Polian on the cost of JG today

nc0gnet0 said:

In the real world, base salary counts towards the guarantee. Brock got a 12 mil signing bonus, and 37 mil guaranteed. No Gm in their right mind would ever write that contract, nor would any agent tie their aspiring QB to a 5 year contract with an average salary of 16 mil. Fuck your stupid.

Click to expand...

remydat said:

No you are simply wrong. Some contracts guarantee the base salary and some contracts don't. Guaranteeing base salaries is a more recent aspect of NFL contracts.

Rodgers contract didn't have much base salary guaranteed either. He got roster bonuses and SB.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/green-bay-packers/aaron-rodgers-3745/

Click to expand...

remydat said:

Says the guy that thinks all base salary is guaranteed in contracts, lol.

Click to expand...

nc0gnet0 said:

no, didn't say that, but any base salary that has been paid would count towards the guarantee, dufus. How do you think Brock's contract has a 37 mil guarantee, but only a 12 mil signing bonus. Give up already.

In one post you tell me Rodgers has 62.6 million guaranteed, then the very next post you post a link that shows it's only 54 mil, this of course after you post the most god awful contract ever. Keep trying........

Click to expand...

remydat said:

You are making no sense. We were talking about singing a contract. The base salary hasn't been paid yet and whether the base salary constitutes a guarantee or not is dependent upon whether the contract says it's guaranteed or not. A guarantee is based on whether it's contractually guaranteed or not dufus.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/...0-million-contract-extension-according-source

The above noted his guaranteed was 62.6 million. Then I looked it up on overthecap and it says 54 million. None of which changes the fact base salaries are not guaranteed.

Click to expand...

nc0gnet0 said:

Let me get out my crayons, and I will draw you a picture, again..........

I never said by definition base salary's are always guaranteed. What I said was this "In the real world, base salary counts towards the guarantee. " This was in context to my statement about your ridiculous and fictitious contract for JG with a 35 mil signing bonus and a 7 mil base salary in the first year. Anyone, other than a moron, would clearly understand that the first year of the base would be paid, thus making that contract at a bare minimum a 42 million dollar guaranteed contract. (35 mil signing bonus + 7 mil first year base = 42 mil guaranteed).

Your blanket statement that "base salaries are not guaranteed" once again shows your ignorance. Portions of the BS can, and usually are. The fact that not all the base is not guaranteed is irrelevant. For proof simply look at Brock Osweillers contract, which clearly has the first two years of his base salary guaranteed. What more proof do you need?????

And all of this doesn't even begin to address the fact in your ridiculous contract, the first three years would be guaranteed

Year 1 base: $7M...+ $7M signing bonus = $14M 35 mill dead cap
Year 2 base: $8M...+ $7M signing bonus = $15M 21 mill dead cap
Year 3 base: $9M...+ $7M signing bonus = $16M 21 mill dead cap
Year 4 base: $10M...+$7M signing bonus = $17M 14 mill dead cap
Year 5 base: $11M...+$7M signing bonus = $18M 7 mill dead cap

The reason for this is until after the third year, it costs more (cap) to cut JG then it does to keep him. This in effect makes the contract a 59 million dollar guarantee. Even if for some reason they did choose to cut him after the second year, it is a 50 mill guaranteed contact. So, it doesn't even fit under the parameters you yourself gave, unless you can provide me with a scenario in which the signing team can only end up paying 35 mil.

Click to expand...

remydat said:

Your logic here is flawed. 35 million over 5 years is 7 million a year. If that is all SB then it is likely the earliest they would even think about cutting him is after year 3. So let's say his base non guaranteed salaries over the first 3 years are 7, 8, 9 million per year. That's another 24 million that technically isn't guaranteed that he is almost certain to be paid because they can't cut him those first 3 years without taking a massive cap hit. We see this all the time with contracts.

Click to expand...

remydat said:

You are being an idiot. Non Guaranteed Base Salary is not a guarantee period. All you are doing is repeating what I already said and pretending like you came up with the idea.



This i my post 297. You asked me for a scenario. I gave you a scenario that provided for a SB and non guaranteed base salary. I clearly point out that while this base salary is technically non guaranteed, it is almost certain to be paid. So you are literally just regurgitating something I said and then pretending like I never said it.

Later on, I even gave you an example of Aaron Rodgers contract, where his first year salary is not part of the guarantee. No one includes base salary in guaranteed numbers unless the contract actually says it's guaranteed. When people talk of guaranteed money, they are speaking of contractually guaranteed money. That was my whole point to you.

The thing the above was trying to point out to you is that it's not just about the guarantee, it's about realistically looking at what his cap hits are and trying to figure out when he be cut without taking a major cap hit. Based on that, I would then look at not just the pure guarantee but also look at any non guaranteed money in years that they probably can't cut him because of the cap hit.

This point apparently has flown right over your head because you want to try and argue semantics.

Click to expand...

Rory Sparrow said:

I would argue that the first four years are guaranteed, as even a $7M cap hit is significant in year 5.

Its stupid for Jimmy G to lock himself into a contract that doesn't really pay him all that much, doesn't inflate into large amounts toward the end of the contract, and is 5 years in length.

Its stupid for a team to agree to such a contract, because so much of the value is tied into the signing bonus that you are still on the hook to pay the player large amounts of money at the end of the deal. If Jimmy G is terrible in his first two years, the team is pretty much stuck with him for the next three years.

If 'guaranteed money' is the sticking point, it would actually make more sense for the team to have a huge roster bonus for the first two years...at least that way even if they are paying Jimmy G $22-$24M/yr of guaranteed money in the first two years, they would have some recourse after that point. I'm not sure why Jimmy G is being given an NFL record signing bonus, nor am I sure why his base salary starts at a mere $7M and doesn't escalate past $11M. Just completely inverse of how a contract should be.

Click to expand...

nc0gnet0 said:

Your a complete moron. The only one trying to wiggle their way out of a losing argument by using semantics is you my friend. When a contract says "X" amount of money guaranteed, it means just that. By definition, any and all money paid out by the team goes towards meeting that guarantee, whether it be signing bonus, roster bonus, or base salary. You wrote a 5 year contract that effectively guaranteed JG would make 59 mil, and then slapped a fictitious 35 mil guarantee on it just so it fit in your argument. Show me one contract that is written like that. Just one.

You can call a duck a rabbit, but it's still a duck.

Click to expand...

remydat said:

Nope you are wrong. When a contract has base salary guaranteed, it says so. You are literally changing the definition of guarantee as it's used in the NFL to suit your argument. I already showed you Rodgers contract.

http://overthecap.com/player/cam-newton/1147/

Here is Newton's in this example, only his 2016 base was guaranteed and only 6 million of his 2017 salary was guaranteed if he was on the roster by the 3rd day of the new league year.

So your argument here is just wrong. Even though only 6 million of his 2017 salary is guaranteed, he would still ultimately get paid all of his base salary in 2017 because even if he had sucked it would be cost prohibitive to cut him as the cap hit was 21 million in 2017.

None of his 2018 salary is guaranteed but again if he sucked, he was still likely to be paid it because the dead money in 2018 is 15 million.

So this is not semantics. This is the entire point I was making to you. Guaranteed money doesn't tell the whole story because there is non guaranteed money that will almost surely be paid even though it's not guaranteed. When people quote guaranteed numbers, they are quoting the contractually guaranteed numbers so saying 35 or 40 million guaranteed doesn't mean that is the money that is definitely going to be paid.

So you are using words without understanding what they mean in the context of the NFL.

Click to expand...

remydat said:

Nope you are wrong. When a contract has base salary guaranteed, it says so. You are literally changing the definition of guarantee as it's used in the NFL to suit your argument. I already showed you Rodgers contract.

http://overthecap.com/player/cam-newton/1147/

Here is Newton's in this example, only his 2016 base was guaranteed and only 6 million of his 2017 salary was guaranteed if he was on the roster by the 3rd day of the new league year.

So your argument here is just wrong. Even though only 6 million of his 2017 salary is guaranteed, he would still ultimately get paid all of his base salary in 2017 because even if he had sucked it would be cost prohibitive to cut him as the cap hit was 21 million in 2017.

None of his 2018 salary is guaranteed but again if he sucked, he was still likely to be paid it because the dead money in 2018 is 15 million.

So this is not semantics. This is the entire point I was making to you. Guaranteed money doesn't tell the whole story because there is non guaranteed money that will almost surely be paid even though it's not guaranteed. When people quote guaranteed numbers, they are quoting the contractually guaranteed numbers so saying 35 or 40 million guaranteed doesn't mean that is the money that is definitely going to be paid.

So you are using words without understanding what they mean in the context of the NFL.

Click to expand...

nc0gnet0 said:

Cam newton

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/carolina-panthers/cam-newton-7716/

$41M initially fully guaranteed (signing bonus, 2015 salary, 2015 roster bonus, 2016 option bonus)

Click to expand...

nc0gnet0 said:

Cam newton

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/carolina-panthers/cam-newton-7716/

$41M initially fully guaranteed (signing bonus, 2015 salary, 2015 roster bonus, 2016 option bonus)

Click to expand...

nc0gnet0 said:

"This was in context to my statement about your ridiculous and fictitious contract for JG with a 35 mil signing bonus and a 7 mil base salary in the first year. Anyone, other than a moron, would clearly understand that the first year of the base would be paid, thus making that contract at a bare minimum a 42 million dollar guaranteed contract. (35 mil signing bonus + 7 mil first year base = 42 mil guaranteed). "

Once again bonehead, your proving my point.

Click to expand...

remydat said:

You are not following. I pointed out that Newton's contract has non guaranteed base salary that he is clearly going to receive because it would be cost prohibitive to cut him. His contract is proof that not all base salary is guaranteed even if it will be paid which is your stupid argument.



No again you are an idiot. I already provided Aaron Rodgers contract that shows that his guaranteed money did not include his base salary. Like how stupid can you be. Sometimes teams guarantee base salary and sometimes they don't. There is nothing in the CBA that says the first year base salary has to be guaranteed. Tell you want, go find in the CBA where it says first year base salary has to be guaranteed and explain to me why Rodger's wasn't?

Click to expand...

Originally Posted by nc0gnet0
"This was in context to my statement about your ridiculous and fictitious contract for JG with a 35 mil signing bonus and a 7 mil base salary in the first year. Anyone, other than a moron, would clearly understand that the first year of the base would be paid, thus making that contract at a bare minimum a 42 million dollar guaranteed contract. (35 mil signing bonus + 7 mil first year base = 42 mil guaranteed). "

Click to expand...

remydat said:

What are you talking about? While they can cut JG and not owe him a dime, cutting him after one year would count 28 million against the cap because the unallocated portion of the signing bonus (35 million - 7 million) would get accelerated upon cutting him.

So you seem confused. The reason why signing bonuses result in cutting someone being cost prohibitive is because of the impact on the cap not because of whether the team still owes him money. You fundamentally don't seem to grasp the distinction between cash paid and salary cap accounting.

And when you have a roster bonus then it doesn't offer as much protection because you can be cut prior to the roster bonus and this so called guaranteed money doesn't have to be paid which speaks to my point. Roster bonus guarantees are not deterrents to cutting someone that sucks. They are incentives to cut someone that sucks because they don't usually trigger until a specific date each year so if a guy sucks you have an incentive to cut them before the trigger. Hence why roster bonus still come with a SB because it's the SB that provides the main incentive to prevent cutting someone because in doing so, there is an acceleration of the unallocated portion of the bonus.

The point here is that guaranteed money isn't the end all be all. You have to look at the form and the timing so these so called guarantees to understand what the actually money is that is likely to be paid.

Click to expand...

remydat said:

Your logic here is flawed. 35 million over 5 years is 7 million a year. If that is all SB then it is likely the earliest they would even think about cutting him is after year 3. So let's say his base non guaranteed salaries over the first 3 years are 7, 8, 9 million per year. That's another 24 million that technically isn't guaranteed that he is almost certain to be paid because they can't cut him those first 3 years without taking a massive cap hit. We see this all the time with contracts.

So fundamentally, no it doesn't have to at least be 40 million guaranteed.

Click to expand...