Scribd
Upload
121 views1 page

2013 NFL Salary Cap Analysis

The document analyzes the salary cap makeup of several NFL teams considered contenders based on the concentration of cap dollars committed to their top 10 and top 5 highest paid players. It finds that teams like New England, San Francisco, and Seattle have lower concentrations of cap dollars committed to their top players, leaving more flexibility, while teams like Denver, New York Giants, and Pittsburgh have higher concentrations committed to fewer players.

Uploaded by

api-210705375
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
121 views1 page

2013 NFL Salary Cap Analysis

The document analyzes the salary cap makeup of several NFL teams considered contenders based on the concentration of cap dollars committed to their top 10 and top 5 highest paid players. It finds that teams like New England, San Francisco, and Seattle have lower concentrations of cap dollars committed to their top players, leaving more flexibility, while teams like Denver, New York Giants, and Pittsburgh have higher concentrations committed to fewer players.

Uploaded by

api-210705375
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

This is a follow-up from my NFL salary cap discussion yesterday with Pete Sheppard and callers on The Big

Show, WEEI 93.7 FM.

The following is a snapshot of NFL 'contender' salary cap makeup and these teams' relative positioning based on concentration of committed cap dollars within their respective Top 10 - and then Top 5- roster spots. Obviously 'contender' is highly subjective in a league of such parity. Data based on [Link]'s latest figures as of 5/19/13 AM. A couple cases (Kyle Arrington's contract figures, for example) have not yet been reported and would likely cause an adjustment to that team's Top 10. figure. A relatively low concentration of top-end cap dollars could be read as an indication of team philosophy on spending throughout the roster. Conversely, a team like Houston, as it's currently constructed, would presumably be handicapped in quality depth spending in the immediate future. This snapshot should also provide an indication of a team's ability or likelihood to take on - or not take on- any new top contracts prior to the draft. It's interesting to note how signifcantly the positioning here could change for teams'on borrowed time' -like San Francisco or Seattle . Both are getting high-end quarterback play without having to carry that kind of contract. That benefit clearly won't last forever. Plenty of ways to interpret this data, and it could still continue to change slightly as free agency advances... Let me know your own read on all of this...@chatham58 on Twitter.
*2013 NFL Salary Cap 123 M Team QB DT G LB CB TE WR K G TE Total Top 10 Cap Hits Top 10 as % of Cap Team TE DE CB RB WR Total Top 5 Cap Hits Top 5 as % of Cap NE 13.8 10.6 10.0 5.6 5.0 4.1 3.5 3.4 3.3 2.7 62.0 50% SF 8.7 QB 8.0 WR 7.3 G 6.5 T 6.4 CB 36.9 30% SF TE DE CB RB WR WR LB C S P 8.7 8.0 7.3 6.5 6.4 6.0 5.1 5.0 4.9 4.1 61.9 50% QB WR G T CB TE DT WR S LB ATL 12.0 9.1 7.7 6.1 5.7 5.3 5.2 4.4 3.9 3.5 62.8 51% GB QB TE CB DE DT G LB LB LB WR 9.8 8.8 8.5 6.7 6.6 5.6 5.2 4.9 4.8 4.0 64.8 53% DE DT G QB RB CB T WR FB LB BAL DEN 13.0 QB 20.0 11.5 CB 11.0 7.5 T 9.8 6.8 WR 6.0 5.8 LB/DE 5.7 5.4 G 5.4 5.0 LB 4.2 4.9 TE 3.5 4.3 TE 3.3 4.2 K 3.3 68.3 72.3 56% 59% SEA 11.0 9.7 9.5 8.5 8.2 46.9 38% NYG 20.9 11.0 9.3 6.8 6.2 5.4 4.7 4.1 3.7 3.6 75.6 61% PITT 13.6 10.1 9.5 9.2 8.0 7.7 5.8 4.8 4.5 3.1 76.2 62% SEA 11.0 9.7 9.5 8.5 8.2 7.6 7.3 6.0 5.2 5.0 78.0 63% HOU 14.6 11.3 10.8 9.5 8.3 5.8 5.5 5.5 5.0 4.6 80.7 66% HOU 14.6 11.3 10.8 9.5 8.3 54.4 44%

QB G S T DE CB C LB/DE WR T

QB S CB LB TE G LB S DE WR

TE WR T RB DE DE QB C DT DE

WR CB QB DE RB TE C S T LB

ATL GB BAL NE 12.0 QB 9.8 DE 13.0 QB 13.8 9.1 TE 8.8 DT 11.5 DT 10.6 7.7 CB 8.5 G 7.5 G 10.0 6.1 LB 6.7 QB 6.8 LB 5.6 5.7 DE 6.6 RB 5.8 CB 5.0 40.5 40.3 44.5 45.0 33% 33% 36% 37%

TE WR TE RB DE

QB S CB LB TE

PITT DEN NYG 13.6 QB 20.0 QB 20.9 10.1 CB 11.0 G 11.0 9.5 T 9.8 S 9.3 9.2 WR 6.0 T 6.8 8.0 LB/DE 5.7 DE 6.2 50.3 52.6 54.1 41% 43% 44%

WR CB QB DE RB

You might also like