Vikings Cap Moves
So with the Nick Vigil deal hitting a snag, the Vikings are $11.1 million under the cap. On June 2, they get another $7.9 million of cap room to work with. So what are they waiting for? Goessling is reporting that the Vikings are telling agents that they can only do vet minimum deals at this point.
Not sure, however Vigil’s numbers are already appearing on over the cap...
https://overthecap.com/salary-cap/minnesota-vikings/
What’s taking them so long to sign another free agent?
I can't *cough*Ravens*cough imagine why they need to *cough*LT*cough* hold so much money.
They’re not going to trade for Brown. They would have to give him and O’Neill huge extensions. No one in the league can afford to pay 2 tackles that kind of money.
@"Lee 19" said: They’re not going to trade for Brown. They would have to give him and O’Neill huge extensions. No one in the league can afford to pay 2 tackles that kind of money.We could afford it.
@"Lee 19" said: They’re not going to trade for Brown. They would have to give him and O’Neill huge extensions. No one in the league can afford to pay 2 tackles that kind of money.I they really wanted to, the extensions could be structured to fit both under future caps.
@"Knucklehead" said:Would be awesome to get Brown in the fold. If we do then we have taken care of Tackle and DT in free agency. Also, I would think the Peterson pick-up, would rule out a CB in the first round anyway.@"Lee 19" said: They’re not going to trade for Brown. They would have to give him and O’Neill huge extensions. No one in the league can afford to pay 2 tackles that kind of money. I they really wanted to, the extensions could be structured to fit both under future caps.So that leaves us in a great position to move up to the 5 spot and draft Wilson/Fields whomever the brass thinks is better. I love Wilson but I have been wrong once or twice but who's counting on a blog anyway :)
@"Lee 19" said: They’re not going to trade for Brown. They would have to give him and O’Neill huge extensions. No one in the league can afford to pay 2 tackles that kind of money.Brown, a LT, will likely get something similar to what LT Dion Dawkins got last year: 4 years, $60M, $11M cap hit in year one.
O'Neill, a RT will likely get something just under that. I think a lot of Vikings fans overrate O'Neill. He's been good, but he hasn't been great yet. And he plays RT. I'll say 4 years, $48M, $9M cap hit year one.
That's $20M between the two. Vikings are currently $21M under the cap in '22. And that's with Cousins enormous $45M cap hit and Hunter's $17M hit, both of which will be restructured. It also doesn't include the fact that the cap will go up significantly next season (which, granted, will boost the above contracts as well).
So yeah, we can afford both if we really want to.
@MaroonBells I think those dollars are a bit light. I think Zeus is going to need closer to $20 per and O'Neill $15+.
I really wanted and advocated for us to draft Dawkins (Temple - I saw play a few times) back in 2017 draft. We would have had to move up from 70 (Elflein) because Dawkins went 63 to the Bills, Oh well. I was also a big fan of drafting O'Neil and predicted he would start year one and took some crap for that. Oh well, every once in a while I am right but not according to the wife:)
With my great track record (notice I didn't add any of the misses) I go back to Wilson at 5 if available :)
@"BarrNone55" said: @MaroonBells I think those dollars are a bit light. I think Zeus is going to need closer to $20 per and O'Neill $15+.You're probably right. But those numbers would be per-year averages, not cap hit. We can choose to put as much or as little into that 1st year as we want, especially when you consider how much the cap will go up in '23.
Probably O'Neill range here.
@"MaroonBells" said:Read yesterday that the big cap jump won't be until 24, the cap is based on previous years revenues and the new TV deal won't kick in until 23. So you would be looking at kicking that can 4 years out in a league where players average less than that for a career. Might be a bit early to be spending that new tv money.@"BarrNone55" said: @MaroonBells I think those dollars are a bit light. I think Zeus is going to need closer to $20 per and O'Neill $15+. You're probably right. But those numbers would be per-year averages, not cap hit. We can choose to put as much or as little into that 1st year as we want, especially when you consider how much the cap will go up in '23.
@"JimmyinSD" said:It will likely increase a decent amount over the next two years due to the return of revenue and the 17th game, and then explode in '24 due to the TV deal. OTC projects $200 in '22, $225 in '23 and then a whopping $260 in '24.@"MaroonBells" said:Read yesterday that the big cap jump won't be until 24, the cap is based on previous years revenues and the new TV deal won't kick in until 23. So you would be looking at kicking that can 4 years out in a league where players average less than that for a career. Might be a bit early to be spending that new tv money.@"BarrNone55" said: @MaroonBells I think those dollars are a bit light. I think Zeus is going to need closer to $20 per and O'Neill $15+. You're probably right. But those numbers would be per-year averages, not cap hit. We can choose to put as much or as little into that 1st year as we want, especially when you consider how much the cap will go up in '23.So unless you're writing one or two year contracts, there will be a very deep hole in 2024 to stuff money into. A hole nearly $80M larger than it is now. And like I said, the Vikings have $21M in space for '22 (estimated $200 cap space). And that includes a $45M hit for Cousins which we likely won't see and a $17M hit for Hunter that we likely won't see.
What's more, right now we have $34M committed to 2024. If the cap is $260M, you can do the math.
@"MaroonBells" said:@"JimmyinSD" said:It will likely increase a decent amount over the next two years due to the return of revenue and the 17th game, and then explode in '24 due to the TV deal. OTC projects $200 in '22, $225 in '23 and then a whopping $260 in '24.@"MaroonBells" said:Read yesterday that the big cap jump won't be until 24, the cap is based on previous years revenues and the new TV deal won't kick in until 23. So you would be looking at kicking that can 4 years out in a league where players average less than that for a career. Might be a bit early to be spending that new tv money.@"BarrNone55" said: @MaroonBells I think those dollars are a bit light. I think Zeus is going to need closer to $20 per and O'Neill $15+. You're probably right. But those numbers would be per-year averages, not cap hit. We can choose to put as much or as little into that 1st year as we want, especially when you consider how much the cap will go up in '23.So unless you're writing one or two year contracts, there will be a very deep hole in 2024 to stuff money into. A hole nearly $80M larger than it is now. And like I said, the Vikings have $21M in space for '22 (estimated $200 cap space). And that includes a $45M hit for Cousins which we likely won't see and a $17M hit for Hunter that we likely won't see.
What's more, right now we have $34M committed to 2024. If the cap is $260M, you can do the math.
It never goes as far as we are led to believe. If the cap goes up 40% you can bet every position will think they are worth 45% more. More money in the cap won't ease cap woes, it will just be a bigger number to discuss.
@"JimmyinSD" said:@"MaroonBells" said:@"JimmyinSD" said:It will likely increase a decent amount over the next two years due to the return of revenue and the 17th game, and then explode in '24 due to the TV deal. OTC projects $200 in '22, $225 in '23 and then a whopping $260 in '24.@"MaroonBells" said:Read yesterday that the big cap jump won't be until 24, the cap is based on previous years revenues and the new TV deal won't kick in until 23. So you would be looking at kicking that can 4 years out in a league where players average less than that for a career. Might be a bit early to be spending that new tv money.@"BarrNone55" said: @MaroonBells I think those dollars are a bit light. I think Zeus is going to need closer to $20 per and O'Neill $15+. You're probably right. But those numbers would be per-year averages, not cap hit. We can choose to put as much or as little into that 1st year as we want, especially when you consider how much the cap will go up in '23.So unless you're writing one or two year contracts, there will be a very deep hole in 2024 to stuff money into. A hole nearly $80M larger than it is now. And like I said, the Vikings have $21M in space for '22 (estimated $200 cap space). And that includes a $45M hit for Cousins which we likely won't see and a $17M hit for Hunter that we likely won't see.
What's more, right now we have $34M committed to 2024. If the cap is $260M, you can do the math.
It never goes as far as we are led to believe. If the cap goes up 40% you can bet every position will think they are worth 45% more. More money in the cap won't ease cap woes, it will just be a bigger number to discuss.
Damn greedy players. How will the owners cope if they get an extra $113 billion if they have to turn right around and give it to all those greedy players?What you don't seem to understand is that it all evens out in the end. If the cap goes up 40%, salaries will go up 40%. There can be no additional 5% on a salary without an equal reduction of 5% elsewhere. That's the beauty of the salary cap, the beauty of the market.
I think you see "woes" everywhere you look.
@"MaroonBells" said:@"JimmyinSD" said:@"MaroonBells" said:@"JimmyinSD" said:It will likely increase a decent amount over the next two years due to the return of revenue and the 17th game, and then explode in '24 due to the TV deal. OTC projects $200 in '22, $225 in '23 and then a whopping $260 in '24.@"MaroonBells" said:Read yesterday that the big cap jump won't be until 24, the cap is based on previous years revenues and the new TV deal won't kick in until 23. So you would be looking at kicking that can 4 years out in a league where players average less than that for a career. Might be a bit early to be spending that new tv money.@"BarrNone55" said: @MaroonBells I think those dollars are a bit light. I think Zeus is going to need closer to $20 per and O'Neill $15+. You're probably right. But those numbers would be per-year averages, not cap hit. We can choose to put as much or as little into that 1st year as we want, especially when you consider how much the cap will go up in '23.So unless you're writing one or two year contracts, there will be a very deep hole in 2024 to stuff money into. A hole nearly $80M larger than it is now. And like I said, the Vikings have $21M in space for '22 (estimated $200 cap space). And that includes a $45M hit for Cousins which we likely won't see and a $17M hit for Hunter that we likely won't see.
What's more, right now we have $34M committed to 2024. If the cap is $260M, you can do the math.
It never goes as far as we are led to believe. If the cap goes up 40% you can bet every position will think they are worth 45% more. More money in the cap won't ease cap woes, it will just be a bigger number to discuss.
Damn greedy players. How will the owners cope if they get an extra $113 billion if they have to turn right around and give it to all those greedy players?What you don't seem to understand is that it all evens out in the end. If the cap goes up 40%, salaries will go up 40%. There can be no additional 5% on a salary without an equal reduction of 5% elsewhere. That's the beauty of the salary cap, the beauty of the market.
I think you see "woes" everywhere you look.
I don't see it as a greedy players issue, but Jimmy raises the point. The first wave of free agents will be looking to soak up more than their share of that 40%. QBs will be getting about 30% of it and the mid level vets will be getting cut.
@"MaroonBells" said:@"JimmyinSD" said:@"MaroonBells" said:@"JimmyinSD" said:It will likely increase a decent amount over the next two years due to the return of revenue and the 17th game, and then explode in '24 due to the TV deal. OTC projects $200 in '22, $225 in '23 and then a whopping $260 in '24.@"MaroonBells" said:Read yesterday that the big cap jump won't be until 24, the cap is based on previous years revenues and the new TV deal won't kick in until 23. So you would be looking at kicking that can 4 years out in a league where players average less than that for a career. Might be a bit early to be spending that new tv money.@"BarrNone55" said: @MaroonBells I think those dollars are a bit light. I think Zeus is going to need closer to $20 per and O'Neill $15+. You're probably right. But those numbers would be per-year averages, not cap hit. We can choose to put as much or as little into that 1st year as we want, especially when you consider how much the cap will go up in '23.So unless you're writing one or two year contracts, there will be a very deep hole in 2024 to stuff money into. A hole nearly $80M larger than it is now. And like I said, the Vikings have $21M in space for '22 (estimated $200 cap space). And that includes a $45M hit for Cousins which we likely won't see and a $17M hit for Hunter that we likely won't see.
What's more, right now we have $34M committed to 2024. If the cap is $260M, you can do the math.
It never goes as far as we are led to believe. If the cap goes up 40% you can bet every position will think they are worth 45% more. More money in the cap won't ease cap woes, it will just be a bigger number to discuss.
Damn greedy players. How will the owners cope if they get an extra $113 billion if they have to turn right around and give it to all those greedy players?What you don't seem to understand is that it all evens out in the end. If the cap goes up 40%, salaries will go up 40%. There can be no additional 5% on a salary without an equal reduction of 5% elsewhere. That's the beauty of the salary cap, the beauty of the market.
I think you see "woes" everywhere you look.
I understand just fine, you trying to shit rainbows on those with future cap concerns seem to be the one not getting it.You are the one that keeps using this new cap money as an answer to our cap crunch, you claim kicking these bonuses and what not down the road will somehow be ok because of this new tv contract money. I am simply pointing out the obvious that seems to escape you and that is the fact that when the cap goes up there won't be more money to run the team, it will still be the same situation just bigger dollars, with the added complications of trying to pay for our 3 previous years poor spending habits.
@"greediron" said:@"MaroonBells" said:@"JimmyinSD" said:@"MaroonBells" said:@"JimmyinSD" said:It will likely increase a decent amount over the next two years due to the return of revenue and the 17th game, and then explode in '24 due to the TV deal. OTC projects $200 in '22, $225 in '23 and then a whopping $260 in '24.@"MaroonBells" said:Read yesterday that the big cap jump won't be until 24, the cap is based on previous years revenues and the new TV deal won't kick in until 23. So you would be looking at kicking that can 4 years out in a league where players average less than that for a career. Might be a bit early to be spending that new tv money.@"BarrNone55" said: @MaroonBells I think those dollars are a bit light. I think Zeus is going to need closer to $20 per and O'Neill $15+. You're probably right. But those numbers would be per-year averages, not cap hit. We can choose to put as much or as little into that 1st year as we want, especially when you consider how much the cap will go up in '23.So unless you're writing one or two year contracts, there will be a very deep hole in 2024 to stuff money into. A hole nearly $80M larger than it is now. And like I said, the Vikings have $21M in space for '22 (estimated $200 cap space). And that includes a $45M hit for Cousins which we likely won't see and a $17M hit for Hunter that we likely won't see.
What's more, right now we have $34M committed to 2024. If the cap is $260M, you can do the math.
It never goes as far as we are led to believe. If the cap goes up 40% you can bet every position will think they are worth 45% more. More money in the cap won't ease cap woes, it will just be a bigger number to discuss.
Damn greedy players. How will the owners cope if they get an extra $113 billion if they have to turn right around and give it to all those greedy players?What you don't seem to understand is that it all evens out in the end. If the cap goes up 40%, salaries will go up 40%. There can be no additional 5% on a salary without an equal reduction of 5% elsewhere. That's the beauty of the salary cap, the beauty of the market.
I think you see "woes" everywhere you look.
I don't see it as a greedy players issue, but Jimmy raises the point. The first wave of free agents will be looking to soak up more than their share of that 40%. QBs will be getting about 30% of it and the mid level vets will be getting cut.
Right. So? The point is they can look for whatever the hell they want. They might get it, they might not, but every team is in the exact same position. If you decide to pay your QB 15% of your cap, that's your prerogative. It means that you pay other positions less.Roster construction and cap distribution is as much a strategy as Xs and Os. But nobody's at a disadvantage here. There are no "cap woes" on one team that don't exist on another. It's a perfectly level playing field and fans need to stop getting bent out of shape about skyrocketing salaries and comparing them to real world salaries. Like, oh $17M a year isn't enough to feed your family and make you happy? It's not about that; it's a game, no different than Monopoly, where you're given a percentage of revenue to play the game, and to keep your best "properties" you have to pay for them. If you don't, you lose them. But guess what? Unlike Monopoly, where you can go bankrupt, in this game, your profit margin is all but guaranteed. Expenses (salaries) can only go up when revenue goes up. It's actually a goddam racket for owners.
Edit Post (mod action — author will see a notice)
Warn Poster
Suspend User (3 days)
The user will be suspended for 3 days and will receive an email with the reason and information about how to appeal.