The Athenaeum Forum

FanPulse: Browns fans remain 83% confident in direction of team Denzel Ward Jersey , while Steelers plummet to 26% in Week 3 Welcome to SB Nation FanPulse — a survey of fans across the NFL, powered by SurveyMonkey. Each week, we send 32 polls to 100+ plugged in fans from each team. Browns fans, sign up HERE to join FanPulse.The Week 3 polls are in, so let’s take a look at the results!How confident are you in the direction of the team? Last week: 85 percent confidenceThis week, 83% of fans voted for their confidence in the direction of the Browns, a 2% decline from last week. That isn’t too bad of a drop after a loss, and most of the issues were attributed to the kicking game, something that really doesn’t impact fans’ thoughts about the direction of the franchise. That number will plummet, though, with a home loss to the Jets.The Steelers’ confidence meter has seen a much more drastic change -- their fans voted them at 26% this week, a decline of 37% from week to week.Will the Browns win or lose in Week 3?Odds: Browns are 3-point favoritesDawgs By Nature FanPulse: Browns by 7Gang Green Nation FanPulse: Jets by 4Cleveland fans are pretty confident this week, predicting the team to not only cover the spread, but win by a full touchdown.How would you fix NFL overtime? 47% of fans voted for college rules Jarvis Landry Jersey , which I would absolutely hate with a passion. I do not like scores being over-inflated, and I’d rather see teams do traditional drives down the field.I voted for “keep it as is,” but I kind of wish there was another option to help distinguish things. I love the fact that a field goal by the first possessing team cannot end the game, but I don’t like the fact that ties still exist. I would rather the games continue until someone has won. DBN presents an detailed and thorough explanation as to what the 89% minimum spending requirement is in theNFL, and where the Cleveland Browns stand when it comes to cap hits vs. cash spends."WhiteFanposts Fanshots Sections Daily Dawg ChowRufio’s PlaybookNFL Free AgencyCleveland Browns Salary Cap: Understanding the 89% Cash Spending RequirementNew,4commentsDBN presents an detailed and thorough explanation as to what the 89% minimum spending requirement is in theNFL, and where the Cleveland Browns stand when it comes to cap hits vs. cash spends.EDTShareTweetShareShareCleveland Browns Salary Cap: Understanding the 89% Cash Spending RequirementKirby Lee-USA TODAY SportsIt’s time for our annual explanation on how the 89% cash spending rule works, and where the Cleveland Browns fall. First, if you’ve been following this feature for several years, note that the Browns and all 32 teams in the NFL were compliant for the first four-year period of the rule, which was from 2013-2016. We are presently in the second four-year period of the rule, which runs from 2017-2020.The NFLPA has provided a nice infographic of each team’s cash spending in the past, but they did not do the same for the 2018 season. Bummer. Instead, we will rely on the data provided by Over the Cap.The minimum spending requirement from 2017-2020 will be based on the cumulative amount of whatever the salary cap is set at each year Myles Garrett Jersey , an amount that one can only estimate at this point in time. For just 2018 alone, the salary cap was $177.2 million, and the Browns had a cash spend of $208.8 million (117.8%).Requirements: 89% in Cash Spending from 2017-2020The 89% rule does not apply toa single season, but rather a span of four years.Therefore, it doesn't matter if the Browns spend less than 89% in 2017, or if they spend less than 89% in 2018. several years ago. I will present a simple example below that should convey the difference well enough, using CB Terrance Mitchell as an example.CB Terrance Mitchell’s Contract, Cap Hits Per Year YearBase SalarySigning BonusRoster BonusWorkout BonusTotal Cap HitYearBase SalarySigning BonusRoster BonusWorkout BonusTotal Cap HitThe table above represents Mitchell’s cap hits per year.Mitchell’s contract was very simple: base salaries, his $2 million signing bonus, and some roster/workout bonuses. What is the difference between a signing bonus and a roster bonus when talking about cap hits? Roster and workout bonuses are paid in the full amount for a specific year if a player is on the roster by a certain date, or have accomplished certain feats.Signing bonuses are fully guaranteed, but divided by the number of years of the contract to create an equal signing bonus allocation per year against the cap ($2 million divided by 3 year-contract = $666,666 per year against the cap).CB Terrance Mitchell’s Contract, Cash Spends Per YearYearBase SalarySigning BonusRoster BonusWorkout BonusTotal Cap HitYearBase SalarySigning BonusRoster BonusWorkout BonusTotal Cap HitThe table above represents the cash spends per year on Mitchell. While the Browns are able to divide Mitchell’s signing bonus over three years for salary cap purposes Jim Brown Jersey White , the fact is that they physically paid Mitchell that $2 million signing bonus, straight up, in 2018. The total cap hit and cash spend numbers are always going to be the same, but the per year numbers are different.Why is it important to understand this? Let's say the Browns are currently under the 89% spending requirement by a good amount, but still want to be in decent cap shape for the future. Signing a player with a $12 million signing bonus on a 3-year deal (through 2019, for example) would be pro-rated to $4 million per year for cap hits, but the immediate cash spend in 2018 would be at a much higher clip -- the full $12 million -- which can help a team "catch up quicker" to the spending requirement if they need to.What is the Projection for the 89% Rule?The minimum spendingrequirement says that teams must spend, in cash, at least 89% of thetotal salary cap from 2017-2020. To determine the 89% minimum cash spending requirement, the sums of the salary caps are multiplied by 89%. The only years we know for certain are 2017 and 2018, so we will estimate 2019 and 2020.Figuring Out the 89% Floor YearSalary CapNotesYearSalary CapNotesSince the total salary cap from 2017-2020 is $732.4 million, then every NFL team, including the Browns, must have a cash spend of at least 89% of that by the end of the 2020 league year Bernie Kosar Jersey White , which is $651.84 million.Do the Browns Need to Start Spending More?The short answer is "Not Really," as they are already above average in terms of the spending requirements.The table below outlines the Browns' cash spending for the years 2017-2020, with the data coming from Over the Cap. If you are confused by what the tablemeans, I explain it below.Projecting the Browns’ ComplianceYearCash Spend% of Cap SpentAdditional NotesYearCash Spend% of Cap SpentAdditional NotesThe % of Cap Spent is calculated by taking the Running Total Cash Spend / Running Total of the Salary Cap.In 2019, the Browns have already spent 97.81% of the cumulative cap, which is above the 89% requirement. They are well on pace to exceed the cumulative 89% cash spending.For those still confused on how the numbers above were obtained:Add the 2017-2019 cash spends: $177.107M + $208.821M + $136.576M = $522.504MAdd the 2017-2019 salary caps: $167.0M + $177.2M + $188.2M = $532.7MDivide the first amount by the second amount: $522.504M / $532.7M = 98.09% already spentWe are already three years into the process. Looking forward to 2020, the Browns are already almost at the 89% cumulative amount for all four years; they will likely reach it within the next week, in fact. Also remember that all 32 teams were compliant the last time around, so every NFL team has demonstrated the financial acumen to meet the requirements.AppendixThe repercussions of not meeting the 89% requirement aren’t even all that severe:If you don't reach the amount, is it better to basically distribute slight bonuses to your current players, with the backlash of knowing you could have used that money instead toward a better-fitting player? Teams should be motivated to spend on players they feel can improve their team, rather than spending a certain amount on someone just for the sake of meeting the requirement.