Some Clarification is in Order: A Quick Followup on Salary and Wins

by Topher Doll on Feb 17, 2012 2:35 PM MST in Some Clarification is in Order

In a recent fanshot Xanders had a quote about the Broncos spending history. In the comments section there was a great discussion about how to build a team. While there are plans later this off-season to go much more in depth and look at a much bigger picture than purely salary and wins. But I did some research and wanted to post it but it wouldn't fit in the comments section so I decided to make a new post about it.

So while this won't be as thorough or as well flushed out as I would normally do, this is a brief overview of the situation. Also take note that there are things in the work involving roundtable discussion, indepth studies and a much more clear view of how money affects the game of football.

So let's get to it.

Quick Preface:

So while there are no official, hard numbers on the 2011 salary numbers I used 2008-2010. Now I used three seasons because one season would work but using three allows for a bigger picture. For each team I listed the wins and salary number for that season and at the end I included an average win and salary for those three seasons so we can get a much more clear picture of each team's practices and get a more overarching view of the league as a whole. The last column is a Cost per Win statistic which takes total wins divided by total salary and we can see how each team makes the most of their money. Now with these three final columns we can see how winning teams spend and which teams spend money well, though a bad team could spend little and therefore have a quality Cost per Win metric. With that being said, let's get to the meat of the article.

The Table:

The table is sorted by Cost per Win.

Team	2010 Wins	2010 Salary	2009 Wins	2009 Salary	2008 Wins	2008 Salary	Average Wins	Average Salary	Cost per Win
Indy	10	$103,360,985	14	$103,360,985	12	$93,373,915	12	$100,031,962	$7,897,260
NE	14	$95,977,133	10	$96,913,133	11	$92,734,120	12	$95,208,129	$8,743,604
Atl	13	$95,062,952	9	$95,062,952	11	$96,391,525	11	$95,505,810	$9,242,498
Balt	12	$108,880,797	9	$109,503,397	11	$90,713,965	11	$103,032,720	$10,079,288
Phi	10	$102,285,815	11	$106,493,095	9	$109,557,398	10	$106,112,103	$10,611,210
Minn	6	$99,802,010	12	$99,802,010	10	$132,977,805	9	$110,860,608	$10,614,314
SD	9	$116,558,935	13	$117,458,935	8	$111,813,340	10	$115,277,070	$11,155,845
Dal	6	$90,340,939	11	$90,340,939	9	$146,401,600	9	$109,027,826	$11,409,889
Pitt	12	$119,292,960	9	$119,292,960	12	$128,815,061	11	$122,466,994	$11,481,281
Tenn	6	$109,486,770	8	$113,494,050	13	$126,017,443	9	$116,332,754	$11,633,275
NO	11	$121,552,424	13	$121,552,424	8	$131,531,820	11	$124,878,889	$11,830,632
Car	2	$112,963,398	8	$112,963,398	12	$112,114,711	7	$112,680,502	$12,367,372
GB	10	$113,959,603	11	$113,959,603	6	$94,018,300	9	$107,312,502	$12,382,212
Ari	5	$101,458,306	10	$111,138,646	9	$122,110,110	8	$111,569,021	$12,396,558
NYJ	11	$120,634,420	9	$120,634,420	9	$116,910,097	10	$119,392,979	$12,946,227
NYG	10	$136,255,746	8	$138,354,866	12	$115,816,180	10	$130,142,264	$13,014,226
Den	4	$101,658,735	8	$101,658,735	8	$95,599,778	7	$99,639,083	$13,187,526
TB	10	$84,592,822	3	$84,592,822	9	$104,329,311	7	$91,171,652	$14,147,325
Hou	6	$121,943,610	9	$122,258,610	8	$108,445,418	8	$117,549,213	$14,296,526
Mia	7	$136,536,261	7	$126,383,421	11	$114,649,660	8	$125,856,447	$14,338,076
Chi	11	$120,672,110	7	$120,672,110	9	$120,065,819	9	$120,470,013	$14,456,402
Cin	4	$93,840,588	10	$93,840,588	4	$109,727,880	6	$99,136,352	$14,870,453
SF	6	$106,148,952	8	$103,738,952	7	$118,766,239	7	$109,551,381	$14,938,825
Wash	6	$99,953,611	4	$99,953,611	8	$111,963,684	6	$103,956,969	$17,326,161
Buff	4	$110,799,226	6	$111,253,126	7	$113,364,927	6	$111,805,760	$17,968,783
Jax	8	$106,879,214	7	$106,879,214	5	$122,109,207	7	$111,955,878	$17,992,909
Sea	7	$88,765,820	5	$89,075,820	4	$102,985,710	5	$93,609,117	$19,592,606
KC	10	$80,624,650	4	$81,829,650	2	$84,000,016	5	$82,151,439	$21,745,969
Oak	8	$108,020,490	5	$111,527,250	5	$152,389,371	6	$123,979,037	$23,246,069
Cle	5	$93,932,182	5	$93,932,182	4	$131,916,300	5	$106,593,555	$23,398,585
St. L	7	$99,397,892	1	$99,707,892	2	$116,677,660	3	$105,261,148	$49,860,544
Det	6	$99,910,434	2	$99,910,434	0	$95,827,117	3	$98,549,328	$63,353,140
Avg		$106,298,431		$106,798,132		$113,253,609		$108,783,391	$16,641,425

Notes:

- Top 10 teams in spending averaged 9.1 wins while the bottom 10 teams average 7.9 wins.
- Top half averaged 8.5 wins while the bottom half averaged 7.5 wins.

As we can see, for 2008 to 2010 teams that spent more won more, pure and simple. Now obviously there were exceptions on both sides, but generally over the whole league, rather than picking and choosing your examples, you spend, you win. Now please remember this is just a basic overview, more on this topic will come at in later articles from MHR.

- Top 10 teams (top/best 10 means 10 teams that spend the lowest per win) in Cost per win averaged 10.3 wins while the bottom 10 teams averaged 5.3 wins.
- Top half in Cost per Win averaged 9.9 wins while the bottom half averaged 6.1 wins.
- No team in the top 5 had below 10 wins and no team in the top 10 had below 9 wins.
- No team in the bottom 5 had above 6 wins and no team in the bottom 10 had above 7 wins.

Here we see a bit clearer picture, teams that spent efficiently also won. Teams that spent a lot of money AND spent it well won games more than those who just SPEND or those who just use money EFFICIENTLY. This is the key, while spending money is very likely to help you win, there is more volatility, or a larger difference between the top 10 when just looking at spending compared to a low volatility in the Cost per Win.

To summarize, if you spend you are more likely to win, but if you spend and spend that money efficiently, you are set.

Well there you go, a quick look at a multi-year study on Salary and Wins, now like I said, please keep in mind this is just an overview, more indepth studies and conversations will come later but hopefully this helps.

Tweet Comment 7 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Very interesting...

One missing piece here has to do with CAP and CASH when it comes to spending. From reading posts on MHR, there is a lot of misunderstanding and confusion about this. I wish there was a white paper on this and all of the issues involved, then proper context could be lent to commentary about how much a team has to spend and where they choose to spend it. Including committed $$ which are not always apparent. As with the draft, then everyone could talk just as intelligently about the spending decisions after they have all been made. The “what I would have done as GM” commentary would have the same reason and depth as the Mock Drafts have -and the same limitations. Instead, I see a rush to judgement and opinion that may or not be based in the right context. The Broncos seem to say they spend in cash all they can, minus a reserve, up to close to the cap. If true, then one must account for all the embedded requirements, accounting treatments and restructured deals when commenting on it. There is a reason a guru is needed to track all this in the FO. I, for one, could use a better understanding of the issues they deal with, the complex trade offs and so forth. It also appears to be a moving target all the way until the final roster is set and subject to trades etc. As an example, if the first Orton trade Elway tried would have gone through,,,what would the effect have been on the budget and what other moves would that have allowed we didnt get to make? Once Orton was released, Elway then said that $$ would be rolled forward to player choices this season…My point being that if the FO was able to to the deals they wanted to do, how much would that then change one’s opinion of the FO decision making.

by Denverkewl on Feb 17, 2012 3:19 PM MST reply actions 1 recs

These are topics that will likely be covered this off-season

And good questions. There are defenses between the cap and spending, but salary is a fair way to judge how a team is spending since it includes base salaries and roster bonuses.

I am a bear of very little brains and big words bother me.

by Topher Doll on Feb 17, 2012 4:08 PM MST up reply actions

+1 Denverkewl

Character may be manifested in the great moments but it is made in the small ones -- Philip Brooks
My ship finally came in, but it was the Kobayashi Maru.
Follow @MHR_KaptainKirk
KaptainKirk on FaceBook

by KaptainKirk on Feb 17, 2012 4:49 PM MST up reply actions

Pay our guys first (Bunkley, Prater, etc...)

Then look for a couple good players at key positions in free agency (Brandon Carr, Dan Connor, etc…) and continue building through the draft (Fletcher Cox, Doug Martin, etc…).

TurfSharks.com

by ElwayFanJ on Feb 17, 2012 3:46 PM MST reply actions

Special Request! When this gets discussed,

please would somebody address how the new CBA ruling specifying that any cap money not spent in a year (2012, for example) can be “rolled over” so to speak to add to the next year (in this case 2013). There does not seem to be an end to how many seasons you can accumulate this extra cap room, though the base for the minimum % of cap that must be spent would seem to limit how much you can save up. Just seems like it is going to come into play somewhere, but I am not sure where.

by idahobronc on Feb 17, 2012 6:42 PM MST reply actions

For sure

It’s something that plays a big part in a teams long term spending plans.

I am a bear of very little brains and big words bother me.

by Topher Doll on Feb 17, 2012 9:19 PM MST up reply actions

Exact wording:

Article 13, Section 6(b)(v)
Carrying Over Room . A club may “carry-over” Room from one League-Year to the following League-Year by submitting notice in writing signed by the owner to the NFL no later than fourteen (14) days prior to the start of the next League-Year indicating the maximum amount of room that the club wishes to carry over…

Note that if Denver carries over $3mil this season, that effectively raises their cash floor, so if you carry it over, you will also pay it out in cash vs. cap. That will mitigate teams saving up too much. Add in a teams ability to manage the surplus, and it seems like a pretty handy tool. There is wording in other sections of the CBA that would affect this in the final league year of the current CBA, but that probably isn’t worth breaking down at this point.

I will say that it is a flexible enough provision that what a team chooses to do with it specifically may speak volumes. We move $3mil to 2012? Sounds like that $3mil is already spent to me…

Perseverance, secret of all triumph.

by Jeremy Bolander on Feb 17, 2012 9:38 PM MST up reply actions