Raiderstation

My main question is when and how will it effect our cap once the Wilkins stuff is sorted out. I know right now we are at the second highest. But I'm definitely not a cap guy. So just curious both outcomes where it will take our cap number

vtraider wrote: Fri Dec 12, 2025 4:03 pm My main question is when and how will it effect our cap once the Wilkins stuff is sorted out. I know right now we are at the second highest. But I'm definitely not a cap guy. So just curious both outcomes where it will take our cap number

For cap questions, tho I am not as knowledgeable as Chucker, I go to

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/las-vegas-r ... /year/2026

Can change which year you look at.
Looks like Wilkins will be about 30 mil dead next year, and we will have about 35 mil dead cap total.

Listed cap for 2026 is 116.5 mil, but that will change of course. Still, it looks like we are good for cap space next year.

raider_kin wrote: Fri Dec 12, 2025 5:02 pm For cap questions, tho I am not as knowledgeable as Chucker, I go to

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/las-vegas-r ... /year/2026

Can change which year you look at.
Looks like Wilkins will be about 30 mil dead next year, and we will have about 35 mil dead cap total.

Listed cap for 2026 is 116.5 mil, but that will change of course. Still, it looks like we are good for cap space next year.

But with the dispute going on of whether released for cause or not. That could definitely effect things for the better. That's what I'm more confused about. If there is an approximate date of finding out things and if it goes in our way what would our cap look like

vtraider wrote: Fri Dec 12, 2025 5:11 pm But with the dispute going on of whether released for cause or not. That could definitely effect things for the better. That's what I'm more confused about. If there is an approximate date of finding out things and if it goes in our way what would our cap look like

It's wishful thinking to assume he isn't going to get his money. Maybe, he doesn't get it right away and a few years of litigation may persists but the NFL will def count that $ against the Raiders in 2026.

Question.....

When has the cap made any difference one way or the other to this organoization?

Anyone...anyone....

Sold My Soul wrote: Fri Dec 12, 2025 7:00 pm Question.....

When has the cap made any difference one way or the other to this organoization?

Anyone...anyone....

I remember Bruce Allen doing a good job managing the cap when he was with the Raiders.

Toast wrote: Fri Dec 12, 2025 7:12 pm I remember Bruce Allen doing a good job managing the cap when he was with the Raiders.

1995......

That's how pathetic Raider Nation has become.....

Wilkins arbitration is a sleeping giant. Yes, it matters greatly. A loss in arbitration bumps the dead cap hit to a staggering $50M.

That is approximately 1/6 of the effective salary cap, not counting the rest of the dead money. Geno is on track to add another $18.5M.

They are already the least talented team in the division. Add in less effective money to create a roster than the divisional opponents, and well, buckle up.

Sold My Soul wrote: Fri Dec 12, 2025 7:00 pm Question.....

When has the cap made any difference one way or the other to this organoization?

Anyone...anyone....

Yes, they’ve been terrible either way, but it matters.

You can look at just about any roster on Over The Cap and with some level of confidence guess the roster cuts in the offseason. Saved cap space relative to the dead cap hit if cut or traded.

It’s strange to me that (and not accusing you directly of this) the same people who tell you the Raiders are in great shape because they have $100M+ in cap space will turn around and also tell you that $40-$60M+ in dead cap is no big deal. One is great and the other is somehow negligible, in the same breath.

DrDUne wrote: Fri Dec 12, 2025 10:38 pm Yes, they’ve been terrible either way, but it matters.

You can look at just about any roster on Over The Cap and with some level of confidence guess the roster cuts in the offseason. Saved cap space relative to the dead cap hit if cut or traded.

It’s strange to me that (and not accusing you directly of this) the same people who tell you the Raiders are in great shape because they have $100M+ in cap space will turn around and also tell you that $40-$60M+ in dead cap is no big deal. One is great and the other is somehow negligible, in the same breath.

It's great to have a lot of cap space. It's not great to have only 32 players under contract in 2026 - the fewest in the NFL. However when you look at our list of FAs, it's not like we're losing difference-makers, partly because we don't have many difference-makers on the roster.

Personally I don't worry much about dead cap because it's a symptom of past decisions. I'm more concerned with the future decisions and making sure we don't f[raiders_icon]ck up again. Just don't retain a player you don't want because you want to avoid dead cap - keeping that guy doesn't remove the dead cap, it just means you effectively have dead cap taking up a roster spot. If all your dead cap is due to bad decisions, then someone should probably lose their job. In our case, much of the dead cap is due to decision makers who are gone or a guy who is hopefully gone soon (Carroll).

Cap space is kind of a myth at the moment. We are currently sitting at 106M in space, but we don't yet know how much the cap will go up. And currently we would only have 32 players in the amount we do have tied up. There will be some releases, I expect Geno gone which gives us 8M additional. And I expect us to resign some of the guys who are in their final year. Right now, we have the second most available cap space, but again, I expect that to change. Unfortunately, we will be fighting for players with a Chargers team that has the third most and are in a position to make moves since they are a playoff team or close to it. We also have a bunch of dead money, but as of right now that ends this year. But teams carry dead money almost every year hence my thought that Geno will be removed.

chucker wrote: Sat Dec 13, 2025 6:30 am It's great to have a lot of cap space. It's not great to have only 32 players under contract in 2026 - the fewest in the NFL. However when you look at our list of FAs, it's not like we're losing difference-makers, partly because we don't have many difference-makers on the roster.

Personally I don't worry much about dead cap because it's a symptom of past decisions. I'm more concerned with the future decisions and making sure we don't fck up again. Just don't retain a player you don't want because you want to avoid dead cap - keeping that guy doesn't remove the dead cap, it just means you effectively have dead cap taking up a roster spot. If all your dead cap is due to bad decisions, then someone should probably lose their job. In our case, much of the dead cap is due to decision makers who are gone or a guy who is hopefully gone soon (Carroll).

Agreed. I know I beat the dead (cap) horse pretty loudly, it just bothers me to see that kind of space squandered, particularly for a bad team.

Then come the bigger signing bonuses or restructures to push cap hits down the road, and it seems like those contracts are the ones that perpetuate the cycle.

DrDUne wrote: Sat Dec 13, 2025 6:45 am Agreed. I know I beat the dead (cap) horse pretty loudly, it just bothers me to see that kind of space squandered, particularly for a bad team.

Then come the bigger signing bonuses or restructures to push cap hits down the road, and it seems like those contracts are the ones that perpetuate the cycle.

It would be nice to have a pay as you go model without the signing bonuses or restructures, but it's hard to compete with that model. Borrowing cap from the future has to be part of the plan IMO - as long as you don't take it to ridiculous levels like the Saints did. It's like an interest free loan, and the "money" is more plentiful at the time you have to "pay it back".

The real issue in dead money is player selection. Good players signed to "bad" contracts aren't a problem unless they have an unforeseen injury. Bad players signed to any kind of contract are the real problem and that's the real problem the Raiders have had. Every team has some bad players signed to bad contracts..... the good teams overshadow that with all the good players they draft and sign.

In the end it's not about money, it's about football.

Look on the bright side. At least coaches salaries are not part of the cap.

Sold My Soul wrote: Fri Dec 12, 2025 7:00 pm Question.....

When has the cap made any difference one way or the other to this organoization?

Anyone...anyone....

Yea............................................