Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)

Re: Another Trey reset

Posted: 2/8/2013 1:03 PM

Re: Another Trey reset 


I do like the change in the offense.

The change in the defense is the area to watch.

Ray Horton is the right guy, but, if he does good, he is gone. 

The idea of having the same defensive coordinator for a period of time develops the defensive scheme.

He has a good year and becomes a head coach, who replaces him and what do they do with the defense another change?  I doubt the change the defense, but a new defensive coordinator makes another difference.

The set number is not available.  I read today the number was $45.6 and Cin has $50.6.

The percentage is 89% that they have to spend.  So if the final number was $45.6, they will need to spend $40.584 million.

The quarterback is the key and it just seems that Chud and Turner will look long and hard at Brandon Weeden.  If they don't have a favorable opinion by March 1st, they will be looking long and hard for his replacement.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 2/8/2013 2:29 PM

Re: Another Trey reset 


According to ESPN the Browns are $48.9 million under the cap.

http://bleacherreport.com/arti...nfl-team/page/9

The cap is expected to be about $121 million when they announce it in March. So the Browns are at about $72 million now (121-49). 89% of 121 is about $108 million, which is the floor. So, the Browns need to spend about $36 million to get to the $108M.

Except that they really don't have to. Daddywags on page 2 of this thread was explaining that teams only have to AVERAGE 89% for a four-year period from 2013-2016. So the Browns could come in at 75% or 80% this year as long as they are at 95% or thereabouts the next three years. Just so long as they average 89% by 2016. I assume this is correct as the poster seemed to know what he was talking about. 

So teams have to make a strategic decision. Do they just try to spend 100% of the cap every year and maximize talent? Or do they hold off this year in hopes of using the money on better players in subsequent years? 

In the Browns case, do they sign a free agent QB now (or trade for an established vet like Alex Smith), or do they hold off and give Weeden another year, then have more cap space the following year if they decide Weeden isn't the guy?

Since half the team was either rookies or second-year players last year, they may want to go easy this year and see who develops into solid contributors and who doesn't, then jump in big next year when they know exactly where they need help.

Last edited 2/8/2013 2:31 PM by PROSECUTOR

Reply | Quote
  • redright
  • Faithful Best Friend
  • 12980 posts this site

Posted: 2/8/2013 2:55 PM

Re: Another Trey reset 



PROSECUTOR wrote: According to ESPN the Browns are $48.9 million under the cap.

http://bleacherreport.com/arti...nfl-team/page/9

The cap is expected to be about $121 million when they announce it in March. So the Browns are at about $72 million now (121-49). 89% of 121 is about $108 million, which is the floor. So, the Browns need to spend about $36 million to get to the $108M.

Except that they really don't have to. Daddywags on page 2 of this thread was explaining that teams only have to AVERAGE 89% for a four-year period from 2013-2016. So the Browns could come in at 75% or 80% this year as long as they are at 95% or thereabouts the next three years. Just so long as they average 89% by 2016. I assume this is correct as the poster seemed to know what he was talking about. 

So teams have to make a strategic decision. Do they just try to spend 100% of the cap every year and maximize talent? Or do they hold off this year in hopes of using the money on better players in subsequent years? 

In the Browns case, do they sign a free agent QB now (or trade for an established vet like Alex Smith), or do they hold off and give Weeden another year, then have more cap space the following year if they decide Weeden isn't the guy?

Since half the team was either rookies or second-year players last year, they may want to go easy this year and see who develops into solid contributors and who doesn't, then jump in big next year when they know exactly where they need help.
Pros,

There is said to be 19+ million in carryover from unused CAP in prior years. I am unsure if it is a discretionary allowed spend but the article I read indicated the sum could be added to the amount useable in FA. 
Do you have any infomation on this?
Is that in your figures?
Reply | Quote