SmashMouth

The formulas for determining the franchise and transition tags ultimately tie the amount at each position to a percentage of the salary cap. Thus, once the salary cap is known, the tag amounts are known.

With the salary cap at a record-high $224.8 million for 2023, the tags have been determined.

er multiple reports, the franchise tags are as follows:

The window for applying the tags opens on February 21 and closes on March 7. All that really matters is the deadline; unless, however, teams want to apply it before the Scouting Combine in an effort to tamp down the rampant tampering that happens in Indianapolis.

Link Back

Rugby Saint II

I'm surprised that running backs are paid less than tight ends. I know running backs have been devalued lately but I would have expected better pay for them.

AsylumGuido

Love this. When the Eagles and the Browns start doing exactly what Harley and the Saints have been doing for over the past decade they are "gaining an edge over the league by manipulating the salary cap".

BakoSaint

There is a very well known saying 'everything in moderation.'

You can go to different teams at the link below and see how they are managing their caps by looking at their 2023 base salaries.

https://overthecap.com/salary-cap-space

We have no players with high base salaries which means we have pushed almost every possible dollar back.

The Eagles are very similar to us which means they are doing the same thing. I was not personally aware of this, but what it means to me is they are spending now to win within their window and it will come back to haunt them long term, but they are actually top contenders with a young QB so its fine to take their shot now. They have shown they are willing to do cycles of rebuilding and maxing out the cap so they are just in that phase of the cycle, but if they try not to rebuild later and give aging hurt players extensions to delay the inevitable, I will criticize them. They are a much younger roster than us, which makes it more acceptable short term. They also let a top running back walk, moved on from desean jackson, and they were able to trade away zach ertz without a deadly cap hit so they have been careful about aging players and been willing to rebuild in the past. What they are doing now will have an effect of 'freezing' their roster as some players age and they lose the flexibility to move on from those players, but at least they are doing it in a time when they have the young qb and loaded roster to possibly win it all in that window.

The Browns seem to have restructured many contracts but are not 'all in' like the Saints and Eagles. They are paying Amari Cooper his $20 million base salary in 2023. They did not restructure it to push the case back to later years because they realize he is aging, his performances have been uneven, and they would like the flexibility to cut or trade him without a massive cap hit. The Browns also have Chubb and Teller earning base salaries over $10 million but they have restructured Garrett and Watson down to about $1 million so they are a mixed bag. As a RB Chubb is also likely to decline so this is smart, so that they are not stuck when he ages and starts averaging 3.5ypc with having to resign him to a 'pay cut' of $10-15 million a year in order to avoid a $30 million dead cap hit for moving on, the situation we are in with Michael Thomas. Oddly, they are over $30 million under the current year cap, which will roll over, but that does not make it all the same, they lose flexibility by doing a restructure that cannot be undone even if the money does roll over. It is a very odd strategic choice that they have structured/restructured Watson's contract down to $1 million and pushed the money out to future years in order to get way more under the cap than they need to be. If Watson were to get a few massages or have another run in with the law, then then all he stands to lose in 2023 salary for now is $1 million, whereas if they would have structured that money as base salary then he would have lost about $2 million for each game check.

Now if you look at the Chiefs, you see 6 players making base salaries of $5.5-$19.5 million. Clearly they are paying a lot of their bills this year. Chris Jones has the highest 2023 base salary at $19.5 million. This is strategically important because it means each of his game checks is over $1 million so holding out costs him big. Can you imagine if he had been cut an $18 million bonus and his base salary reduced to $1 million? He could hold out all year for almost free. Also, any of these Chiefs stars has to think twice about getting in a fight at the strip club, as it will cost them big in the pocket books, whereas someone like Alvin Kamara can relax and enjoy themselves at the pro bowl and put a beating on anyone who disrespects them with little consequence, because missing a few games is no big deal when your base salary is $1 million and most of your cash is guaranteed in bonus checks that have already been cashed. Also, none of the Chiefs top paid stars has their contracts end with void years to defer money. As a result, the Chiefs can use franchise and transition tags on anyone they want, and anyone they lose will also count for comp picks. Virtually every non-rookie contract on teams like the Saints ends in a void year, so it is effectively a cut if the player won't extend, so tags and comp picks dont apply. Say the very unlikely happens and Michael Thomas returns completely to 2019 form in 2023. We can't tag him. We get no comp pick. Because we are 'smart' and ended his contract in void years to get an 'edge.'

If you look at the Steelers and 49ers you will see a similar strategy to the Chiefs. Some other teams are more inbetween.

Ultimately I don't think max leverage makes sense unless you see your team as at the end of its window with a last chance to win now. I see us as doing this to win a weak division now when we don't have the pieces to win it all, which is stupid. There are major costs in flexibility and optionality. You can't use tags and you don't get comp picks on anyone you restructure with void years. Its very costly to move on from an aging or injured player once you have pushed their money back. Suspensions and retirements costs the team not the player when their salaries have been converted to cashed bonus checks. You can't cut or trade players to save money short term, in fact it costs you money to do it, so you can't make moves that make sense for your team. And while it may buy you extra cash to compete short term, in the long term the bills come due and you owe that money back and have to keep doing it forever just to break even.