Skip to content

Cap could now be above $123 million

alg-holding-cash-jpg Getty Images

The NFL’s version of the crop report is expected to be released in the days before free agency begins.  And unless the NFL’s version of Clarence Beeks ends up in a gorilla suit (in a gorilla cage with a real gorilla), the NFL’s version of Duke & Duke could be shouting, “Buy!  Buy!” when the market opens.

Per a source with knowledge of the situation, it’s now believed that the salary cap could exceed $123 million per team.

Not long ago, it was believed the cap would be $121 million per team.  More recently, the magic number became $122 million.

Now, it’s more than $123 million.

At $123 million, that’s only a 1.9-percent increase over last year.  But it’s more than anyone thought it would be.  And the extra $2.4 million in 2013 can provide the foundation for a much larger guaranteed payment now, with the amount spread for cap purposes over multiple years.

Besides, with many teams fighting to get in compliance with the cap, every dollar helps.

Permalink 25 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill, Top Stories
25 Responses to “Cap could now be above $123 million”
  1. longhairdontcare66 says: Feb 26, 2013 4:19 PM

    Goodell must have sent his charitable donations to the NFL instead of the “heads up football”

  2. maximusprime107 says: Feb 26, 2013 4:19 PM

    this might be a stupid question but whatever, if almost every team has to drastically shuffle around their cap why doesn’t the NFL just increase it more? lord knows they can afford to do it

  3. chad504boy says: Feb 26, 2013 4:19 PM

    Mickey Loomis making magic happen.

  4. radrhatr says: Feb 26, 2013 4:24 PM

    Does it matter? Everyone is gonna “massage” the numbers to suit themselves anyway. The cap is about as real as OZ.

  5. tundey says: Feb 26, 2013 4:25 PM

    How much of the increase is the $36M stolen from the Redskins by John Mara?

  6. jakkispeed says: Feb 26, 2013 4:27 PM

    While they’re at it, how about giving the Redskins and Cowboys their cap space back that they stole before that whole thing ends up in court?

  7. lilrob10201 says: Feb 26, 2013 4:34 PM

    I don’t think that the NFL should raise the salary cap anymore,because each year if it keeps increasing before you know it every football team in the NFL will have enough salary to blow on every FA on the market.

  8. nineroutsider says: Feb 26, 2013 4:37 PM

    Multi-culturalskins and Cowboys fans please remember to apply the appropriate penalty to that number to determine your true cap number…

  9. donnymacjack says: Feb 26, 2013 4:40 PM

    I’m convined no one has a clue how much the cap will be. One week it’s up, the next it’s down, then it’s flat, then it’s flat for the forseeable future, now it’s up.

    The cap math is right up there with tax-math. Only the rich can figure it out.

  10. tobymo says: Feb 26, 2013 4:47 PM

    I’m still wondering how John Mara got Goddell to take $18M away from the Redskins this year for not breaking any rules.

  11. ddavis83 says: Feb 26, 2013 4:49 PM

    So what?

    - Mike Brown

  12. dennisatunity says: Feb 26, 2013 4:51 PM

    maximusprime107
    It’s not a stupid question at all. What you are doing is asking exactly the right question. The answer comes in two parts: First the easy answer is that the union reps for the players agreed to it in collective bargaining. The more complex answer is that it’s an attempt to hold down the salaries that players are making. Is it right to hold down salaries? That answer depends on whether you support the millionaire players or the billionaire owners. (Apparently no answer supports the fans who must now put out an average of $400 a game for a family of 4 to attend a game.)

  13. mrpowers88 says: Feb 26, 2013 4:51 PM

    Call me cynical, but…

    -Could the league be leaking these increases just so that when the actual cap number is announced and isn’t as high as believed, the players do what they didn’t last year and oust De Smith? (Not sure about this, mainly because I’m pretty sure the league loves outmaneuvering Smith at pretty much every turn.)

    or

    -Is the union applying the the second year of cap penalties to the Cowboys and Redskins to the rest of the league right now, so that the “effective” cap might be $123M for the un-penalized teams, but the “actual” cap -the one for a regular, 32-team league- would actually be a lower number? (More likely in my opinion.)

  14. tastethejace says: Feb 26, 2013 4:58 PM

    When the cap goes up… guess who gets passed on the expenses.

  15. chawk12thman says: Feb 26, 2013 5:11 PM

    What is the Cap Floor? Does it raise as well and are any teams close to that number? Just wondering…..

  16. peytonsneck18 says: Feb 26, 2013 5:16 PM

    My Colts are sitting pretty with their freed up money

  17. darknessspreads says: Feb 26, 2013 5:17 PM

    @dennisatunity

    I agree with you in spirit, but personally, I don’t like to think of it as “billionaire owners and millionaire players.”

    I like to think of it like so:

    “Workers who have busted their asses to get this opportunity, who place their health on the line to entertain us, and who are the actual reason that I cut on my TV and watch the NFL”

    VS.

    “Suits that are completely interchangeable because there will always be someone ready and willing to own one of the biggest cash cows in the known universe, an NFL team, waiting in the wings to replace them”

  18. belgaron says: Feb 26, 2013 5:55 PM

    In a related story, the Washington Redskins have asked if 2013 can be another uncapped year so they can “outmaneuver” the rest of the league by paying players big for one year and then spend the money again later in capped years. Oh, and if they aren’t allowed, they will sue.

  19. j98me2 says: Feb 26, 2013 6:03 PM

    @dennisatunity
    How do you take a family of 4 to an NFL game for only $400

  20. butthatmakestoomuchsense says: Feb 26, 2013 6:18 PM

    tastethejace says: When the cap goes up… guess who gets passed on the expenses.

    If you guessed “no one”, you’re correct.

    A lot of people have it backwards. The league owners charge whatever they want to charge, keep the first $2 Billion, and then allocate 50% to player salaries.

    Prices do not- I repeat, do not- rise to support a salary cap.

  21. musicman495 says: Feb 26, 2013 6:53 PM

    belgaron says: Feb 26, 2013 5:55 PM

    In a related story, the Washington Redskins have asked if 2013 can be another uncapped year so they can “outmaneuver” the rest of the league by paying players big for one year and then spend the money again later in capped years. Oh, and if they aren’t allowed, they will sue.
    ————————-
    Very clever. If it weren’t that the owner’s colluded to cap salaries in an uncapped year, and the league approved every contract the Redskins gave out, you’d be right on the money.

  22. thegenoatkinsdiet says: Feb 26, 2013 7:54 PM

    $124M? Do I hear $124M?

  23. belgaron says: Feb 26, 2013 8:14 PM

    @Musicman495

    Except the cap deals with the overall spending not the individual contracts. Individual league approval does not constitute a free pass to outspend the rest of the league, nice try.

  24. kidcreatine says: Feb 26, 2013 8:52 PM

    @Musicman495

    Except the cap deals with the overall spending not the individual contracts. Individual league approval does not constitute a free pass to outspend the rest of the league, nice try.

    ——————————————————-

    Individual contracts make up the overall cap. When it is a UNcap year, every team can spend any amount they want. That why is was call an UNCAPPED year which was put in place from the last CBA.

    john mara colluted with other owners. Do you know what collusion mean??

  25. vernonbasketball says: Feb 26, 2013 8:58 PM

    then the jets have a little more room thank god

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!