The NFL’s salary cap is a cornerstone of the league’s financial structure, designed to promote competitive balance by limiting how much teams can spend on player salaries. Governed by the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) between the NFL and the NFL Players Association (NFLPA), the salary cap ensures that teams operate within a shared financial framework, with the cap calculated based on league revenues. However, one contentious aspect of the current system is how retired players’ contracts—specifically, the remaining prorated bonuses—count against a team’s salary cap as “dead money.” This practice raises questions about fairness, team flexibility, and the broader implications for the league. Here’s why retired players’ contracts should not count against the salary cap.
Understanding Dead Money and Retired Players
When a player signs a contract with an NFL team, it often includes a signing bonus, which is paid upfront but prorated evenly over the length of the contract for salary cap purposes. If a player retires before the contract expires, the remaining prorated portions of the signing bonus accelerate and count against the team’s salary cap as dead money. For example, when Aaron Donald retired, the Rams delayed placing him on the retirement list. In doing so, the Rams brought Donald’s salary cap number down to $24.97 million. Placing Donald on the retirement list immediately would have caused the Rams to take on a $28.5 million cap charge.
This system is rooted in the CBA’s salary cap accounting rules, which aim to prevent teams from manipulating contracts to gain cap advantages. However, applying dead money to retired players creates several issues that undermine the spirit of the salary cap and hinder team-building efforts.
The Case for Excluding Retired Players from the Salary Cap
- Retirement Is Not a Team Decision
Unlike trades or releases, which are team-initiated actions, retirement is a personal decision made by the player. Teams have no control over when a player chooses to retire, yet they are penalized with dead money on their salary cap. This lack of agency makes it unfair for teams to bear the financial burden of a player’s retirement. For instance, if a star player unexpectedly retires due to injury or personal reasons, the team is left with a significant cap hit, limiting their ability to sign new talent or retain existing players. - Dead Money Distorts Competitive Balance
The salary cap is intended to level the playing field, but dead money from retired players can create disparities. Teams with significant dead money are at a disadvantage compared to teams with cleaner cap sheets, as they have less flexibility to build competitive rosters. This can lead to prolonged rebuilding periods, especially for teams that invested heavily in a player who retired early. Removing retired players’ dead money from the cap would allow teams to recover more quickly and maintain competitive balance. - Encouraging Player Autonomy and Well-Being
Players often face immense pressure to continue playing, even when they are physically or mentally ready to retire, due to the financial implications for their teams. Knowing that their retirement will burden their team with dead money can create guilt or external pressure to delay retirement. Excluding retired players from the salary cap would empower players to make decisions based on their health and personal circumstances, rather than financial consequences for their teams. This aligns with the NFLPA’s ongoing efforts to prioritize player health and safety. - Simplifying Cap Management
The current system adds unnecessary complexity to salary cap management. General managers must account for potential dead money from retirements, which can be unpredictable and difficult to plan for. Removing retired players from the cap would streamline cap accounting, allowing teams to focus on active roster construction rather than managing financial penalties from past contracts. - Precedent in Other Sports
Other major sports leagues, such as the NBA, handle retired players’ contracts differently. In the NBA, teams can apply for a “retirement waiver” to remove a retired player’s salary from the cap under certain conditions. While the NFL’s salary cap rules are more rigid, adopting a similar approach could provide relief for teams and encourage a more equitable system. The NFL could implement a rule where retired players’ dead money is excluded from the cap, with safeguards to prevent abuse, such as requiring players to officially file for retirement with the league.
Addressing Counterarguments
Critics of excluding retired players from the salary cap may argue that it could lead to cap circumvention. For example, teams might encourage players to “retire” temporarily to free up cap space, only to have them return later. However, this concern can be addressed through strict enforcement and penalties for such behavior. The NFL already has mechanisms in place, such as the System Arbitrator, to investigate and penalize cap circumvention. Additionally, players who retire and later return are subject to existing CBA rules, which could be tightened to prevent abuse.
Another argument is that teams should be held accountable for the contracts they offer, including the risk of retirement. While this is true, the current system disproportionately penalizes teams for factors beyond their control. A more balanced approach would hold teams accountable for active roster decisions while recognizing that retirement is a unique circumstance.
A Path Forward
Amending the CBA to exclude retired players’ dead money from the salary cap would require negotiation between the NFL and NFLPA. Given that the current CBA runs through the 2030 season, this change would likely need to be addressed in the next round of negotiations. However, incremental steps could be taken in the meantime, such as:
- Cap Relief for Unexpected Retirements: The NFL could introduce a provision allowing teams to apply for cap relief if a player retires unexpectedly, similar to the NBA’s retirement waiver. This would provide flexibility while maintaining accountability for contract structuring.
- Enhanced Retirement Benefits: To offset concerns about player compensation, the NFL could increase retirement benefits, such as pension enhancements or health insurance extensions, funded through league revenues rather than team salary caps.
- Education and Planning: The NFL and NFLPA could work together to educate players and teams about the cap implications of retirement, encouraging better contract structuring and retirement planning.
Conclusion
The NFL’s salary cap is a vital tool for maintaining competitive balance, but its treatment of retired players’ contracts is outdated and unfair. Excluding retired players from the salary cap would empower players to make personal decisions, simplify cap management, and promote fairness across the league. While challenges exist, they can be addressed through careful rulemaking and enforcement. As the NFL and NFLPA continue to evolve the CBA, prioritizing player autonomy and team flexibility should be at the forefront. After all, the game is about the players on the field—not the ones who have hung up their cleats.
For more discussion, please visit The Rams Forum
On Twitter: @TheRamsForum
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.