McKinnie’s pay cut – more than meets the eye?

mckinnie1

I’ve been trying to track down some more info on this, but if Bryant McKinnie’s $1M incentive is truly based on 50% playing time only (i.e. there’s not some other qualifier), then that $1M would still count against the Cap this year.  So, if the reported information is correct, this move was not done for Salary Cap purposes.

Basically, incentives are either “likely to be earned” or “not likely to be earned”.  If they are LTBE, they count against the present Cap (and if unearned, are credited against the following year’s Cap).  If they are NLTBE, they don’t count this year, but would count next year, if earned.

The difference between the two types of incentives is that an incentive is considered to be LTBE if it would have been earned in the prior year.  For McKinnie, he obviously played more than 50% of the offensive plays last year, so this new incentive (if as reported) would be LTBE and that $1M would still count against this year’s Cap.

So, based on that, it doesn’t appear that this move was made for Salary Cap purposes, as it created no additional Cap space for this year.  Seen in that light, it looks more like the Ravens want to save money if he doesn’t play as much as expected.  After all, if they expect him to be their starting LT all season, then why go through this exercise, especially when it’s saved them nothing this year.

So, what does that mean?  Does that mean they are expecting to see him play less?  Does it mean that they don’t trust McKinnie?  Or that they don’t expect him to hold onto the LT job for the entire season?  Could we see Michael Oher as the starting LT?  Or how about Kelichi Osemele at LT?

At this point, it’s all just speculation – and perhaps the reports, so far, are missing some important facts – but it does appear that the front office’s motives for reducing McKinnie’s pay may have had less to do with the Salary Cap and more to do with other factors.

 

3 Raves on “McKinnie’s pay cut – more than meets the eye?

  1. Brian on said:

    No, they got rid of them as a method of carrying Cap space from one year to the next, but they otherwise still exist. Now, teams are simply allowed to elect to carry over Cap space from one season to the next without having to use the old “phony” incentives routine.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

 

Hot off the street

FILMSTUDY: Offensive Linemen Control Finale in NOLA

With some of the most interesting camp battles taking place on the offensive line, I did full scoring for the last game. All of the OL scoring is based on 76 non-penalty, real offensive snaps, which e...read more

Ravens and House of Ruth Enter 3-Year Partnership

The Baltimore Ravens and the House of Ruth Maryland have launched a three-year community partnership, the team and House of Ruth Maryland announced on Thursday. The partnership hope to raise aware...read more

RAVENS LINKS: Ravens’ Top 6 Rivalries

Top Ravens' Rivalries: Past & Present CBS Baltimore discusses six Ravens rivalries of the past and present. Read the full list here. Harbaugh speaks about NFL's latest ruling on domestic vi...read more

RAVENS 22, SAINTS 13: 5 Good, 5 Bad Takeaways

Although the scoreboard tells a different story, the Baltimore Ravens reserves absolutely dominated the New Orleans Saints last night in the Superdome. There’s a social media phenomenon called Th...read more

Ravens at Saints: What we Looked For, What we Saw

Heading into the Ravens final preseason game we chronicled five things to look for as the Ravens closed out their preseason schedule last night in New Orleans. Here’s a look at how those things p...read more

View More