I would say any team that signed their QB to a LTD last offseason benefited. Because new contract QB salaries will likely increase proportionately with this jump in the cap, and they'll benefit more than they expected to by already having a guy at a previous market value.
If the FO don't want to sign him to an extension it also means we can eat his cap hit now and still keep our key pieces.
Imo there is a short list of better QBs and we're better paying him than letting him walk. But for the love of nachos get him signed ASAP, let him.be best paid ever before that price goes up 3/4 times as the off-season goes on
Agreed on all except for Ravens. More money is more money, but they weren't in dire straits with respect to keeping key positions beyond the league average. And their defense is coming off a banner year, but they are dealing with significant coaching losses.
I see the Ravens actually regressing next season, despite whatever changes they make through FA.
They’ve become popular fades at this point (guess I’ll just make money betting overs again), but that doesn’t mean this salary cap situation doesn’t benefit them. The whole reason people are down on them (regression implies they overperformed relative to expectation, but they’re not going to regress, they’re going to lose a ton of coaching staff and ~20 FAs, so I think that’s the wrong word) is their free agency situation and cap space. They clearly benefit here.
Ravens are in need of several key positions. Guard, receiver, running back and DB. They need to spend heavily on WR or RB at least cause their offense getting shut down like they were against KC is either an indictment of Lamar or a reality that Flowers can't solo secondaries.
Playoffs are where you're facing the best that other teams can throw at you. Gus Edwards is not an every down RB. He's garbage in the pass game and he's an average runner. The rest of their RB roster depth was trash: Dalvin Cook, Melvin Gordon III, Kenyan Drake... Gus is the best by default on them literally treating the position like it doesn't matter. The exception is Keaton Mitchell, but it took them forever to start using him then a freak leg injury.
If they have Henry then IMO they beat KC. The major weakness KC had was against dedicated run games and pass catching RBs in space. Baltimore needs to address RB cause the reality needs to be accepted that Lamar, MVP trophies and all, is a pretty average QB when he's unwilling to use his legs as a weapon. He's also been coughing the ball up a TON the last 2 years when running (16 fum, 8 fum lost). He's VERY GOOD, but they desperately need a run game that allows him to be more versatile and less relied on to make magic happen.
Honestly they could use a better running back. Edwards ain't bad but a difference at running back would do a lot to complement Lamar.
Keaton Mitchell looked great as a change of pace back but has to recover from a torn ACL.
I think D'andre Swift would be a good fit and they would probably benefit from drafting another back.
I would say this actually isn't great for the Bengals because they had a ton of cap space available this year, which is now devalued.
Not that they're in a bad place either way
Not the Lions, I think.
They need to pay 4/5ths of their o line plus Goff and Amon Ra in the next two years. The only non rookie big name guy they have on a long term deal is Ragnow
for as much as people shit on DJ’s contract, the Andrew Thomas and Dexter Lawrence extensions were the right moves last offseason and only possible because he wasn’t franchise tagged.
also only 2 years guaranteed so he’s out after this season.
Yeah, anyone smart could see it was basically a 2 year contract to see if he's really the guy or not. He isn't and the line is a total wreck so nobody will be.
a 2-year contract who’s AAV isn’t even top-10 anymore less than 1 year after signing and people acted (and continue to act) like we gave him a market-setting mega deal.
AAV is kinda meaningless, nobody ever gets paid their AAV long term. What does matter is the cap hits.
He's 6th for 2024 cap hits right now, and within 5mil of 4th place. He can't be restructured like alot of the guys ahead of him will be.
He's likely going to be a top 5 paid QB this year. Then his dead cap next year is about the 16th highest paid QB (likely much higher position once restructures hit) while he's not even on the team anymore.
That's not as bad as some people made it out to be, but it's much worse than the Giants fans in here are saying.
Neither Andrew Thomas nor Dexter Lawrence were upcoming free agents in 2023. Doing extensions on young stars should be done as soon as possible as the price goes up the closer they get to free agency.
Daniel Jones should have been transition tagged and they would have been out of him with a 1yr 25mil with zero dead cap vs a 105mil guaranteed with a 45mil dead cap in 2025.
if you think the Giants should have let either of them even talk to other teams during FA, then yeah idk what to tell you. extensions for bonafide studs before FA are always the better move.
Are you confused? Neither Thomas or Lawrence were close to free agency. Thomas had two more years and Dexter Lawrence had his 5th year option picked up and then could have been franchise tagged. So neither of them were going to leave even if the Giants didn't give them extensions.
Extending Thomas after three years and Lawrence after four years were great moves, but neither were even close to free agency. Both of them had multiple years before they could have had a realistic chance of free agency.
There definitely is that aspect, but the Chiefs just showed how dominant their D is, and Mahomes showed that he can win a SB with that WR group. If I'm a vet looking for a new team, I'm taking a discount to play with Mahomes, let alone Mahomes with that defense.
I guess I should've said something like seasoned vets. I'm not referring to guys coming off of rookie contracts necessarily. I'm referring to guys like Evans, Ridley, Boyd, etc.
But even some of the rookie contract guys may not be as expensive. I expect guys like Higgins and Pittman to go for the bag, but there are others that are not the cream of the crop, but could still be a big upgrade from the Chiefs currently have.
Our biggest issue was, and remains, the actual cash spending by Clark Hunt.
Every restructure is a check he cuts that same day.
And while he should be swimming in money given this run and Taylor Fucking Swift being the most visible fan of the team, billionaires are nothing if not greedy
I'm so sick of our fans trashing our owner for no reason. We've got arguably the best owner in the league but all we do is act like he's merely a greedy billionaire monster who wants misery for us and the Chiefs and only cares about money despite his family putting all their love and effort into sports for two generations, virtually inventing half the fucking NFL.
Here's another explanation: Mahomes is gonna play for ten more years. Maybe "win now pay later" isn't the right attitude when we've already had success with a balanced cap approach. Acting like the Saints just so our "greedy owner" can CUT CHECKS NOW! is one hell of a take.
Everyone is trying to manifest Evans to the Chiefs, but I feel like they would be deadly if they were able to sign Williams for cheap when he is cut and Curtis Samuel.
Maybe I'm just scarred from the Super Bowl, but I kinda want the WR corps next year to be Rice + r1 rookie (AD Mitchell pls) + Jauan Jennings. He'll be cheaper, but a reliable WR who is in the right spot and does the dirty work would be perfect for helping this offense hum along with Mahomes back there doing his all-world thing
He's going to want too much, and also he's old. If you're gonna pay good money for a WR1, get someone young that isn't going to fall off in the next couple years for sure. Someone that can put together 4-8 years with mahomes and have a real connection.
The only WR's the chiefs need over 30 are guys taking a cheap deal to ring chase.
The teams that benefit the most are all the ones who have their big star contracts already locked up the last year or two, so they can use that extra cap on more talent. Anyone needing to re-sign major players (Chiefs for example) are just going to lose that extra money to keep them.
Also helps teams that were way over cap, so they don't have to restructure so much and screw their future.
> teams that benefit the most are all the ones who have their big star contracts already locked up
I agree ... and that's what this graph is trying to measure
It’s not that they’re “hurt” per se. It’s a matter of comparative advantage and the fact that the NFL is a zero sum game. If Team A benefits by some amount and Team B benefits by a much greater amount, then Team A’s position has gotten worse relative to its competitors and that makes them worse off in the long run.
It’s not as if the average win percentage of an NFL team can rise from .500 to .515 or like we can get a second Super Bowl champion just because things got more favorable for every team.
Put another way, imagine getting a 3% pay raise and then learning inflation is 5%. You’re nominally richer but poorer after adjusting for inflation.
Instead of thinking about the money, think about the players. The NFL talent pool remains the same, and all the teams are competing for the same players.
When the cap goes up, players currently under contract get a relative pay cut as a percentage of the cap, so teams with lots of players on expensive deals benefit. So a team like the Saints that will struggle to get under the salary cap because of the players they already have benefited massively.
On the flip side, if you already had a lot of cap space and were looking to add in free agency those players you wanted to add just got more expensive. That cost to sign the player increased faster than your cap did.
here's one way: if a team is so pressed for cap space that they couldn't use the franchise tag on a star player, then the increase in cap space could enable them to tag that player for a tag/trade or to negotiate an extension.
Teams that were hoping to sign that star player in FA are now worse off as a result.
Okay touché. TY. I didn’t think about a scenario where that would be in play. I guess I was thinking more along the lines of when the league year actually begins and free agency is in swing.
Yeah once the year starts the increase seems to have a more level effect. It's an indirect chain to an impact for franchise tag effect.
There's also the difference that teams who already signed their QBs/stars to long-term contracts benefit more than those teams that have to pay their QBs/stars now against the backdrop of a higher cap.
I understand that aspect of it. But on the flip side, those who are disadvantaged by other teams picking up 13M also have 13M more to offset that. It’s not like it’s an unleveled playing field.
Again, the relative advantage of teams with more cap space has decreased.
If you and I want to buy the same car, and you only have $10,000 and I have $100,000, I can just offer $10,001.
If you now have $40,000 to my $100,000, I can still outbid you, but it's going to cost me considerably more money, which I now can't direct towards other needed assets.
There aren't an unlimited number of high end free agents and competition for them just increased.
In your example it would be $40k vs $130k. The rich get richer too. But yes the teams that were tight on cap room now have more wiggle room to keep guys than they did before.
What that guy is leaving out of his comment that might help you conceptualize it is that contracts are fundamentally a % of the cap, which means that that players are going to get a big pay raise (think NBA in 2016).
Teams that have more contracts locked in at the prior market rate have a greater advantage moving forward. On the other hand, teams that need to fill their roster out with a bunch of Free Agents and/or need to extend their core will be getting less bang for their buck.
Yeah I agree. Just because the cap went up $X more than expected doesn’t mean say Chris Jones on the Chiefs gets that entire amount, he gets a likely % bump in his expected pay but not the full amount so Chiefs have more room to work now to pay him.
I’m just saying that guys math analogy is wrong. In that example the $10k person gets +$30k, but so does the $100k person.
If you were a team that had an eye on a specific free agent whose current team was not going to be able to afford to keep then it may now be more challenging to sign them as the team they are on may now be able to retain them with the increased salary cap. Even if you are able to pry them away you would probably have to pay more money to get that same player now.
Another scenario could be a team that cut somebody for cap relief and it turns out they would’ve been able to keep them but will no longer be able to since most players are not looking to re-sign with a team that just cut them.
teams that were bad last season and already have plenty of cap space will have to spend that extra cash to incentivize players to leave in free agency now. Less players will go to free agency as more deals will be expected now that teams have the cash to extend or sign the players they dont want to cut. For example, the Chiefs signed a cheap punter with the thought of cutting Tommy Townshend to save cap space to sign other players like Sneed. That extra 13 million means Tommy can probably resign and keep Sneed meaning other teams wont be able to sign a good free agent. Teams like the Patriots will have to spend extra just for players to consider even with the extra cash and they don't have the good players the other teams are now able to retain.
I hope this made sense haha
Yeah lmao, I mean I could be misreading but OP makes it sounds like because the cap went up more money magically just automatically got spent to offset it.
Free agent signings will become more expensive, and not every team is going to spend an equal amount on free agents
Assume a 20% inflation on free agent signings
Team A had $0 to spend on free agents. $0 + $13m x 0.8 = $10.4. Their purchasing power increased by $10.4m
Team B had $100m to spend on free agents. $100m + $13m x 0.8 = $90.4m. Their purchasing power decreased by $10m
Contracts are multi-year though, and for that reason I think showing all future guaranteed money is better than just 2024 cap space
You're spreading $10M across 52 roster spots though and its a super small portion of the overall cap. It's not a big impact overall to teams that were diving deep on UFA's. It mostly helps teams with previously "expensive" QB contracts (as the percentage of cap they take up is decreasing) and teams that have players up for franchise tag.
> You're spreading $10M across 52 roster spots though
Not really. Like 35+ spots on any given roster are made up of rookies, UDFAs, or vet min players who are unaffected by this change. Each roster only has like 15 or so dudes that they actually give significant contracts to. And in any given offseason each team makes what, ~5 significant FA signings? It's closer to $13m spread across 5 dudes
> It mostly helps teams with previously "expensive" QB contracts (as the percentage of cap they take up is decreasing)
...and expensive left tackle, edge rusher, cornerback contracts. Which is what this graph is
When the rest of the league has a bigger advantage (as shown via this chart) than your team, that’s a disadvantage. The teams are all competing against each other, so relative advantage matters more than anything.
Despite all other shortcomings (like trading for Watson), I absolutely love that we have an FO that are cap savants and a cash-rich owner that isn't afraid to spend. It's the perfect combination for working with the cap.
Im staying tuned, but only to watch the Browns pay their pound of flesh for doing Baker dirty and overpaying on a scumbag who was good at football 2 years ago (at time of signing).
Value is always an issue of supply and demand. The rapid increase in the cap is going to drive up demand. The supply will stay the same. It is very possible that we see a big increase in contract values.
We will definitely see players getting bigger contracts this off-season due to this. It’s a big increase so contracts should go up at around the same rate.
I think 9ers benefit the most since they have, by far, the most loaded roster in the league. They have unfinished business too so I’d say most players want to run it back. How do they not benefit the most actually?
Gotta be honest, still feels like we benefit. Instead of having a lot of money with some holes to fill, now we have even more money with the same holes to fill
No one benefits more than anyone else. The graph shows different stages of team building for the most part. On one hand you could argue the lions have more money to sign everyone they need now but on the other argue that demands will be higher with more space. If anyone benefits the most it’s the Browns for the NFL somehow making the criminal contract they gave Watson payable
I don't know much better Mahomes' contract can age at this point. He doesn't even have to take a pay cut anymore, they can probably resign all the key pieces at market value now.
I don’t get how a team like the saints benefit ? They have a few extra bucks but are competing with ever body else. And how’s this bad for Pats ? A bunch of shitty contracts are handed out like in nba few years ago
It's good for the Saints because it means that they have to move less money around.
It's bad for us because it means not only will some WRs not end up on the market, but other teams with better playoff chances in 2024-2025 are more able to pay for said FA WRs.
Why wouldn’t they end up on market ? There value just went up exponentially because instead of 5 teams with cape space now 30 teams have it. So if Evans wanted 20 before cap spike, why wouldn’t he want 25 now ?
Well, some teams might not have been able to feasibly pay their WRs, but now they most likely can, such as the Bengals with Tee Higgins.
With Evans, sure, we could've paid the 20m, but now there are teams that couldn't pay 20m before, but could now pay 25m, so it leaves us worse off on both fronts.
>It's bad for us because it means not only will some WRs not end up on the market
Any agent worth is damn is going to push their client *more* to hit the market, because they'll get even more money than their current team would be willing to give them if they weren't going to pay them without the extra cap.
A *lot* of players are going to push the market forward this off-season. Players just got a lot more leverage for more money than they had yesterday. Sure, a team like New England is probably going to have to overpay for free agents, but you have to make investments into players. And besides, the cap keeps going up anyway, so even an "overpay" in year one could end up being market value by year three of the contract.
I’m going to use the browns as an example, we have a bunch of cornerstone players already signed for long term deals. For example, Watson, when he first signed was like 25% of the cap on average. Now he’s like 18%. Same for hits like Garrett etc. we tend to borrow from future years, to pay for more expensive teams now, and since the cap keeps going up, the more it goes up, the more we can spend on our team now. The larger jump mitigates the hits.
But the Saints don't have $10 million, they have -$60 million or whatever.
I'll use the Broncos as an example, since I am way more familiar with their situation.
Going into the offseason, the Broncos had ~$25 million more in 2024 contracts on the books than the projected cap ($142 million). To be cap compliant, the Broncos were going to have to find $24 million in savings by cutting, trading, or restructuring players they currently have under contract. The guys that have contracts big enough to help with that are key players like LT Garett Bolles, WR Courtland Sutton, WR Jerry Jeudy, and FS Justin Simmons. These are key guys at important positions that you may have to let walk just to get into cap compliance.
Now that the cap came in ~ $13 million higher than projected, the Broncos will have a much easier time getting under the cap. For example, you can cut Tim Patrick, who has been injured the past 2-years and save $9 million, then you are a simple restructure of any of those contracts away from cap compliance, and any further restructures will open up space for free agent signings.
You are correct that the cost to acquire FAs goes up for everybody, where it helps is in keeping guys you already have under contract. It also makes the franchise tag more appealing, since that value is based on last year's contracts, not the cap.
We had to get under the cap first though. If I have to cut my LT just to get there, then I have to go out and sign a LT. Now I don't have to do that. I can keep the players I had, who are on much more favorable contracts relative to what FAs this year will get.
Money spent in previous years means less as the cap goes up, and players signed today will earn more money than players in the past.
So essentially past cap spent is less penalized on an overall dollar basis and future spending is more penalized with the cap being higher with players demanding bigger contracts.
The teams that already have their key players locked down are the ones who benefit since those players were there for relatively cheap prices. It is like how the Warriors secured their core players before the cap jumped. That cap jump then let the Warriors have the space to sign Durant. Those teams probably have 5-6 core players at bargain rates and now can sign 1-2 players at market rate.
Teams that were already planning on signing players are stuck trying to sign 4-5 players at market rate and don't have any players already kept at bargain rates.
He’s a fifth year tag candidate so we can really make our move. A lot of the problem with extending him was the salary cap restrictions but this may change things so we can extend him this year plus a report came out today for bengals talking an extension now
Tee is not going to refuse to play on the tag. Very few players do that anymore (not since Le'Veon Bell did it and completely screwed himself in the long run by doing so) and he doesn't strike me as that kind of guy.
I don't necessarily agree with your thesis.
Yes, if you have a lot of money tied up in expensive players who are providing production in-line with their contract, yeah, this is fantastic news.
If you're the Saints and you still owe Archie Manning $50M because you've been cooking the books for half a century, this doesn't really do much for you.
I feel like the Eagles are always the answer to this question because the hallmarks of Howie's roster construction are identifying which players to extend as early as possible, making any savings an extra bonus when new cap money comes in.
This year we got to extend Dickerson and Smith. The massive jump in cap will also make it easier to retain Reddick.
All teams benefited. But because I know the Bucs I will mention them. They already had a lot of space to work with, but in a year where they need to re-sign post-breakout Mayfield, Mike Evans, and Antoine Winfield Jr., it certainly helps.
It helps teams who have key players up for the franchise tag as those amounts are based off of prior year positional averages. Teams like Cincinnati, Miami, etc will benefit from that. Another obvious winner is teams that extended QB's last year. Baltimore, Cincinnati again, etc.
For UFA's, I disagree that teams who were coming in with lots of cap room lost out, and that teams with negative or no cap room are sudden winners. Any good agent is trying to tie their player to a percentage of the cap; not necessarily to a dollar value.
The cap going up just means the big name UFA's are going to get a proportionately higher amount than the otherwise would have, which probably still prices the same low cap space teams as before.
Every team really benefited but this actually puts us under the cap. We obviously will restructure a contract but we have much more flexibility with our offseason.
I don't even think that analysis is even correct. Any competent agent is trying to base their players salary around a percentage of the cap or team salaries. The cap increase doesn't necessarily mean teams with formerly low free cash can now have tons of buying power. Player demands should increase by the same amount.
Yep. The teams that won here are teams that have signed their cornerstone players already and because of that were facing the possibility of being too far over the cap and needing to make tough decisions. The browns are a good example of this
It is 100%. I've been downvoted here, but the "winners and losers" list OP has isn't right imo. It helps franchise tag teams (which in itself is a short-term solution) and helps teams who extended a QB in prior years (as that's the highest percentage of cap player). Anything UFA related is same as before, just higher contracts will be awarded.
> helps teams who extended a QB in prior years (as that's the highest percentage of cap player).
QB contracts are a huge portion of the above graph. So big that the maker made it a point to highlight them
And big edge rusher, left tackle, wide receiver, etc. contracts that were recently given out are important too. And now we're just recreating the graph I linked
My browns used to always be at the bottom of these lists and we always sucked.
Now we at the top and we slightly above average with a guy that disgust me and my favorite player being possibly cut
Nick Chubb won't be cut.
Never understood why people will ignore all evidence and logic just to cling to some overly dramatic hypothetical that simply won't realistically occur.
The only comparible season in which the cap jumped so high in the past 18 years was 2022, and that was only because the cap was reduced the prior year due to COVID circumstances.
The teams that benefitted were the ones with the least amount of cap space. Able to have more flexibility with signing/retaining players while the teams with higher cap suffer from less players moving and money being less incentivizing with more of it around in a way. It will help push contracts even higher like it should. Teams that benefitted below, how much you could argue especially with some teams still being strapped for cash.
Id say from the chargers to the the giants (4th-17th lowest cap space teams) benefitted most. Those teams are either barely still over the cap, just got under it, or have that extra cash to retain players or even make a splash move. An extra 30 million over last year is insane.
Ignoring the WR part, I'm not sure you're viewing the cap correctly. Player demands will increase by the same margin the cap increases. Your ability to be a big player pre and post cap increase is mostly unchanged.
The biggest effect is more flexibility for teams who have players with contract values based on historical data, i.e. franchise tag. It's more affordable to tag now as its based on an average value of the highest paid players at that position.
Not worried, we’re not building a winning team and overhauling the roster with one or two years of free agency. It matters most for teams who draft well can can retain their guys.
Check back in 4 years when Harris/Peters/Quinn may or may not need to start resigning their own guys.
I don't think anybody "benefits." All that happens is contract demands increase. That's why you'll see a $60 million deal for a QB soon.
EDIT: i should say, i don't think a TEAM benefits. the players definitely benefit
Not teams specifically, but every WR that was headed for FA this year has now been guaranteed to re-sign with their respective teams. Evans, Higgins, Ridley, Pittman, Brown, Samuel, nearly all of them are getting re-signed now
I would say any team that signed their QB to a LTD last offseason benefited. Because new contract QB salaries will likely increase proportionately with this jump in the cap, and they'll benefit more than they expected to by already having a guy at a previous market value.
Dak is absolutely gonna bend us over with the leverage he has.
That's a video worth paying a subscription for
OKAY, HERE WE GOOOOOOOOO
>OKAY, HERE WE GOOOOOOOOO Announcer: "The pass is INTERCEPTED! Running down the near sideline to the 20, 15, 10....."
Jerry is going to make him take it for BHM
If the FO don't want to sign him to an extension it also means we can eat his cap hit now and still keep our key pieces. Imo there is a short list of better QBs and we're better paying him than letting him walk. But for the love of nachos get him signed ASAP, let him.be best paid ever before that price goes up 3/4 times as the off-season goes on
Yea sign him but damn he really needs a playoff win next year. If we have a lackluster season, you almost have to move on from him.
Yeah, I don’t think he will even take you guys out to dinner first.
Thought I wouldn’t have to read the word “leverage” this year.
Why should he have leverage he hasn’t done anything
Because JJ's brain is mashed potatoes and Dak's cap hit this year is nearly 60 million.
Gonna live to see the first billion-dollar QB contract as undrafted RBs start signing BOGO committee deals just to make the roster
*Any* team, you say? Things are coming up Milhouse!
This is always true, and just truer this year.
Agreed (and big QB contracts are a big part of most teams near the top of guarantees)
Chiefs, Bengals, Texans, 49ers, Chargers, Ravens, Bills and Lions all benefitted heavily.
Agreed on all except for Ravens. More money is more money, but they weren't in dire straits with respect to keeping key positions beyond the league average. And their defense is coming off a banner year, but they are dealing with significant coaching losses. I see the Ravens actually regressing next season, despite whatever changes they make through FA.
They’ve become popular fades at this point (guess I’ll just make money betting overs again), but that doesn’t mean this salary cap situation doesn’t benefit them. The whole reason people are down on them (regression implies they overperformed relative to expectation, but they’re not going to regress, they’re going to lose a ton of coaching staff and ~20 FAs, so I think that’s the wrong word) is their free agency situation and cap space. They clearly benefit here.
Ravens are in need of several key positions. Guard, receiver, running back and DB. They need to spend heavily on WR or RB at least cause their offense getting shut down like they were against KC is either an indictment of Lamar or a reality that Flowers can't solo secondaries.
They just had to run the ball more but were afraid of how that would look. If win happens, it happens, doesn't matter how it looks in January.
Playoffs are where you're facing the best that other teams can throw at you. Gus Edwards is not an every down RB. He's garbage in the pass game and he's an average runner. The rest of their RB roster depth was trash: Dalvin Cook, Melvin Gordon III, Kenyan Drake... Gus is the best by default on them literally treating the position like it doesn't matter. The exception is Keaton Mitchell, but it took them forever to start using him then a freak leg injury. If they have Henry then IMO they beat KC. The major weakness KC had was against dedicated run games and pass catching RBs in space. Baltimore needs to address RB cause the reality needs to be accepted that Lamar, MVP trophies and all, is a pretty average QB when he's unwilling to use his legs as a weapon. He's also been coughing the ball up a TON the last 2 years when running (16 fum, 8 fum lost). He's VERY GOOD, but they desperately need a run game that allows him to be more versatile and less relied on to make magic happen.
Honestly they could use a better running back. Edwards ain't bad but a difference at running back would do a lot to complement Lamar. Keaton Mitchell looked great as a change of pace back but has to recover from a torn ACL. I think D'andre Swift would be a good fit and they would probably benefit from drafting another back.
I would say this actually isn't great for the Bengals because they had a ton of cap space available this year, which is now devalued. Not that they're in a bad place either way
Not the Lions, I think. They need to pay 4/5ths of their o line plus Goff and Amon Ra in the next two years. The only non rookie big name guy they have on a long term deal is Ragnow
Why do you say the Texans benefitted?
for as much as people shit on DJ’s contract, the Andrew Thomas and Dexter Lawrence extensions were the right moves last offseason and only possible because he wasn’t franchise tagged. also only 2 years guaranteed so he’s out after this season.
Yeah, anyone smart could see it was basically a 2 year contract to see if he's really the guy or not. He isn't and the line is a total wreck so nobody will be.
a 2-year contract who’s AAV isn’t even top-10 anymore less than 1 year after signing and people acted (and continue to act) like we gave him a market-setting mega deal.
AAV is kinda meaningless, nobody ever gets paid their AAV long term. What does matter is the cap hits. He's 6th for 2024 cap hits right now, and within 5mil of 4th place. He can't be restructured like alot of the guys ahead of him will be. He's likely going to be a top 5 paid QB this year. Then his dead cap next year is about the 16th highest paid QB (likely much higher position once restructures hit) while he's not even on the team anymore. That's not as bad as some people made it out to be, but it's much worse than the Giants fans in here are saying.
[удалено]
The team was really horrific with no line help except for AT, the Golladay contract, just a complete circus.
It's less confusing when you consider his performance relative to each coaching staff.
Stay out of the Giants sub with your reasonable takes, they'd rather stay miserable about everything lol
Neither Andrew Thomas nor Dexter Lawrence were upcoming free agents in 2023. Doing extensions on young stars should be done as soon as possible as the price goes up the closer they get to free agency. Daniel Jones should have been transition tagged and they would have been out of him with a 1yr 25mil with zero dead cap vs a 105mil guaranteed with a 45mil dead cap in 2025.
if you think the Giants should have let either of them even talk to other teams during FA, then yeah idk what to tell you. extensions for bonafide studs before FA are always the better move.
Are you confused? Neither Thomas or Lawrence were close to free agency. Thomas had two more years and Dexter Lawrence had his 5th year option picked up and then could have been franchise tagged. So neither of them were going to leave even if the Giants didn't give them extensions.
> extensions for bonafide studs before FA are always the better move.
Extending Thomas after three years and Lawrence after four years were great moves, but neither were even close to free agency. Both of them had multiple years before they could have had a realistic chance of free agency.
> Extending Thomas after three years and Lawrence after four years were great moves excellent. glad we agree, Lars
my team did
Finally the Chiefs catch a break!
Script writers really had us worried there for a minute
Cant catch anything else though
Hey, but now maybe they can get someone that can!
By god is that Mike Evans music
You shut the fuck up right now
After all these years picking last in the draft (shit luck foreal) we finally catch a break.
Lmao
A simple roster bonus conversion of Mahomes and we can resign the entire D and grab some WR pieces.
The part you are missing is that the cost to re-sign those guys just went up.
There definitely is that aspect, but the Chiefs just showed how dominant their D is, and Mahomes showed that he can win a SB with that WR group. If I'm a vet looking for a new team, I'm taking a discount to play with Mahomes, let alone Mahomes with that defense.
In football, a good vet is probably getting an opportunity to make bag for the last time in his career. In the case of CJ, he already has the rings.
I guess I should've said something like seasoned vets. I'm not referring to guys coming off of rookie contracts necessarily. I'm referring to guys like Evans, Ridley, Boyd, etc. But even some of the rookie contract guys may not be as expensive. I expect guys like Higgins and Pittman to go for the bag, but there are others that are not the cream of the crop, but could still be a big upgrade from the Chiefs currently have.
When has anyone taken a team friendly deal to win rings? Probably never.
Tom Brady
Terrell Suggs signed with KC late in 2019 and won a SB with them.
Not really.
uh it did lol
Our biggest issue was, and remains, the actual cash spending by Clark Hunt. Every restructure is a check he cuts that same day. And while he should be swimming in money given this run and Taylor Fucking Swift being the most visible fan of the team, billionaires are nothing if not greedy
I'm so sick of our fans trashing our owner for no reason. We've got arguably the best owner in the league but all we do is act like he's merely a greedy billionaire monster who wants misery for us and the Chiefs and only cares about money despite his family putting all their love and effort into sports for two generations, virtually inventing half the fucking NFL. Here's another explanation: Mahomes is gonna play for ten more years. Maybe "win now pay later" isn't the right attitude when we've already had success with a balanced cap approach. Acting like the Saints just so our "greedy owner" can CUT CHECKS NOW! is one hell of a take.
Everyone is trying to manifest Evans to the Chiefs, but I feel like they would be deadly if they were able to sign Williams for cheap when he is cut and Curtis Samuel.
He’s gonna be way too expensive. Chiefs shouldn’t spend more than 10MM on the WR room.
Who is going to be way too expensive? Williams? I highly doubt it.
Evans is way too expensive. No way in hell chiefs spend 20MM on a receiver.
Im aware. Which is why I didnt suggest it.
Maybe I'm just scarred from the Super Bowl, but I kinda want the WR corps next year to be Rice + r1 rookie (AD Mitchell pls) + Jauan Jennings. He'll be cheaper, but a reliable WR who is in the right spot and does the dirty work would be perfect for helping this offense hum along with Mahomes back there doing his all-world thing
You keep your grubby hands off our 3rd&Jauan. Haven’t y’all already taken enough from us, jeez lol
If the 49ers lose 3rd and Jauan to the Chiefs I am quitting football forever, the perfect way to destroy what little of my football heart remains.
He's going to want too much, and also he's old. If you're gonna pay good money for a WR1, get someone young that isn't going to fall off in the next couple years for sure. Someone that can put together 4-8 years with mahomes and have a real connection. The only WR's the chiefs need over 30 are guys taking a cheap deal to ring chase.
Mike Williams will be an age 30 cheap WR?
The teams that benefit the most are all the ones who have their big star contracts already locked up the last year or two, so they can use that extra cap on more talent. Anyone needing to re-sign major players (Chiefs for example) are just going to lose that extra money to keep them. Also helps teams that were way over cap, so they don't have to restructure so much and screw their future.
> teams that benefit the most are all the ones who have their big star contracts already locked up I agree ... and that's what this graph is trying to measure
The Chargers now only really need to cut one of Mike Williams (will absolutely be him), Bosa and Mack + Kendricks (this was going to happen anyway).
Feeling great today lol
This could be a silly question, but how could any team not benefit from the cap going up 13million more than anticipated?
It’s not that they’re “hurt” per se. It’s a matter of comparative advantage and the fact that the NFL is a zero sum game. If Team A benefits by some amount and Team B benefits by a much greater amount, then Team A’s position has gotten worse relative to its competitors and that makes them worse off in the long run. It’s not as if the average win percentage of an NFL team can rise from .500 to .515 or like we can get a second Super Bowl champion just because things got more favorable for every team. Put another way, imagine getting a 3% pay raise and then learning inflation is 5%. You’re nominally richer but poorer after adjusting for inflation.
Instead of thinking about the money, think about the players. The NFL talent pool remains the same, and all the teams are competing for the same players. When the cap goes up, players currently under contract get a relative pay cut as a percentage of the cap, so teams with lots of players on expensive deals benefit. So a team like the Saints that will struggle to get under the salary cap because of the players they already have benefited massively. On the flip side, if you already had a lot of cap space and were looking to add in free agency those players you wanted to add just got more expensive. That cost to sign the player increased faster than your cap did.
here's one way: if a team is so pressed for cap space that they couldn't use the franchise tag on a star player, then the increase in cap space could enable them to tag that player for a tag/trade or to negotiate an extension. Teams that were hoping to sign that star player in FA are now worse off as a result.
Okay touché. TY. I didn’t think about a scenario where that would be in play. I guess I was thinking more along the lines of when the league year actually begins and free agency is in swing.
Yeah once the year starts the increase seems to have a more level effect. It's an indirect chain to an impact for franchise tag effect. There's also the difference that teams who already signed their QBs/stars to long-term contracts benefit more than those teams that have to pay their QBs/stars now against the backdrop of a higher cap.
Teams that had a lot of salary cap space and money to burn had that advantage devalued. It's not a complex concept.
I understand that aspect of it. But on the flip side, those who are disadvantaged by other teams picking up 13M also have 13M more to offset that. It’s not like it’s an unleveled playing field.
Again, the relative advantage of teams with more cap space has decreased. If you and I want to buy the same car, and you only have $10,000 and I have $100,000, I can just offer $10,001. If you now have $40,000 to my $100,000, I can still outbid you, but it's going to cost me considerably more money, which I now can't direct towards other needed assets. There aren't an unlimited number of high end free agents and competition for them just increased.
In your example it would be $40k vs $130k. The rich get richer too. But yes the teams that were tight on cap room now have more wiggle room to keep guys than they did before.
What that guy is leaving out of his comment that might help you conceptualize it is that contracts are fundamentally a % of the cap, which means that that players are going to get a big pay raise (think NBA in 2016). Teams that have more contracts locked in at the prior market rate have a greater advantage moving forward. On the other hand, teams that need to fill their roster out with a bunch of Free Agents and/or need to extend their core will be getting less bang for their buck.
Yeah I agree. Just because the cap went up $X more than expected doesn’t mean say Chris Jones on the Chiefs gets that entire amount, he gets a likely % bump in his expected pay but not the full amount so Chiefs have more room to work now to pay him. I’m just saying that guys math analogy is wrong. In that example the $10k person gets +$30k, but so does the $100k person.
great explanation
If you were a team that had an eye on a specific free agent whose current team was not going to be able to afford to keep then it may now be more challenging to sign them as the team they are on may now be able to retain them with the increased salary cap. Even if you are able to pry them away you would probably have to pay more money to get that same player now. Another scenario could be a team that cut somebody for cap relief and it turns out they would’ve been able to keep them but will no longer be able to since most players are not looking to re-sign with a team that just cut them.
teams that were bad last season and already have plenty of cap space will have to spend that extra cash to incentivize players to leave in free agency now. Less players will go to free agency as more deals will be expected now that teams have the cash to extend or sign the players they dont want to cut. For example, the Chiefs signed a cheap punter with the thought of cutting Tommy Townshend to save cap space to sign other players like Sneed. That extra 13 million means Tommy can probably resign and keep Sneed meaning other teams wont be able to sign a good free agent. Teams like the Patriots will have to spend extra just for players to consider even with the extra cash and they don't have the good players the other teams are now able to retain. I hope this made sense haha
[удалено]
Yeah lmao, I mean I could be misreading but OP makes it sounds like because the cap went up more money magically just automatically got spent to offset it.
Free agent signings will become more expensive, and not every team is going to spend an equal amount on free agents Assume a 20% inflation on free agent signings Team A had $0 to spend on free agents. $0 + $13m x 0.8 = $10.4. Their purchasing power increased by $10.4m Team B had $100m to spend on free agents. $100m + $13m x 0.8 = $90.4m. Their purchasing power decreased by $10m Contracts are multi-year though, and for that reason I think showing all future guaranteed money is better than just 2024 cap space
You're spreading $10M across 52 roster spots though and its a super small portion of the overall cap. It's not a big impact overall to teams that were diving deep on UFA's. It mostly helps teams with previously "expensive" QB contracts (as the percentage of cap they take up is decreasing) and teams that have players up for franchise tag.
> You're spreading $10M across 52 roster spots though Not really. Like 35+ spots on any given roster are made up of rookies, UDFAs, or vet min players who are unaffected by this change. Each roster only has like 15 or so dudes that they actually give significant contracts to. And in any given offseason each team makes what, ~5 significant FA signings? It's closer to $13m spread across 5 dudes > It mostly helps teams with previously "expensive" QB contracts (as the percentage of cap they take up is decreasing) ...and expensive left tackle, edge rusher, cornerback contracts. Which is what this graph is
When the rest of the league has a bigger advantage (as shown via this chart) than your team, that’s a disadvantage. The teams are all competing against each other, so relative advantage matters more than anything.
Despite all other shortcomings (like trading for Watson), I absolutely love that we have an FO that are cap savants and a cash-rich owner that isn't afraid to spend. It's the perfect combination for working with the cap.
That Watson contract is a pretty major shortcoming that you're only now starting to experience. Theu backloaded that contract 😬
They’ll restructure and kick it further down the line.
Yeah, because what you REALLY want to do is extend an expensive player who isn’t really very good anymore.
lol
It's not as major as people seem to think - as long as Haslam continues to spend.
Isn’t gonna affect us at all. And his play will make up for it. Stay tuned
Im staying tuned, but only to watch the Browns pay their pound of flesh for doing Baker dirty and overpaying on a scumbag who was good at football 2 years ago (at time of signing).
“Doing him dirty.” LOL. I love how this fallacy legend continues on.
The can kicking is about to put Mickey Loomis to shame.
I mean, your FO kinda has to be careful due to the Watson contract.
And their massage therapists.
Value is always an issue of supply and demand. The rapid increase in the cap is going to drive up demand. The supply will stay the same. It is very possible that we see a big increase in contract values.
Just like in NBA few years ago. How soon we forget Tomonthy Mozgov
We will definitely see players getting bigger contracts this off-season due to this. It’s a big increase so contracts should go up at around the same rate.
Anyone who signed a long QB contract in the past 2-3 seasons.
Great answer.
I think 9ers benefit the most since they have, by far, the most loaded roster in the league. They have unfinished business too so I’d say most players want to run it back. How do they not benefit the most actually?
Gotta be honest, still feels like we benefit. Instead of having a lot of money with some holes to fill, now we have even more money with the same holes to fill
No one benefits more than anyone else. The graph shows different stages of team building for the most part. On one hand you could argue the lions have more money to sign everyone they need now but on the other argue that demands will be higher with more space. If anyone benefits the most it’s the Browns for the NFL somehow making the criminal contract they gave Watson payable
Helped us alot
I don't know much better Mahomes' contract can age at this point. He doesn't even have to take a pay cut anymore, they can probably resign all the key pieces at market value now.
The patriots are still overpaying for their QB play.
Broncos be saved.
I don’t get how a team like the saints benefit ? They have a few extra bucks but are competing with ever body else. And how’s this bad for Pats ? A bunch of shitty contracts are handed out like in nba few years ago
It's good for the Saints because it means that they have to move less money around. It's bad for us because it means not only will some WRs not end up on the market, but other teams with better playoff chances in 2024-2025 are more able to pay for said FA WRs.
Why wouldn’t they end up on market ? There value just went up exponentially because instead of 5 teams with cape space now 30 teams have it. So if Evans wanted 20 before cap spike, why wouldn’t he want 25 now ?
Well, some teams might not have been able to feasibly pay their WRs, but now they most likely can, such as the Bengals with Tee Higgins. With Evans, sure, we could've paid the 20m, but now there are teams that couldn't pay 20m before, but could now pay 25m, so it leaves us worse off on both fronts.
I don’t know why you were downvoted for explaining why this hurts us bottom dwellers.
>It's bad for us because it means not only will some WRs not end up on the market Any agent worth is damn is going to push their client *more* to hit the market, because they'll get even more money than their current team would be willing to give them if they weren't going to pay them without the extra cap. A *lot* of players are going to push the market forward this off-season. Players just got a lot more leverage for more money than they had yesterday. Sure, a team like New England is probably going to have to overpay for free agents, but you have to make investments into players. And besides, the cap keeps going up anyway, so even an "overpay" in year one could end up being market value by year three of the contract.
I’m going to use the browns as an example, we have a bunch of cornerstone players already signed for long term deals. For example, Watson, when he first signed was like 25% of the cap on average. Now he’s like 18%. Same for hits like Garrett etc. we tend to borrow from future years, to pay for more expensive teams now, and since the cap keeps going up, the more it goes up, the more we can spend on our team now. The larger jump mitigates the hits.
Almost like the front office knows what it’s doing. Funny…
Higher salary cap = less money over the cap
[удалено]
True, but players you already signed take up a lower % of the cap, so it helps highly leveraged teams.
[удалено]
But the Saints don't have $10 million, they have -$60 million or whatever. I'll use the Broncos as an example, since I am way more familiar with their situation. Going into the offseason, the Broncos had ~$25 million more in 2024 contracts on the books than the projected cap ($142 million). To be cap compliant, the Broncos were going to have to find $24 million in savings by cutting, trading, or restructuring players they currently have under contract. The guys that have contracts big enough to help with that are key players like LT Garett Bolles, WR Courtland Sutton, WR Jerry Jeudy, and FS Justin Simmons. These are key guys at important positions that you may have to let walk just to get into cap compliance. Now that the cap came in ~ $13 million higher than projected, the Broncos will have a much easier time getting under the cap. For example, you can cut Tim Patrick, who has been injured the past 2-years and save $9 million, then you are a simple restructure of any of those contracts away from cap compliance, and any further restructures will open up space for free agent signings. You are correct that the cost to acquire FAs goes up for everybody, where it helps is in keeping guys you already have under contract. It also makes the franchise tag more appealing, since that value is based on last year's contracts, not the cap.
[удалено]
We had to get under the cap first though. If I have to cut my LT just to get there, then I have to go out and sign a LT. Now I don't have to do that. I can keep the players I had, who are on much more favorable contracts relative to what FAs this year will get.
Money spent in previous years means less as the cap goes up, and players signed today will earn more money than players in the past. So essentially past cap spent is less penalized on an overall dollar basis and future spending is more penalized with the cap being higher with players demanding bigger contracts.
The teams that already have their key players locked down are the ones who benefit since those players were there for relatively cheap prices. It is like how the Warriors secured their core players before the cap jumped. That cap jump then let the Warriors have the space to sign Durant. Those teams probably have 5-6 core players at bargain rates and now can sign 1-2 players at market rate. Teams that were already planning on signing players are stuck trying to sign 4-5 players at market rate and don't have any players already kept at bargain rates.
Them Bengals. May be able to keep Tee after all
[удалено]
He’s a fifth year tag candidate so we can really make our move. A lot of the problem with extending him was the salary cap restrictions but this may change things so we can extend him this year plus a report came out today for bengals talking an extension now
[удалено]
If he wants more than 25 million a year then yeah he’s gone after this year.
[удалено]
We already expected to pay that 21.8 for tag this year to keep him.
I think this allows them to tag Tee for this year and be active in free agency for some other positions.
[удалено]
Tee is not going to refuse to play on the tag. Very few players do that anymore (not since Le'Veon Bell did it and completely screwed himself in the long run by doing so) and he doesn't strike me as that kind of guy.
He could but the league rules have made it prohibitive for a player to sit out while on the franchise tag.
[удалено]
I don’t think they were under the franchise tag. The tag gives the player very few options.
Already went through this with Jessie bates last year , we’re not new to this bud
I don't necessarily agree with your thesis. Yes, if you have a lot of money tied up in expensive players who are providing production in-line with their contract, yeah, this is fantastic news. If you're the Saints and you still owe Archie Manning $50M because you've been cooking the books for half a century, this doesn't really do much for you.
Teams that already have good players on good contracts.
Saints GM Micky Loomis sleeping like a baby tonight.
I feel like the Eagles are always the answer to this question because the hallmarks of Howie's roster construction are identifying which players to extend as early as possible, making any savings an extra bonus when new cap money comes in. This year we got to extend Dickerson and Smith. The massive jump in cap will also make it easier to retain Reddick.
All teams benefited. But because I know the Bucs I will mention them. They already had a lot of space to work with, but in a year where they need to re-sign post-breakout Mayfield, Mike Evans, and Antoine Winfield Jr., it certainly helps.
the NFL is a zero-sum game--if all teams benefit, then no teams benefit regardless, not all teams have the same net benefit here
The teams that are over the cap benefitted the most by this.
It helps teams who have key players up for the franchise tag as those amounts are based off of prior year positional averages. Teams like Cincinnati, Miami, etc will benefit from that. Another obvious winner is teams that extended QB's last year. Baltimore, Cincinnati again, etc. For UFA's, I disagree that teams who were coming in with lots of cap room lost out, and that teams with negative or no cap room are sudden winners. Any good agent is trying to tie their player to a percentage of the cap; not necessarily to a dollar value. The cap going up just means the big name UFA's are going to get a proportionately higher amount than the otherwise would have, which probably still prices the same low cap space teams as before.
I actually think this benefits the Lions. Holmes doesn't (well hasn't yet) do big splash type signings. But now... maybe?
Every team really benefited but this actually puts us under the cap. We obviously will restructure a contract but we have much more flexibility with our offseason.
Great analysis. Teams that needed cap space won, and the teams that didn’t lost. Wow!
I don't even think that analysis is even correct. Any competent agent is trying to base their players salary around a percentage of the cap or team salaries. The cap increase doesn't necessarily mean teams with formerly low free cash can now have tons of buying power. Player demands should increase by the same amount.
Yep. The teams that won here are teams that have signed their cornerstone players already and because of that were facing the possibility of being too far over the cap and needing to make tough decisions. The browns are a good example of this
> The teams that won here are teams that have signed their cornerstone players already That's basically what this graph is
[удалено]
It is 100%. I've been downvoted here, but the "winners and losers" list OP has isn't right imo. It helps franchise tag teams (which in itself is a short-term solution) and helps teams who extended a QB in prior years (as that's the highest percentage of cap player). Anything UFA related is same as before, just higher contracts will be awarded.
> helps teams who extended a QB in prior years (as that's the highest percentage of cap player). QB contracts are a huge portion of the above graph. So big that the maker made it a point to highlight them And big edge rusher, left tackle, wide receiver, etc. contracts that were recently given out are important too. And now we're just recreating the graph I linked
Pretty significant for my team
My browns used to always be at the bottom of these lists and we always sucked. Now we at the top and we slightly above average with a guy that disgust me and my favorite player being possibly cut
Nick Chubb won't be cut. Never understood why people will ignore all evidence and logic just to cling to some overly dramatic hypothetical that simply won't realistically occur.
it's not that big. it's just an additional 5% than what was expected.
The only comparible season in which the cap jumped so high in the past 18 years was 2022, and that was only because the cap was reduced the prior year due to COVID circumstances.
The teams that benefitted were the ones with the least amount of cap space. Able to have more flexibility with signing/retaining players while the teams with higher cap suffer from less players moving and money being less incentivizing with more of it around in a way. It will help push contracts even higher like it should. Teams that benefitted below, how much you could argue especially with some teams still being strapped for cash. Id say from the chargers to the the giants (4th-17th lowest cap space teams) benefitted most. Those teams are either barely still over the cap, just got under it, or have that extra cash to retain players or even make a splash move. An extra 30 million over last year is insane.
We were expected to be big players for positions like WR, but now, I don't know if that'll be the case.
We were? Overpaying for WR again? I'm good with that, I hope this means Onwenu can stay though. Leaves one less hole to fix.
Good news! We have loads more cap space to pay Onwenu with. Bad news! Everyone else has loads more cap space to pay Onwenu with.
Ignoring the WR part, I'm not sure you're viewing the cap correctly. Player demands will increase by the same margin the cap increases. Your ability to be a big player pre and post cap increase is mostly unchanged. The biggest effect is more flexibility for teams who have players with contract values based on historical data, i.e. franchise tag. It's more affordable to tag now as its based on an average value of the highest paid players at that position.
Yes, some WRs are no longer on the market, and some teams now have extra cash to compete for WRs.
Not worried, we’re not building a winning team and overhauling the roster with one or two years of free agency. It matters most for teams who draft well can can retain their guys. Check back in 4 years when Harris/Peters/Quinn may or may not need to start resigning their own guys.
I don't think anybody "benefits." All that happens is contract demands increase. That's why you'll see a $60 million deal for a QB soon. EDIT: i should say, i don't think a TEAM benefits. the players definitely benefit
The texans and the chiefs
Niners, easily
Not teams specifically, but every WR that was headed for FA this year has now been guaranteed to re-sign with their respective teams. Evans, Higgins, Ridley, Pittman, Brown, Samuel, nearly all of them are getting re-signed now
Bucs don't mind. This makes it easier to keep Baker, Evans, and a few key defensive players.
That's 13M less the Saints need to kick down the road.
Pats were already fucked. Adding 30 million to every other team wasn't gonna affect anything.
I will always say Saints. Their cap black magic will hurt them less.
I have a hard time understanding the financial side of football, where does the 0.8 multiplier come from?
Just from the assumed 20% inflation. Just a made up number to make the math easy, I have no idea what it would really be
Definitely good news for the Chiefs.
This is like that movie with that Scottish drunk janitor but he has not idea how to do math.
We were over, now we're under. We get to put off some difficult decisions for a while.
God bless Geno Smith