Watt a no show at mandatory camp

[Northern_Blitz]

For the record I’d trade him, too, but the deal won’t handcuff them the way the cap goes up every year and with such a cheap QB room.

Paying two WR like #1’s would have been a worse move, IMO.

No matter what we do with Watt this time, I think it's worth taking a second to note that the team did a great job of not kicking more and more money down the road on this contract with TJ. I don't think freeing up money through the deal would have made a real difference in how competitive we are.

And by not having a huge balloon of a cap hit at the end of the contract (like we did with Ben at the end).

[hackjam]

No matter what we do with Watt this time, I think it's worth taking a second to note that the team did a great job of not kicking more and more money down the road on this contract with TJ. I don't think freeing up money through the deal would have made a real difference in how competitive we are.

And by not having a huge balloon of a cap hit at the end of the contract (like we did with Ben at the end).

Yeah really good point. Not having the big QB contract def helps there too. But between cap inflation between 2021 and now and the minimal spending at QB they were able to keep that one in check.

[WindyCitySteel]

Nope.. if a $9 Mill per contract or $14 Mill per contract “handcuffs us” with a RB then a $40 Mill per contract definitely handcuffs us.. lol.

I’m using hyperbole but the way folks talked about contracts that were 1/3 of this handcuffing us was always comical.

Najee’s deal wouldn’t handcuff us, either, it’s just not smart to overpay for a RB’s declining years, especially if he was average to start with.

[whatever]

pay the man
he deserves it
its a business

[Joel Buchsbaum]

Pay the man a fair market value. Watt is 30, not 35 and should have 2 or 3 more peak years left in him.

[NorthCoast]

No matter what we do with Watt this time, I think it's worth taking a second to note that the team did a great job of not kicking more and more money down the road on this contract with TJ. I don't think freeing up money through the deal would have made a real difference in how competitive we are.

And by not having a huge balloon of a cap hit at the end of the contract (like we did with Ben at the end).

I posted this on another board but it's worth inserting it here because I think some fans are being misled by the league cap limitations.

It's not necessarily the cap that teams have to worry about. That can be dealt with using extensions, restructures, voided years, etc. It's the annual cash outlays that drive roster construction and it hasn't been completely an even field for all teams.

So, here's an example of how a team can manipulate the cap and cash:

"So, how bad has the cash differential gotten in the NFL? According to Spotrac, the Cleveland Browns have spent $401.3 million more on players than their divisional rival, the Pittsburgh Steelers, have since the start of the 2020 league year. That debt has been added to the team’s accounting in future years, but, again, there’s no due date to get cap neutral, so in theory, that money can continue to be kicked into the future in perpetuity.

While the Browns don’t make much of a case that spending equals winning, the next four teams behind them in 2020 to 2025 cash spending are a group of teams that have found success: the San Francisco 49ers, Buffalo Bills, Miami Dolphins and Philadelphia Eagles. Earlier this offseason, the 49ers’ CEO Jed York curbed cash spending on his team, following a season where San Francisco failed to make the postseason, sold six percent of the franchise and the team still has $92 million in dead cap on their books in 2025.

If an owner was well-moneyed beyond his football franchise, though, he could have continued to push through that bump in the road and spent and restructured deals to the NFL’s liking."

The last sentence is the key to the problem. Rich owners/teams can simply outspend teams like the Steelers, piling up future debt that never is forced due.

Philly is another example of a savvy money managing team. Many of their top contracts expire in 2029. So with the league allowed maximum four more void years added it pushes it to 2033. What's so great about 2033? It just happens to be the year most of the streaming services contracts expire with the NFL, meaning 2034 is likely to see another big jump in cap allowance. Thus 'pushing the can' won't have the dramatic effect some might expect.