In an uncapped 2010, will Portis' contract be voided? (Cap experts needed here)

[Oldskool]

This one is for the salary cap experts out there (i'm simply an aficionado).

I was reading up on the salary cap ramifications of an uncapped year and something caught my eye about Portis' contract and the mass amount of money he is due after the 2009 season

http://www.askthecommish.com/salarycap/faq.asp

Question 1.7a

If a player earns a contract that is 5 years and pays him a total of $20 Million, he counts $4 million per year against the cap, right?

Answer: If it were only that simple.

Teams with heavy payloads learned quickly that the best way to combat the Salary Cap was to circumvent it. They did this by back loading contracts, pushing all of the big money to the end of the contract. For example, a 5-year, $20 million contract (not counting a signing bonus) signed in 2005 as described above could possibly allocate the money in the following manner:

Year 1 (2006): $450,000 (min. cap given to players with 4+ years experience)

Year 2 (2007): $1 million

Year 3 (2008): $1.5 million

Year 4 (2009): $5 million

Year 5 (2010): $12 million

Note: I have provided this example to reflect another important point. With the 2010 season being uncapped, there are special rules governing how much money can be pushed into the future. In reality, a contract like the one listed above is NOT actually valid under the present set of circumstances, since the final year is currently set to be an uncapped season. The contract would not be allowed as it would have specifically violated the league's "30% Rule". The "30% Rule" governs veteran contracts that are entered into in a capped year and extend into the final year of the CBA. The rule states that these contracts cannot have an annual increase of more than 30% of the salary, excluding amounts treated as a signing bonus, provided for in the FINAL CAPPED YEAR. If the CBA is not extended, then 2009 will be the final capped year and this contract would not be valid.

If you look at Portis' contract (via rotoworld http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/player_contract.aspx?sport=nfl&id=94), you'll see the large amount of money he is owed:

3/1/2004: Signed an eight-year, $50.5 million contract. The deal contains $17 million in bonuses, including a $9.3255 million "signing bonus" in 2008. Portis' 2009 salary is guaranteed, as well as $6.43 million of his 2010 salary. 2009: $745,000 (+ $500,000 roster bonus), 2010: $7.1905 million, 2011: $8.254 million, 2012-2013: $8.5 million, 2014: Free Agent. Cap charge: $6.17 million (2009).

That's $23,945.00 of a $50,500.000 contract, which exceeds the 30% rule.

Am I reading this incorrectly and if so, how?

Thanks.

[Oldskool]

bump to the 1st page

[Spear]

The salary can't increase by more than 30% year-over-year in uncapped years. Percentage of overall contract being owed has nothing to do with anything.

There's a big jump from 2009 salary to 2010 salary, but since 2009 is capped, I guess it doesn't count. Only the uncapped years seem to count and their increases are in line with the rule.

In any case, Portis' contract was approved by the league and must be valid.

[Smoot Point Really]

I believe we'll see Randy Thomas voided too...

[dachozenone]

Portis' contract virtually ensures his return in 2010

Posted by Mike Florio on October 9, 2009 6:02 PM ET

With the performance of Redskins running back Clinton Portis moving toward "just a guy" territory and his involvement in various squabbles and pissing matches quickly becoming tiresome, many will begin to speculate that Portis won't be back with the Redskins in 2010.

Whether he's there or not next year, Portis will get paid. A lot.

Per a league source, a whopping $6.43 million of his $7.195 million base salary for 2010 is guaranteed.

So if owner Dan Snyder decides to move on, Portis will have one hell of a parting gift.

The source says that Portis also is due to earn a $500,000 roster bonus, pushing his total compensation for next year to $7.695 million.

Thus, while the Redskins can save more than $1.2 million by moving on, they'll still be paying Portis nearly $6.5 million, regardless of whether he's on the team.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/10/09/portis-contract-virtually-ensures-his-return-in-2010/

[Spear]

This thread is not about cutting Portis, it's about Portis' contract being voided by the league for violating the 30% rule.

Which, as I explained, won't happen because all contracts or revisions to contracts have to be approved by the league. Therefore, Portis' must be valid or he would not be on the roster right now.

[dachozenone]

This thread is not about cutting Portis, it's about Portis' contract being voided by the league for violating the 30% rule.

Which, as I explained, won't happen because all contracts or revisions to contracts have to be approved by the league. Therefore, Portis' must be valid or he would not be on the roster right now.

I just posted the link to show that his salary is basically guaranteed. So the whole calculation thing is a mute point. Plus like you posted the league would not approve a contract if it was not valid.

[Ax]

I've never understood the fascination with the cap. Our guys have always figured out a way to get, and keep, whoever they want. It's only who they've wanted, that can be worrisome from time to time. If these stats are correct, what a team spends on it's roster has nothing to do with how they perform.

http://www.altiusdirectory.com/Sports/nfl-salaries.php

Year.....................................................................Total Payroll

2008

NFL Teams Total Payroll

NFL Oakland Raiders Team Salaries.............................$ 152,389,371

NFL Dallas Cowboys Team Salaries.............................$ 146,401,600

NFL Minnesota Vikings Team Salaries..........................$ 133,354,045 Won Div

NFL Cleveland Browns Team Salaries...........................$ 131,916,300

NFL New Orleans Saints Team Salaries........................$ 131,531,820

NFL Pittsburgh Steelers Team Salaries........................$ 128,815,061 Super Bowl Champ

NFL Tennessee Titans Team Salaries..........................$ 126,017,443 Won Div

NFL Arizona Cardinals Team Salaries...........................$ 122,110,110 Won Div

NFL Jacksonville Jaguars Team Salaries.......................$ 122,109,207

NFL Chicago Bears Team Salaries...............................$ 120,065,819

NFL San Francisco 49ers Team Salaries.......................$ 118,766,239

NFL New York Jets Team Salaries...............................$ 116,910,097

NFL St. Louis Rams Team Salaries..............................$ 116,677,660

NFL New York Giants Team Salaries............................$ 115,816,180 Won Div

NFL Miami Dolphins Team Salaries...............................$ 114,649,660 Won Div

NFL Buffalo Bills Team Salaries...................................$ 113,364,927

NFL Carolina Panthers Team Salaries...........................$ 112,114,711 Won Div

NFL Washington Redskins Team Salaries......................$ 111,963,684

NFL San Diego Chargers Team Salaries........................$ 111,813,340 Won Div

NFL Cincinnati Bengals Team Salaries..........................$ 109,727,880

NFL Philadelphia Eagles Team Salaries.........................$ 109,557,398 Wildcard

NFL Houston Texans Team Salaries.............................$ 108,445,418

NFL Tampa Bay Buccaneers Team Salaries...................$ 104,329,311

NFL Seattle Seahawks Team Salaries..........................$ 102,985,710

NFL Atlanta Falcons Team Salaries.............................$ 96,391,525 Wildcard

NFL Detroit Lions Team Salaries.................................$ 95,827,117

NFL Denver Broncos Team Salaries.............................$ 95,599,778

NFL Green Bay Packers Team Salaries.........................$ 94,018,300

NFL Indianapolis Colts Team Salaries...........................$ 93,373,915 Wildcard

NFL New England Patriots Team Salaries......................$ 92,734,120

NFL Baltimore Ravens Team Salaries............................$ 90,713,965 Wildcard

NFL Kansas City Chiefs Team Salaries..........................$ 83,623,776

I know this doesn't answer your question Oldskool. I guess I'm just saying, cap wise, it no big deal either way, keep him or not. I'll worry about that AFTER the season.

[Larry Brown #43]

I've never understood the fascination with the cap. Our guys have always figured out a way to get, and keep, whoever they want.

Sort of. The way we work the cap sometimes forces us to keep guys we DON'T want to keep, and prevents us from getting adequate replacements for those players. When we renegotiate the deals of guys like Jansen and Portis, and then their performance slips, we're stuck with them because the cap hit becomes too great to cut them. This also makes it harder to draft or sign replacements for these players.

When we renegotiate with a guy, he becomes "un-cuttable" if you will. His base salary drops down to peanuts (which is part of the reason the Skins "payroll" looks low in the chart you posted), but his high salary is converted to a signing bonus. So the player gets a nice signing bonus check up front for agreeing to the renegotiation, so it's good for him. And the conversion of his salary into a signing bonus allows the Skins to stretch the cap hit over the remainder of the life of the contract.

But if you cut that player, that stretched out cap hit comes due, or "accelerates" to the current year. So instead of a guy counting $3 million against your cap each year for the next 4 years, he'd count $12 million against the cap immediately because he was cut. That dead money really hurts you, because it essentially means your team's salary cap is $12 million less than it is for the rest of the league. That's why you keep a guy you don't really want to keep.

And, you can only allocate so much cap space to one position. So if you're forced to keep Portis because the cap hit to cut him would be too great, you also can't afford to draft his replacement (someone like Adrian Peterson, who we could have drafted but we took Landry instead), because you can only allocate so much money to one position and still field a competitive team. Of couse, it might not have made sense to draft AP at that time, but the more cap flexibility you have, the more you can think about drafting the best player available.

[celts32]

The Redskins should be cutting every bad contract they have this offseason if there is an uncapped year. Who cares if they have to pay 6 million to Portis if it doesn't count against the cap. The important thing is to get rid of all the bad contracts so that the new coach can remake the team without restrictions. The cap will return once a new CBA deal is reached so this is a one time chance for the skins to fix all thier cap problems.

[Spear]

The Redskins should be cutting every bad contract they have this offseason if there is an uncapped year. Who cares if they have to pay 6 million to Portis if it doesn't count against the cap. The important thing is to get rid of all the bad contracts so that the new coach can remake the team without restrictions. The cap will return once a new CBA deal is reached so this is a one time chance for the skins to fix all thier cap problems.

That is the common, flawed thinking. Once the cap goes away, all signing bonus protation gets wiped with it, since that money has been paid. If a new cap were to be instituted, we could cut any players making too much money without any penalty, whenever we deem it necessary. Whether that's immediately upon the next capped year, 1 year later, 2 years later, etc. It doesn't matter. There is no immediate need to cut anyone next year, unless we've been itching to cut them all along. Jon Jansen would have fit that bill, but I can't really think of anyone else.

[ThePreciating]

That is the common, flawed thinking. Once the cap goes away, all signing bonus protation gets wiped with it, since that money has been paid. If a new cap were to be instituted, we could cut any players making too much money without any penalty, whenever we deem it necessary. Whether that's immediately upon the next capped year, 1 year later, 2 years later, etc. It doesn't matter. There is no immediate need to cut anyone next year, unless we've been itching to cut them all along. Jon Jansen would have fit that bill, but I can't really think of anyone else.

So cut or not, all those bonuses are accelerated to the uncapped year?

[Spear]

So cut or not, all those bonuses are accelerated to the uncapped year?

Basically. There's nothing written that says that bonuses are accelerated to the uncapped year, it's just irrelevant what money anyone paid out before the institution of the hypothetical new cap. All that will matter are salary and signing bonuses moving forward from that point.

As long as no one has a guaranteed salary during the uncapped year and beyond, there would be no penalty for cutting anyone at any time.

[addicted]

Portis' contract virtually ensures his return in 2010

Does it? Not saying we should cut him but if we wanted to we could still save money right? Or am I reading this wrong?

Thus, while the Redskins can save more than $1.2 million by moving on, they'll still be paying Portis nearly $6.5 million, regardless of whether he's on the team.

We'd just have to pay him that money and we save money right?

[bikie]

Sort of. The way we work the cap sometimes forces us to keep guys we DON'T want to keep, and prevents us from getting adequate replacements for those players. When we renegotiate the deals of guys like Jansen and Portis, and then their performance slips, we're stuck with them because the cap hit becomes too great to cut them. This also makes it harder to draft or sign replacements for these players.

to quote our new offensive consultant: "Bingo!!" our cap management would work fine if we had the talent evaluation to go with it... but injuries and unfulfilled potential really hamstring us by making impossible to move progressively subpar players, and therefore limiting our ability to achieve any depth or competitive starting line up...

[Est.1974]

I thought the 30% rule only applied to contracts being negotiated, or restructured, in 2009 ( ie, the final capped year ). That may not be correct, but it has been my interpretation of the rule. Here are some articles on the rule. Big Al's contract is noted in the second one.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/10847836

http://adamjt13.blogspot.com/2009/03/loophole-around-nfls-30-percent-rule.html

As I say, I may not be correct. Hows does it read to you ?