Cap Space For All 32 NFL Teams - Page 2 - Jets Insider.com Forums

Flaming Mo · 01-09-2013, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SONNY WERBLIN

Are any Bengals under contract for 2013?

Michael Johnson is not, he would be great as an OLB for us...

nycdan · 01-09-2013, 10:07 AM

I see why Caldwell preferred JAX.

RMJK · 01-09-2013, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GreenReaper

The $19.4 mil Jets CAP space on that list is misleading. Cause Jets only have 10 of the 22 starters signed to contracts. So the cupboard is really bare, for the draft and filling out the 53 man roster.

If we get lucky in the Draft, walk ons, FAs, etc then we'll have a better idea what we can spend. I think we can rework a few contracts and keep some heavy weights.

patman · 01-09-2013, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sec.101row23

Exactly, without seeing how many players are under contract it is hard to determine what those numbers mean. As far as Baltimore goes, that 15 million will be used primarily for Flacco.

The Bengals and Colts are in great situations, IF the Jets are entertaining any ideas of trading Revis, they should call Cinnci. They have 2 second round picks this year and a ton of cap space. If they add Revis to that front 7 they could be nasty.

They didn't want to spend 8 mill a year to keep Joseph, and you think they want to spend draft picks and pay Revis almost twice that?

James Hasty · 01-09-2013, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GreenReaper

The $19.4 mil Jets CAP space on that list is misleading. Cause Jets only have 10 of the 22 starters signed to contracts. So the cupboard is really bare, for the draft and filling out the 53 man roster.

The number is negative ($19.4) mil as in over the cap.

sec.101row23 · 01-09-2013, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patman

They didn't want to spend 8 mill a year to keep Joseph, and you think they want to spend draft picks and pay Revis almost twice that?

Revis isnt going to cost 16 million per year. They now have significant space to improve their team. If they wanted to add a Revis, they have the ability to do so now.

SONNY WERBLIN · 01-09-2013, 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sec.101row23

Revis isnt going to cost 16 million per year. They now have significant space to improve their team. If they wanted to add a Revis, they have the ability to do so now.

Mike Brown does not spend that kind of money on one player. The only teams with some cap room whom I could see trading for Revis would be Minnesota or Chicago because both will be playing 4 games per year against either Aaron Rogers or Calvin Johnson for the next 8+ seasons. A player like Revis is almost a necessity for Minnesota or Chicago to win that division.

sec.101row23 · 01-09-2013, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SONNY WERBLIN

Mike Brown does not spend that kind of money on one player. The only teams with some cap room whom I could see trading for Revis would be Minnesota or Chicago because both will be playing 4 games per year against either Aaron Rogers or Calvin Johnson for the next 8+ seasons. A player like Revis is almost a necessity for Minnesota or Chicago to win that division.

Good points. I was just looking at cap space and resources to facilitate the trade.

patman · 01-09-2013, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sec.101row23

Revis isnt going to cost 16 million per year. They now have significant space to improve their team. If they wanted to add a Revis, they have the ability to do so now.

Yes they do, but they already showed that they don't value the position that highly. A guy like Cason, DRC, Jenkins- you know a 2nd tier starting corner along with a Moore/Landry and not wreck their pay structure.

patman · 01-09-2013, 11:12 AM

Cro is a lot easier to trade than Revis. Cro is locked up for two years and is healthy. Revis might not be able to work out before the draft and wants more money and a huge SB.

Plus trading their best player for a draft pick that 50% of the STH may not recognize is not the way to keep them satisfied

CleatMarks · 01-09-2013, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by James Hasty

The number is negative ($19.4) mil as in over the cap.

You're right James. I think a lot of people are missing the - sign in that number.

That -19.4 means over the cap. The Jets have to dump 20 million just to get to cap and then sign a bunch of people even if they're JAGs.

CleatMarks · 01-09-2013, 11:25 AM

Wow, just looking at Cincy. Given the picks they've got, and the talent they recently picked up, they are set up for long term success if they spend the money.

Cincinnati $8.5M $55.1M

55 million cap space.... wow.

Tai-Mai-Shu · 01-09-2013, 12:09 PM

LMAO......NE is plus 18mil and Jets is minus 19mil.

124 · 01-09-2013, 03:23 PM

The absolute worst cap situation in the NFL.

Amazing.

Beerfish · 01-09-2013, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 124

The absolute worst cap situation in the NFL.

Amazing.

Good thing Tanny was and still is a cap expert or we would have been in real trouble eh?

124 · 01-09-2013, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beerfish

Good thing Tanny was and still is a cap expert or we would have been in real trouble eh?

Indeed Lahey, indeed.

patman · 01-09-2013, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tai-Mai-Shu

LMAO......NE is plus 18mil and Jets is minus 19mil.

The pats are just OK cap wise. Volmer, Woodhead, Endleman,Talib and Welker are FA.

My guess is that either Welker and Volmer move on. More likely Welker

Batmans A Scientist · 01-09-2013, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CleatMarks

Wow, just looking at Cincy. Given the picks they've got, and the talent they recently picked up, they are set up for long term success if they spend the money.

Cincinnati $8.5M $55.1M

55 million cap space.... wow.

Don't they have to be at 90%? So isn't the team required to spend $35M - $40M this offseason? I wonder if they rework some contracts for guys like Atkins and AJ Green to keep them long term and make them cap friendly for the future.

revischrist · 01-09-2013, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeJam Football

Its not rocket science people. You simply dump as many players as possible and acquire as many decent draft picks as possible for 3 straight years. Then you have a roster full of up and coming players with cheap contracts. If you can remain competitive during this process then you are way ahead of the game. The NFL is a young players league. Pick the right ones and you have a good team. Your the Patriots. Pick the wrong ones and your the Jags or the Raiders.

LOL, the Patriots are only good because they have Brady. If they had the same roster with sanchez at QB they are 6-10 team. Same could be said of teams like the Packers and Falcons.

patman · 01-09-2013, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by revischrist

LOL, the Patriots are only good because they have Brady. If they had the same roster with sanchez at QB they are 6-10 team. Same could be said of teams like the Packers and Falcons.

When during the season would have BB sat sanchez and started mallet? Remember, Cassell won 11 games.

01-09-2013, 10:07 AM	#22
nycdan I'm tired of pretending I'm not a total b1tchen rock star from Mars. All League Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Thornwood, NY Posts: 4,781	I see why Caldwell preferred JAX.

01-09-2013, 11:12 AM	#30
patman happy to be here All Pro Join Date: Apr 2003 Posts: 7,152	Cro is a lot easier to trade than Revis. Cro is locked up for two years and is healthy. Revis might not be able to work out before the draft and wants more money and a huge SB. Plus trading their best player for a draft pick that 50% of the STH may not recognize is not the way to keep them satisfied

01-09-2013, 11:25 AM	#32
CleatMarks All League Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 2,596	Wow, just looking at Cincy. Given the picks they've got, and the talent they recently picked up, they are set up for long term success if they spend the money. Cincinnati $8.5M $55.1M 55 million cap space.... wow.

01-09-2013, 12:09 PM	#33
Tai-Mai-Shu Undrafted Free Agent Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Amsterdam, NL Posts: 123	LMAO......NE is plus 18mil and Jets is minus 19mil.

01-09-2013, 03:23 PM	#34
124 All Pro Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 7,961	The absolute worst cap situation in the NFL. Amazing.