2013 Salary Cap Spending

[Spor_tees]

I can't say as any of the cap talk has ever interested me all that much.

The Bengals always spend pretty close to the cap, but as mentioned (I think), it's how they spend it.

No matter how much I talk about it, that thought process isn't changing any time soon.

Cap talk gets a big yawn from me.

The Bengals rolled over I think $15 million left over space from last year that many thought was going to go for extensions that haven't been sign yet. There is very little info out there, but I found a site that listed the Bengals as only having $9 million in cap room currently. That really isn't much when you take into account roster bonuses and other escalators. I find it off, but I have nothing else to go by.

My link

[HoosierCat]

you need to learn what sunk costs are dude... for real.

I do, because I have no idea what you are talking about.

What Smith was paid in his first two years here are sunk costs. They are unrecoverable whether Smith stays or leaves, and so should not have any bearing on whether or not to keep him in stripes. To do so would be to commit what's known as the sunk costs fallacy.

The question before the Bengals is what to do about the future. Smith is playing well and will certainly draw interest in free agency if he's allowed to test the market next March. Short of the franchise tag, there may not be a way to avoid that now. But in my view the Bengals can ill-afford to let Smith go. The team has too many needs and not enough picks as it is. Letting Smith walk repeats the mistakes of letting TJ and JJoe walk, and would represent yet another setback to an offensive line that's seen 60% turnover from 2011 to 2012 alone.

I would not at all be surprised to see the Bengals tag Andre. It's not like they have any other big-bucks FAs in 2013, and it gives them one more season to decide whether to give him a big payday.

[Spor_tees]

you need to learn what sunk costs are dude... for real.

I do, because I have no idea what you are talking about.

What Smith was paid in his first two years here are sunk costs. They are unrecoverable whether Smith stays or leaves, and so should not have any bearing on whether or not to keep him in stripes. To do so would be to commit what's known as the sunk costs fallacy.

The question before the Bengals is what to do about the future. Smith is playing well and will certainly draw interest in free agency if he's allowed to test the market next March. Short of the franchise tag, there may not be a way to avoid that now. But in my view the Bengals can ill-afford to let Smith go. The team has too many needs and not enough picks as it is. Letting Smith walk repeats the mistakes of letting TJ and JJoe walk, and would represent yet another setback to an offensive line that's seen 60% turnover from 2011 to 2012 alone.

I would not at all be surprised to see the Bengals tag Andre. It's not like they have any other big-bucks FAs in 2013, and it gives them one more season to decide whether to give him a big payday.

Damn Hoosier you fell for the trap I was laying for someone else! I know what sunk cost are, but I wanted him to provide more info to hang himself with. Sunk costs is actual money that is lost in investments and should be deemed unrecoverable when evaluating the decision. No? Andre Smith is not an investment nor a 'property,' he's an employee. That's a pretty big difference. If you want to get technical, Smith is an independent contractor that is part of a union and has an agent that brokers his agents talents, but to make this a lot easier to understand, we'll just say he is an employee.

Smith was drafted in the first round of the NFL draft and negotiated to a contract with the expectations and agreed upon belief that Smith would do what was required of him by the team to live up to the money that was being promised to him in the contract. This contract even had an agreed upon maximum weight that the team deemed a "playing weight." How can you blame the Bengals after Smith's poor physique and performance at the combine? The contract had signing bonus, guaranteed money, performance escalators, two optional club years, and other triggers in combination with the "playing weight" clause.

Smith held out and showed up late to his first training camp with the Bengals over-weight and out of shape. Strike one, Smith was above his "playing weight" which is part of his contract. Smith was fined for it. Smith eventually hurt his foot and his entire first year was a wash. Many in the team believed that Smith's poor professional attitude led to him not showing up according to how he promised in the contract, and caused his injury, more in a moment.

At the end of Smith's first season, after having surgery on his foot, the team plead Smith to stay in Cincinnati in order to rehab his foot, stay in shape, and keep his weight in check, which would be essential in helping keep extra pressure off his foot and allow to heal. Smith fought with the Bengals about it and swore he would take care of business back in Alabama. Cincinnati fought with him, but Smith hit the airport, and off he went.

Cincinnati would receive periodic reports that Smith's foot was not healing quickly, but they had no clue how bad things were until he showed up for training camp his second year. Smith was once AGAIN out of shape, over weight, and still injured. Smith's foot was not only still injured, but was way behind pace as to how far along it should have been. It became obvious that Smith had not done any of the things in Alabama that he promised to the Bengals. Once again Smith was fined because he did not report at the "playing weight" amount in his contract. Smith spent basically his entire second year in the NFL doing what he should have been doing during the off season. Strike two!

After the end ofthe year the Bengals approached Smith once again and asked him to stay in Cincinnati to rehab and workout with team officials and doctors. If you believe some reports, the Bengals may have used what they believed was Smith's ultimate motivator, money and the two option years they held, to get him to stay. Smith finally agreed. He stayed in Cincinnati and finally was able to take some weight off, heal, and condition.

Smith showed up for his third training camp within his "playing weight" but Marvin still believed he needed more conditioning for what would be his first extended season in the NFL. After spending some days working out on the side with the conditioning guys, Smith was finally able to get on the field and take his place at RT, two years behind schedule. Smith played pretty much the entire year, at above average play, somewhat inconsistent where he would hold a stud DE to a shut out, but then get beat like a drum by a journeyman DE. Fans felt encouraged by Smith's play, and hoped he might be a linchpin to the line they had hoped for. During the offseason, the Bengals decided to decline Smith's option years in his contract. Some fans and NFL followers were kind of surprised given the figures, but then again how could the Bengals promise two more years of money to a guy that has played one of his first three years as a number one pick?

Smith showed up for his fourth Bengal's training camp in the best shape of his career. He was well within his "playing weight" clause and looked for lean. His foot was also pretty much healed for good, despite some soreness and swelling during his third year. So far through the first half of an overall disappointing season for the Bengals, Smith has played the best year of his career. Smith has had an occasional poor, or average game, including a just plain bad game against the Broncos, yet has earned some positive press. Some fans, including myself are not surprised that Smith is now playing this well given it's a contract year, however this is how Smith should have been playing in his second year, not his fourth.

After reading this, can you now see why this is not sunk costs? Sunk cost are based on losses from speculations. What happened was money lost to expectations of an employee under contract that had certain clauses that were meant to keep the employee on pace to perform to the level he had promised when his signature was put on the dotted line. By the way Smith has played in his fourth year, there is no doubt that if Smith had lived up to his part of the deal, the Bengals would have made the right decision, however the way Smith played in his fourth year also proved that this isn't about sunk costs, it was about, breach of contract more than anything else. Smith should thank the Bengals everyday for keeping him along as long as they did. If Smith was cut after his second failed year, how much money do you think he would have gotten out on the free agent market as a third year NFL pro, with zero regular season experience and is know to have a poor attitude, doesn't listen to his team, and is fat, lazy, out of shape, and fragile? This isn't sunk costs. I'm going to save this post on file so I don't have to type all this out again.

[HoosierCat]

Damn Hoosier you fell for the trap I was laying for someone else! I know what sunk cost are, but I wanted him to provide more info to hang himself with. Sunk costs is actual money that is lost in investments and should be deemed unrecoverable when evaluating the decision. No?

Well, no, since sunk costs are not necessarily lost. But that's not particularly important. Nothing you wrote changes the fact that the past is the past and matters not one bit to whether we re-sign Smith.

[Spor_tees]

Damn Hoosier you fell for the trap I was laying for someone else! I know what sunk cost are, but I wanted him to provide more info to hang himself with. Sunk costs is actual money that is lost in investments and should be deemed unrecoverable when evaluating the decision. No?

Well, no, since sunk costs are not necessarily lost. But that's not particularly important. Nothing you wrote changes the fact that the past is the past and matters not one bit to whether we re-sign Smith.

Nooooo sunk costs are based on investments where the only action a person has in the decision is based on an informed choice based on speculation. The Bengals' choice to take Smith was based on past performance and the expectation that Smith would follow the terms of his contract and live up to expectation. In fact, the only reason Smith didn't live up to expectations, was because he didn't follow the terms and conditions set forth in his contract. You're a college educated man, I know you can understand this. It's doesn't fall with the terms and conditions set forth as sunk costs.

Filling the locker room fridge with Gatorade for the players with speculations that players wouldn't abuse the privilege and fill their backpacks with them and take them home. Well after finding out the players were indeed doing that, the Bengals staff instead decided to ignore the sunk costs, put a Marvin Lewis note on the fridge, and refill it with Gatorade. That's a big difference.

[HoosierCat]

I think you really need to google sunk costs, BB.

[Spor_tees]

I think you really need to google sunk costs, BB.

From: Sunk Costs

Definition of 'Sunk Cost'

A cost that has already been incurred and thus cannot be recovered. A sunk cost differs from other, future costs that a business may face, such as inventory costs or R&D expenses, because it has already happened. Sunk costs are independent of any event that may occur in the future.

In this definition it refers to inventory (which I would assume includes loss prevention, damaged, and depreciation) and research and development. Both things are types of property, physical or intellectual.

From: Sunk Cost

In economics and business decision-making, sunk costs are retrospective (past) costs that have already been incurred and cannot be recovered. Sunk costs are sometimes contrasted with prospective costs, which are future costs that may be incurred or changed if an action is taken. Both retrospective and prospective costs may be either fixed (that is, they are not dependent on the volume of economic activity, however measured) or variable (dependent on volume).

If you read my entire post, which I wouldn't blame some for not doing, it was rather long, you could see that the Bengals were in fact able to retrieve some of their investment. Smith's contract contained certain clauses that allowed Smith to be fined, or not paid for, certain actions and instances that Smith was responsible for. Therefore, Smith and his first two years with the Bengals can not be listed as lost costs from that perspective either. In fact, the Bengals optional contract years with Smith was another method that the Bengals had in his contract, that allowed them to not only cut future spending, but to recoup past loses based on Smith performance.

[HoosierCat]

If you read my entire post, which I wouldn't blame some for not doing, it was rather long, you could see that the Bengals were in fact able to retrieve some of their investment.

So? The rest still represents sunk costs, and none of what they did or didn't get back has any bearing on whether they ought to re-sign him. The only question is whether or not you think he's played well enough in the last two seasons to warrant a new deal. I do, you don't. We'll find out who's right.

[Spor_tees]

If you read my entire post, which I wouldn't blame some for not doing, it was rather long, you could see that the Bengals were in fact able to retrieve some of their investment.

So? The rest still represents sunk costs, and none of what they did or didn't get back has any bearing on whether they ought to re-sign him. The only question is whether or not you think he's played well enough in the last two seasons to warrant a new deal. I do, you don't. We'll find out who's right.

If you look at the numbers, the Bengals actually saved more in future costs than they lost during Smith's first two years. The only sunk cost in this matter is a high first round pick by the Bengals that they can never go back and fix.

As for the future, the Bengals know better than any other team in the league who Andre Smith is. They know he isn't worth giving a one year $13 million dollar Franchise tag on (projected roughly based on last years $11+ million dollar tag) or give another long term contract that will be for a starting RT in the NFL with 4 years of experience (which is actually only two) that would be somewhere along the line of a 3-4 year deal averaging about $9 million a year. When Joe Thomas last year signed an extension with the Browns he signed a seven year $84 million dollar extension. We all know Smith is no Joe Thomas, but based on the numbers, I think Smith is slotted fairly. The point is, there is no where that the Bengals can feel comfortable giving this guy this kind of money. Unless Smith is willing to sign a one or two year deal in the $7 million dollar price range, which is highly unlikely to do, I don't seeing it happening. The Bengals would fall right into Smith's trap if they tagged him, Smith would just sign the tender, cash the check, play the season, and go back into free agency and collect a big pay day. Any future involving Smith ouside the one I outlined, would be a horrible business decision, expectially taking into account the young players on this team that actually are producing in rookie contracts and are soon up for extensions.

So Hoosier, your willing to mortgage the future of this team in order to keep Smith?

[ArmyBengal]

Have to agree with Hoosier in this certain situation.

None of what happened in the past (sunk costs) has any bearing whatsoever on whether or not they should resign him.

The only past that should be a factor is, is Smith currently playing the way they thought he was going to ??

Has he gotten to the point they thought he would ??

Seattle is just this season getting to a point where drafting Russell Okung is paying off and the Bengals got sh*t for drafting Smith.

In looking at that draft from now, Andre has probably been one of the best OT's taken that year.

Thinking we should just take another OT within the first couple picks so we can let him walk is crazy when considering this teams holes.

Tag him and go from there if they must.

If it doesn't work out, draft RT the next season when there aren't so many holes to fill.

[Spor_tees]

Have to agree with Hoosier in this certain situation.

None of what happened in the past (sunk costs) has any bearing whatsoever on whether or not they should resign him.

The only past that should be a factor is, is Smith currently playing the way they thought he was going to ??

Has he gotten to the point they thought he would ??

Seattle is just this season getting to a point where drafting Russell Okung is paying off and the Bengals got sh*t for drafting Smith.

In looking at that draft from now, Andre has probably been one of the best OT's taken that year.

Thinking we should just take another OT within the first couple picks so we can let him walk is crazy when considering this teams holes.

Tag him and go from there if they must.

If it doesn't work out, draft RT the next season when there aren't so many holes to fill.

You realize that if they Franchise tag Smith, they are more than likely not going to be able to extend one of either Atkins, MJ, or Dunlap. Is Smith worth that? Put Boling at RT, draft a RT with one of the first three picks, let them battle it out, and extend everybody, including Dalton, Green, and maybe even Boling. Seems like a no brainer to me.

So did you guys miss me? Let me tell you I have been visiting a lot of different boards even non-sports related ones, and have learned a lot about discussing things. Its one to be be hard headed and a jerk about general comments I used to make with absolutely nothing concrete to back it up, it's another to know when to pick your battles or move on. I have a very strong feeling about Smith, but at this point the numbers, playing performance, and consequences of resigning Smith back up every I have to say about him.

[ArmyBengal]

Have to agree with Hoosier in this certain situation.

None of what happened in the past (sunk costs) has any bearing whatsoever on whether or not they should resign him.

The only past that should be a factor is, is Smith currently playing the way they thought he was going to ??

Has he gotten to the point they thought he would ??

Seattle is just this season getting to a point where drafting Russell Okung is paying off and the Bengals got sh*t for drafting Smith.

In looking at that draft from now, Andre has probably been one of the best OT's taken that year.

Thinking we should just take another OT within the first couple picks so we can let him walk is crazy when considering this teams holes.

Tag him and go from there if they must.

If it doesn't work out, draft RT the next season when there aren't so many holes to fill.

You realize that if they Franchise tag Smith, they are more than likely not going to be able to extend one of either Atkins, MJ, or Dunlap. Is Smith worth that? Put Boling at RT, draft a RT with one of the first three picks, let them battle it out, and extend everybody, including Dalton, Green, and maybe even Boling. Seems like a no brainer to me.

Atkins isn't going anywhere, they will pay him and there will be to no thought about it.

Many here think that both MJ and Dunlap disappear for great periods of time only to reappear and make you wonder where the hell this player has been. If we are talking about losing one or the other, most probably would say that as long as Atkins is in the middle, he will make those playing on the outside better. Losing Geathers bloated contract won't hurt either.

So just move a player to a position he hasn't played at the NFL level and hope for the best ?? Boling needs to stay at OG. Why shake up the o-line further with additional moves (see inconsistency) and another rookie to man the RT spot ?? Not to mention all the holes this team has that should be of higher priority to address with those first three picks ??

In looking at what I wrote again, I said "If they must" in regards to the tag.

If a short term deal is impossible, which I don't see his agent letting him sign, the tag is the better option.

Letting him walk and starting over is going backward. This team has gone down that road and we know how it ends.

The beauty of boards is, opinions are just that. Some feel one way, some feel another.

Time will tell what happens and what the team was thinking.

If i'm wrong, so be it. If i'm right, so be it as well.

This isn't a competition for me. It's not a battle.

[HoosierCat]

I agree, Atkins will get re-signed. I think they should re-sign Dunlap, but I'm not sure that they will. Injury issues figured heavily in their decisions not to pursue Rucker and Fanene earlier this year, and I'm afraid the same thing could happen here. (And for the record I think letting him go would be a mistake.) I think they'll get MJ back without breaking the bank, but I can also see a scenario where they re-up Carlos and MJ goes.

One other name to watch IMHO is Peko. They have two rooks in Still and Thompson looking for playing time and Peko is scheduled to eat up about $5 million in cap space next year and $4 million in 2014.

[ArmyBengal]

I wonder the same thing about Peko with the team having both Still and Thompson in the fold.