ColtFreaks.com - Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum   ColtFreaks.com Home Page

Go Back   ColtFreaks.com - Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum > Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum > Indianapolis Colts Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-12-2019, 12:49 PM
sherck's Avatar
sherck sherck is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Posts: 3,742
Thanks: 1,769
Thanked 1,182 Times in 520 Posts
Default Things that make you go hmmmmmmm……….Salary Cap Edition

WARNING: Salary Cap Related……profound boredom might overcome you.

Over the first two years as the Colts GM, Chris Ballard structured his veteran contracts in a very specific way. His structure delivered all of a contracts guaranteed money in the first year or two of the contract with no negative cap hit in later years. All contracts paid a level amount or a decreasing amount as the contact ran (i.e. no “ballooning” contracts with big pay outs at the end no one expects the team to honor). Examples of this are:

Jonathan Hankins, 3-year, $27.000m, $9.0m average per year, $10.5m guaranteed in year one (salary + roster bonus) with nothing guaranteed in year two or beyond.

Jabaal Sheard, 3-year, $25.500m, $8.5m average per year, $9.5m guaranteed in year one (salary + roster bonus) and $3.25m of his year two salary guaranteed with zero money guaranteed in year three.

Eric Ebron, 2-year, $13.000m, $6.5m average per year, $6.25m guaranteed in year one (salary + roster bonus) with nothing guaranteed in year two.

Jack Doyle, 3-year, $18.900m, $6.3m average per year, $7.5m guaranteed in year one (salary + roster bonus) with nothing guaranteed in year two or beyond.

Denico Autry, 3-year, $17.800m, $5.9m average per year, $6.5m guaranteed in year one (salary + roster bonus) with nothing guaranteed in year two or beyond.

John Simon, 3-year, $13.500m, $4.5m average per year, $5.5m guaranteed in year one (salary + roster bonus) with nothing guaranteed in year two or beyond.

In the first two years with Ballard as GM, almost all the contracts (except for Sheard) followed the exact same pattern; no signing bonus (spread out over the life of the contract) but instead guaranteed first year salaries and guaranteed first year roster bonuses. The same pattern.

So, why am I bringing this up? Mark Glowinski.

3-year contract

$16.200m total worth (smaller than expected since it was reported as an $18m contract)

Signing Bonus = $4.200m (this is the first veteran signing bonus on a multi-year contract Ballard has done as Colts GM)

Average Cap Hit = $5.400m per year

Year One = $1.500m salary, $1.400m pro rated signing bonus hit, $500k roster bonus = $3.400m cap hit
Year Two = $4.250m salary, $1.400m pro rated signing bonus hit, $500k roster bonus = $6.150m cap hit
Year Three = $4.750m salary, $1.400m pro rated signing bonus hit, $500k roster bonus = $6.650m cap hit

Some Questions:

A) Why a super low salary for year one? A team typically only does this when they need to save cap space in that year, not when they have more than $110m to spend.

B) Why a signing bonus that is now pro-rated across the life of the contract? Why not continue to pay roster bonuses that will not impact future years? The only reason I can think of is that the player needed the money NOW and not in early March (when the new season starts and roster bonus can be paid).

C) Why does he choose now to “balloon” a contract when he did not choose to do so earlier? Sure, it is a small contract and the balloon is tiny (in relation to the size of the cap) but it breaks a pattern Ballard has established.

Not a huge disturbance in the Force but I have zero idea with as much cap space as we have why he broke pattern to give both a signing bonus instead of a roster bonus and to balloon the contract between years one and two to save money in 2019. It makes little sense to me.

Walk Worthy,
__________________
==============
Thad
The future is so bright; I gotta triple up!
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to sherck For This Useful Post:
Indiana V2 (02-12-2019), smitty46953 (02-12-2019)
  #2  
Old 02-12-2019, 01:05 PM
Pez Pez is offline
Accidental Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,576
Thanks: 1,019
Thanked 684 Times in 374 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sherck View Post
WARNING: Salary Cap Related……profound boredom might overcome you.

Over the first two years as the Colts GM, Chris Ballard structured his veteran contracts in a very specific way. His structure delivered all of a contracts guaranteed money in the first year or two of the contract with no negative cap hit in later years. All contracts paid a level amount or a decreasing amount as the contact ran (i.e. no “ballooning” contracts with big pay outs at the end no one expects the team to honor). Examples of this are:

Jonathan Hankins, 3-year, $27.000m, $9.0m average per year, $10.5m guaranteed in year one (salary + roster bonus) with nothing guaranteed in year two or beyond.

Jabaal Sheard, 3-year, $25.500m, $8.5m average per year, $9.5m guaranteed in year one (salary + roster bonus) and $3.25m of his year two salary guaranteed with zero money guaranteed in year three.

Eric Ebron, 2-year, $13.000m, $6.5m average per year, $6.25m guaranteed in year one (salary + roster bonus) with nothing guaranteed in year two.

Jack Doyle, 3-year, $18.900m, $6.3m average per year, $7.5m guaranteed in year one (salary + roster bonus) with nothing guaranteed in year two or beyond.

Denico Autry, 3-year, $17.800m, $5.9m average per year, $6.5m guaranteed in year one (salary + roster bonus) with nothing guaranteed in year two or beyond.

John Simon, 3-year, $13.500m, $4.5m average per year, $5.5m guaranteed in year one (salary + roster bonus) with nothing guaranteed in year two or beyond.

In the first two years with Ballard as GM, almost all the contracts (except for Sheard) followed the exact same pattern; no signing bonus (spread out over the life of the contract) but instead guaranteed first year salaries and guaranteed first year roster bonuses. The same pattern.

So, why am I bringing this up? Mark Glowinski.

3-year contract

$16.200m total worth (smaller than expected since it was reported as an $18m contract)

Signing Bonus = $4.200m (this is the first veteran signing bonus on a multi-year contract Ballard has done as Colts GM)

Average Cap Hit = $5.400m per year

Year One = $1.500m salary, $1.400m pro rated signing bonus hit, $500k roster bonus = $3.400m cap hit
Year Two = $4.250m salary, $1.400m pro rated signing bonus hit, $500k roster bonus = $6.150m cap hit
Year Three = $4.750m salary, $1.400m pro rated signing bonus hit, $500k roster bonus = $6.650m cap hit

Some Questions:

A) Why a super low salary for year one? A team typically only does this when they need to save cap space in that year, not when they have more than $110m to spend.

B) Why a signing bonus that is now pro-rated across the life of the contract? Why not continue to pay roster bonuses that will not impact future years? The only reason I can think of is that the player needed the money NOW and not in early March (when the new season starts and roster bonus can be paid).

C) Why does he choose now to “balloon” a contract when he did not choose to do so earlier? Sure, it is a small contract and the balloon is tiny (in relation to the size of the cap) but it breaks a pattern Ballard has established.

Not a huge disturbance in the Force but I have zero idea with as much cap space as we have why he broke pattern to give both a signing bonus instead of a roster bonus and to balloon the contract between years one and two to save money in 2019. It makes little sense to me.

Walk Worthy,
Good question. Complete conjecture, but I can imagine Glowinski and Muir insisting on this type of contact in exchange for signing below the $7.5M annual league average for an OG. (even lower now that it's actually a 16.2M contract when it was originally $18M).

I wonder if Glowinski and play center behind Boehm in a pinch.
__________________
** 2017 Premier league champion **

"I want to dominate all my opponents, and take their will away to play the game, by each play, and finishing them past the whistle."
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Pez For This Useful Post:
VeveJones007 (02-12-2019)
  #3  
Old 02-12-2019, 01:13 PM
Pez Pez is offline
Accidental Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 1,576
Thanks: 1,019
Thanked 684 Times in 374 Posts
Default

In a way also, it fits with one of ballard's stated goals, that staying so far under the cap is for the purpose of paying our own veterans. Glow definitely proved his worth and didn't demand stupid money.
__________________
** 2017 Premier league champion **

"I want to dominate all my opponents, and take their will away to play the game, by each play, and finishing them past the whistle."
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-12-2019, 01:16 PM
TheMugwump's Avatar
TheMugwump TheMugwump is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 1,800
Thanks: 1,594
Thanked 1,549 Times in 883 Posts
Default

Does this amount to a better short term deal for the player? If so, is it a sign of loyalty and a way to reward a player already on the team in order to encourage a certain...smoothness in future negotiations with on-roster players? Other than Doyle, none of those others were already Colts, right?

IDK, you tell me.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-12-2019, 02:56 PM
sherck's Avatar
sherck sherck is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Posts: 3,742
Thanks: 1,769
Thanked 1,182 Times in 520 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pez View Post
In a way also, it fits with one of ballard's stated goals, that staying so far under the cap is for the purpose of paying our own veterans. Glow definitely proved his worth and didn't demand stupid money.
But a contract that conformed to Ballard's track record would also fit with his stated goal.

3-year, $16.4m total

Year One = $4.2m guaranteed roster bonus, $1.3m salary = $5.5m cap hit

Year Two = $5.45m non-guaranteed salary (zero dead money)

Year Three = $5.45m non-guaranteed salary (zero dead money)


Same amount of guaranteed money, same money out of pocket for Irsay, same total dollar amount but structured in a way that matches what he did in the past.

I just don't see a reason for him to break his pattern.

Walk Worthy,
__________________
==============
Thad
The future is so bright; I gotta triple up!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-12-2019, 02:59 PM
sherck's Avatar
sherck sherck is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Posts: 3,742
Thanks: 1,769
Thanked 1,182 Times in 520 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMugwump View Post
Does this amount to a better short term deal for the player? If so, is it a sign of loyalty and a way to reward a player already on the team in order to encourage a certain...smoothness in future negotiations with on-roster players? Other than Doyle, none of those others were already Colts, right?

IDK, you tell me.
Nope. Actually, doing it the way Ballard did it for the last 2 years is a better deal for the player because every new contract is the opportunity for a new, bigger contract.

If you have zero dead money in the later years of a contract, there is nothing holding a team to keeping you from hitting the open market by cutting you. Most NFL players will bet on themselves 100% of the time.

I still don't see it.

Walk Worthy,
__________________
==============
Thad
The future is so bright; I gotta triple up!
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to sherck For This Useful Post:
TheMugwump (02-16-2019)
  #7  
Old 02-12-2019, 03:01 PM
smitty46953's Avatar
smitty46953 smitty46953 is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 4,905
Thanks: 3,323
Thanked 1,965 Times in 1,038 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sherck View Post
But a contract that conformed to Ballard's track record would also fit with his stated goal.

3-year, $16.4m total

Year One = $4.2m guaranteed roster bonus, $1.3m salary = $5.5m cap hit

Year Two = $5.45m non-guaranteed salary (zero dead money)

Year Three = $5.45m non-guaranteed salary (zero dead money)


Same amount of guaranteed money, same money out of pocket for Irsay, same total dollar amount but structured in a way that matches what he did in the past.

I just don't see a reason for him to break his pattern.

Walk Worthy,
Irsay has a new guitar he is saving for?
__________________
Never argue with an idiot, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience !!!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-12-2019, 03:20 PM
VeveJones007 VeveJones007 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 3,111
Thanks: 1,209
Thanked 1,114 Times in 612 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pez View Post
Good question. Complete conjecture, but I can imagine Glowinski and Muir insisting on this type of contact in exchange for signing below the $7.5M annual league average for an OG. (even lower now that it's actually a 16.2M contract when it was originally $18M).

I wonder if Glowinski and play center behind Boehm in a pinch.
This was my first thought. Glow wanted a little more guarantee that he wouldn’t be looking for a new place to play in 2020.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-12-2019, 03:22 PM
VeveJones007 VeveJones007 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 3,111
Thanks: 1,209
Thanked 1,114 Times in 612 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sherck View Post
Nope. Actually, doing it the way Ballard did it for the last 2 years is a better deal for the player because every new contract is the opportunity for a new, bigger contract.

If you have zero dead money in the later years of a contract, there is nothing holding a team to keeping you from hitting the open market by cutting you. Most NFL players will bet on themselves 100% of the time.

I still don't see it.

Walk Worthy,
This isn’t something new to the league. Players and agents agree to these types of deals all the time. It’s a trade off decision that comes down to what the player values most.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-12-2019, 05:07 PM
Chaka's Avatar
Chaka Chaka is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 859
Thanks: 337
Thanked 667 Times in 286 Posts
Default

Interesting observation and breakdown, but I think you're reading too much into it. The contract structure Ballard has used previously was not sustainable if he wanted to compete for any of the more sought after free agents, so he was going to have to deviate from it regardless.

We can all guess why Glowinski's structure is slightly different from the earlier ones (maybe Glowinski wanted the money right away for some reason, as you suggested), but unlike the other free agents he is a free agent-to-be - meaning that he had a bit more leverage that the other free agents and could ask for something more tailored to his needs.

Ultimately, though, the contract isn't all that different in substance - it's still basically a one-year deal for $5.7 guaranteed and two option years. Whether that $5.7 is absorbed this upcoming year, or over the next three isn't that significant in my view.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
ColtFreaks.com is in no way affiliated with the Indianapolis Colts, the NFL, or any of their subsidiaries.