PDA

View Full Version : Elway says Broncos to spend more than Cap in 2012


JLesSPE
02-15-2012, 03:26 PM
http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_19971672

Kaylore
02-15-2012, 03:35 PM
Each year, the Broncos' cash budget for player salaries always has been around 95 percent of what the NFL lists as the salary cap. Cash versus cap? Say the Broncos gave Von Miller a five-year contract with a $10 million signing bonus. The 2011 salary cap figure is $2 million because that $10 million can be spread out equally over the length of the five-year contract. While that $10 million can be reduced for cap purposes by accounting, it's real money.

Read more: Elway says Broncos to spend more than NFL salary cap in 2012 - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_19971672#ixzz1mUbWIv5P
Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content: http://www.denverpost.com/termsofuse

Uh oh! SoCal is not going to enjoy facts getting in the way of his burn-Bowlen-Brigade.

ZONA
02-15-2012, 05:06 PM
I don't understand how they let Prater become a FA. He should have had a contract offer during the season for many more years to come.

OBF1
02-15-2012, 05:15 PM
Uh oh! SoCal is not going to enjoy facts getting in the way of his burn-Bowlen-Brigade.


You posted something that I have been thinking about for quite some time now. Whether or not you posted this on purpose or by mistake. You did not write down SoCal-Broncofan..... which I have been in doubt of for quite some time. Is he really a Broncos fan??? I can understand not posting on the mane, but all be does is complain about the owner, the new QB AND praises our below average LB named dj williams, Makes me wonder if he is just another in the long line of trolls on this once proud fan website.

oubronco
02-15-2012, 05:19 PM
Good now address the D-line

DivineLegion
02-15-2012, 05:40 PM
You posted something that I have been thinking about for quite some time now. Whether or not you posted this on purpose or by mistake. You did not write down SoCal-Broncofan..... which I have been in doubt of for quite some time. Is he really a Broncos fan??? I can understand not posting on the mane, but all be does is complain about the owner, the new QB AND praises our below average LB named dj williams, Makes me wonder if he is just another in the long line of trolls on this once proud fan website.

I think a majority of the best football conversations I've had on the Mane over the past 9 years have involved SoCal. He's always been one of my favorite posters, and was clutch with the camp reports. His Bowlen bashing is extreme, but I have friends who are more stuborn on sillier issues.

Kaylore
02-15-2012, 05:45 PM
You posted something that I have been thinking about for quite some time now. Whether or not you posted this on purpose or by mistake. You did not write down SoCal-Broncofan..... which I have been in doubt of for quite some time. Is he really a Broncos fan??? I can understand not posting on the mane, but all be does is complain about the owner, the new QB AND praises our below average LB named dj williams, Makes me wonder if he is just another in the long line of trolls on this once proud fan website.

He's mad about Cutler being traded and Shanny being fired so he's blaming Bowlen. He still has good takes.

BroncoBuff
02-15-2012, 05:55 PM
Uh oh! SoCal is not going to enjoy facts getting in the way of his burn-Bowlen-Brigade.

LOL .... but didn't it seem like his pitchforks and torches "storm the ramparts" philosophy grew louder and louder, and just as it reached its crescendo, boom! Orton was gone and TT was in. Seemed kinda that way to me actually.

broncos-rock
02-15-2012, 06:07 PM
I don't understand how they let Prater become a FA. He should have had a contract offer during the season for many more years to come.

Yea! I agree but didn't the hit and run thing (stripper) just happen. Public relations nightmare.

Ray Finkle
02-15-2012, 06:38 PM
You posted something that I have been thinking about for quite some time now. Whether or not you posted this on purpose or by mistake. You did not write down SoCal-Broncofan..... which I have been in doubt of for quite some time. Is he really a Broncos fan??? I can understand not posting on the mane, but all be does is complain about the owner, the new QB AND praises our below average LB named dj williams, Makes me wonder if he is just another in the long line of trolls on this once proud fan website.

Yep, that Socal's a first rate A-hole!:wave:


His choices in baseball and hockey blow tooROFL!

RhymesayersDU
02-15-2012, 07:15 PM
He's mad about Cutler being traded and Shanny being fired so he's blaming Bowlen. He still has good takes.

He has good takes unless it involves DJ. He thinks DJ can walk on water or something. It's pretty bad.

extralife
02-15-2012, 07:19 PM
you guys are really dumb

of course they'll spend more cash than the cap. if they sign, say, Prater and then give out two deals with signing bonuses to just about anyone (including Bunkley), that alone combined with the people currently on the roster and the rookie pool would be more "cash" than the salary cap. and we'll still be $25 million under the cap, but Elway will have duped you because you are stupid.

Hamrob
02-15-2012, 07:27 PM
I have to agree. Whomever buys this BS from the Broncos is a little short sighted. Elway essentially said nothing.

The Broncos are $50 million under. Yes they will spend the cap amount...because, they will sign 80 guys. Then, once they trim down to 53...they'll be (like has become the norm around here) $30m under.

This team has gone Cheap. Don't accept it if you don't want to. It's the truth.

Next year, they will be in trouble....because they will be forced to spend at least 89% of the cap. That's when, we will see some guys signed to decent contracts...because they'll be forced to.

Don't expect anything to happen this year. This is Bowlens last big savings year!

eddie mac
02-15-2012, 07:29 PM
He basically means they'll spend another $50m-$60m this year cos they're already accounting for $70m cash in 2012 on player salaries/roster bonuses etc etc. About $10m of that will go on rookies unless we trade up and have to pay a bigger signing bonus. Pick 25 normally nets around $2.5m-$3.5m cash in the first year. Depending on how many of our own we bring back you could be talking $20m-$35m on re-signing our own free agents, leaving maybe enough money for 1-2 big/mid-tier signings, who knows.

Requiem
02-15-2012, 07:29 PM
Elway make it rain on them pros.

http://www.falconfriday.com/images//2007/05/a.jpg

BroncoInferno
02-15-2012, 07:36 PM
I think a majority of the best football conversations I've had on the Mane over the past 9 years have involved SoCal. He's always been one of my favorite posters, and was clutch with the camp reports. His Bowlen bashing is extreme, but I have friends who are more stuborn on sillier issues.

Yep. SoCal says we didn't spend much in 7 of 9 years. Problem is the two outliers. Why would we spend more those particular seasons? The reason is obvious: Shanny has us tight against the cap most seasons in his win now mind frame, so we couldn't spend money most seasons. The two seasons that where we had some breathing room with the cap, we spent. Last season we didn't spend because we had a new regime with a short offseason to work with. If you think not spending was a bad idea, just look at Philly and Washington. They spent a ton last offseason, with poor results.

Drek
02-15-2012, 07:52 PM
Uh oh! SoCal is not going to enjoy facts getting in the way of his burn-Bowlen-Brigade.

Except this is Klis being spoon fed his facts by the organization while independent reporting shows a history of being well below league average in payroll.

Like for example the entire 2000-2009 period per USA Today:
LINK HERE (http://content.usatoday.com/sportsdata/football/nfl/salaries/team/2009)

Bottom half of the league year after year with a small number of exceptions (like '05, where I can't even think of who we gave the money to). Many years in the bottom 10.

Meanwhile this is an organization that is consistently ranked as a top 10 total value with top 10 revenues year after year. So how is it that a team who is a top 10 earner has habitually been a bottom 10 spender?

The Broncos FO plays a mean shell game with their money figures. How exactly did they spend $117M of the $120M cap when all sources have them at >$20M below the cap? Somehow they gave out an additional $17M+ over the prorated value of bonuses like the example used with Miller? To who? Warren counts for $1.25M. You got maybe another million or two in McGahee. Bailey's bonus for his new deal was supposed to be a 1:1 pay out to cap hit for this season. Who else? We're talking $10M in actual money that sits unaccounted for, i.e. a little over what Brandon Mebane had for a total signing bonus to return to Seattle.

BroncoInferno
02-15-2012, 08:21 PM
Except this is Klis being spoon fed his facts by the organization while independent reporting shows a history of being well below league average in payroll.

Like for example the entire 2000-2009 period per USA Today:
LINK HERE (http://content.usatoday.com/sportsdata/football/nfl/salaries/team/2009)

Bottom half of the league year after year with a small number of exceptions (like '05, where I can't even think of who we gave the money to). Many years in the bottom 10.

Meanwhile this is an organization that is consistently ranked as a top 10 total value with top 10 revenues year after year. So how is it that a team who is a top 10 earner has habitually been a bottom 10 spender?

The Broncos FO plays a mean shell game with their money figures. How exactly did they spend $117M of the $120M cap when all sources have them at >$20M below the cap? Somehow they gave out an additional $17M+ over the prorated value of bonuses like the example used with Miller? To who? Warren counts for $1.25M. You got maybe another million or two in McGahee. Bailey's bonus for his new deal was supposed to be a 1:1 pay out to cap hit for this season. Who else? We're talking $10M in actual money that sits unaccounted for, i.e. a little over what Brandon Mebane had for a total signing bonus to return to Seattle.

Shanny's win now attitude had us tight against the cap most seasons. That's why we didn't spend most years. It also explains the outlier seasons, which make no sense otherwise. Contrary to your belief, it's a GOOD thing that we did not spend much last season with the shortened offseason to acclimate the new players. Look what happened to two of the bigger spenders, Philly and Washington. They underachieved.

Cito Pelon
02-15-2012, 08:39 PM
Except this is Klis being spoon fed his facts by the organization while independent reporting shows a history of being well below league average in payroll.

Like for example the entire 2000-2009 period per USA Today:
LINK HERE (http://content.usatoday.com/sportsdata/football/nfl/salaries/team/2009)

Bottom half of the league year after year with a small number of exceptions (like '05, where I can't even think of who we gave the money to). Many years in the bottom 10.

Meanwhile this is an organization that is consistently ranked as a top 10 total value with top 10 revenues year after year. So how is it that a team who is a top 10 earner has habitually been a bottom 10 spender?

The Broncos FO plays a mean shell game with their money figures. How exactly did they spend $117M of the $120M cap when all sources have them at >$20M below the cap? Somehow they gave out an additional $17M+ over the prorated value of bonuses like the example used with Miller? To who? Warren counts for $1.25M. You got maybe another million or two in McGahee. Bailey's bonus for his new deal was supposed to be a 1:1 pay out to cap hit for this season. Who else? We're talking $10M in actual money that sits unaccounted for, i.e. a little over what Brandon Mebane had for a total signing bonus to return to Seattle.

They didn't prorate the bonus money with their internal accounting, apparently. I have no idea who is playing fast and loose with the $$$ figures, USAToday, the Broncos, ESPN, whomever.

All I know is during the Shanny era they were constantly every year trying to rework contracts to get below the salary cap so they could sign FA's. And they were way up there with dead money on bonuses paid out for players no longer on the team like Griese, Dale Carter, IHOP, etc, etc, on and on. They paid $800k plus signing bonuses to Robert Brooks, Seth Joyner, Jerry Rice, Leon Lett, that list of similar overpaid vets goes on and on also.

houghtam
02-15-2012, 08:48 PM
Meanwhile this is an organization that is consistently ranked as a top 10 total value with top 10 revenues year after year. So how is it that a team who is a top 10 earner has habitually been a bottom 10 spender?

I think we have some more evidence here that it may be just as beneficial to lose cheaply as it is to spend to win. To a businessperson, anyway.

SoCalBronco
02-15-2012, 09:00 PM
Wow...people are obsessed with me...funny stuff. In any case, the proof is in the pudding, I'm not interested in talk, let's see some serious spending start to happen and if it does, I'll be more than happy to give them credit.

Chris
02-15-2012, 09:11 PM
It's Peanut Butter Jelly Time, Elway. Peanut. Butter. Jelly. Time.

Missouribronc
02-15-2012, 09:23 PM
This does not mean the free agents you're creaming your pants over will sign with Denver, nor does it mean Denver will go after them.

FYI.

Bronco Rob
02-15-2012, 09:36 PM
.

Kaylore
02-15-2012, 10:02 PM
Except this is Klis being spoon fed his facts by the organization while independent reporting shows a history of being well below league average in payroll.

Like for example the entire 2000-2009 period per USA Today:
LINK HERE (http://content.usatoday.com/sportsdata/football/nfl/salaries/team/2009)

Bottom half of the league year after year with a small number of exceptions (like '05, where I can't even think of who we gave the money to). Many years in the bottom 10.

Meanwhile this is an organization that is consistently ranked as a top 10 total value with top 10 revenues year after year. So how is it that a team who is a top 10 earner has habitually been a bottom 10 spender?

The Broncos FO plays a mean shell game with their money figures. How exactly did they spend $117M of the $120M cap when all sources have them at >$20M below the cap? Somehow they gave out an additional $17M+ over the prorated value of bonuses like the example used with Miller? To who? Warren counts for $1.25M. You got maybe another million or two in McGahee. Bailey's bonus for his new deal was supposed to be a 1:1 pay out to cap hit for this season. Who else? We're talking $10M in actual money that sits unaccounted for, i.e. a little over what Brandon Mebane had for a total signing bonus to return to Seattle.

Here's where that argument falls apart. Name someone who we didn't sign because of money during that period. I can think of one guy: Andre Carter. We outbid for Graham. We lost Kerney because he decided he'd have a better shot at a SB with Seattle, we signed Bannon, Green, Simeon Rice, Koutovides - there were endless players we threw big money at and they didn't pan out. When we would cut them a couple years (or sometimes earlier) after signing them our cap room ballooned out of control.

And name during all this time there was not even a mention that Bowlen was trying to stop this to save money. Shanahan had a blank check do what he wanted to. If there was even a hint of him being restrained in anyway by Bowlen it would have been out in the papers.

Now people are trying to re-write history, some here probably to preserve Shanahan's legacy and blame Bowlen for Shanahan winning one playoff game in a decade of post-Elway football. The truth is that Shanahan wasn't very good at evaluating pro-personnel and it cost the Broncos.

jwmann2
02-15-2012, 10:04 PM
I have to agree. Whomever buys this BS from the Broncos (http://www.fromthisseat.com/index.php/nfl/denver-broncos) is a little short sighted. Elway essentially said nothing.

The Broncos are $50 million under. Yes they will spend the cap amount...because, they will sign 80 guys. Then, once they trim down to 53...they'll be (like has become the norm around here) $30m under.

This team has gone Cheap. Don't accept it if you don't want to. It's the truth.

Next year, they will be in trouble....because they will be forced to spend at least 89% of the cap. That's when, we will see some guys signed to decent contracts...because they'll be forced to.

Don't expect anything to happen this year. This is Bowlens last big savings year!

This isn't baseball. It doesn't matter how much the team spends, it's all about how the team drafts and how they pan out down the road. The Bengals were 40 million under the cap this season and they still made the playoffs thanks in part to their rookies-Dalton and Green.

Drunken.Broncoholic
02-15-2012, 10:08 PM
Steelers were 27 million more on payroll than the team that knocked them out of the playoffs. I agree with some in that Bowlen has been cheap. He needs to buy less fur coats this year and bring in some talent.

Archer81
02-15-2012, 10:21 PM
Resign Prater, Colquit and Bunkley and I'm good.

:Broncos:

extralife
02-15-2012, 11:08 PM
Resign Prater, Colquit and Bunkley and I'm good.

:Broncos:

so you might say that in return for locking it up, colquit must be locked up

BroncoBuff
02-15-2012, 11:11 PM
Resign Prater, Colquit and Bunkley and I'm good.

Seems funny to list kickers like that, but it makes sense too. Crappy punts and missed field goals are the worst.

Archer81
02-15-2012, 11:21 PM
so you might say that in return for locking it up, colquit must be locked up


Exactly.

Then we know for sure he has it locked up.

:Broncos:

Drunken.Broncoholic
02-15-2012, 11:22 PM
Seems funny to list kickers like that, but it makes sense too. Crappy punts and missed field goals are the worst.

I don't miss those 12 yard Mitch Berger shanks at all.

Archer81
02-15-2012, 11:25 PM
Seems funny to list kickers like that, but it makes sense too. Crappy punts and missed field goals are the worst.


I remember the Jason Baker era...so when you find good kickers, keep them.

:Broncos:

Miss I.
02-15-2012, 11:31 PM
I remember the Jason Baker era...so when you find good kickers, keep them.

:Broncos:

agreed...I don't even miss Jason Elam as much anymore, though sometimes I dream about him...that's probably weird, yeah....oops...damn it...must think before I post. ;D

Archer81
02-15-2012, 11:37 PM
agreed...I don't even miss Jason Elam as much anymore, though sometimes I dream about him...that's probably weird, yeah....oops...damn it...must think before I post. ;D


I feel the same way about Prater. Scruffy guy, crazy tats. So uhh...yeah. Beer! Boobs! *Smashes can into forehead!

:Broncos:

Miss I.
02-15-2012, 11:40 PM
I feel the same way about Prater. Scruffy guy, crazy tats. So uhh...yeah. Beer! Boobs! *Smashes can into forehead!

:Broncos:

Grunt! Grunt! Snort! Pound chest! Beer Good! Spend more cap good! Beer! Ugha ugha! Beer! ;D

Archer81
02-15-2012, 11:45 PM
Grunt! Grunt! Snort! Pound chest! Beer Good! Spend more cap good! Beer! Ugha ugha! Beer! ;D


Beer cap! BEER WENCH, BRING ME THIS CAP!

UGHHHHH RAW MEAT! FIRE!

:Broncos:

Shananahan
02-15-2012, 11:48 PM
Grunt! Grunt! Snort! Pound chest! Beer Good! Spend more cap good! Beer! Ugha ugha! Beer! ;D
Hot guys! Athletic bodies! Hot guys! Athletic bodies! Hot guys! Athletic bodies! Hot guys!

Archer81
02-15-2012, 11:52 PM
Hot guys! Athletic bodies! Hot guys! Athletic bodies! Hot guys! Athletic bodies! Hot guys!


You have to say it with a lisp or it does not come true. Flappy wrist action, too. And glitter.

:Broncos:

Miss I.
02-15-2012, 11:58 PM
Hot guys! Athletic bodies! Hot guys! Athletic bodies! Hot guys! Athletic bodies! Hot guys!

too many words....when I go all sexy dude alert mode, it's more grunty and drooly...

mmm eric....mmmm tim...mmm...Von...me want sammich....mmm Doom hit Brady good...mmm....brady doom samwich...mmm.....tim hit deck instride...mmmmmmmmmmm...tim deck sammich...mmmm...

me excuse self, must get sammich.

eddie mac
02-16-2012, 04:03 AM
This does not mean the free agents you're creaming your pants over will sign with Denver, nor does it mean Denver will go after them.

FYI.

I think more FA's will consider signing for us this year than last given our improvement and the media hype here over Tebow. Other NFL stars want to be noticed and in Denver they will be cos of the media circus and in the majority other NFL players respect Tebow as you'll note from the massive amount of tweets post Pitt game.

Drek
02-16-2012, 04:15 AM
They didn't prorate the bonus money with their internal accounting, apparently. I have no idea who is playing fast and loose with the $$$ figures, USAToday, the Broncos, ESPN, whomever.
You know you highlighted part of my post where I went into this very thing right? The mindset of not prorating bonus money still comes up about $10M short. At the same time it means we should be WAY further below the salary cap than we were last year as all of our big bonus receivers (Champ, Miller, Doom, to a lesser degree Tebow, etc.) are all now simply receiving their salaries. By that measure we should be the dominant money team this off-season.

All I know is during the Shanny era they were constantly every year trying to rework contracts to get below the salary cap so they could sign FA's. And they were way up there with dead money on bonuses paid out for players no longer on the team like Griese, Dale Carter, IHOP, etc, etc, on and on. They paid $800k plus signing bonuses to Robert Brooks, Seth Joyner, Jerry Rice, Leon Lett, that list of similar overpaid vets goes on and on also.
This is the divide people aren't getting. Yes, from a cap standpoint Shanahan kept us close to the limit. But they did it with back ended contracts and option and roster bonuses that we generally never paid or only half paid. Shanahan's favorite kind of deal was giving a name veteran on the downside of his career a 3 or 4 year deal for big money but one with a healthy bonus on the front and small AAVs for the first year or two and ballooning AAV on the back end. That is why year after year we were cutting guys to get back under, because the vet who was in decline and making $1M last season is seeing his base salary jump to $5M this season. Look at Daniel Graham's contract, its a perfect example of this. The only difference was Shanahan didn't stick around throughout the deal to cut him on the back end when we were paying an older TE almost $6M a year.


Here's where that argument falls apart. Name someone who we didn't sign because of money during that period. I can think of one guy: Andre Carter. We outbid for Graham. We lost Kerney because he decided he'd have a better shot at a SB with Seattle, we signed Bannon, Green, Simeon Rice, Koutovides - there were endless players we threw big money at and they didn't pan out. When we would cut them a couple years (or sometimes earlier) after signing them our cap room ballooned out of control.

And name during all this time there was not even a mention that Bowlen was trying to stop this to save money. Shanahan had a blank check do what he wanted to. If there was even a hint of him being restrained in anyway by Bowlen it would have been out in the papers.

Now people are trying to re-write history, some here probably to preserve Shanahan's legacy and blame Bowlen for Shanahan winning one playoff game in a decade of post-Elway football. The truth is that Shanahan wasn't very good at evaluating pro-personnel and it cost the Broncos.

I make no excuses for Shanahan. And as I said above, the reason the cap ballooned out of control was because Shanahan was playing fast and loose with what budget he had. We still consistently gave out less cash per season than we gave out, year after year, for almost this entire decade.

Also, we pretty clearly lost out on Brandon Mebane last off-season entirely because of money. We pursued him. We gave him a contract offer. Sources claim it was a "low ball" offer. Then he goes back to Seattle for a very reasonable deal and we overpay for Warren's corpse because the low ball strategy hasn't worked and we've got a gaping hole at DT.

CEH
02-16-2012, 05:52 AM
Bowlen was paying Shanny $7 MM to design his restraunt one year. Any guarenteed money of any current contract has to be in some type an escrow account so there is cash in escrow accounts. We aren't sure what the cash flow is at Dove Valley. But yes last year we lost out on FAs because of money. This year with the rollover we shall see who we go after. As always you need to have a ceiling for all new FA you are willing to go up to. Just good business.

BroncoInferno
02-16-2012, 06:52 AM
Also, we pretty clearly lost out on Brandon Mebane last off-season entirely because of money. We pursued him. We gave him a contract offer. Sources claim it was a "low ball" offer. Then he goes back to Seattle for a very reasonable deal and we overpay for Warren's corpse because the low ball strategy hasn't worked and we've got a gaping hole at DT.

What's with the continued obsession with Mebane? Do you really think he would have made much of a difference in our season? Because I don't. He's a very good run-stuffing DT who brings zero to the table as a pass rusher and isn't a game-changer. We got a similar player in Bunkley (solid run-stuffer, no pass rush) for a fraction of the cost. I'd say the front office made the more cost-efficient move.

TonyR
02-16-2012, 07:34 AM
What's with the continued obsession with Mebane?

It is funny. Massively over-hyped here. The fact that he re-signed with his own team when 31 other teams had the chance to make better offers tells you most of what you need to know.

Beantown Bronco
02-16-2012, 07:48 AM
What's with the continued obsession with Mebane? Do you really think he would have made much of a difference in our season? Because I don't.

By definition, just by showing up, he would've made a bigger impact than Ty Warren. This isn't even debatable.

BroncoInferno
02-16-2012, 07:56 AM
By definition, just by showing up, he would've made a bigger impact than Ty Warren. This isn't even debatable.

If we sign Mebane, what are the chances we go after a similar player in Bunkley? We went down the list to Bunkley because we were outbid for Mebane. We got the more cost effective option. If you want to complain that we didn't go on a spending spree, go ahead, but it's been proven over and over again that that approach does not work. Look no further than Philly's "Dream Team" for proof.

lonestar
02-16-2012, 11:00 AM
I don't understand how they let Prater become a FA. He should have had a contract offer during the season for many more years to come.

Just maybe he did not want to sign a new contract. Maybe he Thought he would try to see what his worth was. HOPING they would NOT tag him.

It is not always the FO fault for things that happen. Sometimes it is beyond their control.
And maybe they have their eye on someone else that may be a FA. Someone that has a strong leg at sea level. That can always put the ball out of the EZ at mile high and deep into the EZ at sea level.

Maybe there is going to be a rule change again this year on kick offs and they want to see if he is the guy for it.

Loads of factors YOU have no clue about.

BroncoBen
02-16-2012, 11:08 AM
I'm still confused on exactly what Elway was trying to say.. So the Broncos going to spend money on Free Agents or not..?

lonestar
02-16-2012, 11:12 AM
I have to agree. Whomever buys this BS from the Broncos is a little short sighted. Elway essentially said nothing.

The Broncos are $50 million under. Yes they will spend the cap amount...because, they will sign 80 guys. Then, once they trim down to 53...they'll be (like has become the norm around here) $30m under.

This team has gone Cheap. Don't accept it if you don't want to. It's the truth.

Next year, they will be in trouble....because they will be forced to spend at least 89% of the cap. That's when, we will see some guys signed to decent contracts...because they'll be forced to.

Don't expect anything to happen this year. This is Bowlens last big savings year!
You should change Your name to Hardon.

They are NOT 50 mil under it is less than 20 in 2012 dollars.

ThEy do have access to 2011 dollars to spend. IIRF they can carry some or all of it over to 2013. When it might make a difference playoffs wise.

FWIW they have consistently been near the 90% mark on cap money for a long time. So the HAVE to spend mandate will not be anything new for them. It is what they have been doing since Pat had the balls to fire Mikey.

This is not a playoff team in two years maybe but now it will be one and done until this team matures abit. The youngest OL in the nfl last year. The third youngest team in the NFL and that was only because the old times in the DB area.

Mellow out. It is only a game.

Shananahan
02-16-2012, 11:23 AM
I'm pretty sure that technically they are a playoff team.

DENVERDUI55
02-16-2012, 12:03 PM
You did not write down SoCal-Broncofan..... which I have been in doubt of for quite some time. Is he really a Broncos fan??? .

Well he is living in LA and a BULLS, Penguin, and not sure of baseball team but whoever was the best team in 97-98. It's easy to see what banwagons he jumped on when he started following sports at least he has stayed on them.

lonestar
02-16-2012, 02:21 PM
Steelers were 27 million more on payroll than the team that knocked them out of the playoffs. I agree with some in that Bowlen has been cheap. He needs to buy less fur coats this year and bring in some talent.


With the constant harping on CHEAP. Remember that the GIANTS had the most
Room under the cap than anyone did last year.

Drek
02-16-2012, 04:19 PM
What's with the continued obsession with Mebane? Do you really think he would have made much of a difference in our season? Because I don't. He's a very good run-stuffing DT who brings zero to the table as a pass rusher and isn't a game-changer. We got a similar player in Bunkley (solid run-stuffer, no pass rush) for a fraction of the cost. I'd say the front office made the more cost-efficient move.

Signing Warren was the response to losing out on Mebane. At that time when we let Mebane go back to Seattle after low balling him Bunkley was believed to have been traded to Cleveland already. Getting Bunkley was a move the FO fell completely ass backwards into.

Also, Mebane is a very good run stuffer who generates solid pass rush up the middle. The guy did have a 5.5 sack season a couple years ago, he's just been on a defense with no other pass rush threats since Kerney fell apart physically. He doesn't put up a ton of numbers but he does move the pocket.

Meanwhile Bunkley is a tolerable run stuffer who generates zero pass rush. Marcus Thomas generates a slight blip of pass rush and is completely lost at containing the run. We had the two of them playing the majority of snaps at DT last year and when they weren't in there we had guys like Unrein and McBean in.

Its not an obsession with Mebane, he just perfectly underscores a cost over production mindset where you pinch every penny even if it means taking an inferior player. Why is he such a great example? Because DT was a position Fox acknowledged during the lockout would need to be addressed. Then after not addressing it during the draft he and Elway claimed it would be resolved during FA. Then come FA they make it quite clear that of the top tier DTs who were going to be free agents they preferred Mebane. Fox talked about being high on him when he first came out. Mebane admitted no real loyalty to Seattle. The Broncos brought him in and gave him a contract offer. But then we lose him to Seattle for very reasonable money and in response we give almost as much per year to Warren.

This shows a team that knew DT was a problem all along. A team that saw a player they viewed as a significant remedy. But when it came time to pay for said remedy they got cheap. When that act bit them in the ass they overreacted by throwing bad money after Warren simply because it required less up front money (sign of a cash strapped team) for fewer years. Never mind Warren's significantly lower ceiling and significantly higher risk than Mebane.

It is clear cut as all hell that the team sacrificed an indisputable talent gap there for a small amount of cash savings. That isn't fiscal prudence, that is fiscal incompetence.

Hamrob
02-16-2012, 06:45 PM
With the constant harping on CHEAP. Remember that the GIANTS had the most
Room under the cap than anyone did last year.No, they didn't, the Jags did, followed by...our Broncos!

Hamrob
02-16-2012, 06:48 PM
With the constant harping on CHEAP. Remember that the GIANTS had the most
Room under the cap than anyone did last year.No, they didn't, the Jags did, followed by...our Broncos!

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/12/remaining-2011-cap-space-by-team/

Read it and listen to the birds singing....cheap, cheap, cheap!!!

Hamrob
02-16-2012, 06:57 PM
You should change Your name to Hardon.

They are NOT 50 mil under it is less than 20 in 2012 dollars.

ThEy do have access to 2011 dollars to spend. IIRF they can carry some or all of it over to 2013. When it might make a difference playoffs wise.

FWIW they have consistently been near the 90% mark on cap money for a long time. So the HAVE to spend mandate will not be anything new for them. It is what they have been doing since Pat had the balls to fire Mikey.

This is not a playoff team in two years maybe but now it will be one and done until this team matures abit. The youngest OL in the nfl last year. The third youngest team in the NFL and that was only because the old times in the DB area.

Mellow out. It is only a game. They have $50 million to play with. That's $27m from last year (2nd cheapest team in the NFL) and over $20m more for 2012.

Cheap, cheap, cheap...sings the birdy!

lonestar
02-18-2012, 11:24 AM
They have $50 million to play with. That's $27m from last year (2nd cheapest team in the NFL) and over $20m more for 2012.

Cheap, cheap, cheap...sings the birdy!

I knew I had read this some where just took time to find it..

The Broncos usually keep back the extra 5 percent in order to pay players they may need to sign during the season to replace players who wind up on the season-ending injured reserve list.

In 2011, the Broncos spent $117.5 million in cash on salaries, or 98 percent of the $120.375 million salary cap. The cap is expected to again come in at $120.375 million for the 2012 season.

Read more: Elway says Broncos to spend more than NFL salary cap in 2012 - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_19971672#ixzz1ml6flk4T
Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content: http://www.denverpost.com/termsofuse


So stick it in your ear about PAT being cheap..

Hamrob
02-18-2012, 01:50 PM
I knew I had read this some where just took time to find it..



So stick it in your ear about PAT being cheap..You really are gullible. Fans start calling the Broncos cheap...and here comes Legwold to save the day! BS

Read any other site including espn, si, and Florio...The broncos spent the 2nd least amount of any team last year. That is why they can carry over $27m.

How about reading the posts I made before your run off your suck!

Here you go idiot!

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/12/remaining-2011-cap-space-by-team/

Shananahan
02-18-2012, 02:09 PM
I think you have a reading comprehension problem or something dude. Klis' (not Legwold) article cited the amount the team spent in cash and reported that the team keeps a budget for what they actually spend each season separate from the true cap. The link you provided while calling him an idiot addresses cap space, which is completely different from what he's talking about.

Missouribronc
02-18-2012, 09:00 PM
Cash spent does not equal cap money spent.

Don't get your hopes up for the free agent you're creaming yourself over...

lonestar
02-18-2012, 10:04 PM
You really are gullible. Fans start calling the Broncos cheap...and here comes Legwold to save the day! BS

Read any other site including espn, si, and Florio...The broncos spent the 2nd least amount of any team last year. That is why they can carry over $27m.

How about reading the posts I made before your run off your suck!

Here you go idiot!

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/02/12/remaining-2011-cap-space-by-team/

Idiot aye. Who do you suppose has the best info on the team the local guy. Or those thousands of mile away that just playgerize each other.

Sorry but I'll believe the local guy that has better contacts and has legit sources.

But you can believe whether guys if you want. As far as Legwold is concerned he is probably more plugged into the Broncos than anyone since Adam S. moved on.

Wow are the morons on here fast to throw the stupid, idiot, clown card out.

Anythings that refutes something they have taken as gospel, use derogatory commentary without the benefit of a adult conversation.

lonestar
02-18-2012, 10:13 PM
Cash spent does not equal cap money spent.

Don't get your hopes up for the free agent you're creaming yourself over...

Mo I believe that everyone is hoping for big names while knowing that there is NO indication that it will happen.

Every comment I have read from the EFX group is they are looking for value. In order to have cash to Draft well and keep our valued TEAM players.

I realize that most on here grewup on madden or fantasy football so have zero concept of budgets and monetary control. But the realities of life are MONEY does not grow on trees..

They not only have to Deal withnthisnyear but also have money in the CAP for,next years UFA on the team already.

It is unlikelymonemsuper star FA is going to make the TEAm leap into the super bowl.

I think tat anyone without their heads up their butts can see we are ntnready to compete with the elite teams. It is going to take 4-6 more great players and that is not count those that choose to retire or move on this year.

OrangeSe7en
02-19-2012, 07:43 AM
When do people have to renew their season tickets?

barryr
02-19-2012, 07:47 AM
The Broncos can start throwing around money to players who are not worth it, is that going to make the team better? Spending wisely is what this team needs, not giving ridiculous contracts around just because they have the money. Snyder with the Skins has constantly done that and what does he ever have to show for that?

CEH
02-19-2012, 07:56 AM
When do people have to renew their season tickets?

March 1st , the first of 2 payments is due

OrangeSe7en
02-19-2012, 08:05 AM
March 1st , the first of 2 payments is due

Well there you have it. This could be the reason for Elway saying this. Free agency is after the renewal, which is rather convenient.

houghtam
02-19-2012, 02:09 PM
Well there you have it. This could be the reason for Elway saying this. Free agency is after the renewal, which is rather convenient.

Rep. That's actually a pretty good point; something I've never really considered.

Shananahan
02-19-2012, 02:19 PM
Yeah, something tells me Denver is going to have a very difficult time selling tickets this year.

SoCalBronco
02-19-2012, 02:22 PM
Well there you have it. This could be the reason for Elway saying this. Free agency is after the renewal, which is rather convenient.

Good point. I didn't think of that earlier.

Shananahan
02-19-2012, 02:34 PM
That seems absurd to me, though. I'm sure it doesn't hurt that renewal is prior to FA, so there could be incentive to talk big plans beforehand, but making it out like Elway is saying this stuff to convince people to buy season tickets is silly.

Denver just had one of their better seasons in five years, with a young, superstar fan favorite at QB and a home playoff victory over the Steelers. I find it hard to believe the front office feels the need to scheme and promise things just to get season tickets renewed.

lonestar
02-19-2012, 02:35 PM
Yeah, something tells me Denver is going to have a very difficult time selling tickets this year.

which planet are you living on?

Shananahan
02-19-2012, 02:36 PM
Over your head, dude.

lonestar
02-19-2012, 02:37 PM
That seems absurd to me, though. I'm sure it doesn't hurt that renewal is prior to FA, so there could be incentive to talk big plans beforehand, but making it out like Elway is saying this stuff to convince people to buy season tickets is silly.

Denver just had one of their better seasons in five years, with a young, superstar fan favorite at QB and a home playoff victory over the Steelers. I find it hard to believe the front office feels the need to scheme and promise things just to get season tickets renewed.

They have consistently said no big splashes, they are going after value players..

SO whoever seems to be reading tea leafs differently needs some professional help..

Drek
02-19-2012, 04:38 PM
The Broncos can start throwing around money to players who are not worth it, is that going to make the team better? Spending wisely is what this team needs, not giving ridiculous contracts around just because they have the money. Snyder with the Skins has constantly done that and what does he ever have to show for that?

No one is saying to just start lighting cash on fire for the sake of getting rid of it. Of course they need to spend it well. But the solution isn't to just not spend for fear of doing a bad job with the money. They need to spend in the wisest way possible and if that isn't good enough then find someone who can.

This is why I'm a proponent of going after Carl Nicks to replace Beadles at LG. Nicks is young, he's got a ton of playoff experience, he's very good, and elite linemen have shown the most consistency when changing teams. Make him the big splash, use Beadles as a universal OL backup who can challenge Walton and Franklin for their jobs and gives us another option if Clady never gets back to 100% and we opt to let him walk at the end of his deal as a result.

Then spend wisely on a host of other young guys looking to make the next step to full time starter. Guys like Dan Connor and Tom Zbikowski likely come cheap if a starting job is on the table. Someone like Jason Jones could likely be had with the promise of playing him how he wants, as an interior pass rusher, with the understanding that he'll probably play less than every down but be given the chance to put up numbers when in. You can make smart, low cost signings like that based on the gaping holes we have at DT, MLB, S, and CB.

Rohirrim
02-19-2012, 04:49 PM
Like Joe Pa always said, "The worst decision is no decision at all."