How much salary cap space does each team possess for the 2016 league year? Significantly more than is typically reported. I explain and calculate the True Cap Space available to each team below the break:
With the 2016 regular season now complete and the remaining teams facing postseason elimination in the coming weeks, fans will come across a variety of resources and articles – including websites such as this one – that specify the amount of cap space that each possesses for the 2016 offseason. The purpose of specifying team cap space is to provide fans with a proxy that indicates the degree to which each team possesses the CBA-allocated resources to acquire new talent. While teams can structure contracts in such a way as to acquire talent despite a minimal amount of cap space (at least in the short term), it remains intuitive that teams with more cap space have more of an opportunity to acquire talent via free agency and trades than teams with less cap space.
However, an important characteristic of salary cap space is that it is measured as a snapshot in time, on the basis of the current contractual status of the players on (and off of) a given roster. A team can typically increase its cap space by restructuring a contract or releasing a player. Because most contracts in the NFL at any given time are not guaranteed for that specific season, it is this last type of transaction that occurs with great frequency as free agency approaches. As a result, fans will also come across many articles identifying the amount of cap space that a team can save by releasing certain players.
Given these facts, it seems odd that salary cap space is universally reported and discussed in accordance with the following convention: Team X currently “possesses” Y Amount of Cap Space but can “save” Z Amount of Cap Space by releasing Player A (whose contract is not guaranteed). If the team was never obligated to use the cap space on the player, then the team is not actually “saving” cap space that was previously committed. The team is merely declining its team option on the player, and is not “saving” cap space any more than when it chooses not to sign any free agent or trade for any player on any other team.
As a result, most teams actually possess significantly more cap space at the beginning of any given offseason than will be reported according to the standard convention. But it just turns out that most teams will spend most of that cap space on their own players by simply choosing to not release those players. For example, the standard convention would identify Drew Brees as counting $30 million against the salary cap, but would point out that the Saints could “save” $20 million in salary cap space by releasing Brees. The correct way to describe this situation – emphasizing the true salary cap commitment and the decision which must be made – is to say that Brees is scheduled to count $10 million against the salary cap but that the Saints have the option to use an additional $20 million of salary cap space to retain Brees if they choose to not release him.
This example also highlights that the only amounts that are truly committed to a given team’s salary cap are 2016 signing bonus proration amounts and dead money amounts. All other amounts can be manipulated. Base salaries and roster bonuses can be avoided by releasing the player. Guaranteed salaries can be avoided by trading the player. Future signing bonus proration amounts can be deferred by releasing or trading the player after June 1st. 2016 signing bonus proration amounts and dead money amounts, however, are completely “stuck” to the 2016 salary cap and therefore represent sunk costs.
I refer to the difference between a team’s Adjusted Salary Cap and its sum of 2016 signing bonus proration amounts and dead money amounts as its “Realizable Cap Space.” This is the total amount of cap space theoretically at the team’s disposal. This assumes, in part, that every player can be released as a Post-June-1st termination. While this is not logistically feasible, it is possible in theory and reflects the transactional optionality that exists.
The table below shows the 2016 Realizable Cap Space for each team. The “Adjusted Cap” column assumes that all residual 2015 salary cap space will be carried forward to 2016; this won’t exactly happen once unearned LTBE incentives and earned NLTBE incentives are netted out.
Team | Adjusted Cap | Proration/Dead Money | Realizable Cap Space |
JAX | 183,302,458 | (15,578,176) | 167,724,282 |
OAK | 163,571,280 | (13,980,365) | 149,590,915 |
TB | 157,595,530 | (12,672,361) | 144,923,169 |
TEN | 173,787,131 | (31,299,170) | 142,487,961 |
CLE | 167,772,848 | (26,284,253) | 141,488,595 |
CIN | 158,439,898 | (19,947,649) | 138,492,249 |
IND | 156,796,676 | (19,041,221) | 137,755,455 |
CHI | 153,145,637 | (16,285,043) | 136,860,594 |
SF | 162,221,069 | (26,870,036) | 135,351,033 |
MIN | 153,033,470 | (17,893,379) | 135,140,091 |
PHI | 158,369,480 | (24,301,075) | 134,068,405 |
STL | 152,836,127 | (19,798,873) | 133,037,254 |
NYG | 161,433,300 | (28,545,868) | 132,887,432 |
NYJ | 152,453,091 | (20,134,419) | 132,318,672 |
DEN | 153,112,155 | (22,349,635) | 130,762,520 |
MIA | 159,874,204 | (31,398,288) | 128,475,916 |
WAS | 156,155,900 | (28,437,817) | 127,718,083 |
KC | 153,280,990 | (26,752,320) | 126,528,670 |
SD | 152,622,088 | (27,547,036) | 125,075,052 |
HOU | 152,476,332 | (28,535,699) | 123,940,633 |
GB | 157,470,884 | (34,356,480) | 123,114,404 |
SEA | 149,951,918 | (27,385,705) | 122,566,213 |
ARI | 153,874,721 | (34,455,481) | 119,419,240 |
DET | 151,003,620 | (34,411,370) | 116,592,250 |
ATL | 156,476,953 | (41,489,918) | 114,987,035 |
BUF | 155,325,925 | (41,039,958) | 114,285,967 |
PIT | 155,004,149 | (42,582,078) | 112,422,071 |
CAR | 154,214,372 | (42,609,881) | 111,604,491 |
NE | 151,517,314 | (41,712,099) | 109,805,215 |
DAL | 155,275,450 | (45,972,103) | 109,303,347 |
BAL | 152,113,228 | (42,989,442) | 109,123,786 |
NO | 151,807,395 | (57,658,527) | 94,148,868 |
Team | Realizable Cap Space | Guarantees | Minimums | True Cap Space |
TEN | 142,487,961 | (5,364,436) | (21,600,000) | 137,123,525 |
JAX | 167,724,282 | (33,050,383) | (19,800,000) | 134,673,899 |
CIN | 138,492,249 | (4,398,274) | (21,600,000) | 134,093,975 |
OAK | 149,590,915 | (17,141,560) | (21,600,000) | 132,449,355 |
IND | 137,755,455 | (6,404,791) | (22,050,000) | 131,350,664 |
SF | 135,351,033 | (4,124,408) | (22,050,000) | 131,226,625 |
TB | 144,923,169 | (15,048,325) | (21,600,000) | 129,874,844 |
CLE | 141,488,595 | (11,757,133) | (19,800,000) | 129,731,462 |
NYG | 132,887,432 | (6,975,701) | (21,150,000) | 125,911,731 |
MIN | 135,140,091 | (9,963,930) | (21,600,000) | 125,176,161 |
SEA | 122,566,213 | – | (23,850,000) | 122,566,213 |
GB | 123,114,404 | (1,972,852) | (22,950,000) | 121,141,552 |
CHI | 136,860,594 | (17,681,971) | (21,600,000) | 119,178,623 |
STL | 133,037,254 | (16,906,392) | (20,250,000) | 116,130,862 |
DEN | 130,762,520 | (14,901,993) | (22,500,000) | 115,860,527 |
DET | 116,592,250 | (5,871,736) | (22,050,000) | 110,720,514 |
PIT | 112,422,071 | (4,347,468) | (22,050,000) | 108,074,603 |
SD | 125,075,052 | (17,919,168) | (21,150,000) | 107,155,884 |
CAR | 111,604,491 | (5,352,801) | (21,600,000) | 106,251,690 |
WAS | 127,718,083 | (21,847,046) | (21,600,000) | 105,871,037 |
ARI | 119,419,240 | (13,635,932) | (22,050,000) | 105,783,308 |
PHI | 134,068,405 | (29,997,066) | (19,350,000) | 104,071,339 |
HOU | 123,940,633 | (20,532,396) | (20,250,000) | 103,408,237 |
ATL | 114,987,035 | (16,807,465) | (22,050,000) | 98,179,570 |
NE | 109,805,215 | (15,665,015) | (21,150,000) | 94,140,200 |
BAL | 109,123,786 | (15,854,704) | (21,600,000) | 93,269,082 |
MIA | 128,475,916 | (35,573,920) | (21,600,000) | 92,901,996 |
DAL | 109,303,347 | (18,818,001) | (21,150,000) | 90,485,346 |
BUF | 114,285,967 | (23,841,673) | (21,600,000) | 90,444,294 |
NYJ | 132,318,672 | (43,633,264) | (19,800,000) | 88,685,408 |
KC | 126,528,670 | (40,179,757) | (20,250,000) | 86,348,913 |
NO | 94,148,868 | (17,154,420) | (19,800,000) | 76,994,448 |