Antonio Brown restructures contract, frees up nearly $4 million in cap space

[Count Steeler]

As the Steelers continue their now-annual game of salary-cap limbo, their 2011 and 2013 MVP has done the team a favor.
The favor, of course, doesn’t require much of a sacrifice. In lieu of collecting a total of $6 million in game checks from September through December, Brown took most of it right now.
The restructuring, first reported by ESPN’s Adam Schefter, creates $4 million in cap space. The actual number, assuming that the Steelers maximized the ability to convert salary to signing bonus by reducing Brown to the minimum base salary for his level of experience ($715,000), comes out to $3,963,750.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/03/07/antonio-brown-restructures-contract-frees-up-nearly-4-million-in-cap-space/

[GBMelBlount]

So we have extra cap space to pick up a free agent?

If we could plug a hole or two on defense in FA, picking up a beast wide receiver in the first round would be a lot more pallatable imo.

[ALLD]

Mike Wallace might need to do the same thing, but in order to avoid being cut.

[Spike]

$3.6 million under the cap?

We're RICH!

[st33lersguy]

They are continuing these restructures? Isn't this what has started them above the cap the last few years?

[oneforthetoe]

Not all restructures are the same. IMO,what got the Steelers in trouble was restructuring players who weren't worth another contract. If Wood was still the player he once was we could have simply extended hois contract at lowered his cap hit. It would still be a huge hit, but he was once in the top 5 at his position.. Instead we are basically paying two players to play the same position. Jason would have either been let go or offered a moderate contract. No doubt the fo has made some mistakes , but this was the biggest misstep. Ben is worth another contract as was Troy (short contract) so those don't bother me as much. We could be bungles fans and have 20 million not spent and still not be able to win a playoff game.

Yea I know we have had two 8-8 seasons but I like the team we are fielding next year to get back to the playoffs.

[steelreserve]

You know what would be great? Giving out contracts we could actually afford without going back and fucking with them every offseason to make things worse in the long run. Other teams are doing that. We should look into it. That way, in 2017 or 2018 we wont be saying things like:


Sorry Antonio, you were a great Steeler, but $18.6 million is just too steep a price for a guy who's now arguably the #2 receiver, best of luck!


Ben, we'll never forget the Super Bowls you led us to, but a $36 million cap hit for a 36-year-old QB is too much to bear, so I guess I understand.


Yeah, let's please not go down that road any more.

[X-Terminator]

Isn't next year simply year 2 of Antonio's contract? Why do we have people complaining about this? Yeah, I get the past restructures, but not only has Brown proven that he's worth the money, he's also making WAY LESS than most top WRs in the league. Mike Wallace is making more than him, for crying out loud.

If he keeps up his current production over the next 2 seasons, they can simply extend him, cancel out the remaining 2 years of his current deal and save money that way. You know, like they just did with Heath and Troy.

[steelreserve]

Isn't next year simply year 2 of Antonio's contract? Why do we have people complaining about this? Yeah, I get the past restructures, but not only has Brown proven that he's worth the money, he's also making WAY LESS than most top WRs in the league. Mike Wallace is making more than him, for crying out loud.

If he keeps up his current production over the next 2 seasons, they can simply extend him, cancel out the remaining 2 years of his current deal and save money that way. You know, like they just did with Heath and Troy.

Heath and Troy's deals only worked that way out because both of them essentially agreed to be paid $4M a year for the last two years of the new deals, with no new signing bonus. (Troy: 1 year $12M -> 3 years, $20M; Heath: 1 year, $10M -> 3 years, $18M). That's all well and good for veterans at the end of their careers who are still productive AND agree to that, but I would hardly count on it as a strategy for every player.

And it's not like the money "goes away" either - in two years, we'll still be paying a $7M cap figure for Polamalu, which is better than the $12M this year, but no walk on the beach.

Brown is a great player and did everything to deserve the money he's being paid, but man, every time we do this we make it a crapload harder on ourselves.

[Mojouw]

Heath and Troy's deals only worked that way out because both of them essentially agreed to be paid $4M a year for the last two years of the new deals, with no new signing bonus. (Troy: 1 year $12M -> 3 years, $20M; Heath: 1 year, $10M -> 3 years, $18M). That's all well and good for veterans at the end of their careers who are still productive AND agree to that, but I would hardly count on it as a strategy for every player.

And it's not like the money "goes away" either - in two years, we'll still be paying a $7M cap figure for Polamalu, which is better than the $12M this year, but no walk on the beach.

Brown is a great player and did everything to deserve the money he's being paid, but man, every time we do this we make it a crapload harder on ourselves.

Those numbers are not static though. As the cap increases each year, the proportion of the cap that each player's salary represents stays close to the same even though the dollar amount goes up.

The flat and slightly shrunken cap of the first portion of the new CBA is what made those restructures so crippling. With the league announcing (in an almost official way) that the cap will begin to progress on a steady upward curve, all present and future restructures are not as bad.

$7 million in 2014 is not the same as $7 million in 2016.

[X-Terminator]

Was just about to post that, Mojouw.

We need to consider adding a "Thanks" button to our forum, so that we can agree with a post and give it recognition without having to repeat what was said or not post at all.

Sorry about the brief OT...

[86WARD]

Those numbers are not static though. As the cap increases each year, the proportion of the cap that each player's salary represents stays close to the same even though the dollar amount goes up.

The flat and slightly shrunken cap of the first portion of the new CBA is what made those restructures so crippling. With the league announcing (in an almost official way) that the cap will begin to progress on a steady upward curve, all present and future restructures are not as bad.

$7 million in 2014 is not the same as $7 million in 2016.

QFT

[steelreserve]

Those numbers are not static though. As the cap increases each year, the proportion of the cap that each player's salary represents stays close to the same even though the dollar amount goes up.

The flat and slightly shrunken cap of the first portion of the new CBA is what made those restructures so crippling. With the league announcing (in an almost official way) that the cap will begin to progress on a steady upward curve, all present and future restructures are not as bad.

$7 million in 2014 is not the same as $7 million in 2016.


Yeah, I get that. Nobody's saying we should be giving completely flat contracts. Our problem is that the cap increases deflate the later years of a contract by like 15-20%, and we do restructures that cause jumps of 50% or 100%.

If we give out, say, a 5-year, $36 million contract, we don't restructure it 5.5M/6.5M/7.5M/8.5M/9M, which would be rising along with the cap and dealing with it responsibly. We restructure it to 2M/3M/3M/13M/15M and then we're really stuck with a problem. We could possibly handle ONE contract that way with cap increases, but we typically have 4 or 5 like that, so - duh.

[Mojouw]

Yeah, I get that. Nobody's saying we should be giving completely flat contracts. Our problem is that the cap increases deflate the later years of a contract by like 15-20%, and we do restructures that cause jumps of 50% or 100%.

If we give out, say, a 5-year, $36 million contract, we don't restructure it 5.5M/6.5M/7.5M/8.5M/9M, which would be rising along with the cap and dealing with it responsibly. We restructure it to 2M/3M/3M/13M/15M and then we're really stuck with a problem. We could possibly handle ONE contract that way with cap increases, but we typically have 4 or 5 like that, so - duh.

Okay. I see what you are getting out now. I hope that by restructuring guys on their 2nd contract rather than the dreaded 3rd contract, they can keep the salary to performance ratio in line. How that will work with the cap....ehhhhhh. Draft better? I don't know.

At least after 2015 or so a bunch of money that isn't going to Ben comes off the books...(Ike, Woodley) and then in 2016 some more (Troy, Heath).

Plus look at the Saints. They were supposedly dead in the water in terms of the cap. Unlikely to even scrap together the coin needed to resign Jimmy Grahamn. What did the do? Land the highest priced guy in the FA class. I'm starting to think the cap doesn't actually matter anyways...

[Spike]

Charting their money

Here's a breakdown of the Steelers' recent moves to get into compliance with the league's salary cap:

Player Old cap New cap Savings

LaMarr Woodley $13,590,000 $5,600,000 $7,990,000*

Troy Polamalu $10,887,000 $6,387,000 $4,500,000

Ike Taylor $11,942,000 $7,692,000 $4,250,000

Antonio Brown $8,470,000 $4,517,500 $3,952,500

Heath Miller $9,466,500 $6,133,166 $3,333,334

Total $24,025,834

* — Woodley counts $8.57 million against 2015 salary cap



Player Dead money

LaMarr Woodley $14,170,000+

Willie Colon $4,300,000

Larry Foote $666,667

Terry Hawthorne $142,539

Curtis Brown $130,300

Justin Brown $78,054

Misc Players $31,000

Total $19,518,560

+ — Woodley's cap charges: $5.6 million (2014), $8.57 mil (2015)

http://triblive.com/sports/steelers/...#axzz2vki2LhHM

[Mojouw]

So all the dead money is off the books after 2015?

Not too bad. 2 off-seasons to clean up the cap (2013 and 2014). Now just resign and extend a few core guys and the money stuff is fixed.

Or am I missing something?

[steelreserve]

So all the dead money is off the books after 2015?

Not too bad. 2 off-seasons to clean up the cap (2013 and 2014). Now just resign and extend a few core guys and the money stuff is fixed.

Or am I missing something?

Yeah ... Ben's new contract, Pouncey's new contract, Heyward's new contract, DeCastro's new contract, the shit-sandwich part of Brown's restructured deal, the shit-sandwich part of Timmons' restructured deal ... that or let go of some of those players. Plenty to keep us busy.

[X-Terminator]

Yeah ... Ben's new contract, Pouncey's new contract, Heyward's new contract, DeCastro's new contract, the shit-sandwich part of Brown's restructured deal, the shit-sandwich part of Timmons' restructured deal ... that or let go of some of those players. Plenty to keep us busy.

I get all of the concern, but you keep acting like the cap is going to be flat from here on out, when we know it isn't. It's going to rise significantly every year. So they shouldn't have too much of an issue re-signing all of those guys and still be able to deal with Brown and Timmons. I have the feeling the Steelers do not want to put themselves in the position they were in again, to the point where they lose good, young, home-grown talent like Keenan Lewis and are stuck with old vets with big contracts. They will likely sign all of them to market-value, but team-friendly contracts. You simply are not going to be able to field a good team by paying them peanuts like some (not you) seem to advocate.

On top of that, they MUST draft better than they have been, so that they can more easily replace aging vets and not give them an expensive 3rd contract if they don't have to.

[Mojouw]

Yeah ... Ben's new contract, Pouncey's new contract, Heyward's new contract, DeCastro's new contract, the shit-sandwich part of Brown's restructured deal, the shit-sandwich part of Timmons' restructured deal ... that or let go of some of those players. Plenty to keep us busy.

Yeah, but after one more year or so, we are done paying big money to people not currently on the roster. That was my point. All the players you mentioned, while they will be costly to sign, will not be on 3rd contracts that are restructured 6 ways to Sunday.

That was all I meant. Dead money and contracts that are heavily slanted towards paying for past performance are almost behind the Steelers. Of course, so are playoff seasons.

[steelreserve]

Yeah, but after one more year or so, we are done paying big money to people not currently on the roster. That was my point. All the players you mentioned, while they will be costly to sign, will not be on 3rd contracts that are restructured 6 ways to Sunday.

That was all I meant. Dead money and contracts that are heavily slanted towards paying for past performance are almost behind the Steelers. Of course, so are playoff seasons.


Well, let's hope so. If I'm not mistaken, dead money can't stay on the books for more than two years anyway under the new CBA (and the one before it). That's thanks to the Rickey Jackson Rule, when the 49ers gave him a 10-year contract when he was 37 years old, basically paying him $1 million and spreading the cap hit out to $100K a year. So to stop that practice, they made all the dead money come forward to the current season (and the one after, depending on release date).

At any rate ... what I guess I am saying is that I hope when it comes to re-sign the next group of guys, we do it sensibly. I'm not advocating paying them peanuts - duh, that won't work - but we just cannot go paying everyone $10M and deferring $8M of it for the first couple seasons this time around. That will mean some tough decisions, like - do we keep Pouncey at that price, or save $5M by signing a center who is merely above average? Which one or two of Timmons/Jones/Worilds stick around for big money after the current contract; we can't have all three. We WILL have to let go of some players. You can say that this comes down to the typical "we need to draft better" argument, and I guess it does.