The Chargers are $20M over the cap for next season with 53 players under
contract according to Over the Cap (including the 12 players signed to
reserve/future contracts):

https://overthecap.com/salary-cap/los-angeles-chargers

I think OTC is a little more accurate than Spotrac, although I'm not sure:

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/los-angeles-chargers/yearly/cap/

And then they have 26 free agents. How can they possibly put a team
together? I would like to re-sign a bunch of the free agents:

Unrestricted free agents (7):
​
CB Bryce Callahan
DL Morgan Fox
T Trey Pipkins
P JK Scott
QB Easton Stick
LB Drue Tranquill
OLB Kyle Van Noy

Restricted Free Agents (2):

WR Jalen Guyton
TE Donald Parham Jr.

Exclusive Rights Free Agents (2):

K Cameron Dicker
NT Breiden Fehoko

That's another 11, which would give them 64 under contract. Only the top
51 count for cap purposes. And then there are the draft picks. The team
has to be cap-compliant by 4 pm ET on March 15. They will have to cut or
restructure Mack and Allen, plus cut the obvious candidates (Hopkins,
Feiler, Murray?, Everett?). They can't do anything about Bosa's or JC
Jackson's contracts according to OTC.
​

Players under contract right now:

Offense (25):

Quarterback (1): Justin Herbert

Running back (4): Austin Ekeler, Joshua Kelley, Isaiah Spiller, RB Larry
Rountree

Fullback (1): Zander Horvath

Offensive line (10): T Rashawn Slater, G Matt Feiler, C Corey Linsley, G
Zion Johnson, G Brenden Jaimes, G/T Jamaree Salyer, T Andrew Trainer, C
Isaac Weaver, G Zack Bailey, T Austen Pleasants

Wide receiver (5): Keenan Allen, Mike Williams, Joshua Palmer, Keelan
Doss, WR John Hightower

Tight end (4): Gerald Everett, Tre' McKitty, Stone Smartt, Hunter Kampmoyer

Defense (26):

Defensive line (5): NT Austin Johnson, DE Sebastian Joseph-Day, Otito
Ogbonnia, Christopher Hinton, David Moa

Edge rusher (5): Joey Bosa, Khalil Mack, Chris Rumph II, Ty Shelby,
Carlo Kemp

Linebacker (5): Kenneth Murray, Amen Ogbongbemiga, Nick Niemann, Damon
Lloyd, Tyreek Maddox-Williams

Cornerback (6): J.C. Jackson, Asante Samuel Jr., Michael Davis, Ja'Sir
Taylor, Deane Leonard, Michael Jacquet

Safety (5): Derwin James, Alohi Gilman, JT Woods, Raheem Layne, Mark Webb

Specialists (2):

K Dustin Hopkins

P

LS Josh Harris

​

--Robin

Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> writes:

> And then they have 26 free agents. How can they possibly put a team
> together? I would like to re-sign a bunch of the free agents:

The standard method is to take a highly paid player with a significant
number of years left on the current contract, and pay all but the
veteran minimum up front. This amortizes the converted salary evenly
over the contract.

E.g. if you converted about $20M for Joey Bosa, that would be $5M for
each of the next 4 years, saving $15M this year. However, then you will
have $5M less each of the following 3 years.

IMO teams do this way too much in general, but the one time I am behind
it is when you make it to the playoffs for the first time in a long
time.

Here's something I wrote last year:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.sports.football.pro.dallas-cowboys/c/hr4CQZ85cuE/m/hb_yo3z9BAAJ

That points into the middle of the discussion, but you can scroll.

Eddie

Eddie Grove wrote:
> Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> writes:
>
>> And then they have 26 free agents. How can they possibly put a team
>> together? I would like to re-sign a bunch of the free agents:
>
> The standard method is to take a highly paid player with a significant
> number of years left on the current contract, and pay all but the
> veteran minimum up front. This amortizes the converted salary evenly
> over the contract.
>
> E.g. if you converted about $20M for Joey Bosa, that would be $5M for
> each of the next 4 years, saving $15M this year. However, then you will
> have $5M less each of the following 3 years.
>
> IMO teams do this way too much in general, but the one time I am behind
> it is when you make it to the playoffs for the first time in a long
> time.
>
> Here's something I wrote last year:
>
> https://groups.google.com/g/alt.sports.football.pro.dallas-cowboys/c/hr4CQZ85cuE/m/hb_yo3z9BAAJ
>
> That points into the middle of the discussion, but you can scroll.
>
> Eddie
>

I know you can restructure contracts, but the question is whether that
works for the players the Chargers have.

Their highest-paid players (cap numbers, i.e. base salary plus prorated
signing bonus + roster bonus) for 2023 are:

Bosa: 31M

Mack: 27.4M

Allen: 21.7M

Williams: 19M

JC Jackson: 17M

Linsley: 13.1M

The other players are under $10M.

Bosa is under contract through 2025, his age-30 season. His cap hit
declines a little each season but is still $25M in 2025. Should the
Chargers restructure so as to add years to his contract, given his age?
Would Bosa even be amenable to doing that?

The same question, in spades, with Mack. He is under contract for 2023
and 2024, his age 32 and 33 seasons, with cap hits of over $27M for each
season. Do you want to extend him?

Allen is under contract for 2023 and 2024, his age 31 and 32 seasons.
His cap number in 2024 is actually higher, at $25.8M. Do you want to
extend him?

Now, the players could agree to add additional contract years with
minimal salary, which would effectively spread the existing cap hits
over more years and therefore reduce the present years' cap hits. But
why would a player agree to that (unless he's at the end of his playing
days)? This is what the "fake years" of your salary cap discussion seems
to be getting at.

Each of these players has a high cap number for each of the remaining
years of their contracts. If the Chargers retain the players, I don't
see how restructures would help, unless the players are willing to take
less money by spreading existing obligations over additional years. If
they cut the players, they've lost one or more of their best players.

But the Chargers need to clear some $40M. They are over by $20M to start
with, plus (say) $10M to sign draft picks and another $10M to sign
necessary free agents. The cleanest way is to cut both Mack (save
$22.9M) and Allen (save $17.5M) with post-June 1 designations, which
would save $40.5M.

Other possible cuts, with post-June 1 designation numbers:

Davis: 7.4M

Feiler: 6.5M

Everett: 4M

Murray: 2.4M

Hopkins: 2.3M

McKitty: 1.1M

Maybe they could cut Mack, restructure Allen, and then cut everyone
except Davis. Mack was important to this team, but they have to get to
$40M, or something close to that, as far as I can see. That's a big ask.

--Robin

Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> writes:

> Eddie Grove wrote:
>> Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> writes:
>>
>>> And then they have 26 free agents. How can they possibly put a team
>>> together? I would like to re-sign a bunch of the free agents:
>>
>> The standard method is to take a highly paid player with a significant
>> number of years left on the current contract, and pay all but the
>> veteran minimum up front. This amortizes the converted salary evenly
>> over the contract.
>>
>> E.g. if you converted about $20M for Joey Bosa, that would be $5M for
>> each of the next 4 years, saving $15M this year. However, then you will
>> have $5M less each of the following 3 years.
>>
>> IMO teams do this way too much in general, but the one time I am behind
>> it is when you make it to the playoffs for the first time in a long
>> time.
>>
>> Here's something I wrote last year:
>>
>> https://groups.google.com/g/alt.sports.football.pro.dallas-cowboys/c/hr4CQZ85cuE/m/hb_yo3z9BAAJ
>>
>> That points into the middle of the discussion, but you can scroll.
>>
>> Eddie
>>
>
>
> I know you can restructure contracts, but the question is whether that
> works for the players the Chargers have.
>
> Their highest-paid players (cap numbers, i.e. base salary plus
> prorated signing bonus + roster bonus) for 2023 are:
>
> Bosa: 31M
>
> Mack: 27.4M
>
> Allen: 21.7M
>
> Williams: 19M
>
> JC Jackson: 17M
>
> Linsley: 13.1M
>
> The other players are under $10M.
>
> Bosa is under contract through 2025, his age-30 season. His cap hit
> declines a little each season but is still $25M in 2025. Should the
> Chargers restructure so as to add years to his contract, given his
> age? Would Bosa even be amenable to doing that?
>
> The same question, in spades, with Mack. He is under contract for 2023
> and 2024, his age 32 and 33 seasons, with cap hits of over $27M for
> each season. Do you want to extend him?
>
> Allen is under contract for 2023 and 2024, his age 31 and 32
> seasons. His cap number in 2024 is actually higher, at $25.8M. Do you
> want to extend him?

You don't need to extend them to restructure by adding years. With no
effort at all, pretending league minimum is $1M, pay all allowed salary
due for 2023 in March and you get

Bosa -> $15M savings
Mack -> $8M savings
Allen -> $10M savings

That's $33M without effort. No extensions required.

> But the Chargers need to clear some $40M. They are over by $20M to
> start with, plus (say) $10M to sign draft picks and another $10M to
> sign necessary free agents. The cleanest way is to cut both Mack (save
> $22.9M) and Allen (save $17.5M) with post-June 1 designations, which
> would save $40.5M.

The mistake was getting into this situation when they weren't good
enough to make the cap deficits worthwhile. They'll muddle through and
continue to be at the level of a 1-and-done wildcard team if they're
lucky.

> Other possible cuts, with post-June 1 designation numbers:
>
> Davis: 7.4M

That's enough to get you to your $40M number right there.

Eddie

Robin Miller wrote:
> Eddie Grove wrote:
>> Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> writes:
>>
>>> And then they have 26 free agents. How can they possibly put a team
>>> together? I would like to re-sign a bunch of the free agents:
>>
>> The standard method is to take a highly paid player with a significant
>> number of years left on the current contract, and pay all but the
>> veteran minimum up front. This amortizes the converted salary evenly
>> over the contract.
>>
>> E.g. if you converted about $20M for Joey Bosa, that would be $5M for
>> each of the next 4 years, saving $15M this year. However, then you will
>> have $5M less each of the following 3 years.
>>
>> IMO teams do this way too much in general, but the one time I am behind
>> it is when you make it to the playoffs for the first time in a long
>> time.
>>
>> Here's something I wrote last year:
>>
>> https://groups.google.com/g/alt.sports.football.pro.dallas-cowboys/c/hr4CQZ85cuE/m/hb_yo3z9BAAJ
>>
>>
>> That points into the middle of the discussion, but you can scroll.
>>
>> Eddie
>>
>
>
> I know you can restructure contracts, but the question is whether that
> works for the players the Chargers have.
>
> Their highest-paid players (cap numbers, i.e. base salary plus prorated
> signing bonus + roster bonus) for 2023 are:
>
> Bosa: 31M
>
> Mack: 27.4M
>
> Allen: 21.7M
>
> Williams: 19M
>
> JC Jackson: 17M
>
> Linsley: 13.1M
>
> The other players are under $10M.
>
> Bosa is under contract through 2025, his age-30 season. His cap hit
> declines a little each season but is still $25M in 2025. Should the
> Chargers restructure so as to add years to his contract, given his age?
> Would Bosa even be amenable to doing that?
>
> The same question, in spades, with Mack. He is under contract for 2023
> and 2024, his age 32 and 33 seasons, with cap hits of over $27M for each
> season. Do you want to extend him?
>
> Allen is under contract for 2023 and 2024, his age 31 and 32 seasons.
> His cap number in 2024 is actually higher, at $25.8M. Do you want to
> extend him?
>
> Now, the players could agree to add additional contract years with
> minimal salary, which would effectively spread the existing cap hits
> over more years and therefore reduce the present years' cap hits. But
> why would a player agree to that (unless he's at the end of his playing
> days)? This is what the "fake years" of your salary cap discussion seems
> to be getting at.
>
> Each of these players has a high cap number for each of the remaining
> years of their contracts. If the Chargers retain the players, I don't
> see how restructures would help, unless the players are willing to take
> less money by spreading existing obligations over additional years. If
> they cut the players, they've lost one or more of their best players.
>
> But the Chargers need to clear some $40M. They are over by $20M to start
> with, plus (say) $10M to sign draft picks and another $10M to sign
> necessary free agents. The cleanest way is to cut both Mack (save
> $22.9M) and Allen (save $17.5M) with post-June 1 designations, which
> would save $40.5M.
>
> Other possible cuts, with post-June 1 designation numbers:
>
> Davis: 7.4M
>
> Feiler: 6.5M
>
> Everett: 4M
>
> Murray: 2.4M
>
> Hopkins: 2.3M
>
> McKitty: 1.1M
>
> Maybe they could cut Mack, restructure Allen, and then cut everyone
> except Davis. Mack was important to this team, but they have to get to
> $40M, or something close to that, as far as I can see. That's a big ask.
>
> --Robin
>

I have re-written everything. Here it is (sorry for the redundancy):

(1) Starting Point

The Chargers are $20M over the cap for next season with 53 players under
contract according to Over the Cap (including the 12 players signed to
reserve/future contracts):

https://overthecap.com/salary-cap/los-angeles-chargers

I think OTC is a little more accurate than Spotrac, although I'm not sure:

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/los-angeles-chargers/yearly/cap/

I estimate that the Chargers will need an additional $3M in cap space to
sign their draft picks and an additional $11 million in cap space to
sign 12 free agents I'd like to have back. If Telesco keeps $5M in
reserve (typically $7M according to Popper), that means that the
Chargers need to find $39M in cap space.

(2) Re-signing free agents

The Chargers have 26 free agents. I would like to re-sign 12 of the
free agents (and maybe others to minimum contracts that won't affect cap
space):

Unrestricted free agents (8):

Players who may get more than minimum raises:

T Trey Pipkins: $1,184,269 cap number for 2022; 2023 cap hit?

2023 RT average salaries:
https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/rankings/average/right-tackle/

$4M starting salary is the half-way point in the table and might be
reasonable for Pipkins?

CB Bryce Callahan: $1,275,500 cap number for 2022; 2023 cap hit?

DL Morgan Fox: $1,047,500 cap number for 2022; 2023 cap hit?

LB Drue Tranquill; $2.7M cap number for 2022; this exceeds Kyzir White's
2022 cap hit of $1.8M. 2023 cap hit?

OLB Kyle Van Noy: $2.25M cap number for 2022. 2023 cap hit?

Minimum salary players:

P JK Scott: $965K salary in 2022; bumped to $1.080M in 2023--minimum for
4 years of service?

QB Easton Stick: $965K salary in 2022; bumped to $1.080M in
2023--minimum for 4 years of service?

WR DeAndre Carter: $1.035M salary (minimum for 4-6 years of service) +
$100K bonus in 2022; bumped to $1.165M (minimum for 7-9 years of
service) + 100K bonus in 2023?

Restricted Free Agents (2):

WR Jalen Guyton: $965K salary in 2022; bumped to $1.080M in
2023--minimum for 4 years of service?

TE Donald Parham Jr.: $895K salary in 2022; bumped to $1.010M in
2023--minimum for 3 years of service?

Exclusive Rights Free Agents (2):

K Cameron Dicker: $705K salary in 2022; bumped to $870K in 2023--minimum
for 1 year of service?

NT Breiden Fehoko: $825K salary in 2022; bumped to $940K in
2023--minimum for 2 years of service?

These 12 players' salaries would replace the salaries of players 8
through 19 on the bottom of the top-51 list (assuming for the purpose of
simplicity that the seven draft picks replace the bottom 7 on the list).
Of those 12 players, 11 make $870K and one makes $940K. That totals
$10.51M. So re-signing these players adds to the cap the amount by which
their combined 2023 cap hits exceeds $10.51M. I will guess that the
salary increases will be a total of $7M: $3M for Pipkins, $3M for the
other four non-minimum players who will get raises, and $1M for the
seven minimum-salary players. Under these assumptions, the combined 2023
salaries for these 12 players will be $21,782,000, which exceeds $10.51M
by $11,272,000 and so adds that amount to the salary cap.

Tables I used:

https://overthecap.com/free-agency/los-angeles-chargers [list of free
agents]

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/rankings/average/right-tackle/ [average
salary rankings by position]

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/cba/minimum/ [minimum salaries]

(3) 2023 Draft Picks

Then they will have to add their 2023 draft picks. However, the
Chargers' seven 2023 draft picks (they have all their picks) will add
only about $3M to the team's salary cap total, going by the contracts
received by the Chargers' 2022 draft picks. That's because only the
players with the 51 highest cap numbers count towards the cap, so the
draft picks are, in essence, replacing the bottom 7 players in that
51-player list. The bottom seven all make either $750K or $870K. Looking
at the 2022 draft picks' first-year cap numbers, only the top three
picks have cap numbers exceeding those figures, by a total of $2.35M.
We'll round up to $3M.

2022 picks:

Round 1, Zion Johnson: 2.7M

Round: No pick, use Asante Samuel Jr. from 2021: 1.3M

Round 3, JT Woods: $960K

Round 4, Isaiah Spiller: $890K

Round 5, Otito Ogbonnia: $653K

Round 6, Jamaree Salyer: $749K

Round 7, Deane Leonard: $730K

(4) Finding the money through restructuring contracts

As to how to find the money, Over the Cap says that the Chargers can
gain $60,111,502 in cap space through "simple restructures" of their
existing contracts, and can gain $107,843,980 in cap space through
"maximum restructures" of those contracts:

https://overthecap.com/restructure

The site defines these terms as follows:

A "simple restructure" converts payments into prorated signing
bonuses within the confines of the remainder of the contract. Teams
typically have the ability to unilaterally execute simple restructures
without any action necessary from the player.

Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> writes:

> It seems to me that, since the team still has to pay the same amount
> of compensation (at least if the player remains on the team, or if the
> compensation is guaranteed), these plans (especially the "simple
> restructure") reduce the current year's cap number by pushing
> obligations to following years and making things worse for those
> years. Do the Chargers want to do that?

The problem is that no GM or coach ever wants to go to the owner and say
that the best long term plan is to pay down cap hits from past years and
plan on having a losing record for 3 years. Who cares if the team will
be better after you are fired?

> However, Over the Cap says that the Chargers can do it through what
> they call "simple restructures." I just don't see how.

Take Bosa for example. In 2023 he has a salary of $24M and a penalty
assigned to him of $7M for a previous bonus. That $7M is a sunk cost and
not worth thinking about, but for some reason people obsess over it.
His cap hit is currently $24M + $7M = $31M.

If, instead of doling out the $24M salary in weekly installments during
the season, you pay him $21M in March and dole out the remaining $3M in
weekly payments, his cap hit changes to $3M + $21M/3 + $7M = $17M which
is a savings of $14M compared to the $31M before the change. You divide
by 3 because at the time you pay him the lump sum it will be 3 years
remaining on the contract. [I misread overthecap before].

The change in this example will mean that cap hits of $7M in each of
2024 and 2025 will go towards covering this "simple restructure".
You can push cap hits around, but they always come due.

I picked $21M for ease of arithmetic. They could do a bit more.
The only restriction on this is that the total amount paid weekly has to
be at least the veteran minimum for a player with his accrued years.

This can be done for every player on the team with 2 or more years left
on his contract.

Eddie Grove wrote:
> Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> writes:
>
>> It seems to me that, since the team still has to pay the same amount
>> of compensation (at least if the player remains on the team, or if the
>> compensation is guaranteed), these plans (especially the "simple
>> restructure") reduce the current year's cap number by pushing
>> obligations to following years and making things worse for those
>> years. Do the Chargers want to do that?
>
> The problem is that no GM or coach ever wants to go to the owner and say
> that the best long term plan is to pay down cap hits from past years and
> plan on having a losing record for 3 years. Who cares if the team will
> be better after you are fired?
>
>> However, Over the Cap says that the Chargers can do it through what
>> they call "simple restructures." I just don't see how.
>
> Take Bosa for example. In 2023 he has a salary of $24M and a penalty
> assigned to him of $7M for a previous bonus. That $7M is a sunk cost and
> not worth thinking about, but for some reason people obsess over it.
> His cap hit is currently $24M + $7M = $31M.
>
> If, instead of doling out the $24M salary in weekly installments during
> the season, you pay him $21M in March and dole out the remaining $3M in
> weekly payments, his cap hit changes to $3M + $21M/3 + $7M = $17M which
> is a savings of $14M compared to the $31M before the change. You divide
> by 3 because at the time you pay him the lump sum it will be 3 years
> remaining on the contract. [I misread overthecap before].
>
> The change in this example will mean that cap hits of $7M in each of
> 2024 and 2025 will go towards covering this "simple restructure".
> You can push cap hits around, but they always come due.
>
> I picked $21M for ease of arithmetic. They could do a bit more.
> The only restriction on this is that the total amount paid weekly has to
> be at least the veteran minimum for a player with his accrued years.
>
> This can be done for every player on the team with 2 or more years left
> on his contract.
>

I understand about contract restructuring. I didn't know about voidable
(or just "void") years, but now I do. Here are a couple of links with
examples:

https://www.hogshaven.com/2021/4/12/22379019/how-do-voidable-year-contracts-work-and-why-has-the-nfl-embraced-them-this-year

https://www.buffalorumblings.com/2022/3/16/22981476/nfl-salary-cap-what-are-void-years-and-why-are-teams-using-them

But I just don't think it helps with Bosa. He's under contract through
2025; his cap hits for the last three years of his contract are:

2023: 31,000,000

2024: 29,000,000

2025: 25,360,000

Sure you can push $7 million (or whatever) from 2023 to 2024 or 2025 or
both, but that just makes things all the worse in those seasons.

If you restructure to add years, the Chargers take the risk on his
continuing production and good health.

If you add voidable years to spread out the cap hits, and he ends up not
playing for the Chargers for those years, then all the money you put
into those years becomes due in 2025. Again, a bigger payment than is
now due.

I simply don't see that taking any of these approaches helps the
Chargers. Please let me know if I'm missing something.

Same thing with Mack. He has $27M cap hits this season (2023) and next.
There's nowhere to put the money that makes things better. Maybe he'll
agree to a restructure that reduces his salary. If the Chargers cut him,
they're only on the hook for $4.5M this season and next.

Fundamentally, the Chargers can't be putting almost $60 million of the
estimated $225 million salary cap for 2023 (more than a quarter of the
cap) into two edge rushers, especially ones that are good to very good
but not great.

I didn't realize this, but the 2023 cap hasn't been set yet:

https://overthecap.com/2023-nfl-salary-cap-space-update

--Robin

Robin Miller wrote:
> Eddie Grove wrote:
>> Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> writes:
>>
>>> It seems to me that, since the team still has to pay the same amount
>>> of compensation (at least if the player remains on the team, or if the
>>> compensation is guaranteed), these plans (especially the "simple
>>> restructure") reduce the current year's cap number by pushing
>>> obligations to following years and making things worse for those
>>> years. Do the Chargers want to do that?
>>
>> The problem is that no GM or coach ever wants to go to the owner and say
>> that the best long term plan is to pay down cap hits from past years and
>> plan on having a losing record for 3 years. Who cares if the team will
>> be better after you are fired?
>>
>>> However, Over the Cap says that the Chargers can do it through what
>>> they call "simple restructures." I just don't see how.
>>
>> Take Bosa for example. In 2023 he has a salary of $24M and a penalty
>> assigned to him of $7M for a previous bonus. That $7M is a sunk cost and
>> not worth thinking about, but for some reason people obsess over it.
>> His cap hit is currently $24M + $7M = $31M.
>>
>> If, instead of doling out the $24M salary in weekly installments during
>> the season, you pay him $21M in March and dole out the remaining $3M in
>> weekly payments, his cap hit changes to $3M + $21M/3 + $7M = $17M which
>> is a savings of $14M compared to the $31M before the change. You divide
>> by 3 because at the time you pay him the lump sum it will be 3 years
>> remaining on the contract. [I misread overthecap before].
>>
>> The change in this example will mean that cap hits of $7M in each of
>> 2024 and 2025 will go towards covering this "simple restructure".
>> You can push cap hits around, but they always come due.
>>
>> I picked $21M for ease of arithmetic. They could do a bit more.
>> The only restriction on this is that the total amount paid weekly has to
>> be at least the veteran minimum for a player with his accrued years.
>>
>> This can be done for every player on the team with 2 or more years left
>> on his contract.
>>
>
>
> I understand about contract restructuring. I didn't know about voidable
> (or just "void") years, but now I do. Here are a couple of links with
> examples:
>
> https://www.hogshaven.com/2021/4/12/22379019/how-do-voidable-year-contracts-work-and-why-has-the-nfl-embraced-them-this-year
>
>
> https://www.buffalorumblings.com/2022/3/16/22981476/nfl-salary-cap-what-are-void-years-and-why-are-teams-using-them
>
>
>
> But I just don't think it helps with Bosa. He's under contract through
> 2025; his cap hits for the last three years of his contract are:
>
> 2023: 31,000,000
>
> 2024: 29,000,000
>
> 2025: 25,360,000
>
> Sure you can push $7 million (or whatever) from 2023 to 2024 or 2025 or
> both, but that just makes things all the worse in those seasons.
>
> If you restructure to add years, the Chargers take the risk on his
> continuing production and good health.
>
> If you add voidable years to spread out the cap hits, and he ends up not
> playing for the Chargers for those years, then all the money you put
> into those years becomes due in 2025. Again, a bigger payment than is
> now due.
>
> I simply don't see that taking any of these approaches helps the
> Chargers. Please let me know if I'm missing something.
>
> Same thing with Mack. He has $27M cap hits this season (2023) and next.
> There's nowhere to put the money that makes things better. Maybe he'll
> agree to a restructure that reduces his salary. If the Chargers cut him,
> they're only on the hook for $4.5M this season and next.
>
> Fundamentally, the Chargers can't be putting almost $60 million of the
> estimated $225 million salary cap for 2023 (more than a quarter of the
> cap) into two edge rushers, especially ones that are good to very good
> but not great.
>
> I didn't realize this, but the 2023 cap hasn't been set yet:
>
> https://overthecap.com/2023-nfl-salary-cap-space-update
>
> --Robin

The other big factor, which I meant to mention, is that Herbert's rookie
contract ends after the 2023 season. Beginning in 2024 he will be
playing under a new contract with a very high number, which will really
limit the Chargers' cap flexibility. That's another reason not to push
current contractual obligations for other players into future years.

--Robin

Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> writes:

> Sure you can push $7 million (or whatever) from 2023 to 2024 or 2025
> or both, but that just makes things all the worse in those seasons.

Whenever anyone talks about restructuring, this is all they are talking
about. "I'll gladly pay tomorrow for an overpriced starter today."

Eddie Grove wrote:
> Robin Miller <robin.miller@invalid.invalid> writes:
>
>> Sure you can push $7 million (or whatever) from 2023 to 2024 or 2025
>> or both, but that just makes things all the worse in those seasons.
>
> Whenever anyone talks about restructuring, this is all they are talking
> about. "I'll gladly pay tomorrow for an overpriced starter today."
>

I think they're going to have to release Mack, even though they just
spent a second-round pick to get him. Maybe they can re-sign him at a
lower price.

And I want to correct my prior post. The Chargers don't have to enter
into an extension now with Herbert; they can exercise the fifth-year
option on him. But Popper thinks they'll work out an extension, or at
least try to.

The team has until May 1 to exercise the option:

https://www.nfl.com/news/weighing-fifth-year-options-for-2020-nfl-draft-s-first-round-selections

--Robin

On Sunday, January 22, 2023 at 6:13:37 PM UTC-8, Robin Miller wrote:
> Eddie Grove wrote:
> > Robin Miller <robin....@invalid.invalid> writes:
> >
> >> Sure you can push $7 million (or whatever) from 2023 to 2024 or 2025
> >> or both, but that just makes things all the worse in those seasons.
> >
> > Whenever anyone talks about restructuring, this is all they are talking
> > about. "I'll gladly pay tomorrow for an overpriced starter today."
> >
> I think they're going to have to release Mack, even though they just
> spent a second-round pick to get him. Maybe they can re-sign him at a
> lower price.
>
> And I want to correct my prior post. The Chargers don't have to enter
> into an extension now with Herbert; they can exercise the fifth-year
> option on him. But Popper thinks they'll work out an extension, or at
> least try to.
>
> The team has until May 1 to exercise the option:
>
> https://www.nfl.com/news/weighing-fifth-year-options-for-2020-nfl-draft-s-first-round-selections
>
> --Robin

I was reading about the fifth year extension the other day. It seems it's at the transition tag price, which is around $30 million for QB. So it's not as if they'd be getting a huge discount, and you'd think they want to lock him up with a long term deal sooner than that, as the market keeps going up. I'd think the ideal would be to try to sign him before the Bengals give Burrow his new deal which will be huge given his playoff success.

Michael

phlash74 wrote:
> On Sunday, January 22, 2023 at 6:13:37 PM UTC-8, Robin Miller wrote:
>> Eddie Grove wrote:
>>> Robin Miller <robin....@invalid.invalid> writes:
>>>
>>>> Sure you can push $7 million (or whatever) from 2023 to 2024 or 2025
>>>> or both, but that just makes things all the worse in those seasons.
>>>
>>> Whenever anyone talks about restructuring, this is all they are talking
>>> about. "I'll gladly pay tomorrow for an overpriced starter today."
>>>
>> I think they're going to have to release Mack, even though they just
>> spent a second-round pick to get him. Maybe they can re-sign him at a
>> lower price.
>>
>> And I want to correct my prior post. The Chargers don't have to enter
>> into an extension now with Herbert; they can exercise the fifth-year
>> option on him. But Popper thinks they'll work out an extension, or at
>> least try to.
>>
>> The team has until May 1 to exercise the option:
>>
>> https://www.nfl.com/news/weighing-fifth-year-options-for-2020-nfl-draft-s-first-round-selections
>>
>> --Robin
>
> I was reading about the fifth year extension the other day. It seems it's at the transition tag price, which is around $30 million for QB. So it's not as if they'd be getting a huge discount, and you'd think they want to lock him up with a long term deal sooner than that, as the market keeps going up. I'd think the ideal would be to try to sign him before the Bengals give Burrow his new deal which will be huge given his playoff success.
>
> Michael
>

Yes, Popper writes about that, in somewhat more general terms, that
every new contract can re-set the market, so it would behoove the
Chargers to get it done sooner rather than later.

--Robin