In this week’s OTC Podcast:
- Jets struggles in Dallas
- A deep dive into Patrick Mahomes new contract and what it means for the Chiefs
- 49ers discussion
- All your questions for the week
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS
Recent Posts by
OTC Podcast: September 16, 2023
In this week’s OTC Podcast:
- Aaron Rodgers injured
- Chris Jones holdout ends
- Joe Burrow’s new contract really pushes the money for QBs
- 2024 salary cap update
- Thoughts from week 1
- All your questions for the week
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS
2023 Roster Breakdowns
Every year during the first week of the season I like to break down the various rosters in the NFL in a few different ways. Because some extensions came in late in the week I’ll hold off on doing some of the financial breakdowns until next week, but here are a few ways in which we can look at how teams have been built this year in the NFL (practice squad not included).
Homegrown talent
I define homegrown talent as a player who was either drafted by or originally signed as a UDFA by the team that the player currently plays on. On average 61% of a team’s roster comes from their own draft process with the rest coming from free agency, trades, waiver claims, etc…Having a high number of homegrown players does not mean that a team has necessarily drafted well but it does give insight into how they are attempting to build and develop their current roster. The teams with the largest percentage of homegrown players are the Cowboys (80%), Rams (79.6%), and Buccaneers (72.7%). On the bottom are the Cardinals (44.4%), Panthers (45.6%), and Raiders (46.6%).
| Team | Homegrown | Outside |
| Cowboys | 80.0% | 20.0% |
| Rams | 79.6% | 20.4% |
| Buccaneers | 72.7% | 27.3% |
| Ravens | 71.7% | 28.3% |
| Packers | 71.4% | 28.6% |
| Titans | 70.7% | 29.3% |
| 49ers | 68.4% | 31.6% |
| Chargers | 68.4% | 31.6% |
| Bengals | 67.2% | 32.8% |
| Chiefs | 67.2% | 32.8% |
| Vikings | 67.2% | 32.8% |
| Colts | 66.7% | 33.3% |
| Commanders | 66.2% | 33.8% |
| Seahawks | 65.6% | 34.4% |
| Jaguars | 63.9% | 36.1% |
| Eagles | 62.7% | 37.3% |
| Saints | 61.4% | 38.6% |
| Patriots | 58.7% | 41.3% |
| Lions | 58.6% | 41.4% |
| Bills | 57.6% | 42.4% |
| Broncos | 56.5% | 43.5% |
| Browns | 56.5% | 43.5% |
| Giants | 55.0% | 45.0% |
| Falcons | 52.5% | 47.5% |
| Bears | 51.8% | 48.2% |
| Jets | 50.8% | 49.2% |
| Dolphins | 49.2% | 50.8% |
| Steelers | 49.1% | 50.9% |
| Texans | 48.4% | 51.6% |
| Raiders | 46.6% | 53.4% |
| Panthers | 45.6% | 54.4% |
| Cardinals | 44.4% | 55.6% |
Rosters by Draft Round
Not surprisingly UDFA’s make up the largest percentage of players in the NFL with about a quarter of the league having begun their career as an undrafted player. They are followed by 1st round draft picks who make up 14% of the league. The only other interesting observation is that 3rd round picks make up more of the NFL than 2nd round picks and that is something that is consistent year to year.
| Round | % of Players |
| UDFA | 24.9% |
| 1 | 14.1% |
| 3 | 13.2% |
| 2 | 12.4% |
| 4 | 10.5% |
| 5 | 10.1% |
| 6 | 8.6% |
| 7 | 6.0% |
There are six teams with over 30% of their roster having started as UDFA. The cap ravaged Titans lead the NFL with 39.7% of their team having begun their career as a UDFA. The Raiders, Panthers, Bucs, Broncos and Cardinals are the other teams over 30%.The Browns and Giants are the two teams at no more than 15%.
The Ravens, Cowboys, Jets, and Eagles are all over 20% when it comes to first round picks making up the roster. The Rams who mortgaged their future via trades have just 3.7% of their roster coming from former 1st round players. The Broncos, Bengals, Bears, Colts and Cardinals are the other teams under 10%. Here is the breakdown across the NFL.
| Team | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | UDFA |
| Ravens | 23.3% | 11.7% | 15.0% | 18.3% | 3.3% | 3.3% | 3.3% | 21.7% |
| Cowboys | 21.7% | 10.0% | 16.7% | 11.7% | 6.7% | 8.3% | 3.3% | 21.7% |
| Jets | 20.6% | 7.9% | 7.9% | 12.7% | 19.0% | 11.1% | 3.2% | 17.5% |
| Eagles | 20.3% | 16.9% | 8.5% | 11.9% | 5.1% | 13.6% | 5.1% | 18.6% |
| Giants | 18.3% | 15.0% | 11.7% | 8.3% | 13.3% | 11.7% | 6.7% | 15.0% |
| Falcons | 18.0% | 11.5% | 9.8% | 8.2% | 13.1% | 4.9% | 8.2% | 26.2% |
| Saints | 17.5% | 15.8% | 21.1% | 10.5% | 3.5% | 3.5% | 1.8% | 26.3% |
| Lions | 17.2% | 6.9% | 22.4% | 10.3% | 6.9% | 6.9% | 1.7% | 27.6% |
| Bills | 16.9% | 11.9% | 10.2% | 6.8% | 18.6% | 6.8% | 6.8% | 22.0% |
| Jaguars | 16.4% | 11.5% | 11.5% | 9.8% | 8.2% | 11.5% | 6.6% | 24.6% |
| Packers | 16.1% | 12.5% | 7.1% | 10.7% | 10.7% | 12.5% | 7.1% | 23.2% |
| Chargers | 15.8% | 8.8% | 12.3% | 7.0% | 10.5% | 10.5% | 5.3% | 29.8% |
| Steelers | 15.8% | 12.3% | 19.3% | 12.3% | 7.0% | 5.3% | 8.8% | 19.3% |
| Dolphins | 15.3% | 15.3% | 11.9% | 3.4% | 6.8% | 11.9% | 6.8% | 28.8% |
| Texans | 14.5% | 9.7% | 17.7% | 11.3% | 8.1% | 4.8% | 4.8% | 29.0% |
| Panthers | 14.0% | 21.1% | 8.8% | 7.0% | 3.5% | 8.8% | 1.8% | 35.1% |
| 49ers | 14.0% | 7.0% | 15.8% | 7.0% | 15.8% | 14.0% | 8.8% | 17.5% |
| Vikings | 13.8% | 8.6% | 15.5% | 15.5% | 6.9% | 10.3% | 3.4% | 25.9% |
| Browns | 12.9% | 12.9% | 17.7% | 9.7% | 14.5% | 11.3% | 6.5% | 14.5% |
| Buccaneers | 12.7% | 12.7% | 10.9% | 10.9% | 7.3% | 10.9% | 0.0% | 34.5% |
| Titans | 12.1% | 12.1% | 12.1% | 10.3% | 6.9% | 5.2% | 1.7% | 39.7% |
| Chiefs | 12.1% | 15.5% | 15.5% | 10.3% | 12.1% | 5.2% | 12.1% | 17.2% |
| Seahawks | 11.5% | 21.3% | 6.6% | 14.8% | 11.5% | 4.9% | 3.3% | 26.2% |
| Patriots | 11.1% | 15.9% | 7.9% | 12.7% | 12.7% | 11.1% | 7.9% | 20.6% |
| Commanders | 10.8% | 6.2% | 13.8% | 9.2% | 10.8% | 6.2% | 15.4% | 27.7% |
| Raiders | 10.3% | 8.6% | 13.8% | 8.6% | 10.3% | 5.2% | 5.2% | 37.9% |
| Cardinals | 9.5% | 9.5% | 9.5% | 14.3% | 6.3% | 11.1% | 7.9% | 31.7% |
| Colts | 9.5% | 12.7% | 9.5% | 7.9% | 15.9% | 7.9% | 11.1% | 25.4% |
| Bears | 8.9% | 17.9% | 14.3% | 8.9% | 17.9% | 7.1% | 5.4% | 19.6% |
| Bengals | 8.6% | 19.0% | 17.2% | 10.3% | 8.6% | 10.3% | 5.2% | 20.7% |
| Broncos | 8.1% | 9.7% | 17.7% | 11.3% | 8.1% | 6.5% | 4.8% | 33.9% |
| Rams | 3.7% | 9.3% | 14.8% | 14.8% | 13.0% | 14.8% | 11.1% | 18.5% |
Rosters by Experience
The NFL is certainly a young man’s league. About 56% of the NFL is still in their “rookie” seasons with 33% of the league being either rookies or 2nd year players. Young veterans make up 21% of the NFL and just 7.3% of the NFL is starting their 10th or later season.
| Exp. Level | % of Players |
| 2 to 3 Years | 22.5% |
| 4 to 5 Years | 21.0% |
| Rookies | 17.2% |
| 6 to 8 Years | 16.0% |
| 1 Year | 16.0% |
| 9+ Years | 7.3% |
The heaviest reliance on rookies in 2023 will be the Rams, who have about 28% of their roster made up of rookies. The Packers are next at 27% followed by the Seahawks at 26%. The Bills have the fewest rookies at 6.8%. The Dolphins have the second least at 10.2%.
Teams that have the most players with just 1 year of experience are the Titans at 24%, Chiefs at 22% and Packers, Bears, and Chargers all right around 21%. This is often when we get a big jump in performance from young players so this is something you can look for with these teams. Miami and Jacksonville are the two teams under 10%.
The teams with the most experienced players are the Ravens, Jets, Saints, and Raiders with the Colts and Bengals have no players entering at least their 10th season in the NFL.
Here is the breakdown of each team in the NFL.
| Team | Rookies | 1 Year | 2 to 3 Years | 4 to 5 Years | 6 to 8 Years | 9+ Years |
| Dolphins | 10.2% | 8.5% | 23.7% | 37.3% | 16.9% | 3.4% |
| Raiders | 17.2% | 12.1% | 15.5% | 32.8% | 10.3% | 12.1% |
| Bills | 6.8% | 15.3% | 18.6% | 30.5% | 18.6% | 10.2% |
| 49ers | 15.8% | 15.8% | 19.3% | 28.1% | 14.0% | 7.0% |
| Bengals | 17.2% | 12.1% | 27.6% | 27.6% | 15.5% | 0.0% |
| Buccaneers | 23.6% | 16.4% | 18.2% | 27.3% | 3.6% | 10.9% |
| Falcons | 11.5% | 16.4% | 23.0% | 26.2% | 16.4% | 6.6% |
| Cardinals | 22.2% | 11.1% | 17.5% | 25.4% | 17.5% | 6.3% |
| Steelers | 14.0% | 14.0% | 17.5% | 24.6% | 22.8% | 7.0% |
| Seahawks | 26.2% | 18.0% | 18.0% | 23.0% | 9.8% | 4.9% |
| Panthers | 15.8% | 10.5% | 28.1% | 22.8% | 14.0% | 8.8% |
| Lions | 15.5% | 12.1% | 24.1% | 22.4% | 22.4% | 3.4% |
| Colts | 20.6% | 20.6% | 20.6% | 22.2% | 15.9% | 0.0% |
| Commanders | 12.3% | 20.0% | 27.7% | 21.5% | 10.8% | 7.7% |
| Saints | 15.8% | 10.5% | 19.3% | 21.1% | 21.1% | 12.3% |
| Browns | 16.1% | 12.9% | 24.2% | 21.0% | 16.1% | 9.7% |
| Vikings | 17.2% | 19.0% | 22.4% | 20.7% | 13.8% | 6.9% |
| Eagles | 13.6% | 13.6% | 28.8% | 20.3% | 15.3% | 8.5% |
| Chiefs | 17.2% | 22.4% | 24.1% | 19.0% | 10.3% | 6.9% |
| Jaguars | 19.7% | 9.8% | 29.5% | 18.0% | 19.7% | 3.3% |
| Packers | 26.8% | 21.4% | 19.6% | 17.9% | 12.5% | 1.8% |
| Giants | 13.3% | 16.7% | 30.0% | 16.7% | 18.3% | 5.0% |
| Ravens | 11.7% | 16.7% | 25.0% | 16.7% | 16.7% | 13.3% |
| Texans | 21.0% | 16.1% | 12.9% | 16.1% | 25.8% | 8.1% |
| Broncos | 14.5% | 17.7% | 22.6% | 16.1% | 19.4% | 9.7% |
| Bears | 17.9% | 21.4% | 19.6% | 16.1% | 19.6% | 5.4% |
| Chargers | 15.8% | 21.1% | 24.6% | 15.8% | 14.0% | 8.8% |
| Titans | 20.7% | 24.1% | 20.7% | 15.5% | 8.6% | 10.3% |
| Jets | 14.3% | 14.3% | 23.8% | 14.3% | 20.6% | 12.7% |
| Cowboys | 21.7% | 20.0% | 23.3% | 13.3% | 10.0% | 11.7% |
| Patriots | 19.0% | 14.3% | 17.5% | 12.7% | 28.6% | 7.9% |
| Rams | 27.8% | 16.7% | 31.5% | 9.3% | 11.1% | 3.7% |
OTC Podcast: September 9, 2023
In this week’s OTC Podcast:
- Nick Bosa signs a massive contract extension
- A look at teams using 2023 restructures to create cap carryover for 2024
- All your questions for the week
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS
Explaining New Money Contract Valuation
Here is a look at how to calculate new money in a contract and some of the reasons why this is the way that contracts are valued in the NFL.
Giants Restructure Daniel Jones’ Contract
The Giants were one of the eight teams we mentioned that needed to find a way to create cap space before Thursday’s deadline next week and they did just that with a restructure of QB Daniel Jones’ contract, which was signed just this past March.
The Giants have restructured the contract of QB Daniel Jones, converting $8.42M of his base salary into a signing bonus and creating $6.315M in cap space, per source.
— Field Yates (@FieldYates) September 4, 2023
As reported by Field Yates, converting the $8.42 million created $6.315 million in much needed cap room for New York. This reduced Jones’ 2023 cap number from $21.75 million to $15.435 million. The restructure brings the Giants to about $1 million under the salary cap.
Jones cap numbers in the next three years will each rise by $2.105 million. His new cap number in 2024 will be $47.1 million, which is the 5th highest in the NFL next year. The Giants rank near the top third in projected cap room next year so they should have an easier time next year handling a number like that. His 2025 cap number will be $41.6 million, currently ranked 10th in the league. In 2026 the cap figure explodes to $58.6 million,3rd highest among active contracts that year, in what is clearly designed to be an extend or cut season.
Thoughts on the Chiefs Offer to Chris Jones
Mike Florio of Pro Football Talk put an article up today detailing where the Chiefs and Chris Jones stand on a contract. Per Florio, the Chiefs have offered Jones a three year, $74 million contract and that Jones would settle for a three year, $84.5 million contract. The numbers in the article are framed in a way to make the contract look much lesser than the recent Aaron Donald contract with the Rams but I think that fails to take into account the way that the Chiefs and many others around the NFL would likely view the offer.
The thing with contracts that often leads to the most confusion in the NFL is the concept of how to value a contract extension. A contract extension is typically valued based on the “new money” in a contract. The calculation is simple. Add up all of the money in the contract and subtract from that the money that is owed to the player on his current contract and then you have the new money in the deal. Divide that by the number of new years and you come up with the average per year on the contract.
The valuation in this manner makes sense. Essentially you are buying out a player’s free agency early and this new money is the value you are giving the player. Some constantly look down on this method of contract valuation saying it inflates the contract’s value but when you run through it logically it is the most fair way to value a deal and create a system that allows for teams to be extended prior to the expiration of their current contract- if every player demanded that a current year be ripped up a team would simply wait until the contract expires to make an offer.
However, there are rare instances where teams have agreed to negotiate as if the current contract does not exist. That occurred last season with Aaron Rodgers in Green Bay and then later with Aaron Donald with the Rams, which is pertinent to the Jones negotiation. Donald had three years remaining on his prior contract at a total value of $55 million. The Rams replaced those salaries with new salaries that totaled $95 million. With no new years added it was clear that this was just being viewed as a replacement contract and that is how we arrived at the value of $31.67 million for Donald.
The decision by the Rams to do that deal was likely very controversial among NFL front offices. From the Rams point of view they probably did not look at this as paying nearly $32 million for Donald but rather as a modification of his original six year, $22.5 million per year contract, bringing the value of the contract to about $29.2 million per year. It would not surprise me if this is how most NFL teams are trying to spin the Donald numbers when dealing with other pass rushers and defensive tackles.
The numbers reported by Florio are based on the idea that the Chiefs would follow a similar path as the Rams and just assume that this year doesn’t exist when it comes to doing a deal with Jones. I would think it is doubtful the Chiefs are thinking that way and in many ways the offer likely shows that.
The $74.5 million offer works out to $24.8 million a year, but if we value this as new money, it represents an offer from the Chiefs worth $55 million in new money over two new years, an average of $27.5 million. That number is a “cleaner” figure than the $74.5 million which certainly leads me to believe the Chiefs are taking a traditional approach to the contract valuation. The $84.5 million that Florio says is the magic number would lead to a new money total of $65 million, or $32.5 million a season, which would blow away any other extension for a non-QB and fly past Donald’s number.
$27.5 million a season is certainly a fair offer that splits the market between Donald and everyone else. $32.5 million is probably too rich for the Chiefs. For the most part almost all of the past history is on the Chiefs side other than Donald. Contracts are valued using new money. Older pass rushers (Von Miller, Chandler Jones, Cam Jordan) have all signed contracts that averaged anywhere from $13 million to $20 million a season. The Chiefs offer blows those numbers away.
So when it comes to evaluating offers made to Jones it is important to keep in mind the way that typical contracts are valued to see how the offer compares to the market, the majority of which are valued on the basis of new money.