$12mm cap space needed for 21?

[Guest]

@MaroonBells said:

@JimmyinSD said:

@MaroonBells said:

@JimmyinSD said:

@MaroonBells said:

@"Geoff Nichols" said:

@JimmyinSD said:

@"Geoff Nichols" said:

@MaroonBells said:

@StickyBun said:
This was all structured th same way other teams that are talented do it: make a window to get to the Super Bowl. Vikings took a swing when they signed Cousins, kept Barr, restructured contracts, moved hard cap money around, etc. Now its time to pay the piper. It is what it is but I think Minnesota won't have the dynamic drop off that many teams do that swing and miss. 

I agree that this is their window. They're extending it as long as they can, while they rebuild parts of the team. I would also argue that if they're able to retain some of the pivotal pieces (thinking in particular Barr, Harry) without hitting future books too hard, and hit on as many acquisitions this year as we did last year, then we're going to wake up one day and realize we've already rebuilt. 

The best teams are able to do rolling rebuilds wherein they rebuild pieces at a time. And so never really tear it down to build it back up. I know some advocate for that. God knows why.

For example, Vikings rebuilt the corners last year. TEs are also done. The OL is 3/5 there. WR is on its way. We'll replace one of the safeties this year. I fully expect our two biggest acquisitions this spring (whether FA or the draft) to be a starting 3T and Edge rusher. With luck we can hit on those and then the DL is set for the next several years. 

Now this doesn't mean all those players will be hits. Just that you've replaced an aging, expensive or ineffective player with a player you signed or drafted to be a starter.

This. Some of the best teams can even do it while never taking a step back. I think it all starts with the QB though. As long as you have that box checked it makes the rebuild that much easier. Where tanking starts to make sense is when you can't get a franchise QB. They don't grow on trees so draft and develop is the way to go. The unfortunate part is you likely need a top 3 pick for that.  

I think sometimes you get yourself painted into a corner and need to just eat a season to get that top 3 pick.  Dont necessarily tank,  but quit paying guys that arent going to be part of the long term solution,  get out of those contracts prior to the rebuild instead of having to deal with team as a hindrance to the process.  Hell you might be able to add draft capital by moving on from those players and shorten your process by a year or more.

Yes an no. My personal belief is that you only completely tear the doors off an team if there are cultural issues. That accomplishes what you're suggesting by ridding yourself of high priced players via release or trade. Its kind of a risky game to play though since the veterans are your leaders and you need leadership to successfully rebuild. So you can't just kick people to the curb. There have definitely been teams have have eaten a season but there are too many relationships and egos to just say you're going to do it. The only time it works is when you bring in a new FO that has buy-in from ownership and they basically sabotage a coach that's a lame duck anyways.

Compare Adam Gase to Brian Flores. Although Flores is a better overall coach and culture cultivator he was brought in by the Dolphins to start from scratch. The entire perception was that he would have a 2-3 win team and would then move upwards. Gase went a mess in NY where the GM (MCG) was fighting to save his job and overpromising on a failing roster. When the roster inevitable failed they hired Joe Douglas. When Douglas yanked the bandage off and gave Gase a flawed roster guess who's fault it was? 

Point is that game planning to eat a season is the ultimate tightrope walk. Its not one that would work right now in MN. Everyone would lose their jobs. But that doesn't mean they can't move on from certain players in hopes of finding low cost replacements. The complete rebuild just isn't needed or realistic. 

Agree. It would be different if we had, for example, missed on Danielle and Dalvin and Jefferson and Kendricks and ISJ and Dantzler to name a few, but we didn't. Those are now cornerstones for a rolling, piecemeal rebuild. If we tore it all up, we'd be wasting a big chunk of their careers. 

We been this team for the better part of 40 years.  Enough good pieces to think we are close,  but in reality we are just not good enough in the right areas and the  "reloading"  just seems to have become a perpetual state.

I think that's just a perception. The players I listed aren't just cornerstones, they're potentially game changers. You get lucky on a few pieces around them and things can change very quickly. 

no problems with any of them,  but I still dont know that we are that close,  especially considering what we will likely end up doing to our cap if they keep Cousins for this year and next... and then theirs the questions around Hunter.  Will he come back to form,  will he play for the money he is owed?

Cousins cap hit is not a problem for '21. Vikings I think will rank 10th in money spent at QB. '22 is the year where they surge to 1st and it becomes a problem. But I doubt we pay all of that. He'll either be traded or extended. 

As far as Hunter goes, I don't know why he wouldn't return to form. I guess it's possible; anything's possible. Disk injuries are nothing to sneeze at, but he had the surgery that so many who have recurring disk problems choose to avoid.

And as far as his money goes, there's an argument that his missed year will make a hold out unlikely. Again, I can't recall any player who spent a year on IR and then held out the following year. It's not exactly high-pointing your value. But, hey, maybe that's an argument for doing it now (from the Vikings perspective). Even if we do extend him, his cap hit for '21 would likely stay the same or go down as we push money into future years, when players like Harry and Rudy and Reiff and maybe even Cousins are off the books. Hunter's definitely the kind of player you don't mind investing big future dollars to. 

Cousins has shown to be pretty inflexible when it comes to his paycheck,  so I have my doubts he does anything after 21 that wouldnt benefit him long term and that will likely put us right back in a bad cap situation after only a year or so of relief.  If he was seriously committed to winning here he would realize that teams with high dollar QBs that cant carry a team are a detriment and make his salary work with the cap to put quality around him.

[Guest]

@minny65 said:

@MaroonBells said:

@JimmyinSD said:

@MaroonBells said:

@JimmyinSD said:

@MaroonBells said:

@"Geoff Nichols" said:

@JimmyinSD said:

@"Geoff Nichols" said:

@MaroonBells said:

@StickyBun said:
This was all structured th same way other teams that are talented do it: make a window to get to the Super Bowl. Vikings took a swing when they signed Cousins, kept Barr, restructured contracts, moved hard cap money around, etc. Now its time to pay the piper. It is what it is but I think Minnesota won't have the dynamic drop off that many teams do that swing and miss. 

I agree that this is their window. They're extending it as long as they can, while they rebuild parts of the team. I would also argue that if they're able to retain some of the pivotal pieces (thinking in particular Barr, Harry) without hitting future books too hard, and hit on as many acquisitions this year as we did last year, then we're going to wake up one day and realize we've already rebuilt. 

The best teams are able to do rolling rebuilds wherein they rebuild pieces at a time. And so never really tear it down to build it back up. I know some advocate for that. God knows why.

For example, Vikings rebuilt the corners last year. TEs are also done. The OL is 3/5 there. WR is on its way. We'll replace one of the safeties this year. I fully expect our two biggest acquisitions this spring (whether FA or the draft) to be a starting 3T and Edge rusher. With luck we can hit on those and then the DL is set for the next several years. 

Now this doesn't mean all those players will be hits. Just that you've replaced an aging, expensive or ineffective player with a player you signed or drafted to be a starter.

This. Some of the best teams can even do it while never taking a step back. I think it all starts with the QB though. As long as you have that box checked it makes the rebuild that much easier. Where tanking starts to make sense is when you can't get a franchise QB. They don't grow on trees so draft and develop is the way to go. The unfortunate part is you likely need a top 3 pick for that.  

I think sometimes you get yourself painted into a corner and need to just eat a season to get that top 3 pick.  Dont necessarily tank,  but quit paying guys that arent going to be part of the long term solution,  get out of those contracts prior to the rebuild instead of having to deal with team as a hindrance to the process.  Hell you might be able to add draft capital by moving on from those players and shorten your process by a year or more.

Yes an no. My personal belief is that you only completely tear the doors off an team if there are cultural issues. That accomplishes what you're suggesting by ridding yourself of high priced players via release or trade. Its kind of a risky game to play though since the veterans are your leaders and you need leadership to successfully rebuild. So you can't just kick people to the curb. There have definitely been teams have have eaten a season but there are too many relationships and egos to just say you're going to do it. The only time it works is when you bring in a new FO that has buy-in from ownership and they basically sabotage a coach that's a lame duck anyways.

Compare Adam Gase to Brian Flores. Although Flores is a better overall coach and culture cultivator he was brought in by the Dolphins to start from scratch. The entire perception was that he would have a 2-3 win team and would then move upwards. Gase went a mess in NY where the GM (MCG) was fighting to save his job and overpromising on a failing roster. When the roster inevitable failed they hired Joe Douglas. When Douglas yanked the bandage off and gave Gase a flawed roster guess who's fault it was? 

Point is that game planning to eat a season is the ultimate tightrope walk. Its not one that would work right now in MN. Everyone would lose their jobs. But that doesn't mean they can't move on from certain players in hopes of finding low cost replacements. The complete rebuild just isn't needed or realistic. 

Agree. It would be different if we had, for example, missed on Danielle and Dalvin and Jefferson and Kendricks and ISJ and Dantzler to name a few, but we didn't. Those are now cornerstones for a rolling, piecemeal rebuild. If we tore it all up, we'd be wasting a big chunk of their careers. 

We been this team for the better part of 40 years.  Enough good pieces to think we are close,  but in reality we are just not good enough in the right areas and the  "reloading"  just seems to have become a perpetual state.

I think that's just a perception. The players I listed aren't just cornerstones, they're potentially game changers. You get lucky on a few pieces around them and things can change very quickly. 

no problems with any of them,  but I still dont know that we are that close,  especially considering what we will likely end up doing to our cap if they keep Cousins for this year and next... and then theirs the questions around Hunter.  Will he come back to form,  will he play for the money he is owed?

Cousins cap hit is not a problem for '21. Vikings I think will rank 10th in money spent at QB. '22 is the year where they surge to 1st and it becomes a problem. But I doubt we pay all of that. He'll either be traded or extended. 

As far as Hunter goes, I don't know why he wouldn't return to form. I guess it's possible; anything's possible. Disk injuries are nothing to sneeze at, but he had the surgery that so many who have recurring disk problems choose to avoid.

And as far as his money goes, there's an argument that his missed year will make a hold out unlikely. Again, I can't recall any player who spent a year on IR and then held out the following year. It's not exactly high-pointing your value. But, hey, maybe that's an argument for doing it now (from the Vikings perspective). Even if we do extend him, his cap hit for '21 would likely stay the same or go down as we push money into future years, when players like Harry and Rudy and Reiff and maybe even Cousins are off the books. Hunter's definitely the kind of player you don't mind investing big future dollars to. 

But if we stick with Cousins this year we will have to pay him his full contract for the next two years on the first day of league start.  That is 41 million I think?  

Yep, and I'm not sure how that works. I know that in a trade the guaranteed money travels to the acquiring team, so who knows? Vikings might have a lot of incentive to move Kirk before league year. We wouldn't want Jimmy G's contract, so the 49ers would have to release Jimmy G, freeing up $24M with only $3M dead. That would give them money to put Kirk on the books. But I don't know what happens to Cousins' guarantee if he's traded before it hits. Doesn't hit the Vikings. Does it hit with the 49ers? Or does it just go away because certain metrics of the contract were not met? 

[Guest]

ROGER GOODELLCOM, NFL

NFL Network's Tom Pelissero believes the 2021 NFL salary cap will settle at around $185 million.The NFL and NFLPA are still negotiating what the final number will be, but it is heading towards being higher than the $175 million minimum the two sides agreed to last summer. Teams may not learn what the official number will be until just hours or days before free agency begins. The league is still projecting how many fans will be able to attend 2021 games, something that's mostly out of the league's control. The hope is that vaccinations are ramped up over the next months and that stadiums can be at or near full capacity next fall. The difference between a $175 million and $185 million salary cap may sound small for a roster of over 50 players, but it will be the difference between some veterans being cut or staying on their current deal. The belief is that this will be a buyer's market as many players battle for fewer dollars available. Expect more short-term deals from veterans, who will look to land a more lucrative contract the following season when the salary cap inevitably explodes.

[Guest]

@"BarrNone55" said:

ROGER GOODELLCOM, NFL

NFL Network's Tom Pelissero believes the 2021 NFL salary cap will settle at around $185 million.The NFL and NFLPA are still negotiating what the final number will be, but it is heading towards being higher than the $175 million minimum the two sides agreed to last summer. Teams may not learn what the official number will be until just hours or days before free agency begins. The league is still projecting how many fans will be able to attend 2021 games, something that's mostly out of the league's control. The hope is that vaccinations are ramped up over the next months and that stadiums can be at or near full capacity next fall. The difference between a $175 million and $185 million salary cap may sound small for a roster of over 50 players, but it will be the difference between some veterans being cut or staying on their current deal. The belief is that this will be a buyer's market as many players battle for fewer dollars available. Expect more short-term deals from veterans, who will look to land a more lucrative contract the following season when the salary cap inevitably explodes.

Welcome to another year of white water rafting in the NFL...

[Guest]

@Carl Knowles said:
Zimmer has made comments in the past that the safety position is not one of the more important positions in his defensive scheme.

I think Kris Boyd, Harrison Hand or even Jeff Gladney would make better NFL safeties than NFL corners.

If Patrick Surtain or Caleb Farley fell to the Vikings at pick 14, I think Zimmer might be interested... Zim could move a corner or two back to safety and be ok.

Rudy has already said he won't restructure, so I thinks he is out the door (and easily replaceable). I hate to say this, but I think Zimmer can also replace our safeties without much stress.

I think Zimmer would keep Rieff, Shamar and Barr over Rudy and Harry.

I think Rudy and Harry would save the Vikings almost 20M in cap space.

I think you are taking his comments about the safety position to an extreme. IMO he didn't think we needed to keep Harris on the franchise tag and probably thinks he could replace him if needed. But I do not think he feels Harrison Smith's salary was money badly spent, and he values Smith tremendously. In Zimmer's defense, Smith often plays like a S/WLB hybrid and that's hard to replace.

"keep Rieff, Shamar and Barr over Rudy and Harry" - ? I don't think he would keep any of them over Smith, with the possible exception of Barr (and I think Zimmer has a blind spot about Barr).

[Guest]

@purplefaithful said:

@"BarrNone55" said:

ROGER GOODELLCOM, NFL

NFL Network's Tom Pelissero believes the 2021 NFL salary cap will settle at around $185 million.The NFL and NFLPA are still negotiating what the final number will be, but it is heading towards being higher than the $175 million minimum the two sides agreed to last summer. Teams may not learn what the official number will be until just hours or days before free agency begins. The league is still projecting how many fans will be able to attend 2021 games, something that's mostly out of the league's control. The hope is that vaccinations are ramped up over the next months and that stadiums can be at or near full capacity next fall. The difference between a $175 million and $185 million salary cap may sound small for a roster of over 50 players, but it will be the difference between some veterans being cut or staying on their current deal. The belief is that this will be a buyer's market as many players battle for fewer dollars available. Expect more short-term deals from veterans, who will look to land a more lucrative contract the following season when the salary cap inevitably explodes.

Welcome to another year of white water rafting in the NFL...

$185M would be a huge win. I'm assuming Pelissero got his numbers for the NFLPA since they obviously want to see it come in on the higher end since that = higher salaries and protection for veterans. What it ultimately comes down to is how they account for lost revenue this season and there are few ways to do that. They either bite the bullet and painfully reduce the 2021 cap drastically ($175M) or they take the net impact of this year and bake it into future cap growth. The latter makes more sense for everyone involved but there just isn't an agreement on that. New TV deals and steaming rights will also drastically increase future revenues so having more information on what that looks like will be pertinent. Mainly because if you have a good forecast on future revenues setting the cap at $185M this year may not even inhibit future growth very much. 

Its too early to set a number but I think its more likely than not its going to be $180M or more. Teams seem to think more like $181M but the NFLPA may want to even suggest going to $190M. So we'll see. 

[Guest]

Banking on a successful vaccine roll out seems to be short sighted at this point. 17th game revenue as well as additional playoff dollars are much more tangible and likely. I believe at best we see 25% capacity in the Fall to start with.

[Guest]

@"BarrNone55" said:
Banking on a successful vaccine roll out seems to be short sighted at this point. 17th game revenue as well as additional playoff dollars are much more tangible and likely. I believe at best we see 25% capacity in the Fall to start with.

i would be curious to know what is really going to constitute a "successful vaccine rollout",  I am hearing numbers any where from 40% to 60% of those already offered are declining.  Considering those that have already been offered are primarily frontline healthcare professionals... how will that translate to the gen pop if the doctors and nurses are not jumping for it in mass?  Also then how will the lower than anticipated numbers affect how states allow large group activities to resume.

I am not betting on much more than 10-15% capacity in many stadiums next fall,  especially with the recent concerns over the vaccinated still being able to transmit the virus even if they dont get sick... which makes no sense to me but I havent stayed at a holiday inn for a while.

[Guest]

@JimmyinSD said:

@"BarrNone55" said:
Banking on a successful vaccine roll out seems to be short sighted at this point. 17th game revenue as well as additional playoff dollars are much more tangible and likely. I believe at best we see 25% capacity in the Fall to start with.

i would be curious to know what is really going to constitute a "successful vaccine rollout",  I am hearing numbers any where from 40% to 60% of those already offered are declining.  Considering those that have already been offered are primarily frontline healthcare professionals... how will that translate to the gen pop if the doctors and nurses are not jumping for it in mass?  Also then how will the lower than anticipated numbers affect how states allow large group activities to resume.

I am not betting on much more than 10-15% capacity in many stadiums next fall,  especially with the recent concerns over the vaccinated still being able to transmit the virus even if they dont get sick... which makes no sense to me but I havent stayed at a holiday inn for a while.

Two years w/out going to a game?! 

That's going make me one grumpier MF'er...

[Guest]

@purplefaithful said:

@JimmyinSD said:

@"BarrNone55" said:
Banking on a successful vaccine roll out seems to be short sighted at this point. 17th game revenue as well as additional playoff dollars are much more tangible and likely. I believe at best we see 25% capacity in the Fall to start with.

i would be curious to know what is really going to constitute a "successful vaccine rollout",  I am hearing numbers any where from 40% to 60% of those already offered are declining.  Considering those that have already been offered are primarily frontline healthcare professionals... how will that translate to the gen pop if the doctors and nurses are not jumping for it in mass?  Also then how will the lower than anticipated numbers affect how states allow large group activities to resume.

I am not betting on much more than 10-15% capacity in many stadiums next fall,  especially with the recent concerns over the vaccinated still being able to transmit the virus even if they dont get sick... which makes no sense to me but I havent stayed at a holiday inn for a while.

Two years w/out going to a game?! 

That's going make me one grumpier MF'er...

I love Grumpy Clint... never gets old.