Let's not act like the Saints' approach is the gold standard.

Yes other teams employ the accounting tactic but correlation does not imply causation. It certainly doesn't equal championships.

This franchise has won 10+ games in 4 of the last 10 seasons. So I wouldn't go crowning anyone "Genius"...

All the while being able to feel like you are good enough to be in every game. Good enough to not suffer through multiple seasons of three or four wins like really suck ass franchises. I remember when we knew we had no chance in certain games. Those days are two decades in the past.

Besides, we're not kicking any cans. We're maximizing the cap by accounting for it in later periods when it counts as a far smaller percentage. Smart accounting. In other words, consistent competitive teams for a value enhanced price.

Word it however you prefer, we're employing tactics that impact the roster negatively.

And at the expense of youth and depth - two of arguably the most significance.

This is where we differ, I suppose. To some fans winning all is the only thing that matters. They say they can live with a series of dismal losing years as long as winning it all can be a reality (at least in their minds).

Personally, I'd rather win the vast majority of home games every year for twenty years while making the playoffs a majority of those years even if it means never being a favorite to win it all over that period over sucking three or four years in a row every ten years while winning it all once or twice in that same twenty year period.

The sum total of all of those winning games while I'm sitting in the Dome watching my Saints adds up to far more enjoyment than watching the team win a Super Bowl on TV while suffering through full seasons of losing in person. So, yes, I guess you can say that I can be happy with that sort of mediocrity. The drive home after a win is a million times more enjoyable than a drive home after losing a game that you really had no chance of winning since you were in the middle of yet another "rebuild".

Once everyone is using this accounting method it guarantees that the winner will be using it. By no means is the accounting method the do all be all operationally, but financially it maximizes salary utilization in the hard cap environment. There are definitely operational constraints. That is the trade off. But once everyone is on the system the constraints will be the same across the board and no advantage or disadvantage to any one franchise. As we all know the NFL is first and foremost a business and businesses are in it to maximize the dollar.

You are correct in that the method does not relate to championships today. I'm just pointing out that winning championships is not the ultimate goal. A goal, yes, but not the ultimate.

You are looking at this too much in black and white and assuming a team must either use the Loomis method to the max or live completely under the current salary cap. I think there are many other alternatives.

One of the simplest is to restructure about half of your rosters big contracts annual so that you can take partial advantage of increasing future salary caps but still have the flexibility to apply white out to the second half of bad contracts and not be forced to waste good money after bad. This is what many successful teams are doing. Its like driving a car and using both pedals so you have gas and brakes. It will not get you 100% of the speed of gas only, but you handle turns better.

Another alternative that many successful teams have used is to spend less than the salary cap for a few years and/or to effectively front load contracts by not backloading them, while acquiring higher draft picks, in order then switch gears to max restructuring and backloading new contracts, so that they achieve a peak of salary cap utilization the Saints could never dream of over a briefer period. By averaging out todays dollars over 5 years the Saints may effectively live under the salary cap 2 years from now which is 20-30% higher albeit stuck with many albatross contracts they can't get out of and unable to retool their roster to suit new coaches and changing schemes. But the Saints come in $80 million over the cap before all their restructures. If a competitor comes in $80 million UNDER the cap and does the same restructures they can be $160 million UNDER the cap when the saints are just meeting the cap, and they can go sign Brady and Gronk or trade for Ramsey and Stafford. And since they start under the cap they don't lack flexibility initially and can build a team without dead weight. This has been a very successful formula for teams like the Bucs and Rams.

Another approach is to maximize flexibility while maintaining half that level of warchest. If a team doesn't use much restructuring they may be penalizing themselves 20% on cap but they may be able to cut dead weight and maintain a flexible roster suited to their scheme to make up for it. But the thing is, the second they need to restructure contracts to add more weapons they can. By starting at the salary cap, they can restructure and be $80 million under if needed. By not restructuring most contracts, when they do start restructuring to win within a window of time they have an advantage on the Saints because they may be burdening their 2025 cap with a 2024 restructure prorated bonus, but its not already burdened with with 2021-2023 restructure prorated bonuses hitting in 2025 also, so they have a lighter cap for years to come. This model of lying in wait and winning without debt now, but being able to take it on in the future, is true for a team like the Chiefs or 49ers. Right now they are getting to the big game and having a fair shot to win without going all in. They are able to get out of contracts they don't want to be in. This was also a model the Patriots used for many years, not maxing out the cap and being able to get out of bad contracts. But a team sees their window closing they can still flip the switch any offseason they want, restructure all the contracts, and build a super team for a couple years before they end up stuck in bad contracts and needing a rebuild like the Saints. Jake Haener could have the greatest breakout year of all time in 2024 and win the super bowl and get unanimous MVP over Maholmes and Purdy, but you know what the 49ers could do then? Restructure all their contracts and beat us even if Haener was better than Maholmes, because they could free up $100 million more cap than us. This is like why people having savings accounts and armies have reserves, throwing in 100% sounds like a smart way to max out but actually having a backup plan comes in handy and gives flexibility. Save the rainy day fund for a day it rains. 20% more resources sounds like an obvious choice but where would the Chiefs, 49ers, Bucs, and Rams have been if they could not afford to move on from Smith, Garappalo, Winston, and Goff?

The thing is, your vision of salary cap management is completely stagnant. It ignores the dimension of time. It says to just keep doing the same thing every year, keep chopping wood, keep borrowing to pay back debt. But what other teams are doing is playing 4D chess while Mickey Loomis is playing checkers. They are incorporating timing and cyclicity. Depending on the state of their roster they are building a war chest, advancing while maintaining reserves, balancing debt with liquidity, going all in with overwhelming force, then falling back to regroup when required. Mickey Loomis is just banging his head against a wall until the bottle stops talking to him.

Not going to waste my time reading your latest novella here. I know it's the same old crap, per usual.

However, with Loomis' method we aren't going to have periods with a totally dismal team. We'll always stay at least competitive. That's vitally important to me living five hours away and holding season tickets. Always being competitive is more important to me than the hopes of winning a championship. I want consistent entertainment. The tickets and travel are very expensive and would be a hard sell to my currently breadwinning wife (I'm retired, she has an excellent job) if we went through a period of 3-14 and 2-15.