Projected 2007 NFL Salary Cap Space for Each Team ~ ~ ~

[kelly]

Projected 2007 NFL Salary Cap Space for Each Team

Rank Team $ Under the Cap

1 San Francisco 49ers $42.1 M

2 Buffalo Bills $39.7 M

3 Arizona Cardinals $36.7 M

4 Tennessee Titans $36 M

5 Cleveland Browns $33.305 M

6 St. Louis Rams $31.98 M

7 Minnesota Vikings $31.5 M

8 Jacksonville Jaguars $31 M

9 Cincinnati Bengals $28.8 M

10 NY Jets $28.455 M

11 Green Bay Packers $28.36 M

12 New England Patriots $26.98 M

13 Chicago Bears $26.9 M

14 New Orleans Saints $26 M

15 San Diego Chargers $24.6 M

16 Tampa Bay Buccaneers $23.985 M

17 Detroit Lions $23.8 M

18 Seattle Seahawks $21.9 M

19 Dallas Cowboys $21.5 M

20 Houston Texans $19.8 M

21 Miami Dolphins $17.8 M

22 NY Giants $15.7 M

23 Oakland Raiders $14.105 M

24 Philadelphia Eagles $12.4 M

25 Atlanta Falcons $11.5 M

26 Denver Broncos $7.6 M

27 Kansas City Chiefs $7 M

28 Baltimore Ravens $5.7 M

29 Indianapolis Colts $4.9 M

30 Pittsburgh Steelers $1.44 M

31 Carolina Panthers $-3.1

32 Washington Redskins $-2.388 M

> http://www.askthecommish.com/salarycap/numbers.asp

[ozskin]

I'm sure we'll find a way around it.

[kelly]

I'm sure we'll find a way around it.

NOT to worry ; our FO always finds a way to " crunch the #'s " . . .

[TK]

Ahem.

For the sake of this installment, we have designated teams that are less than $5M under the cap in RED. These are teams that have little money to sign free agents and may need to make cuts or restructure salaries in order to sign all of their draft picks. Teams in BLACK, which are between $5M and $20M under the cap, are teams that look to be in pretty good shape in terms of adding more veterans and signing all of their rookies without having to take drastic measures. Teams in GREEN are teams that are well under the cap and should have plenty of room to sign free agents and rookies. Note that for the first time in years, almost every team in is very good cap shape.

With the latest extension to the CBA, the 2007 salary cap is approximately $109 M, which represents a nice increase over last year's $102 M figure. (Note that the cap was "just" $85.5 M in 2005, the final season prior to the CBA's extension.)

Keep in mind that these numbers remain tentative -- and are changing on a daily basis. These "unofficial" figures are approximate as of January 3 , 2007.

[[[ghost]]]

NOT to worry ; our FO always finds a way to " crunch the #'s " . . .

WHy do you keep on throwing in pictures from collegehumor.com? They're not funny. Its like that guy who kept posting pictures of Evenescence for no reason.

[Joey T]

Ahem.

Quote:

For the sake of this installment, we have designated teams that are less than $5M under the cap in RED. These are teams that have little money to sign free agents and may need to make cuts or restructure salaries in order to sign all of their draft picks. Teams in BLACK, which are between $5M and $20M under the cap, are teams that look to be in pretty good shape in terms of adding more veterans and signing all of their rookies without having to take drastic measures. Teams in GREEN are teams that are well under the cap and should have plenty of room to sign free agents and rookies. Note that for the first time in years, almost every team in is very good cap shape.

With the latest extension to the CBA, the 2007 salary cap is approximately $109 M, which represents a nice increase over last year's $102 M figure. (Note that the cap was "just" $85.5 M in 2005, the final season prior to the CBA's extension.)

Keep in mind that these numbers remain tentative -- and are changing on a daily basis. These "unofficial" figures are approximate as of January 3 , 2007.

So what's your point? :doh:

[TK]

So what's your point? :doh:

Just the one that 99% of the board will miss. The cap is always in flux. FA hasn't even started. We haven't started on restructuring contracts. No one has been cut yet, & as of right now, we don't have a lot draft picks to even have to worry about signing. Just because we're at one place now doesn't mean we can't be somewhere else when we need to be.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled hyper venting & knee jerk F.O. bashing.

[Bang]

So y'all know, this figure is as of the end of the regular season. At that point it is practically impossible to assume what the cap number will be. The fact is that the cap rises on average of 7 million per season, and that rise has not happened yet. (NFL financial year ends at the end of February.)

AND... Contrary to popular belief, not every team works with the same cap number. Incentive bonuses from the year before can cause any particular teams' figure to shift, sometimes significantly.

Basically, a team must count all incentives under the cap as if they were met and paid. Many times, these incentives are not met and paid, and if tha is the case, the difference between what was actually paid and what was figured for the cap is added to the next year's cap.

Considering the Colts and Bears are still playing (and so were 8 other teams when this list was first published), the numbers do not factor in this bonus swing. (Considering a lot of first round pick contracts contain huge escalator and incentive figures, this generally plays into the team's favor. I don't know the exact numbers, but you can bet Carlos Rogers and Sean Taylor, for example, have bonus figures for INTs. Taylor, in fact, was contemplating a holdout last offseason because he figured out that the numbers on his contract were in large part based on such things. Want to see a good one? Look at Phillip Rivers' contract. It looks huge, but a lot of the numbers are based on him winning multiple SUPER BOWLS in his first five years.)

That is only one way that this number is not correct. NFL contracts are up in the end of February, and when those contracts expire, this number changes again. Other players who will not be with the team the next year are also not figured into this number. (like our John Hall, for example) When those players are released, they have their 'salary' number knocked off of this figure. (The remaining pro-rated bonus does kick in, but generally speaking, the salary figure is a much more inflated number towards the end of the contract.) Since the writer of this article has no idea who will be released or retire, there's no way they can accurately assume what the number will be come March 1, opening day of free agency.

2.7 million over is nothing. In all likelihood it will be erased with very small strokes of a pen. the Redskins will have absolutely no trouble getting under this figure, and will likely clear plenty of space to send Redskins One into the stratosphere once again, seeking players to fit the puzzle.

So relax. This story is pretty much a non-story. It is written so that Chicken Little can once again look skyward in fear. Don't be Chicken Little.

Be informed.

And now you are.

~Bang

[dfbovey]

2.7 million over is nothing. In all likelihood it will be erased with very small strokes of a pen. the Redskins will have absolutely no trouble getting under this figure, and will likely clear plenty of space to send Redskins One into the stratosphere once again, seeking players to fit the puzzle.

So relax. This story is pretty much a non-story.

~Bang

Pretty much. I think releasing John Hall and Renaldo Wynn would take care of a good chunk of that, if not all of it. Then you factor in roster bonus conversions into signing bonus and the Redskins have alot of options.

The one thing that could really hinder the Redskins is if they decide to cut Archuleta. Which would handcuff them much like trading Coles did, which led to the loss of Pierce and Smoot.

[Supreme Wu]

Just the one that 99% of the board will miss. The cap is always in flux. FA hasn't even started. We haven't started on restructuring contracts. No one has been cut yet, & as of right now, we don't have a lot draft picks to even have to worry about signing. Just because we're at one place now doesn't mean we can't be somewhere else when we need to be.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled hyper venting & knee jerk F.O. bashing.

It doesn't matter to me how easy or hard it is to fix -- it matters that the team is in this ridiculous situation to begin with.

HOW on earth are we paying so much and getting so little?

Calling it 'FO bashing' makes it sound like its unjustified or something. This FO is lucky it's not being burned in effigy in front of Redskins park every night.

Btw it looks like Carolina should be #32, if they really are -3.1million that's even worse than the Skins.

[MRMADD]

Just the one that 99% of the board will miss. The cap is always in flux. FA hasn't even started. We haven't started on restructuring contracts. No one has been cut yet, & as of right now, we don't have a lot draft picks to even have to worry about signing.

Yep. The cap is going to change quite a bit over the next few months. But our starting point is the worst in the league. The worst. So we're forced to make short-term cap changes -- like renegotiating contracts -- that have negative long-term implications. This is salary cap hell. The Skins will juggle some contracts, crunch some numbers... and keep mortgaging the future. They'll end up with another paper-thin roster, no developmental players, and bumping against the cap despite the fact that they'll only be average in actual payroll spending.

The good news -- if you can call it that -- is that the Skins have only one draft pick who'll even get a signing bonus. So they've got that going for them. Which is nice.

[riggoraider]

If there is one thing that I do not worry about when our team is concerned it is the salary cap. We just need to start picking up players who will help us win games

[THEface]

we should actually be 31st. -2.38 is a larger number than -3.1.

[52decleetzu]

Yep. The cap is going to change quite a bit over the next few months. But our starting point is the worst in the league. The worst. So we're forced to make short-term cap changes -- like renegotiating contracts -- that have negative long-term implications. This is salary cap hell. The Skins will juggle some contracts, crunch some numbers... and keep mortgaging the future. They'll end up with another paper-thin roster, no developmental players, and bumping against the cap despite the fact that they'll only be average in actual payroll spending.

The good news -- if you can call it that -- is that the Skins have only one draft pick who'll even get a signing bonus. So they've got that going for them. Which is nice.

Great post,at least someone gets it.All this "restructuring" and cutting players NOW does is screw you for the FUTURE.All that money that you are "saving" by restructuring doesnt just go away,you pay for it down the road.Same thing when you cut players that could have productive year relative to their salary,it may save a few bucks now,but it kills depth on the roster.

Usually the only time you want to release players is if you have drafted their replacement the year before and you feel like that guy is ready to go,or you have another competent guy that could fill in right away ALREADY on the roster.That is all well and good if you draft smart,and actually have picks to draft with.

You will never win in this league by trading away picks every year,teams that win championships are BUILT not BOUGHT.Draft picks can provide something that FA cant,a productive or even good starter for next to nothing cap wise.Sure some wont work out,but it wont cost you as much as say an Archuleta would if it doesnt and it isnt even close.

The other problem is the Gibbs factor,I would sit Joe down and ask him if he can commit to 3 more years of coaching,if not I think it might be time to part ways.This year to year deal just makes the situation even worse,because I think the FO may feel hamstrung because they know that rebuilding isnt an option with Gibbs at the helm.

If I were the Skins,I would identify my core players on both sides of the ball,keep them and start making calls on the rest for possible trades.I would say just release them outright but you need to at least try to get some of those picks you threw away.

The Skins need to realize that they arent "a FA or two away."You hear all this talk about how teams in the NFL can go from 6-10 to 10-6 in one year,but that is because said team had a lot of depth on the roster to start with the year before,not because it went and signed a bunch of FA.

[RedzoneHunter]

Yep. The Skins will juggle some contracts, crunch some numbers... and keep mortgaging the future. They'll end up with another paper-thin roster, no developmental players, and bumping against the cap despite the fact that they'll only be average in actual payroll spending.

Bingo! Mortgaging the future is a bulls-eye. Year after year we watch these guys go nuts when free agency begins. It's not that I'm against signing free agents or anything. But the way our front office does business, they tie a noose around the team's neck by over-paying over-hyped players who think that they have reached the top of the mountain. Then after they get their fat contracts, they think that they have finally arrived and don't need to work like dogs anymore.

Take last year, for example, all of the signings we made filled the entire team with a bunch of hot air. They actually believed they were going to just coast to the super bowl without putting in the hard work that's necessary to get them there. Now the year is over, and I'm sure these players will respond differently to their wake up call from last year, the trouble is, the new free agents we will over pay this year will go through the same thing, thinking that they can take it easy now, forgetting the fact that they should know that they are going to have to work harder, re-adjusting to a new environment and a new system.

But that's not all. Then we have no depth because we always trade our draft picks away. If you notice, all of the good teams in this league put great value in the draft. Their foundations are laid with the draft. This is where they develop young players while also saving their teams money. They kill two birds with one stone, then another when you consider that they are also adding depth. But the way the Redskins FO is doing business, our house is built on sand, and every year the big storm comes and blows the house down.

Yeah, yeah, I know. We almost got lucky in 2005. We made it to the playoffs, but we shouldn't kid ourselves. That team looked pathetic too. They were 5-6 after 11 games. The only thing that made a difference then was that the players knew they were backed into the corner and had to play must win football, saying, "5 in a row or we don't go." Well that wake up call almost worked, but almost just doesn't cut it. Now we're back to square one. There's another storm coming, but everyone's asleep in the front office. Lets go the other way this year, by trading down for more picks, and don't trade any of next years picks away. Then we can start building a solid foundation too.

[KingGibbs]

So what's your point? :doh:

I was thinking the same thing. :doh:

[Pocono]

As Bang noted in his post this list would not include 2006 cap space pushed into 2007 via the LTBE incentive loophole. Here's a list compiled by MB cap czar AdamJT13 of bogus incentives written into 2006 contracts in Dec to push space forward. Not all this space is moved forward because some of it can be used to offset unlikely to be earned incentives that were earned during 2006. For instance of the 3.1M incentive written into a Cowboy player's contract only about 500K won't be used to offset ULTBE'd incentives that were earned. In most cases you'll notice that it seems the rich get richer with the 49ers who already are 42M under without this loophole picking up another 5-6M of potential cap space.

http://www.kffl.com/forums/showthread.php?t=195571

Jacksonville -- Kenneth Pettway, $8.46 million

Kansas City -- Kawika Mitchell, $8,256,000

New Orleans -- Jay Bellamy $7.7 million

Houston -- David Anderson, $7,646,065

San Francisco -- Anthony Adams, $5,525,000; Keith Lewis, $1,135,473

Cleveland -- Clifton Smith, $4,096,020

Seattle -- Will Heller, $3.3 million

New England -- Troy Brown, $350,000 (also got $50,000 signing bonus); Antwain Spann, $2,913,410

Carolina -- Brett Basanez, $1.6 million; Steven Jackson, $1.6 million

Dallas -- Abram Elam, $3.1 million

Buffalo -- Shaud Williams, $3 million

Detroit -- Claude Harriott, $1.61 million; Dave Pearson, $635,000

Baltimore -- Matt Katula, $2.1 million

Minnesota -- Wendell Mathis, $1.19 million

Indianapolis -- Matt Ulrich, $1 million

N.Y. Giants -- Chase Blackburn, $570,000

Oakland -- Derek Miller, $557,700

Denver -- Damien Nash, $539,788

Philadelphia -- Shawn Barber, $500,095

Green Bay -- Noah Herron, $500,000

Chicago -- Cameron Worrell, $400,000

Washington -- Ade Jimoh, $265,215

Tennessee -- Drew Bennett $250,000

[Rolling Thunder]

One thing everyone should agree on and is hardly ever mentioned in the "Cap" discussion - no matter how much "juggling" you do to get more cap space, you are at a competitive disadvantage in signing "good" free agents when other teams have so much more cap space than you do...they can spend more to get someone they want...

The free agent market is not what it used to be. More and more teams are retaining their top flight players because they have used their cap space effectively. What they don't re-sign tend to be players that are older and have falling production. Cap space means you don't let productive players leave...

Since the new CBA went into effect, the disparity between us and the rest of the league has grown considerably....that is the "mortgaging the future" we need to understand.

[Bang]

One thing everyone should agree on and is hardly ever mentioned in the "Cap" discussion - no matter how much "juggling" you do to get more cap space, you are at a competitive disadvantage in signing "good" free agents when other teams have so much more cap space than you do...they can spend more to get someone they want...

The free agent market is not what it used to be. More and more teams are retaining their top flight players because they have used their cap space effectively. What they don't re-sign tend to be players that are older and have falling production. Cap space means you don't let productive players leave...

Since the new CBA went into effect, the disparity between us and the rest of the league has grown considerably....that is the "mortgaging the future" we need to understand.

The new CBA went into effect about 10 months ago. We didn't have a good season. 5 other teams had worse seasons. 13 other teams finished no better than .500.

Is this the considerable gulf? 18 out of 32 teams at or below .500? In less than a year since the CBA went into effect? I mean, you make it sound like it's been years.

Frankly, i don't understand the "mortgaging the future' aspect of what you're trying to say, either. Of those teams, do you think all of them EXCEPT the Redskins have a chance to get better next year?

As evidenced by the Saints, who went from 3-13 , from only having won one playoff game in their entire history, to the NFC title game .. things change on a dime.

~Bang

[Rolling Thunder]

The new CBA went into effect about 10 months ago. We didn't have a good season. 5 other teams had worse seasons. 13 other teams finished no better than .500.

Is this the considerable gulf? 18 out of 32 teams at or below .500? In less than a year since the CBA went into effect? I mean, you make it sound like it's been years.

Frankly, i don't understand the "mortgaging the future' aspect of what you're trying to say, either. Of those teams, do you think all of them EXCEPT the Redskins have a chance to get better next year?

As evidenced by the Saints, who went from 3-13 , from only having won one playoff game in their entire history, to the NFC title game .. things change on a dime.

~Bang

You missed the point entirely...I'm talking about cap room not records. If I have 5 million to pay a player and you have 3 million, who do you think is going to win.

The thread was about cap room, not performance of the free agents we or anybody else has signed. I must not have explained myself well.

[Bang]

You missed the point entirely...I'm talking about cap room not records. If I have 5 million to pay a player and you have 3 million, who do you think is going to win.

The thread was about cap room, not performance of the free agents we or anybody else has signed. I must not have explained myself well.

Apparently not, and I still dont get it. ( By the by, I know what the thread is about,, i made a big long post about it on the first page explaining why this cap 'problem' is not a big deal)

The Redskins cap room is in the best shape it's been in years, honestly, i can't remember a time that we entered an offseason only 2.7 over. Usually we're closer to ten mil over.

Money in the salary cap doesn't work as simply as you've made it out to be.

Let's use your example and say in your pocket you have five million. I have 3. OK, so on the surface it looks like you have more money. But, i offer the player 30 million over five years, with a nice bonus that is pro-rated over the length of the deal, and I pay him the minimum in salary this year. Now I have still got almost all of my 3 million, and a nice shiny new player. His cap hit is only his minimum salary (or whatever is negotiated,, usually the first two or so years are relatively low in salary.) and the pro rating of one year of his bonus. If it's a five year deal, and his bonus is 5 million bucks, I've only spent about half of my 3 million bucks so far. (Granted this is extremely simplistic, but relatively accurate. there are other factors, like time in service as to what a player's minimum salary can be.. etc.)

NFL contracts are a whole different thing than the family checkbook.

there is no "mortgaging of the future". There is no piper to pay provided you manage the years and the numbers accordingly. NFL salary figures are by and large fictional numbers. If you look at any given player's contract, (a player who has signed a large multi-year deal) you can pretty much pinpoint exactly when he is expected to renegotiate. this is a league-wide practice and it does not add up debt, it does not roll over debt, it moves back end 'salary' money to the front in the form of a bonus and allows the team to pro-rate the hit, and decrease the salary portion of the hit right along with it.

Players do it because they get CASH for fictional salary money they would have never seen. AND it benefits the team because they can have more wiggle room to negotiate.

If they only clear 5 million, for example, it's not like they only have five million they can spend. And unless you sign everyone to a one year contract, you're going to be moving numbers into successive years.

whenever you hear one of these big 6 or 7 year 35 million dollar deals with a 10 mil bonus, the bonus is the first thing to consider when thinking of potential cap trouble. The salary in these deals is staggered in such a way that more than 3/4 of said 'salary' is to be paid out in the final 2 or 3 years of a contract,, years the player will never ever collect on unless he re-does his deal. It's as common a practice as blinking your eyes. the Players Association has negotiated on their players behalf to make it so. It enables players to be paid rather than be cast aside.

~Bang

[Rolling Thunder]

Apparently not, and I still dont get it. ( By the by, I know what the thread is about,, i made a big long post about it on the first page explaining why this cap 'problem' is not a big deal)

The Redskins cap room is in the best shape it's been in years, honestly, i can't remember a time that we entered an offseason only 2.7 over. Usually we're closer to ten mil over.

Money in the salary cap doesn't work as simply as you've made it out to be.

Let's use your example and say in your pocket you have five million. I have 3. OK, so on the surface it looks like you have more money. But, i offer the player 30 million over five years, with a nice bonus that is pro-rated over the length of the deal, and I pay him the minimum in salary this year. Now I have still got almost all of my 3 million, and a nice shiny new player.

NFL contracts are a whole different thing than the family checkbook.

there is no "mortgaging of the future". There is no piper to pay provided you manage the years and the numbers accordingly. NFL salary figures are by and large fictional numbers. If you look at any given player's contract, (a player who has signed a large multi-year deal) you can pretty much pinpoint exactly when he is expected to renegotiate. this is a league-wide practice and it does not add up debt, it does not roll over debt, it moves back end 'salary' money to the front in the form of a bonus and allows the team to pro-rate the hit, and decrease the salary portion of the hit right along with it.

Players do it because they get CASH for fictional salary money they would have never seen. AND it benefits the team because they can have more wiggle room to negotiate.

If they only clear 5 millin, for example, it's not like they only have five million they can spend. And unless you sign everyone to a one year contract, you're going to be moving numbers into successive years.

whenever you hear one of these big 6 or 7 year 35 million dollar deals with a 10 mil bonus, the bonus is the first thing to consider when thinking of potential cap trouble. The salary in these deals is staggered in such a way that more than 3/4 of said 'salary' is to be paid out in the final 2 or 3 years of a contract,, years the player will never ever collect on unless he re-does his deal. It's as common a practice as blinking your eyes. the Players Association has negotiated on their players behalf to make it so. It enables players to be paid rather than be cast aside.

~Bang

Sorry to have inferred that you didn't understand the thread was about salary cap. I was confused about what every team's record had to do with thread.

My over simplification was just to point out the advantages of having more cap room than the other guy. You gloss over pro-rating the signing bonus like it is not a factor. It is a factor. Signing bonuses get pro-rated, but the pro-rated amount gets counted every year of the contract unless the player gets cut or re-negotiates his contract. I know you know what happens if the player is cut. Renegotiating has a tendency of pushing the reckoning to the future. That is fine if the player stays injury free and performing at a high level. When they don't, it makes teams (us) make tough choices about who they can keep or not keep in a particular year that their cap number starts going up.

That being said...the point in my post was the disparity between the amount of cap money we have versus many other teams in the league. Though I have not looked back and done the research, it appears to me that there are more teams with huge amounts of cap room. More than before the new CBA and that means they have, flexiblity to spend more than we do.

[21Knock_U_Out]

we should actually be 31st. -2.38 is a larger number than -3.1.

See, we are moving up already. :laugh:

[Bang]

Sorry to have inferred that you didn't understand the thread was about salary cap. I was confused about what every team's record had to do with thread.

My over simplification was just to point out the advantages of having more cap room than the other guy. You gloss over pro-rating the signing bonus like it is not a factor. It is a factor. Signing bonuses get pro-rated, but the pro-rated amount gets counted every year of the contract unless the player gets cut or re-negotiates his contract. I know you know what happens if the player is cut. Renegotiating has a tendency of pushing the reckoning to the future. That is fine if the player stays injury free and performing at a high level. When they don't, it makes teams (us) make tough choices about who they can keep or not keep in a particular year that their cap number starts going up.

That being said...the point in my post was the disparity between the amount of cap money we have versus many other teams in the league. Though I have not looked back and done the research, it appears to me that there are more teams with huge amounts of cap room. More than before the new CBA and that means they have, flexiblity to spend more than we do.

Now I see what you meant. to be fair tho, even before the CBA went up there was always a huge disparity in a lot of teams and their cap space.. the Eagles, Vikings, Cardinals, Bengals, all notorious for lowballing and guarding that cap space.. their results are the same. Empty fingers and trophy cases.

Other teams like Denver and Tennessee routinely screw up their cap. Look at last offseason for an example.. tennessee so badly screwed up with McNair by not asking him to renegotiate suddenly they were faced with a huge dilemma, and ended up handing him to Baltimore. (A move that in my opinion made the Ravens a playoff team from a team that looked like they could go 6-10 at best) Denver screws their numbers so bad that the second it even looked like the CBA might not be extended they cut three valuable starters... Mike Anderson, Trevor Pryce and Jeb Putzier. (Pryce and Anderson were huge blows to them when you look at how their defense gassed out after t5he mid-point, and their unsettled RB position.)

If I may be allowed a bit of a paranoid moment, I think they get a pass and Snyder doesn't because writing a bash column about snyder is an easy sell ,, most people are predisposed to believe he's a dope,, largely due to the 2000 season. they tend to overlook how well he's managed to work the cap.

every year they prophesize doom, and every year he does pretty much whatever he wants.

~Bang

[DieHardWSHfan]

Will Snyder maneuver his way around the cap to get players? Most likely. But that still doesn't erase how much money we've spent and how little we've got.

Most are forgetting that every other team can free up more space too. With so many other teams with 20+ mil under, how can we possibly sign the players we want, even with Snyder's genius?

Even if he could, compare how much money we've spent to other teams, teams with winning percentages. Money spent doesn't equal wins, and Snyder still seems to think that he can buy his team.

If football was a one man sport then Snyder could easily buy the best player and we'd be champions. But it's not. It's a team sport, and in order to win, you have to be a team, not a bunch of miscellaneous parts assembled from other teams' trash.