2015, Broncos left $267K behind, Rams didn't bring forward $1.245M.

Andrew Mason ‏@MaseDenver 16m16 minutes ago

Andrew Mason Retweeted Mike Middleton

Been asked this a lot today. Only reason I could see is for room re: a restructure or a cut between now and 3/9.

[underrated29]

ok so who on our team is making close to 247k, or will be?

[underrated29]

Maybe for Mcmanus- to restructure him? or one of the backup guys like wesbter or kapri bibbs?




Kapri Bibbs!

[OrangeHoof]

My understanding for not rolling over cap space is that you are only allowed to do this once every few years but I thought you rolled over the whole thing and not leave some behind. That's a new wrinkle that kinda messes with the whole premise.

[Rick]

If they franchise either Brock or Malik it is probably with the intention of doing a long term deal before season.

[VonDoom]

If they franchise either Brock or Malik it is probably with the intention of doing a long term deal before season.

You would think, but the QB tag is over $19 million and the DE tag is over $15. I'd say they don't want to pay either player that rate long term, which is usually what happens when you tag someone and work out a deal. In desperation, they could tag Brock, but I'm thinking if they don't tag Miller, they won't tag anyone.

[Rick]

They tagged Thomas last year and still did a deal, I don't think they ended up paying the franchise price but rather the new long term contract price, or am I wrong?

Franchise tag was just used to keep him off the market, they didn't actually pay that unless I am mistaken.

[VonDoom]

They tagged Thomas last year and still did a deal, I don't think they ended up paying the franchise price but rather the new long term contract price, or am I wrong?

Franchise tag was just used to keep him off the market, they didn't actually pay that unless I am mistaken.

I believe the WR tag number for 2015 was $12.8 million. DT's deal ended up being 5 years, $70 million (AAV of $14 million). That's why if they tag Von ($14-something million this year for linebackers) and do a long term deal, he'll probably get like $18 million a year. Whereas if we tag, say, Jackson, he gets $15 million for the tag, where the team only wants to pay him $10-12 or whatever the rumor is. In other words, the tag is good leverage for a guy whose value is actually higher than the tag amount (DT last year, Miller this year, for example).

[Rick]

Not sure I guess. I see no reason though that just because, say for example they use the 15 mil tag on Malik, that they then have to pay him a contract worth 15+ per year.

To me the tag is just a we have you this year at 15 if we can't get you to sign long term, but they can still work out a long term deal at 12.

[Ziggy]

I'm not sure the Broncos franchise anyone if they sign Von. Franchising Brock or Malik would be overpaying them. I don't think Elway will go that route.

[Davii]

Not sure I guess. I see no reason though that just because, say for example they use the 15 mil tag on Malik, that they then have to pay him a contract worth 15+ per year.

To me the tag is just a we have you this year at 15 if we can't get you to sign long term, but they can still work out a long term deal at 12.

If you tag a player with a tag that is higher than his probable contract price you diminish your chances of getting them to sign that long term deal. If you're Malik and you can play this year for just north of 15 million and then still get a contract for 10 per year next year (or 17 if they tag you again!), why would you not play under the tag and make an extra 5 million?

[chazoe60]

If you tag a player with a tag that is higher than his probable contract price you diminish your chances of getting them to sign that long term deal. If you're Malik and you can play this year for just north of 15 million and then still get a contract for 10 per year next year (or 17 if they tag you again!), why would you not play under the tag and make an extra 5 million?

Injury risk. These guys mostly want long term security more than anything and the risk of playing under the tag and getting injured and then missing out on the long term security is why they hate being tagged.

[Davii]

Injury risk. These guys mostly want long term security more than anything and the risk of playing under the tag and getting injured and then missing out on the long term security is why they hate being tagged.

A tag that earns you 5 million, or more, per year than you would earn otherwise? Come on Chaz...

[chazoe60]

A tag that earns you 5 million, or more, per year than you would earn otherwise? Come on Chaz...

If a guy can play one year for $15M and risk injury or sign for 5 years for $50M with $20M guaranteed a lot of guys will take the long term security. I've heard a ton of them talk about it. It's why they hate the franchise tag.

[Denver Native (Carol)]

INDIANAPOLIS -- NFL Players Association executive director DeMaurice Smith said the union is estimating the salary cap for this upcoming season will be "north of $154 million" per team, marking an increase of roughly $12 million per club over last year's figure.

rest - http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/nfl-players-union-is-pleased-with-the-supersized-salary-cap-bump-022516

I am guessing, but could this be the reason that the Broncos decided to not roll over all cap space?

[Davii]

If a guy can play one year for $15M and risk injury or sign for 5 years for $50M with $20M guaranteed a lot of guys will take the long term security. I've heard a ton of them talk about it. It's why they hate the franchise tag.

Provided he receive more than the tag money in the first year (salary, bonus) and definitely more guaranteed, sure.

[VonDoom]

I'm not sure the Broncos franchise anyone if they sign Von. Franchising Brock or Malik would be overpaying them. I don't think Elway will go that route.

I mentioned that earlier in this thread. To me, the benefit of signing Von long term now is that we can allocate it however we want (potentially giving us more room this year) and avoid the inevitable hold out

[chazoe60]

Provided he receive more than the tag money in the first year (salary, bonus) and definitely more guaranteed, sure.

But thats always the case. Guaranteed money is always going to be more money long term. I'm just answering your original question. Some guys don't think that way, the obvious one being Revis, he constantly bets on himself and plays on high dollar one year contracts. But most guys look for the long term guaranteed money.

[NightTerror218]

Unless it becomes viable cash for signing bonuses.

[Joel]

I'm not sure the Broncos franchise anyone if they sign Von. Franchising Brock or Malik would be overpaying them. I don't think Elway will go that route.
Transition tag's an option. It's not a huge difference, but significant. The lone downside is we'd only retain matching rights, not exclusive ones. But in Oz' case it's unlikely anyone offers him a multi-year deal averaging $17M annually, which is about the average for the top 10 2016 QB salaries (minus Manning.)

[Davii]

Transition tag's an option. It's not a huge difference, but significant. The lone downside is we'd only retain matching rights, not exclusive ones. But in Oz' case it's unlikely anyone offers him a multi-year deal averaging $17M annually, which is about the average for the top 10 2016 QB salaries (minus Manning.)

I could see a transition tag being used if he makes it to free agency just to give us the opportunity to match, but again, if the match is at 15 million plus do you really think the Broncos WANT to match that for Brock?

[VonDoom]

I could see a transition tag being used if he makes it to free agency just to give us the opportunity to match, but again, if the match is at 15 million plus do you really think the Broncos WANT to match that for Brock?

How much of a monetary difference (if any) is there between the exclusive and non-exclusive franchise tags? I'd be tempted to use the non-exclusive on one of those guys (probably Jackson) and see if anyone bites.

I just don't see us giving Brock $19 million for this one year and then having to go through this again next year. I still think we come to a deal with him in the next couple of weeks.

[VonDoom]

Also, FYI - I posted this in the combine thread, but since it came up here ...

Lindsay Jones ‏@bylindsayhjones 2m2 minutes ago

John Elway said the franchise tag would not be a consideration for Brock Osweiler.

[Ziggy]

Transition tag cannot be used on unrestricted free agents. It's only for restricted free agents.

[NightTerror218]

Transition tag cannot be used on unrestricted free agents. It's only for restricted free agents.

It can be used on either I believe. Alex Mack got that tag a couple years ago. It is a top 10 salary instead top 5. And other teams can offer more.

[VonDoom]

Transition tag cannot be used on unrestricted free agents. It's only for restricted free agents.

Are you thinking of a tender? Because transition tags are supposed to be used on UFA's, same as a franchise tag.

[Joel]

I could see a transition tag being used if he makes it to free agency just to give us the opportunity to match, but again, if the match is at 15 million plus do you really think the Broncos WANT to match that for Brock?
Well, that's the big question, but if he refuses to sign for less it's where we are anyway: If Oz would take $12-13M/yr I suspect Elway would've ALREADY given it to him with a smile. But if I understood Spotrac right (and it's accurate in the first place) any match would be much higher, because the transition tag would still guarantee Oz $17M. He might be willing to take less for a long term deal, but probably not much less, which is why I doubt we'd have any offers to match.


How much of a monetary difference (if any) is there between the exclusive and non-exclusive franchise tags? I'd be tempted to use the non-exclusive on one of those guys (probably Jackson) and see if anyone bites.

I just don't see us giving Brock $19 million for this one year and then having to go through this again next year. I still think we come to a deal with him in the next couple of weeks.
If, again, Spotrac's right and I understood it right the difference for Oz isn't big, but is >$1M. Enough to make a difference if we're forced to match offers on Marshall, CJ, Paradis or McManus (not sure without double-checking which of them are ERFAs rather than RFAs.)

For Jackson the difference is HALF what he's reportedly holding out to get; <$9M, which is less than we've reportedly offered. Frankly, I hope he walks, because I think that's $10-15M better spent on MULTIPLE players at least as good, at positions just as important but where we have far less good depth. But if we want him that badly and he won't take $10M, the transition tag'd be a good way to settle the issue without leaving us in a long term cap bind, and if he STILL gets a $15M/yr offer, fine.

[Cugel]

They tagged Thomas last year and still did a deal, I don't think they ended up paying the franchise price but rather the new long term contract price, or am I wrong?

Franchise tag was just used to keep him off the market, they didn't actually pay that unless I am mistaken.

Obviously they can't negotiate a contract LOWER than the franchise tag amount! Osweiler: "So, you want me to take $12 M a year instead of signing a franchise tage 1 year deal for $19 M? Um, no."

[Tned]

From the CBA:


Carrying Over Room. A Club may “carry over” Room from one League Year to the following League Year by submitting notice in writing signed by the owner to the NFL no later than fourteen (14) days prior to the start of the next League Year indicating the maximum amount of Room that the Club wishes to carry over. The NFL shall promptly provide a copy of any such notice to the NFLPA. The amount of Room carried over will be adjusted downward based on the final Room available after the year-end reconciliation

[VonDoom]

Here's the explanation:


Per a source with knowledge of the situation, the Broncos saved $267,088 in order to have extra money available if another postseason team tried to sign any players from the Denver practice squad.

The carryover decision is made at the end of the regular season. For the 12 teams that make the playoffs, it remains possible that another team still in the playoffs will try to sign away a practice-squad player. Having the extra cap space available gives the playoff team flexibility to fend off an attempt to sign a player away.

The Broncos opted to play the situation conservatively. However, none of the other playoff teams did, meaning that they couldn’t have spent any extra money to keep practice squad players or to steal someone else’s.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/02/25/broncos-left-cap-space-behind-to-protect-against-postseason-practice-squad-raid/

[Davii]

Here's the explanation:



http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/02/25/broncos-left-cap-space-behind-to-protect-against-postseason-practice-squad-raid/

Thanks VonD, that makes sense why they didn't roll it all over

[Tned]

Here's the explanation:



http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2016/02/25/broncos-left-cap-space-behind-to-protect-against-postseason-practice-squad-raid/

Strange, that seems to contradict the actual clause in the CBA in a couple ways. One, they seem to include an "adjusted downward" calculation for something like the signing of a practice squad player and two, it says that the league is notified 14 days before the new league year, which I believe is March 9th.

PFT has been known to publish shaky info. I wonder if this is one of those cases, or what the deal is.

[Rick]

Obviously they can't negotiate a contract LOWER than the franchise tag amount! Osweiler: "So, you want me to take $12 M a year instead of signing a franchise tage 1 year deal for $19 M? Um, no."

Obviously it's not obvious or I obviously would not have said that. Obviously!

Your response is bullshit, it is not asking would you take 12m instead it is would you take 12 mil over like 5 years so 60 mil vs tag amount, but you obviously knew that right?

Can I have your direct phone number so I can get all the obvious things out of the way in the future before I post since you obviously have all the obvious answers? Thanks.

Also, can you not be a condescending dick in the future? Also thanks.