Breakdown of Bengals' salary cap situation
(This item was the lead on my NFL insider column this morning in The Enquirer and on our Web site. It's apparent some people who read this blog don't see the paper or the Web site. I wanted to make sure you saw it, too, because there have been a lot of questions and comments here in the past week about the Bengals' salary cap situation.)
The Bengals' inactivity in veteran free agency is largely by design, though it frustrates some of their fans.
But the team's 2007 salary cap budget shows that the club has less than $87,000 of space - not counting the estimated $3.4 million it saved by terminating linebacker Brian Simmons' contract last week.
The NFL salary cap is $109 million.
Not counting Simmons, the Bengals had $87.2 million committed to players for 2007. The Bengals did spend $900,000 more than originally budgeted to offer second-round compensation tenders to punter Kyle Larson and offensive lineman Stacy Andrews, $1.3 million each.
The Bengals also are committed to a salary of $8.644 million to defensive end Justin Smith, designated as their franchise players, unless they can reach a long-term deal with agent Jim Steiner.
Here's where the rest of the money is budgeted, even though some of it is not yet spent:
Dead money (players released in 2006) - $100,000
College free agents in 2007 - $35,000
Draft picks in 2007 - $3.885 million
Practice squad players during the season - $629,200
Offseason workouts ($120 a day for players not already receiving workout bonuses in their contracts) - $275,000
Projected injuries and player grievances - $1.5 million
Projected incentives and other compensation - $1.5 million
posted by Mark at 1:10 PM
7 Comments:
at 3/04/2007 1:31 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 3/04/2007 2:32 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 3/04/2007 9:19 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 3/05/2007 12:54 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 3/05/2007 8:03 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 3/06/2007 3:34 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
at 3/08/2007 2:36 PM 
Anonymous said...
-
-
Post a Comment*Mark,
The Bengals have sold out every football game the last three years plus I believe. Incredibly, they now have a waiting list for tickets. They have sold every luxury box in PBS. They have a state of the art stadium paid for primarily by the tax payers. They claimed they needed this stadium to be competitive.
Where is the money for free agents? Other teams seem willing to spend money to win. The fans have done more than their part. The Bengals seem frugal with their money but are more than willing to take our money. This makes me extrememly angry. I guess they don't care since there is somebody waiting to take my place as a seaon ticket holder.
Ownership is fine with 8-8. It keeps the fans interested and therefore they make money. They don't seem willing to make a serious committment to winning.
I care more about winning than the Bengal's ownership. Sad.
Thanks
Disgruntled Fan
this salary cap talk is a joke. the bengals are way to consertive when it comes to the cap. they could be creative and add millions to there cap space (like the colts)
but they will not. being competive (not super bowls) is the only thing that matters to mike and katie.
I agree as 100,000 in dead money might be perceived as great ownership but it just means that management is loyal to the players who once their contracts run out have no loyalty. They will get drunk on their boats and take 49 million to play for a loser for the next 7 years. Have a nice life in Crapland Eric.
Seeing TJ be vague on his happiness of his contract on NFL network goes to show that its all about the money for the players and the trophy is for the fans..
Spending all that money on offense with so many holes on the defensive back 7 will end up with maybe a couple more 11 win seasons over the next few years but early exit's from the playoffs.
It's fairly obvious, that, from a salary cap standpoint, this team was built to make a run in 2006/2007 and not 2007/2008.
They can't honestly say that losing the players they're gonna lose will make them a better team. Especially when they replace them with draft picks or second-stringers.
What most people fail to understand is although they Bengals sell tickets and have a new stadium, it still put the franchise in the middle of the pack when it comes to spending money.
The cap was supposed to create a socialism system within capitalism system. All the teams would be on the same playing field, each team getting the same amount of money, each team spending the same amount of money. It's designed to force teams to spend a minimum amount on player salaries yet also have a maximum spending limit.
Players are receiving 65% of the shared revenue (ticket sales, tv revenue, merchandise). 35% that is left to the owners. But each team's 35% is different. When the cap was first created, the non-shared revenue gap between teams was closer than what it is today.
Teams such as Dallas and Washington generate larger revenues than the Bengals and other smaller market teams. A large portion of the amounts are non-shared revenue. Dallas may spend 40% of their total revenue on the roster, whereas the Bengals must spend 60% to keep up with the joneses (no pun intended).
While the Bengals spend the 20% on players, the Cowboys allocate the 20% towards coaches, profits, scouting, facilities, and other amenities to help them attract sponsorships and/or players. You can't blame Jerry Jones to making money and you can't blame Mike Brown for expressing his concern about the current uneven balance that will only get worse.
Anonymous poster:
While your revenue vs market vs cap post I understand, what I don't understand is that the smallest market team in the NFL, the Colts, spend more on FA's than the Bengals', have less revenue via their crappy stadium, and still intelligently retain their high priced FA's in the same manner as the Bengals.
Oh and they won the Superbowl last year and make the playoffs each year also.
They have signed and/or traded for Corey Simon, McFarland and Vinateri since last season, for starters.
The problem here isn't the Bengals' "spending more $" as you suggest, or their lack of $ to spend, but "how" they spend it, and their inability to draft consistently well.
The Bengals' have a poor philosophy that starts with ownership, poor roster management, a floundering head coach, and not enough scouts etc.., etc..,
Let's stop making excuses for the Bengals' after 16 years of losing and one winning season during that time, and not a single playoff win.
There is no excuse for that.
None. Fans have a right to question them and be ticked.
The Colts put their money into their offense, have a solid defense and know how to draft.
As Marvin has always said, you build your team through the draft. Teams get compensation picks every year, which allow teams to reload with you talent, while also keeping your core of your team.
It falls back on drafting quality players. It's unfortunate Pollack and Thurman didn't contribute last year or the Bengals would have been in a much better position for their playoff run and we wouldn't be discussing this.
* Our online blogs currently are hosted and operated by a third party, namely, Blogger.com. You are now leaving the Cincinnati.Com website and will be linked to Blogger.com's registration page. The Blogger.com site and its associated services are not controlled by Cincinnati.Com and different terms of use and privacy policy will apply to your use of the Blogger.com site and services.
By proceeding and/or registering with Blogger.com you agree and understand that Cincinnati.Com is not responsible for the Blogger.com site you are about to access or for any service you may use while on the Blogger.com site.
<< Home