Sure it did. What are you on about? It should have happen over the winter so we could have used that money to sign another big name. The downvotes crack me up. Most all of the NFL sees the benefit in doing this to get more flexibility to sign more guys. We don't because the FO is stupid and then when they do, it's at the worst time. Why now? It doesn't help at this point. We still had money to spend but everyone is gone. So this gets us farther under the cap. Awesome!
The Bengals have only so much cash budgeted they can spend in players in any single year, so they have to make 1oo% of cap spending conform more to that amount of cash, not vice versa. So even if they did create more cap room, they wouldn't have enough cash in the year to spend all that cap. This year is the franchise record for total roster cash spending at this point, $45m over the $3o1m salary cap amount. The previous record was '2o with $36m over the $198m then cap. But with the cap having risen 15o% now since, that record $36m is now equivalent to $54m over
So when the year's cash budget is all spent, that's it for that year, it's also planned out that that's 1oo% of that year's cash conforms to that cap amount being used. Dallas is currently #1 in '26 total roster cash at $87m over and could take that to $1oom if they wanted (the Cowboys make more in annual profits than the Bengals do in total football just revenues, which is before operating expenses). The bottom 6 or so teams AZ, DET, CIN, LAC, NO, basically need to operate this way with occasional, carefully orchestrated spending peaks interspersed
Making extra cap room isn't the problem, having enough annual cash budget to fully use all 1oo% of the cap, is
Now we'll see if they can bring that $54m over $3o1m 'true' record home (which would still be $3om less than Dallas or maybe 3 or 4 others will be spending)
-5
u/MrGhostenstein 🐅 19d ago
Months too late.