PDA

View Full Version : Cam Heyward signs contract extension



hawaiiansteeler
07-16-2015, 08:23 PM
no details or formal announcement yet, but just saw this on his twitter account:

Cam Heyward ‏@CamHeyward -

I love this organization! Very blessed and excited about continuing my career as a Steeler! #somanythanks #greatday

https://twitter.com/camheyward

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CKE_oDCWoAA9Vl1.jpg

polamalubeast
07-16-2015, 08:26 PM
Great!

hawaiiansteeler
07-16-2015, 08:27 PM
Ed Bouchette ‏@EdBouchette -

Steelers sign Cam Heyward to six year contract worth $59.25 million

https://twitter.com/edbouchette

salamander
07-16-2015, 08:46 PM
Good news!

steelreserve
07-16-2015, 10:00 PM
is that a dildo on the corner of the desk?

86WARD
07-16-2015, 10:21 PM
Great signing. No brainer.

Steelman
07-17-2015, 08:53 AM
Ed Bouchette ‏@EdBouchette -

Steelers sign Cam Heyward to six year contract worth $59.25 million

https://twitter.com/edbouchette

That sounds like a very good deal!

Congrats to Cam, well deserved!

TD's & Beer
07-17-2015, 08:58 AM
ugh - count me in as the DebbieDowner of this contract, I like the guy, but not that much - he's no Aaron Smith


New deal makes Cameron Heyward second-highest paid Steeler behind Big Ben

$10 Million a year for 6 years for this guy? The best of a mediocre DL bunch?

15 career sacks, he's never even made a Pro-bowl and they are breaking the bank for him?


We should sign Antonio, DeCastro and Beachum first. The offense wins games on this team.

polamalubeast
07-17-2015, 09:21 AM
Sometimes the pro bowl not mean much

Aaron Smith made the pro bowl only once in his career.......The best season of Smith for the sacks is 8..Heyward had 7.5 sacks last year.....

I'm not saying that Heyward is better than Smith, but the Pro Bowl is a horrible argument

TD's & Beer
07-17-2015, 10:11 AM
I'm not saying that Heyward is better than Smith, but the Pro Bowl is a horrible argument

It's not an argument - I was lashing out - I don't think he's worth $10 Million a year for 6 years

Contract money is a statement of worth, so he's the 2nd most valuable player on the team after Ben? Do the players believe that?

polamalubeast
07-17-2015, 10:18 AM
It's not an argument - I was lashing out - I don't think he's worth $10 Million a year for 6 years

Contract money is a statement of worth, so he's the 2nd most valuable player on the team after Ben? Do the players believe that?

This is the market and the contract by Brown was signed in 2012 and Bell is in his rookie contract...This is not the same thing


And even if Bell would have a new contract right now, it would probably be less than Heyward, since the RB position is less expensive than the DL position in the nfl

TD's & Beer
07-17-2015, 10:48 AM
This is the market

then the market sucks, I don't pretend to be a GM, I hate math

86WARD
07-17-2015, 11:29 AM
I'd like to see more details in the contract...

TeeTee
07-17-2015, 12:05 PM
I'm OK with it. There is always a chance a big new deal can turn a player into a fat Woodley, but I feel good about Heyward; he is a natural leader and won't turn into La'Marr the fatso. The message it sends is, "Do good work, and the team will take care of you." You can't pay everyone, you have to make wise decisions on who to pay and who to let walk. I am confident this will end up being a wise move.

Chidi29
07-17-2015, 12:38 PM
It's not an argument - I was lashing out - I don't think he's worth $10 Million a year for 6 years

Contract money is a statement of worth, so he's the 2nd most valuable player on the team after Ben? Do the players believe that?

Market was set for that type of money. Wasn't going to get less than Liguet and his deal, which it is, would be comparable to Cameron Jordan.

steelreserve
07-17-2015, 01:39 PM
This is the market and the contract by Brown was signed in 2012 and Bell is in his rookie contract...This is not the same thing


then the market sucks, I don't pretend to be a GM, I hate math


Market was set for that type of money. Wasn't going to get less than Liguet and his deal, which it is, would be comparable to Cameron Jordan.


It seems like "the market" is now $10M a year for any player who's good at any position. Call it whatever you will, but no matter the reason, we can't afford many more of those.

He's a player I'm glad we kept, but I do have a growing suspicion that we're outbidding ourselves in some of these re-signing negotiations. The Timmons contract, the Pouncey contract, the Gilbert contract, the Cortez Allen contract, and this contract all went that way, and the Worilds contract probably would've gone that way if he hadn't cuckoo-for-Cocoa-Puffsed his way off the team. The DeCastro contract, the Bell contract, the Tuitt contract, and the Shazier contract will probably all go that way too. Cannot afford.

Heyward is a good player, maybe his ceiling on the market is $10M a year. A good GM's job is to get him for $8M while he's still under contract and offer some incentives to take the deal - not pay everyone the absolute most that he'd command on the open market. We look at the maximum that could theoretically be available to a player and go straight to that, and everyone applauds it for "rewarding our players." Well, sorry, but to be a successful GM, sometimes you've got to be a dick. Here's a case where we probably could have done that and helped ourselves in the long run. Cap space is extreeeeeemely important.

Before you say that the players have all the leverage in these negotiations, shut up.

zulater
07-17-2015, 01:47 PM
I'm not a capologist or a math whiz, but in order to keep exceptional players you have to pay fair market value. And I think Cam is on the verge of being exceptional if not already there. He really came on as a force last season imo. It's not just sacks it's hurries that are almost as valuable, and I think I saw somewhere he had 54 hurries last season. Anyway the right way to spend your money in a salaried capped league is on ascending players coming into their prime years. And I think this is a perfect example of it.

polamalubeast
07-17-2015, 01:50 PM
Heyward is a good player, maybe his ceiling on the market is $10M a year. A good GM's job is to get him for $8M while he's still under contract and offer some incentives to take the deal - not pay everyone the absolute most that he'd command on the open market. We look at the maximum that could theoretically be available to a player and go straight to that, and everyone applauds it for "rewarding our players." Well, sorry, but to be a successful GM, sometimes you've got to be a dick.

It was impossible

Cameron Jordan of the saints has had 55 million over 5 years in this offseason and he about the same caliber than Heyward.....A player of the chargers has had 50 million over 5 years....Heyward has had between the two(53 millions on 5 years extension)

Mojouw
07-17-2015, 02:15 PM
It seems like "the market" is now $10M a year for any player who's good at any position. Call it whatever you will, but no matter the reason, we can't afford many more of those.

He's a player I'm glad we kept, but I do have a growing suspicion that we're outbidding ourselves in some of these re-signing negotiations. The Timmons contract, the Pouncey contract, the Gilbert contract, the Cortez Allen contract, and this contract all went that way, and the Worilds contract probably would've gone that way if he hadn't cuckoo-for-Cocoa-Puffsed his way off the team. The DeCastro contract, the Bell contract, the Tuitt contract, and the Shazier contract will probably all go that way too. Cannot afford.

Heyward is a good player, maybe his ceiling on the market is $10M a year. A good GM's job is to get him for $8M while he's still under contract and offer some incentives to take the deal - not pay everyone the absolute most that he'd command on the open market. We look at the maximum that could theoretically be available to a player and go straight to that, and everyone applauds it for "rewarding our players." Well, sorry, but to be a successful GM, sometimes you've got to be a dick. Here's a case where we probably could have done that and helped ourselves in the long run. Cap space is extreeeeeemely important.

Before you say that the players have all the leverage in these negotiations, shut up.

I guess that works in Madden Franchise mode or something, but out in the real world - the market sets the value.

And we don't even have to do the math. It has already been done for us. Heyward's extension is a win. There is no other way to see it.

http://www.spotrac.com/research/nfl/contract-valuation-cam-heyward-528/

86WARD
07-17-2015, 02:15 PM
Except for RBs...lol...their value is "garbage."

steelreserve
07-17-2015, 04:03 PM
I don't know. I guess. Seems like market value has just gotten out of hand even for above-average players, not only the stars.

What I do know is that we are dangerously close to once again having six guys account for half our salary cap, and you can't do that. So you fake it by restructuring and then by 2019 you're $25M over the cap again and anyone good from this year or next year's draft is gone.

We've been through this before. I don't care how good the players are or what the market says, it's getting ourselves into the same problem with different names. A really, really dangerous game to play. Hope we win the Super Bowl in the next year or two.

Steelman
07-17-2015, 04:09 PM
Cam is the cornerstone of our defense right now and for the foreseeable future. He seems to be the unquestioned new leader of the defense, from everything I've read and heard. And at only 26 years old, he's a pretty damn good player who works extremely hard and hustles every play, every game. I definitely agree with Zu, these are the guys you want to pay. I don't think it's a bad deal at all, considering what other lesser players are being paid right now.

tube517
07-17-2015, 04:10 PM
I'm not surprised by the amount at all.

Now, they need to cut the Dirty Cam.

st33lersguy
07-17-2015, 04:40 PM
Awesome

zulater
07-17-2015, 04:52 PM
I'm not surprised by the amount at all.

Now, they need to cut the Dirty Cam.

I second that!

Mojouw
07-17-2015, 05:38 PM
I don't know. I guess. Seems like market value has just gotten out of hand even for above-average players, not only the stars.

What I do know is that we are dangerously close to once again having six guys account for half our salary cap, and you can't do that. So you fake it by restructuring and then by 2019 you're $25M over the cap again and anyone good from this year or next year's draft is gone.

We've been through this before. I don't care how good the players are or what the market says, it's getting ourselves into the same problem with different names. A really, really dangerous game to play. Hope we win the Super Bowl in the next year or two.

Unfortunately, that is how you win championships nowadays. Max out for a handful of key guys and hope you can fill in around them. Look at the good to great teams in the league now, they are all built that way. Seattle is around the secondary and few LBs plus Lynch. Denver is Peyton and the skill guys. Packers are Rodgers and the skill guys with a few olinemen thrown in along with Matthews. We could keep going.

You get a few cornerstone stars, pay them the max contract and hope you can fill in with inexpensive youth, free agent gems, etc just enough to get it done. Why do you think the league pushed so hard for the rookie wage scale?

SteelerFanInStl
07-17-2015, 05:55 PM
I'm glad to see Cam signed to an extension and I think he's definitely worth it. He had a fantastic year last year, especially in the 2nd half, and he's an ascending player.

Psycho Ward 86
07-17-2015, 06:01 PM
In order to keep your homegrown talent, you're going to have to end up paying some extra coin for some, while keeping some at a cheaper than market value price tag.

I laugh every offseason when someone whines about a player that gets a deal just because it wasn't maximally penny-pinched. This deal makes perfect sense.

polamalubeast
07-17-2015, 06:03 PM
I don't know. I guess. Seems like market value has just gotten out of hand even for above-average players, not only the stars.

What I do know is that we are dangerously close to once again having six guys account for half our salary cap, and you can't do that. So you fake it by restructuring and then by 2019 you're $25M over the cap again and anyone good from this year or next year's draft is gone.

We've been through this before. I don't care how good the players are or what the market says, it's getting ourselves into the same problem with different names. A really, really dangerous game to play. Hope we win the Super Bowl in the next year or two.


It's not just the Steelers who do that....Just look at the team that participated in the last two Super Bowl

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/seattle-seahawks/

What can hurt a team is if a player with a big salary not perform like Lamarr Woodley or who are too old(Polamalu,etc)

steelreserve
07-17-2015, 06:33 PM
Yeah, yeah, I get it. We do what we have to in order to keep the players we need, and he's one we needed to keep. Having that many $10M contracts still makes me nervous, with probably three more coming that I don't see any way around.

Maybe what we're seeing is an indirect result of the new rookie salary scale. Lower pay to start, restrictions on what you can do for extensions ... all the high draft picks hit the market in their fifth year, and boom, suddenly everyone's worth $10 million. A different way of doing it, for sure, and probably takes some different skills to navigate than a few years ago. I sure as hell hope we know what we're doing.

dislocatedday
07-17-2015, 06:49 PM
Cam is the cornerstone of our defense right now and for the foreseeable future. He seems to be the unquestioned new leader of the defense, from everything I've read and heard. And at only 26 years old, he's a pretty damn good player who works extremely hard and hustles every play, every game. I definitely agree with Zu, these are the guys you want to pay. I don't think it's a bad deal at all, considering what other lesser players are being paid right now.

This post nails it correctly IMO.

One thing in particular I tend to like about the Steelers is that they develop and reward from within the organization. They never throw extremely large contracts at "big name" outside free agents, and history has shown that those deals rarely provide an equal value in return for the teams giving them out.

Cam is clearly the best young defensive player on the Steelers at this point in time. He has shown himself to be hard-working and plays with a relentless intensity. By accounts I have read, he is also considered a leader and is well-respected by his teammates. I see opposing O-lineman struggling against him consistently in games. He is not an average 3-4 defensive end in the least.

6 yrs/60 Million is a realistic fair deal for him IMO. Yes, you can't pay every player that type of deal, but you have to peg and sign guys as the central building blocks. Maurkice Pouncey got a large deal last offseason because he is clearly the leader on that Oline, has immense talent, brings it every play, etc. His deal was worth it, and I don't see anybody complaining a year later that it was an unwise signing.

My guess is that the Steelers will lose some good players along the way in the coming seasons just because they can't pay large money to everyone, but since the start of this century, I can't think of any large signing that turned out badly except for the Woodley contract and Jason Gildon (..if my memory of Gildon after he signed his big deal is correct.....it's possible I am wrong on this).

TD's & Beer
07-17-2015, 08:47 PM
I sure as hell hope we know what we're doing.

Me too.

I face reality - I see a defense full of holes and have no expectations they will be anything better than average this year, with or without Cam.
We still have no franchise NT, still have a suspect outside pass rush and have huge question marks everywhere in the secondary. If you want to spend all your money on the DL, go ahead, I guess.

I still think we'll need to score 30 pts a game to even have a chance to win that coveted wildcard slot again. Go Ben!

Mojouw
07-17-2015, 09:08 PM
Cam Heyward was a must sign for the Steelers at almost any reasonable cost. The fact that they got him for a bit less than his predicted cost based on recent 3-4 end contracts - we should all be doing cartwheels. Not lamenting his cap charge.

Here is what I see:
1. Other than Timmons, Heyward is the leader of the defense now. You can see it on Sundays just watching your TV. Multiple articles have alluded to the fact that it stretches to the locker room and practice fields. Leadership is important. Especially on a young defense. A really young defense.

2. We still do not know what Butler is going to call on gamedays, but we have some clues. Multiple reports (ones with actual interviews and attributed quotes and stuff), not just speculation, have stated that he wants to get his ends up the field more and use them to cause disruption and make plays in the backfield. Clearly he is not envisioning a version of the 3-4 where the downlineman are just anchored to the LOS. In Heyward you have one of the only 4 or 5 DE's in the league who can fill that role. Hopefully, Tuitt becomes another one. Either way, when you have one of the very few players who excels at an fundamental aspect of your entire defensive philosophy - you don't screw around. Sign the guy.

3. This contract gives the Steelers cost certainty with one of their foundational pieces on defense. It takes him into his age 33 season. Makes it easier to plan and implement other signings once you know what Heyward is going to cost.

4. I'm not having the NT debate again. The Macs will be fine at NT. Watch. No one is going to be bitching about NT by mid season. If you look across the league at the 3-4 teams right now, things have/are changing. In response to the fact that no one really lines up and rams the ball down your throat anymore - NT are de-emphasised. They emphasis along the 3-4 line is focused on DEs that can play the run and rush the passer - on their own. Basically, JJ Watt and Calais Campbell with Mario Williams thrown in. On any NFL defense these days, regardless of scheme, players on the edges make the difference. So, again, I say - the Steelers have one and they didn't over think it - the signed the dude.

I'm sure Heyward and the Steelers are celebrating and so should all of us.

Chidi29
07-17-2015, 10:43 PM
It seems like "the market" is now $10M a year for any player who's good at any position. Call it whatever you will, but no matter the reason, we can't afford many more of those.

He's a player I'm glad we kept, but I do have a growing suspicion that we're outbidding ourselves in some of these re-signing negotiations. The Timmons contract, the Pouncey contract, the Gilbert contract, the Cortez Allen contract, and this contract all went that way, and the Worilds contract probably would've gone that way if he hadn't cuckoo-for-Cocoa-Puffsed his way off the team. The DeCastro contract, the Bell contract, the Tuitt contract, and the Shazier contract will probably all go that way too. Cannot afford.

Heyward is a good player, maybe his ceiling on the market is $10M a year. A good GM's job is to get him for $8M while he's still under contract and offer some incentives to take the deal - not pay everyone the absolute most that he'd command on the open market. We look at the maximum that could theoretically be available to a player and go straight to that, and everyone applauds it for "rewarding our players." Well, sorry, but to be a successful GM, sometimes you've got to be a dick. Here's a case where we probably could have done that and helped ourselves in the long run. Cap space is extreeeeeemely important.

Before you say that the players have all the leverage in these negotiations, shut up.

So you think Heyward is going to just offer up a hometown discount right after Cam Jordan gets paid? That's not how it works.

And yes, it's a rising cost for players across the board. As the cap continues to rise, so will individual contracts. Have to be fluid with our thinking of how much money a player truly gets, just as the cap is fluid and will continue to rise. 10 million now isn't what it was five years ago. And in five years, 10 million will be even less.

86WARD
07-18-2015, 06:59 AM
He's the 11th highest paid DE in the league...granted he's a 3-4 guy, but then so is JJ Watt at $16M a season...

teegre
07-18-2015, 09:40 AM
I've said it before, but it bears iteration:

Heyward & Tuitt will be the best DE tandem in the NFL.

tube517
07-18-2015, 09:42 AM
I've said it before, but it bears iteration:

Heyward & Tuitt will be the best DE tandem in the NFL.


Meh...both busts. Tomlin sucks. Fire John Mitchell. :chuckle:

LLT
07-18-2015, 10:34 AM
Love this so much. As we may all recall...when SU had a chance to talk with Cam during his rookie year, he stressed how he wanted to make a name for himself outside of the legacy of his dad.

Mission accomplished!

Psycho Ward 86
07-18-2015, 01:26 PM
Maybe what we're seeing is an indirect result of the new rookie salary scale. Lower pay to start, restrictions on what you can do for extensions ... all the high draft picks hit the market in their fifth year, and boom, suddenly everyone's worth $10 million. A different way of doing it, for sure, and probably takes some different skills to navigate than a few years ago. I sure as hell hope we know what we're doing.

That, and basically the NFL's version of inflation. Around the time Albert Haynseworth got his record setting deal seems to be when the contracts started to REALLY get out of hand. I remember there were like 4-5 players that became the highest paid players at their positions ever (or something along those lines) that year

hawaiiansteeler
07-18-2015, 07:45 PM
Cam Heyward was a must sign for the Steelers at almost any reasonable cost. The fact that they got him for a bit less than his predicted cost based on recent 3-4 end contracts - we should all be doing cartwheels. Not lamenting his cap charge.




Pittsburgh Steelers: Extension for DE Cam Heyward was a Must

By Dave Holcomb
July 17, 2015

http://a.fn.fncdn.com/images/content/getty/comp/to9tiU.jpg

The Pittsburgh Steelers have made a habit of extending contracts for franchise players before their current deals run out. Pittsburgh did that for James Harrison back in 2009, Ben Roethlisberger a couple times and even for their head coaches.

Thursday night, defensive end Cameron Heyward joined this group, signing a six-year deal worth $59.25 million according to NFL.com reporter Ian Rapoport.

Before the new deal, Heyward had one year left on his contract and was set to make $6.969 million in 2015. With the new contract in place, Heyward will make an average-annual salary of $9.86 million, which makes him the 11th-highest paid defensive end in the NFL and the second-highest paid player on the Steelers.

On the surface, that sounds a bit high, but the Pittsburgh Steelers had little choice but to retain Heyward's services.

to read rest of article:

http://www.footballnation.com/content/pittsburgh-steelers-extension-for-de-cam-heyward-was-must/33830/

zulater
07-19-2015, 10:13 AM
I've said it before, but it bears iteration:

Heyward & Tuitt will be the best DE tandem in the NFL.

I could see that.

steelreserve
07-20-2015, 10:58 AM
That, and basically the NFL's version of inflation. Around the time Albert Haynseworth got his record setting deal seems to be when the contracts started to REALLY get out of hand. I remember there were like 4-5 players that became the highest paid players at their positions ever (or something along those lines) that year


Yeah, the inflation is getting ridiculous. The salary cap has gone up about 20% over the last 7 or 8 years since the Woodley contract, but the number of players making $10 million a year has easily doubled, if not tripled or quadrupled. The result being that it's not only the superstars who are making insane money, but also the players who are merely good. In other words, the cost for talent at the high end of the spectrum is quickly running away from what is sustainable. I wonder how long that will keep up, or whether it'll just accelerate the game of musical chairs that the cap relentlessly enforces.

polamalubeast
07-20-2015, 11:08 AM
Yeah, the inflation is getting ridiculous. The salary cap has gone up about 20% over the last 7 or 8 years since the Woodley contract, but the number of players making $10 million a year has easily doubled, if not tripled or quadrupled. The result being that it's not only the superstars who are making insane money, but also the players who are merely good. In other words, the cost for talent at the high end of the spectrum is quickly running away from what is sustainable. I wonder how long that will keep up, or whether it'll just accelerate the game of musical chairs that the cap relentlessly enforces.

This is the market

The elite players like Suh or Watt make 16-20 million per year

The great,good or average QB make at least 20 million per year

Mojouw
07-20-2015, 11:19 AM
http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/contracts/

Seems like the lessons here are, pay a premium to get your own emerging stars (a roll of the dice) locked up through their prime on an expensive second contract OR pay through the nose to get a FA on their third contract.

Also, the NFL seems willing to pay whatever it takes for QB, LT, pass rush, and CB.

steelreserve
07-20-2015, 01:02 PM
This is the market


I tend to disagree that "the market" is as simple to define as the latest offer made to one guy by a team who may or may not have made a smart move.

omg Cam Jordan got paid X - that's the market!!!!

No, that's one guy. You just follow what everyone else does every time, you'll do no better than everyone else. Maybe this was a case where we just couldn't avoid paying that amount, but you at least try. There's plenty of evidence that Jordan has been significantly better over his career, so I have no idea how that sets the market value as the same for someone who's merely challenging to get to that level but hasn't actually gotten there yet. I mean, Heyward has shown himself to be pretty good, but let's not fool ourselves into thinking he's emerged as one of the most dominant players in the game.

Sometimes you get yourself a good deal, similar to A. Brown's, and I fully believe this could've been one of those cases, only we saw the Jordan deal and allowed ourselves to be talked into paying a couple million more than we had to.

Mojouw
07-20-2015, 01:59 PM
I tend to disagree that "the market" is as simple to define as the latest offer made to one guy by a team who may or may not have made a smart move.

omg Cam Jordan got paid X - that's the market!!!!

No, that's one guy. You just follow what everyone else does every time, you'll do no better than everyone else. Maybe this was a case where we just couldn't avoid paying that amount, but you at least try. There's plenty of evidence that Jordan has been significantly better over his career, so I have no idea how that sets the market value as the same for someone who's merely challenging to get to that level but hasn't actually gotten there yet. I mean, Heyward has shown himself to be pretty good, but let's not fool ourselves into thinking he's emerged as one of the most dominant players in the game.

Sometimes you get yourself a good deal, similar to A. Brown's, and I fully believe this could've been one of those cases, only we saw the Jordan deal and allowed ourselves to be talked into paying a couple million more than we had to.

That line of argument makes a few potentially unwarranted assumptions. The first is that the final signed contract terms was the only offer made to Heyward and his camp. I am willing to bet that is not true at all.

The second is that the NFL player market is an open system. Most of the time it is not. In this case the exceptions prove my point. AB's contract was an exception to the rule. The Steelers had 3 capable emerging young WRs that all were going to need contract renewal or extension around the same time (Wallace, Sanders, and Brown). In that case they were totally able to make their "best offer" to multiple (@ least in their minds) equivalent players. Wallace said "no". AB said "yes". End of story. Now, returning to Heyward - where is the equivalent player? There is no alternative on the market, either internally or externally. I mean, unless you want to count Cam Thomas.

The final one is that Heyward's contract is above market value or at the top of the market, etc. In this case it isn't. I posted the link upthread to the breakdown and all the gory details. Bottom line is that the top end of the market for 3-4 ends (which does NOT include Jordan) is $13.5 million per year. Heyward is getting around $9.875 million per year. Considering that Liguet and Campbell (the best "market" comps for Heyward) got $10.25 and $11.0 million per year on their recent deals, I would say there is no way to look at where the Steelers didn't pay less (maybe not a ton) than "market value" for Heyward.

I get that the amount of money NFL players get is ludicrous and that there are concerns about what percentage of your roster takes up what percentage of your cap space - but to continually rail against every contract being an over-pay and another step along the path to ruin is getting a bit overzealous. If they had handed this kind of contract to MClendon, McCullers, or Tuitt - then it would be terrible. But not for one of the 3 or 4 best young 3-4 ends in the entire league.

teegre
07-20-2015, 09:52 PM
Yeah, the inflation is getting ridiculous. The salary cap has gone up about 20% over the last 7 or 8 years since the Woodley contract, but the number of players making $10 million a year has easily doubled, if not tripled or quadrupled. The result being that it's not only the superstars who are making insane money, but also the players who are merely good. In other words, the cost for talent at the high end of the spectrum is quickly running away from what is sustainable. I wonder how long that will keep up, or whether it'll just accelerate the game of musical chairs that the cap relentlessly enforces.

I have no problem with football players making millions. I also don't have a problem with actors, comedians, and musicians making millions. These are people doing things (playing football, writing songs, telling jokes) that I simply could never do... but, that I enjoy immensely.

Secondly, the NFL has grown by the billions. Ergo, I have no problem with the salaries for the guys who we pay to watch (i.e. the players) going up by the millions.

steelreserve
07-20-2015, 11:52 PM
I have no problem with football players making millions. I also don't have a problem with actors, comedians, and musicians making millions. These are people doing things (playing football, writing songs, telling jokes) that I simply could never do... but, that I enjoy immensely.

Secondly, the NFL has grown by the billions. Ergo, I have no problem with the salaries for the guys who we pay to watch (i.e. the players) going up by the millions.


Don't mistake my attitude for being sour about how much football players make. They're entertainers; if they can bring in millions of dollars apiece with what they do, they deserve pay that reflects that. If Cam Heyward was paid $10,000 a year or $100 million a year, that's all fine by me as long as it helps us win games. This is strictly concern over whether we can afford to fit another big contract into our cap situation, which could prevent us from winning if it turns out we can't. I'm pretty sure we can deal with this one right now, but before long there are going to be something like 9 guys on our team lined up to make that much, and that I'm less sure about. No, the sky is not falling, but every one of these makes me swallow a little harder.

Chidi29
07-21-2015, 12:59 AM
Yeah, the inflation is getting ridiculous. The salary cap has gone up about 20% over the last 7 or 8 years since the Woodley contract, but the number of players making $10 million a year has easily doubled, if not tripled or quadrupled. The result being that it's not only the superstars who are making insane money, but also the players who are merely good. In other words, the cost for talent at the high end of the spectrum is quickly running away from what is sustainable. I wonder how long that will keep up, or whether it'll just accelerate the game of musical chairs that the cap relentlessly enforces.

To be fair/accurate, it's really gone up more like 30%. In 2007, it was 109 million. Now it's 142, just over 30%. So it shouldn't be a surprise to see contracts spike like that. It reflects the cap room teams have.

If you want to make that statement league-wide, fine, but Heyward does not fall in the "merely good" category.

steelreserve
07-21-2015, 02:19 AM
To be fair/accurate, it's really gone up more like 30%. In 2007, it was 109 million. Now it's 142, just over 30%. So it shouldn't be a surprise to see contracts spike like that. It reflects the cap room teams have.

If you want to make that statement league-wide, fine, but Heyward does not fall in the "merely good" category.


He's good. Very good, even. I would not, however, say he's a superstar yet. Not a second-tier player by any means, but a Tier 1a or 1b player.

To me, he falls perfectly into the cadre of players who, if salaries had increased in proportion with the cap, would be about a $7-8 million player, but now those contracts are $10 million to a man.

The real proven stars get that kind of money; they've always been paid in about the 10%-of-salary-cap range and that's not news. To me, extending that down a level is a new development over the past two or three years, along with $20M being the standard contract for any slightly above-average QB, and both are worrisome not only here, but in a leaguewide sense. Yeah, fine, maybe "this is the market," but the market is heading in a dangerous direction if you ask me.

fansince'76
07-21-2015, 05:24 AM
Love this so much. As we may all recall...when SU had a chance to talk with Cam during his rookie year, he stressed how he wanted to make a name for himself outside of the legacy of his dad.

Mission accomplished!

In case anyone's interested, here is the interview (http://www.steelersuniverse.com/forums/showthread.php/8478-Steelers-Universe-Exclusive-Interview-With-Cameron-Heyward-July-2-2011?p=174040&viewfull=1#post174040).

That was probably the one positive about the lockout back in '11 - LLT was able to get interviews with these guys as they had plenty of time on their hands.

teegre
07-21-2015, 11:14 AM
Don't mistake my attitude for being sour about how much football players make. They're entertainers; if they can bring in millions of dollars apiece with what they do, they deserve pay that reflects that. If Cam Heyward was paid $10,000 a year or $100 million a year, that's all fine by me as long as it helps us win games. This is strictly concern over whether we can afford to fit another big contract into our cap situation, which could prevent us from winning if it turns out we can't. I'm pretty sure we can deal with this one right now, but before long there are going to be something like 9 guys on our team lined up to make that much, and that I'm less sure about. No, the sky is not falling, but every one of these makes me swallow a little harder.

Ah, I get it now. Makes sense.

Let me try to assuage your fears:

1. Omar Khan is a cap genius. The Steelers have been able to keep Troy, Harrison, Ward, Farrior, etc. for years. In Khan I trust.

2. The cap is going to go up next year (when the need to re-sign DD & Beachum), as well as the year after that (when they need to re-sign Bell). Heyward might currently be about 8% of the total salary cap, but with each subsequent season, that percentage will decline.

3. Think about the AB contract. They got AB's deal done before he blew up. I foresee the same thing about to occur with Heyward. In fact, for the next five seasons, I think Heyward is going to be the second-best 3-4 DE in the league (behind only JJ Watt).

Chidi29
07-21-2015, 11:24 AM
He's good. Very good, even. I would not, however, say he's a superstar yet. Not a second-tier player by any means, but a Tier 1a or 1b player.

To me, he falls perfectly into the cadre of players who, if salaries had increased in proportion with the cap, would be about a $7-8 million player, but now those contracts are $10 million to a man.

The real proven stars get that kind of money; they've always been paid in about the 10%-of-salary-cap range and that's not news. To me, extending that down a level is a new development over the past two or three years, along with $20M being the standard contract for any slightly above-average QB, and both are worrisome not only here, but in a leaguewide sense. Yeah, fine, maybe "this is the market," but the market is heading in a dangerous direction if you ask me.

I think that point is debatable but even if we still classify Heyward as "very good," you're paying knowing he's got a great chance of becoming a superstar. That's foresight and if anything, a heady move by the Steelers.

Mojouw
07-21-2015, 11:47 AM
Ah, I get it now. Makes sense.

Let me try to assuage your fears:

1. Omar Khan is a cap genius. The Steelers have been able to keep Troy, Harrison, Ward, Farrior, etc. for years. In Khan I trust.

2. The cap is going to go up next year (when the need to re-sign DD & Beachum), as well as the year after that (when they need to re-sign Bell). Heyward might currently be about 8% of the total salary cap, but with each subsequent season, that percentage will decline.

3. Think about the AB contract. They got AB's deal done before he blew up. I foresee the same thing about to occur with Heyward. In fact, for the next five seasons, I think Heyward is going to be the second-best 3-4 DE in the league (behind only JJ Watt).

Ah! I see you that you are unaware of Steelers message board orthodoxy. It goes along theses lines:

1. The Steelers always mismanage the cap. Omar Khan caves to player demands and simply pays what they want. This screws up the cap and the ability to add to the roster year after year.

2. All players should be signed to the minimum contract the Steelers can strong-arm them in to taking. Strangely enough NFL teams apparently hold all the leverage in negotiations. Holdouts are not a thing apparently. Or no player that suits up for the black and gold would ever dare hold out on the Steelers - at least no "real" Steelers. I believe this is the "magic jersey" argument. All players that threaten holdouts should be cut - unless they are super good (known as the Hines Ward caveat).

3. Signing players to contracts based on future performance is a tool of the salary cap devil. Side note - I saw the salary cap devil once. He looks like the robot devil from Futurama - it was weird. Anyway, back to the main point, players should only be paid on present performance and AT BEST be forced to sign heavily incentive laden deals if it is thought that they may outperform some minimal contract figure. Again, holdouts are not a thing (see above). This is known as the "Lamar Woodley is fat"; "Crotez Allen stinks"; and "Marcus Gilbert is a double agent whose sole purpose is to destroy the ligaments of all 4 other starting offensive lineman" clause.

4. Math is hard. So is Googling for contract information on comparable players. Plus those are precedents set by other NFL teams. Clearly, such a model franchise as the Steelers should be blazing new trails in "capology" and not simply blindly following the "sheeple" that lead other NFL teams.

5. The Rooneys are cheap.

steelreserve
07-21-2015, 03:04 PM
Ah! I see you that you are unaware of Steelers message board orthodoxy. It goes along theses lines:

1. The Steelers always mismanage the cap. Omar Khan caves to player demands and simply pays what they want. This screws up the cap and the ability to add to the roster year after year.

2. All players should be signed to the minimum contract the Steelers can strong-arm them in to taking. Strangely enough NFL teams apparently hold all the leverage in negotiations. Holdouts are not a thing apparently. Or no player that suits up for the black and gold would ever dare hold out on the Steelers - at least no "real" Steelers. I believe this is the "magic jersey" argument. All players that threaten holdouts should be cut - unless they are super good (known as the Hines Ward caveat).

3. Signing players to contracts based on future performance is a tool of the salary cap devil. Side note - I saw the salary cap devil once. He looks like the robot devil from Futurama - it was weird. Anyway, back to the main point, players should only be paid on present performance and AT BEST be forced to sign heavily incentive laden deals if it is thought that they may outperform some minimal contract figure. Again, holdouts are not a thing (see above). This is known as the "Lamar Woodley is fat"; "Crotez Allen stinks"; and "Marcus Gilbert is a double agent whose sole purpose is to destroy the ligaments of all 4 other starting offensive lineman" clause.

4. Math is hard. So is Googling for contract information on comparable players. Plus those are precedents set by other NFL teams. Clearly, such a model franchise as the Steelers should be blazing new trails in "capology" and not simply blindly following the "sheeple" that lead other NFL teams.

5. The Rooneys are cheap.


Nailed it.

I have no point.

The front office always knows best and should never be questioned.

There's no point in even discussing it; might as well shut down the message board.

Mojouw
07-21-2015, 03:33 PM
Nailed it.

I have no point.

The front office always knows best and should never be questioned.

There's no point in even discussing it; might as well shut down the message board.

First of all it was joke - so maybe calm down a bit.

Second, what exactly was your point in all this? You seemed to be arguing that Heyward was not worth tier 1 money. When it was pointed out w/ supporting evidence by others (not just myself) that Heyward was indeed first tier at his position AND he is getting paid less than players in the same tier - you responded with a reformulated argument about % of the cap/contract. When it was pointed out that the rise in the cap in the last 7 years more than accounts for that - you had no response.

Look, I personally enjoy your postings here and think you have good stuff to say. But you seem (broad brush here) to never like a contract extension, rework, resigning, or what have you. Put it this way, what would you have paid Heyward? Now find any other NFL player with a comparable level of production and youth that is getting paid that number. If you can't do it, then, yeah, I'm gonna go with the front office.

All that being said, if in 18 months the Steelers can't resign/extend Bell, Brown (he isn't going to let this contract stuff rest), Beachum, DeCastro, and the reason is solely(or @least largely) Heyward's cap figure - - then I will totally admit you were right and get off my soapbox on the issue.

steelreserve
07-21-2015, 04:33 PM
What I think is that there is a dangerous trend leaguewide of paying almost-stars the money that used to be reserved for star players, and I don't think that's sustainable. Maybe we were stuck paying Heyward $10M a year and there was no way around it, and maybe that's what the market really was, but it's still dangerous. Forget the one contract for a minute. The overall trend is what's worrisome.

The rise in the cap certainly does not account for it. I said it rose around 20%, it actually was more like 30% - meantime, the number and skill level of the players getting these contracts increased more as if the salary cap went up 50% or 100%. Aaron Smith, one of the best 3-4 DEs of all time, made $5 million at the peak of his third contract in 2010; that was also the peak of what Keisel earned around the same time. The salary cap has gone up 16% since then; it has not doubled. Look, Heyward's a good player and probably a great guy, but one thing he is not is an Aaron Smith-caliber player, not at this point in his career. The market is running away from what's sustainable. Again, maybe we paid market price and that was what we had to do. That is a completely separate argument from this.

I don't consider Omar Khan a salary cap genius. He is a master of kicking the can down the road. I could do that. The reason why I have criticized seemingly every major re-signing in the past couple of years is because he spent several seasons preparing a nice footlong shit sandwich, we just finally got done eating it, and already people have forgotten all about that even though we're still kind of burping it up - and Khan has already grabbed another hoagie roll and started reaching back into the toilet for more. Giving backloaded deals, restructuring the big contracts already on the books, and hoping for a big increase in the cap is exactly how we got into trouble before. The cap will go up, but it won't always go up as much as you hope, and constantly counting on it to bail you out is how you end up $20 million over the cap.

Maybe his plan is to keep barely stringing things along financially until Ben retires and then let the whole thing go, which I guess might work. I sure hope that's the plan.

Mojouw
07-21-2015, 04:50 PM
What I think is that there is a dangerous trend leaguewide of paying almost-stars the money that used to be reserved for star players, and I don't think that's sustainable. Maybe we were stuck paying Heyward $10M a year and there was no way around it, and maybe that's what the market really was, but it's still dangerous. Forget the one contract for a minute. The overall trend is what's worrisome.

The rise in the cap certainly does not account for it. I said it rose around 20%, it actually was more like 30% - meantime, the number and skill level of the players getting these contracts increased more as if the salary cap went up 50% or 100%. Aaron Smith, one of the best 3-4 DEs of all time, made $5 million at the peak of his third contract in 2010; that was also the peak of what Keisel earned around the same time. The salary cap has gone up 16% since then; it has not doubled. Look, Heyward's a good player and probably a great guy, but one thing he is not is an Aaron Smith-caliber player, not at this point in his career. The market is running away from what's sustainable. Again, maybe we paid market price and that was what we had to do. That is a completely separate argument from this.

I don't consider Omar Khan a salary cap genius. He is a master of kicking the can down the road. I could do that. The reason why I have criticized seemingly every major re-signing in the past couple of years is because he spent several seasons preparing a nice footlong shit sandwich, we just finally got done eating it, and already people have forgotten all about that even though we're still kind of burping it up - and Khan has already grabbed another hoagie roll and started reaching back into the toilet for more. Giving backloaded deals, restructuring the big contracts already on the books, and hoping for a big increase in the cap is exactly how we got into trouble before. The cap will go up, but it won't always go up as much as you hope, and constantly counting on it to bail you out is how you end up $20 million over the cap.

Maybe his plan is to keep barely stringing things along financially until Ben retires and then let the whole thing go, which I guess might work. I sure hope that's the plan.

I can kind of see where you are coming from, but none of that really applies. Take a look at what 3-5 million a year buys you now a days at DE (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/contracts/defensive-end/). My opinion on all of those guys is "nope". My central point is that a player with Heyward's combination of age and production costs (typically) north of $10 million per year. End of story. You want that production out of your 3-4 end spot? You have two options pay for it (Heyward) or hope you drafted it and ride the low cost for 3 years or so (Tuitt).

As to the larger cap issues, the Steelers got bit by a perfect storm last time. They paid premium $$$ to Harrison, Woodley, Polamalu, Hampton, Roethlisberger, Ward, Taylor, and Timmons/Farrior all at the same time. That's what happens when you have a LOADED team, miss on a few draft picks, and keep the band together for one last ride (how many out of that group got 3rd contracts?). EVEN w/ all that, it would still have worked if the CBA negotiations hadn't broken down and as a result the cap flattened out for 2-3 years.

So the Steelers had to eat a bit of shit sandwich. Despite that tasty treat, the negative impact was/has been shockingly minimal. Let's count the "losses" to the cap troubles:

1. Keenan Lewis
2. A season or so of Larry Foote
3. A season of James Harrison
4. Say 3 lower end FA's

That's it. I think that Omar Khan deserves a damn medal. He makes ZERO football decisions. Colbert et al come to him and say "Here is the list. All these guys have got to fit under the cap. Make it happen." Year after year he does, and the negative impacts have been fairly minimal.

hawaiiansteeler
07-21-2015, 06:11 PM
Let's count the "losses" to the cap troubles:

1. Keenan Lewis


I don't think it was so much losing Keenan Lewis because of cap troubles as much as it was Lewis just wanting to play for his "hometown" New Orleans Saints...

polamalubeast
07-21-2015, 06:58 PM
I don't think it was so much losing Keenan Lewis because of cap troubles as much as it was Lewis just wanting to play for his "hometown" New Orleans Saints...

Maybe, but at the same time, the steelers had not offer a contract to Lewis

The Steelers also lost Wallace because the Steelers had no cap space but fortunately it turned out well for us, since Wallace is a disappointment since 2012

steelreserve
07-21-2015, 09:01 PM
I can kind of see where you are coming from, but none of that really applies. Take a look at what 3-5 million a year buys you now a days at DE (http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/contracts/defensive-end/). My opinion on all of those guys is "nope". My central point is that a player with Heyward's combination of age and production costs (typically) north of $10 million per year. End of story. You want that production out of your 3-4 end spot? You have two options pay for it (Heyward) or hope you drafted it and ride the low cost for 3 years or so (Tuitt).

As to the larger cap issues, the Steelers got bit by a perfect storm last time. They paid premium $$$ to Harrison, Woodley, Polamalu, Hampton, Roethlisberger, Ward, Taylor, and Timmons/Farrior all at the same time. That's what happens when you have a LOADED team, miss on a few draft picks, and keep the band together for one last ride (how many out of that group got 3rd contracts?). EVEN w/ all that, it would still have worked if the CBA negotiations hadn't broken down and as a result the cap flattened out for 2-3 years.

So the Steelers had to eat a bit of shit sandwich. Despite that tasty treat, the negative impact was/has been shockingly minimal. Let's count the "losses" to the cap troubles:

1. Keenan Lewis
2. A season or so of Larry Foote
3. A season of James Harrison
4. Say 3 lower end FA's

That's it. I think that Omar Khan deserves a damn medal. He makes ZERO football decisions. Colbert et al come to him and say "Here is the list. All these guys have got to fit under the cap. Make it happen." Year after year he does, and the negative impacts have been fairly minimal.


Well. Shit. Maybe I do worry too much about the cap for my own good; it's entirely possible.

It's true that we didn't suffer any huge losses in free agency; on the other hand, part of that was because we went two whole draft classes without having anyone worth re-signing, so the joke was kind of on us.

The one thing not really accounted for is that our cap troubles have basically precluded us from making any outside signings of any significance for several years. I'm not advocating any of the splashy break-the-bank signings, but perhaps we could've gotten an acceptable cornerback or nose tackle somewhere in that stretch.

I don't know. What's for certain is that that span was not pleasant, and if we can avoid repeating it, I'd like to.

You kind of feel bad for Harrison - of all the guys on the team making $9M or $10M, he was the one who seriously earned it that year, and then through no fault of his own, he didn't get it because he was the only one with a big contract that we hadn't restructured to death and rendered un-cuttable. I still don't think he's made back even half of what he was supposed to earn, and that's after playing three more years counting this one.

Mojouw
07-22-2015, 09:32 AM
Well. Shit. Maybe I do worry too much about the cap for my own good; it's entirely possible.

It's true that we didn't suffer any huge losses in free agency; on the other hand, part of that was because we went two whole draft classes without having anyone worth re-signing, so the joke was kind of on us.

The one thing not really accounted for is that our cap troubles have basically precluded us from making any outside signings of any significance for several years. I'm not advocating any of the splashy break-the-bank signings, but perhaps we could've gotten an acceptable cornerback or nose tackle somewhere in that stretch.

I don't know. What's for certain is that that span was not pleasant, and if we can avoid repeating it, I'd like to.

You kind of feel bad for Harrison - of all the guys on the team making $9M or $10M, he was the one who seriously earned it that year, and then through no fault of his own, he didn't get it because he was the only one with a big contract that we hadn't restructured to death and rendered un-cuttable. I still don't think he's made back even half of what he was supposed to earn, and that's after playing three more years counting this one.

I don't know what to think about the cap - sometimes it seems to not really matter, other times it seems to. All I know is that the Steelers never screwed the pooch so bad that they had to justify something along the lines of trading Jimmy Graham like the Saints just had to. I guess the closest (and this should have been in my list above) was shipping Santonio out of town. That was as much because they were never going to pay him as it was for smoking weed.

I agree that the tumbleweeds that were all the team had to show for two draft classes was a major problem. Basically no one from two classes gets a second contract? OUCH!

Maybe Harrison could beat Cam Thomas and take his couple of million in back-pay from that?

polamalubeast
07-23-2015, 10:15 AM
http://www.steelersdepot.com/2015/07/cameron-heyward-contract-details/

steelreserve
07-23-2015, 12:15 PM
http://www.steelersdepot.com/2015/07/cameron-heyward-contract-details/


So really what it works out to is:

2015: $6,400,000
2016: restructure
2017: restructure
2018: restructure
2019: aw shit
2020: ($22M dead money)

I guess 5 years is a pretty reasonable expectation for how long Ben will play, so in that event it works out.

TD's & Beer
07-24-2015, 10:28 AM
So really what it works out to is:

2015: $6,400,000
2016: restructure
2017: restructure
2018: restructure
2019: aw shit
2020: ($22M dead money)

nah - he'll make it to year 3 of his contract, then we'll restructure



YEAR
BASE SALARY
SIGNING BONUS
ROSTER BONUS
CAP CHARGE


2015
$1,000,000.00
$2,400,000.00
$3,000,000.00
$6,400,000.00


2016
$3,000,000.00
$2,400,000.00
$5,000,000.00
$10,400,000.00


2017
$5,000,000.00
$2,400,000.00
$3,000,000.00
$10,400,000.00


2018
$9,000,000.00
$2,400,000.00
$-
$11,400,000.00


2019
$8,750,000.00
$2,400,000.00
$-
$11,150,000.00


2020
$9,500,000.00
$-
$-
$9,500,000.00




Totals
$36,250,000.00
$12,000,000.00
$11,000,000.00
$59,250,000.00

steelreserve
07-24-2015, 12:03 PM
Do you see the $5 million roster bonus? It'll be restructured next year without a doubt.

We'll need the space to sign Decastro or Bell, plus Beachum if we don't get a deal done in the next couple months. Then watch - Jarvis Jones has a season just good enough that we're not sure whether he's worth a long-term deal, and he's holding out for a $10M contract because he thinks he'll do even better in 2016, so he gets the tranny tag. Then we probably decide to keep either Adams or Foster around (I don't think they'll get rid of both at once), and try to extend S. Thomas if he does well.

Figure the cap will go up as much as $10 million like it did this year, and we'll get $7M from the Woodley dead money expiring plus $4.5M from Polamalu's dead money; that's $21 million in free space, with $35-$40 million a year in contracts to fit under it, which we can probably cut to half of that amount by backloading. So it fits, barely.

But wait - since we had $21 million in cap space, Brown thinks we have plenty of extra money to take care of him and threatens to hold out again if we don't give him a raise. Figure $4M a year for that. It gets better - his cap number goes up $3M next year anyway, so we've got to account for an extra $7M, which of course will be done by backloading.

But wait again - Mike Mitchell's cap number goes up by $4 million next year, so we either restructure his deal and make him uncuttable, or find the money somewhere else. Gilbert's cap number goes up $3.25 million, so we restructure him or someone else. Pouncey's deal goes up by $6 million, so we restructure him AND probably someone else as well to absorb that hit. For those keeping track at home, that's $16 million in new cap charges - another Woodley contract and a half - for which we get nothing in return. It is the same as dead money from a restructure, only in this case it's because of the original structure. The only way to get out of it? Restructuring.

All of this put together means there is no doubt - NONE - that we restructure Heyward's contract next year, or else let an important player walk.

See what I meant about all the restructures and backloading just meaning we kick the can down the road? The cap's going up by more than it used to, but it's going up $10M a year and we're adding $20M or $30M worth of new contracts. We haven't actually "made it" through the salary cap mess at all; we just got a couple-year breather and now the deals we signed in that space are coming right back at us.

I figure we can probably keep the cap situation teetering precariously for about 4 or 5 more years, assuming we sign no new free agents. But when Ben retires - and you know his contract will have been restructured multiple times, because it's the granddaddy of them all - expect it to all go to shit very quickly. We'll likely be facing a situation like the 49ers of the late '90s, which was basically impossible to navigate cleanly. It gives us the best title chance in our remaining window, but boy is there going to be a mess to clean up.

polamalubeast
07-24-2015, 12:27 PM
We must stop to think about the worst case scenario

No chance that Jarvis Jones will have 10 million per year

steelreserve
07-24-2015, 01:01 PM
We must stop to think about the worst case scenario

No chance that Jarvis Jones will have 10 million per year


There was no chance Worilds was going to get that much either.

Even ignoring Jones completely, just from the amount that our existing contracts increase, we're looking at having $5M in cap space and three important players to re-sign, plus give a sizable raise to Brown.

And that's if the cap goes up by the same amount as last year, which is by no means a guarantee. The new TV deal already kicked in. That could be it, and then back to a couple million a year like before. For our sake, I sure hope not. It could be a $15 million increase for all we know. How sure are you?

Remember, all I'm trying to say is that restructuring contracts again is a virtual certainty. Not that our entire cap situation is collapsing and we're all going to die. Like I said, they can keep it up for a few more years this way. Then we're in a world of hurt.

polamalubeast
07-24-2015, 01:35 PM
Personally, I stopped to worry about the salary cap in the last few years...I take it one year at a time and I trust that the front officice will be able to keep the best players on the team.(Bell,Decastro,Brown,etc)

The teams with the most cap space are often the browns, the buccaneers, jaguars, etc and they are all bad teams in the past several years.So, sometimes the cap space does not mean much

TD's & Beer
07-24-2015, 02:04 PM
Do you see the $5 million roster bonus? It'll be restructured next year without a doubt.

I was looking the jump in base pay from $5M to $9M.

Chidi29
07-24-2015, 02:43 PM
Steelers have 8 million in cap space, for the record.

- - - Updated - - -

Steelers have 8 million in cap space, for the record.

Once Woodley and Troy come off the books at the start of next year, they'll have over 20.5 free in that alone. And whatever the increase of the salary cap is.

Mojouw
07-24-2015, 03:05 PM
Do you see the $5 million roster bonus? It'll be restructured next year without a doubt.

We'll need the space to sign Decastro or Bell, plus Beachum if we don't get a deal done in the next couple months. Then watch - Jarvis Jones has a season just good enough that we're not sure whether he's worth a long-term deal, and he's holding out for a $10M contract because he thinks he'll do even better in 2016, so he gets the tranny tag. Then we probably decide to keep either Adams or Foster around (I don't think they'll get rid of both at once), and try to extend S. Thomas if he does well.

Figure the cap will go up as much as $10 million like it did this year, and we'll get $7M from the Woodley dead money expiring plus $4.5M from Polamalu's dead money; that's $21 million in free space, with $35-$40 million a year in contracts to fit under it, which we can probably cut to half of that amount by backloading. So it fits, barely.

But wait - since we had $21 million in cap space, Brown thinks we have plenty of extra money to take care of him and threatens to hold out again if we don't give him a raise. Figure $4M a year for that. It gets better - his cap number goes up $3M next year anyway, so we've got to account for an extra $7M, which of course will be done by backloading.

But wait again - Mike Mitchell's cap number goes up by $4 million next year, so we either restructure his deal and make him uncuttable, or find the money somewhere else. Gilbert's cap number goes up $3.25 million, so we restructure him or someone else. Pouncey's deal goes up by $6 million, so we restructure him AND probably someone else as well to absorb that hit. For those keeping track at home, that's $16 million in new cap charges - another Woodley contract and a half - for which we get nothing in return. It is the same as dead money from a restructure, only in this case it's because of the original structure. The only way to get out of it? Restructuring.

All of this put together means there is no doubt - NONE - that we restructure Heyward's contract next year, or else let an important player walk.

See what I meant about all the restructures and backloading just meaning we kick the can down the road? The cap's going up by more than it used to, but it's going up $10M a year and we're adding $20M or $30M worth of new contracts. We haven't actually "made it" through the salary cap mess at all; we just got a couple-year breather and now the deals we signed in that space are coming right back at us.

I figure we can probably keep the cap situation teetering precariously for about 4 or 5 more years, assuming we sign no new free agents. But when Ben retires - and you know his contract will have been restructured multiple times, because it's the granddaddy of them all - expect it to all go to shit very quickly. We'll likely be facing a situation like the 49ers of the late '90s, which was basically impossible to navigate cleanly. It gives us the best title chance in our remaining window, but boy is there going to be a mess to clean up.

Okay., I will take the bait. The entire problem is solved by signing Decastro, Timmons, Brown, and Beachum to multi-year extensions Remember, backloading is not a bad thing if you don't do it with guaranteed money. The restructure is a problem because you have to actually pay that money. But backloading a contract is just a way to ego boost players. "You're totally the highest paid guy at your position!". They just don't highlight the fact that 50+% of the money is non guaranteed and in the last two years of the deal where the players is more expensive to keep on the roster than it is to cut them.

Unless Jarvis Jones is revealed to be the second coming, I don't see how he gets even 6 million per. Let alone twice that.

I thought it was the Woodley restructure and the Polamalu deal that were going to kill the cap. Now it is the Heyward deal. What if it never, you know, actually happens? Do we still have to talk about it all the time?

We should be focus on the shit deals this team does make, not the imaginary ones it doesn't. Such as - How was it a good idea to sign a back-up RB that offers no reason to take your main RB off the field? Blount was a stupid signing from a football standpoint and an even dumber one from a chemistry standpoint. In contrast, DeAngelo Williams actually makes sense. He is a vet, so he won't mind not being "the guy". His skillset actually means you don't have to change the entire offensive scheme when he comes on the field.

Or what about paying Mike Mitchell a bunch of money after he had one good season playing behind one of the best front sevens in the NFL. Were we all supposed to ignore his prior seasons where he just barely average? Wouldn't the team be in a better cap position and football situation if Shamarko Thomas had simply taken his lumps and played last season? I don't care about the position issue - wouldn't have mattered anyways.

Cortez Allen. Keenan Lewis. There, that should start a pretty solid argument.

The next important player the Steelers cut due to the cap will be the first.

steelreserve
07-24-2015, 03:25 PM
Steelers have 8 million in cap space, for the record.

Once Woodley and Troy come off the books at the start of next year, they'll have over 20.5 free in that alone. And whatever the increase of the salary cap is.


That'll be gone in the blink of an eye. $16M in cap increases for the four players I mentioned. I hadn't even bothered looking at Ben, but it turns out that's another $6.5 million. We claw back about $1.5-$2 million from players whose cap hit goes slightly down. Then Moats' cap number goes up by $1.7M, basically canceling that out. So our starting point is whatever the cap increase is, minus $2 million.

Then we've got other decisions on some of our minor free agents - for instance, do we want to keep Spence, Blake, Vince Williams, or Will Johnson around? If so, they'll cost us more than they do now. Do we want to sign Wheaton to a longer deal? Ditto for that. So assuming we act roughly average on that, the amount of space we're looking at in 2016 is the cap increase minus $3-4 million.

If the cap goes up by $10M again, we've got $6-7 million to get contract extensions done for one star player (DeCastro), one superstar (Bell), a decent left tackle (Beachum), and whatever pay increase Brown is going to want. Call it $8M, $9M, $7M, and $4M if we get typical deals; that's another $28M a year just to keep our own guys.

If the cap goes up by $15 million instead of $10 million, it doesn't really matter much in light of that. The only way we'll ever be able to keep our own guys is still by backloading AND restructuring. Make no mistake about it.

polamalubeast
07-24-2015, 03:35 PM
For the Total (w / Top 51)the steelers are at 135 million

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/pittsburgh-steelers/cap/

For next year, they are at 145 million

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/pittsburgh-steelers/cap/2016/

The Steelers will only need (if necessary) to do a little restructuring or some cut to be in good shape

Mojouw
07-24-2015, 03:52 PM
For the Total (w / Top 51)the steelers are at 135 million

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/pittsburgh-steelers/cap/

For next year, they are at 145 million

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/pittsburgh-steelers/cap/2016/

The Steelers will only need (if necessary) to do a little restructuring or some cut to be in good shape

Hey, now. Facts and figures have no place in this debate. Remember, the Steelers are like a majestic comet - streaking across the sky to some newfangled salary cap hell of their own making.

It's not like every other NFL team does the same stuff or anything...

steelreserve
07-24-2015, 04:05 PM
For the Total (w / Top 51)the steelers are at 135 million

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/pittsburgh-steelers/cap/

For next year, they are at 145 million

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/pittsburgh-steelers/cap/2016/

The Steelers will only need (if necessary) to do a little restructuring or some cut to be in good shape


That 2016 list is assuming a lot of unlikely things. Like we let go of all our 2015 free agents and don't replace them, that we don't try to extend anyone under contract for 2016 until they become free agents after the end of the 2016 season, etc. The real number we have to deal with is going to be a lot more than that.

As I said, the sky is not falling and we won't lose anyone important right away.

I don't think the argument that "we didn't lose anyone important last time with all the restructures, so we won't this time" is anywhere near correct, though. We didn't lose anyone important because we were "lucky" (if you can call it that) that we had no star players to sign when the cap situation was at its worst. If we did, we wouldn't have been able to keep them, simple as that. I guess not having star players in the first place is more acceptable to some people than having them and letting them get away, but the end result is the same in either case and it was reflected on the field.

We may not run into real problems from this until, say, 2018, just keep an eye out.

Mojouw
07-24-2015, 04:22 PM
Here's the thing. I'm tired of hearing that in the period between 2011 and 2015 he "bloodletting" and "salary cap driven" breakdown of the Steelers roster occurred. It is in almost all media stories about the Steelers and is even found in Steelers focused news/analysis outlets that should know far better. The roster turnover was because players got old, their bodies started breaking down, or they started not being good at football anymore. Sometimes it was a combination of those things.

Aaron Smith's body simply fell apart - multiple seasons. He was let go for that reason, not his cap #.
Casey Hampton's body also started to break down. At the end he simply wasn't good enough anymore. His cap # had no impact on the film he was putting down.
James Farrior could no longer stay with backs and TEs in coverage. He wasn't really explosive as an interior blitzer.
Ike Taylor can't cover basically anyone anymore.
Polamalu was simply broken and ineffective.
Ward - ditto
Foote was broken and ineffective.
Kiesel was broken and ineffective.

Now, I certainly realize that maybe if these guys all took the vet minimums or something they would have knocked around another year or so - but the bottom line it wasn't like these guys were still effective and the Steelers were like, well, we're out of money, so see ya! I mean I guess that happened with Harrison and Plaxico Burress and likely with Santonio Holmes.

But this period of "salary cap hell" and roster purgatory that the franchise is just now recovering from, didn't really happen on the field. I guess on a balance sheet maybe it did. What actually happened is that a championship core got old and for 2-3 draft classes, the team drafted crappy players.

But that is apparently too complex of a story for the media folks and it is easier to say that they got rid of a bunch of players and got younger because of the cap, rather than because of trying to replenish talent.

polamalubeast
07-24-2015, 04:29 PM
That 2016 list is assuming a lot of unlikely things. Like we let go of all our 2015 free agents and don't replace them, that we don't try to extend anyone under contract for 2016 until they become free agents after the end of the 2016 season, etc. The real number we have to deal with is going to be a lot more than that.

As I said, the sky is not falling and we won't lose anyone important right away.

I don't think the argument that "we didn't lose anyone important last time with all the restructures, so we won't this time" is anywhere near correct, though. We didn't lose anyone important because we were "lucky" (if you can call it that) that we had no star players to sign when the cap situation was at its worst. If we did, we wouldn't have been able to keep them, simple as that. I guess not having star players in the first place is more acceptable to some people than having them and letting them get away, but the end result is the same in either case and it was reflected on the field.

We may not run into real problems from this until, say, 2018, just keep an eye out.

Why worried about 2018 ????

Lots of thing can happen during 3-4 years,so you are wasting your time to be worried about 2018!

86WARD
07-24-2015, 04:58 PM
Yeah...the cap could drop...who knows...

polamalubeast
07-24-2015, 04:59 PM
Yeah...the cap could drop...who knows...

Very unlikely and almost every teams would be in trouble if it happens.

Craic
07-24-2015, 06:07 PM
Here's the thing. I'm tired of hearing that in the period between 2011 and 2015 he "bloodletting" and "salary cap driven" breakdown of the Steelers roster occurred. It is in almost all media stories about the Steelers and is even found in Steelers focused news/analysis outlets that should know far better. The roster turnover was because players got old, their bodies started breaking down, or they started not being good at football anymore. Sometimes it was a combination of those things.

Aaron Smith's body simply fell apart - multiple seasons. He was let go for that reason, not his cap #.
Casey Hampton's body also started to break down. At the end he simply wasn't good enough anymore. His cap # had no impact on the film he was putting down.
James Farrior could no longer stay with backs and TEs in coverage. He wasn't really explosive as an interior blitzer.
Ike Taylor can't cover basically anyone anymore.
Polamalu was simply broken and ineffective.
Ward - ditto
Foote was broken and ineffective.
Kiesel was broken and ineffective.

Now, I certainly realize that maybe if these guys all took the vet minimums or something they would have knocked around another year or so - but the bottom line it wasn't like these guys were still effective and the Steelers were like, well, we're out of money, so see ya! I mean I guess that happened with Harrison and Plaxico Burress and likely with Santonio Holmes.

But this period of "salary cap hell" and roster purgatory that the franchise is just now recovering from, didn't really happen on the field. I guess on a balance sheet maybe it did. What actually happened is that a championship core got old and for 2-3 draft classes, the team drafted crappy players.

But that is apparently too complex of a story for the media folks and it is easier to say that they got rid of a bunch of players and got younger because of the cap, rather than because of trying to replenish talent.

I'd say you're right, and wrong.

Yes, we did enter into a period of salary-cap purgatory. Yes, we made some hard decisions based on it, but it was all designed and planned around the aging core of the Steelers. Almost every player you listed up there was going to be a target of being cut for cap reasons. The Steelers gambled their cap against (1) a chance to go to the SB again, and (2) aging players retiring/losing skills, giving us more cap room. They both happened.

86WARD
07-24-2015, 06:50 PM
Very unlikely and almost every teams would be in trouble if it happens.

But possible...lol.

Craic
07-24-2015, 06:57 PM
That 2016 list is assuming a lot of unlikely things. Like we let go of all our 2015 free agents and don't replace them, that we don't try to extend anyone under contract for 2016 until they become free agents after the end of the 2016 season, etc. The real number we have to deal with is going to be a lot more than that.

As I said, the sky is not falling and we won't lose anyone important right away.

I don't think the argument that "we didn't lose anyone important last time with all the restructures, so we won't this time" is anywhere near correct, though. We didn't lose anyone important because we were "lucky" (if you can call it that) that we had no star players to sign when the cap situation was at its worst. If we did, we wouldn't have been able to keep them, simple as that. I guess not having star players in the first place is more acceptable to some people than having them and letting them get away, but the end result is the same in either case and it was reflected on the field.

We may not run into real problems from this until, say, 2018, just keep an eye out.

Well, Timmons has a year left on his contract after this season. He'll be a 11.8 million dollar cap hit, 3 mill unavoidable. His base is 8.7 mill. Resign him with a smaller base and stretch the signing bonus, we may see 3 mill relief from him alone. Heath Miller is a 5.6 mill. hit (1.6 mill dead money). At age 32, he'll either sign a smaller deal, or will have to face life after football after 2016 (he'll be 34), which lowers his cap number either way. We may get upwards of 5 million in cap relief after dealing with them.

As for Free agents,

McLendon we might want back. His cap number will probably be around 3 Mill.
Cam Thomas we all hope is gone.
Ramon Foster we want back, his cap number, assuming a 10 percent increase, will probably be around 2.4 mill
Decastro will ahve a year left on his contract, and has a 8Mill cap hit. That'll get extended. I'd be willing to bet we get 2 to 4 mill in relief.
Jarvis Joes is in the same boat, but only a 2.7 Mill hit. If he doesn't produce this year, and is looking for a contract, it'll reduce his cap him prob. by half.
Foster and Gradowki. Figure 4.5 mill hit for the two fo them.
Bell will get resigned, but no cap help there. Wheaton will get resigned, but no cap help there. DeAngelo Williams might get resigned, we might see a small cap help there. That leavesw Gay, Beachum, Johns and Golden. Total, about 7 mill.

As of right now, the 2016 season has no dead money added to it. That means according to all the signed contracts, right now we sit at 5 million under the cap. When you add in all I have above (and not counting Jones either way), we come in 3.9 Mill over the cap.

To, to @polamalubeast's numbers, the "little" restructing is going to be about 4 mil worth of restructuring. If Miller decides to retire, or the Steelers get the Bettis Special 1.5 mill or whatever it is from him, that almost takes care of it alone.

Mojouw
07-24-2015, 06:58 PM
I'd say you're right, and wrong.

Yes, we did enter into a period of salary-cap purgatory. Yes, we made some hard decisions based on it, but it was all designed and planned around the aging core of the Steelers. Almost every player you listed up there was going to be a target of being cut for cap reasons. The Steelers gambled their cap against (1) a chance to go to the SB again, and (2) aging players retiring/losing skills, giving us more cap room. They both happened.

What were the hard decisions? Who were the players that were let go too early? Who were the critical and realistic FA's that went unsigned (Revis was never coming to Pittsburgh)? About the only "difficult" thing was a # of contract restructures, that are now almost all off the books. Or at least the big ones.

I'm honestly asking, because looking at it, I think the whole thing was a media driven story and had very little to do with what was actually happening on the football field. Pittsburgh has recently had a few sub-par seasons because they were bad at keeping enough young talent in the pipeline (drafting) not because the cap forced them to decimate the roster.

But one story is hard to demonstrate (facts, research, etc) and one easily fits in a 140 character twitter. Wonder which one became the narrative?

teegre
07-25-2015, 09:22 PM
Ah! I see you that you are unaware of Steelers message board orthodoxy. It goes along theses lines:

1. The Steelers always mismanage the cap. Omar Khan caves to player demands and simply pays what they want. This screws up the cap and the ability to add to the roster year after year.

2. All players should be signed to the minimum contract the Steelers can strong-arm them in to taking. Strangely enough NFL teams apparently hold all the leverage in negotiations. Holdouts are not a thing apparently. Or no player that suits up for the black and gold would ever dare hold out on the Steelers - at least no "real" Steelers. I believe this is the "magic jersey" argument. All players that threaten holdouts should be cut - unless they are super good (known as the Hines Ward caveat).

3. Signing players to contracts based on future performance is a tool of the salary cap devil. Side note - I saw the salary cap devil once. He looks like the robot devil from Futurama - it was weird. Anyway, back to the main point, players should only be paid on present performance and AT BEST be forced to sign heavily incentive laden deals if it is thought that they may outperform some minimal contract figure. Again, holdouts are not a thing (see above). This is known as the "Lamar Woodley is fat"; "Crotez Allen stinks"; and "Marcus Gilbert is a double agent whose sole purpose is to destroy the ligaments of all 4 other starting offensive lineman" clause.

4. Math is hard. So is Googling for contract information on comparable players. Plus those are precedents set by other NFL teams. Clearly, such a model franchise as the Steelers should be blazing new trails in "capology" and not simply blindly following the "sheeple" that lead other NFL teams.

5. The Rooneys are cheap.

LOL

Alas, that is so true. I have a name that I call those people who think like that: "Mom" and "Dad". :wink02:

teegre
07-25-2015, 09:47 PM
Maybe I do worry too much about the cap for my own good.

I think that this is it. Relax, man.

86WARD
07-25-2015, 09:52 PM
https://flavorwire.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/frankie.jpg

teegre
07-25-2015, 09:53 PM
https://flavorwire.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/frankie.jpg

:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:

Mojouw
07-27-2015, 08:01 PM
In danger of beating this into the ground, but if you want to read about how to truly mismanage the cap and run a franchise aground, this is it. Not what the Steelers have been doing. They have played with fire, but this guy is basically chain smoking outside of a gas station.

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/the-introduction-to-the-end-in-new-orleans/