The W
Views: 100739014
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
22.11.14 1808
The W - Football - Signing draftees & the salary cap
This thread has 22 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 5.46
Pages: 1
(1781 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (4 total)
Mayhem
Scrapple








Since: 25.4.03
From: Nashville, TN

Since last post: 25 days
Last activity: 2 days
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.19

Maybe some of my fellow Wieners can help me out on this one ... we all know that the salary cap is $80.6 million ... how does this number count when it comes to signing rookies after the April draft? Does the $80.6 million include draftees after they sign?




I'm like, angry at numbers.
Promote this thread!
Roy.
Pepperoni








Since: 25.2.04
From: Keystone State

Since last post: 2388 days
Last activity: 857 days
#2 Posted on
    Originally posted by Mayhem

    Maybe some of my fellow Wieners can help me out on this one ... we all know that the salary cap is $80.6 million ... how does this number count when it comes to signing rookies after the April draft? Does the $80.6 million include draftees after they sign?


I think so, yes. The articles I've been reading about the cap in Philadelphia says that they are 24 million under the cap for both free agents and draft picks.

Also, if you go by Madden Football and ESPN Football video games, then the cap counts for all players, draft picks or not.

What this means is that a team that is close to the cap should be weary if they have an early draft pick, because the rookie could (in theory) push them over the cap.

If I'm wrong, somebody correct me. I'm no expert, but that is how I understand the salary cap.



Gravity is a contributing factor in nearly 73 percent of all accidents involving falling objects.
brick
Bockwurst








Since: 17.1.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 569 days
Last activity: 565 days
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.83
There are alot of little idiocincrecies when it comes to the draft and the salary cap.

Quick and easy answer, yes the picks contract counts against the cap.

One way the NFl eases things for teams is by institutng a rookie cap. This is a set amount of money that each team has to sign their draft picks based on the number of picks and where they fall. This has allot to do with the way players get slotted into salarys and why with a few holdout exceptions they seem to sign in the order they were drafted (for the first rounders anyway). Since teams and the agents all know that the first round pick can only get so much of the rookie pool for their team and that the team most likely won't pay more than the pick taken ahead of them.

Also the NFL only counts the top 45 +/- salaries (I may be wrong on that number but I'm in the ballpark) against the cap until final cuts are made. This is why teams can afford to carry so many players into camp.
Sec19Row53
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Oconomowoc, WI

Since last post: 9 days
Last activity: 17 hours
Y!:
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.36
    Originally posted by brick
    Also the NFL only counts the top 45 +/- salaries (I may be wrong on that number but I'm in the ballpark) against the cap until final cuts are made. This is why teams can afford to carry so many players into camp.


I think they count the top 53 (the number of players that are on the roster in the regular season).



[It's where I sit]
Thread rated: 5.46
Pages: 1
Thread ahead: McCareins to Jets
Next thread: NFL Draft
Previous thread: The States that make up New England!
(1781 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
These guys have everything. Why in the world can't they just lay low until their careers are over? And what would possess these athletic freaks to want to get into it with women?
Related threads: Salary Cap Update - Clarett sticks it to the man - Free Agent Losses For Your Team ... - More...
The W - Football - Signing draftees & the salary capRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.106 seconds.