NFL.com: Bucs spent least money since '04

The Bucs have spent less money on player salaries and bonuses than any other NFL team since 2004, according to a report from the NFL.com's new beat writer, Jason La Canfora.

La Canfora looked at NFL Management Council figures to determine how much "committed cash" each NFL team had spent from 2004-08, and the disparity is surprising. The Bucs rank last among 32 teams with $449 million, which is $53 million under the league average. That works out to $10.6 million less per year under the league average, and a full $23.4 million per year less than the highest-spending team, the Dallas Cowboys.

It's disappointing news for Bucs fans, and La Canfora posted a follow-up story, looking at how much NFL teams have spent per win over the past five seasons. The Bucs have spent the least in the NFL according to the numbers, but they're hardly the most efficient when it comes to cost per win -- with 38 wins in those five seasons, the Bucs spent an average of $11.81 million per victory, and 13 NFL teams spent less per win than the Bucs.

What does this mean to fans? Does it make you question the commitment to winning if the Bucs are spending less on players than any other team in the league?

-- Greg Auman, Times staff writer

Comments

[big007hed]

I think this just relates to the way that Gruden and Allen ran the team, they went with older veterans and tried to continually find diamonds in the rough like Antonio Bryant, Earnest Graham, and Clifton Smith just to name a few... It worked out ok but spending the most still hasn't produced a playoff win for the Cowboys so it all depends

[Jack]

I agree. This was Bruce Allen's strategy of not wanting to get soaked in reeling a big name free agent. That's why it was refreshing to read Bucs were the top bidders for Haynesworth. OK - So what now? We are undercap and undertalented in critical positions like WR, DE.

[Stephen Blackehart]

Sort of coincides with the Man U purchase, doesn't it?

They saved ~$40M in that span, and just unloaded one of their big-name soccer players recently. Does all this mean we have to wait for Manchester to be profitable before they start dropping serious coin on the Bucs?

[jerseybuc]

The only thing that surprises me is that this story was broken by nfl.com and not a local paper in Tampa. I live outside the area, but it has been apparent for quite a few years that the Bucs are skimping on salaries, and it has been broached numerous times on buc boards and in responses on this paper. Where have you guys been????

[CW]

It's not surprising that nfl.com broke a story about salaries. NFL teams tend to keep as much info as they can about contracts and salaries secret. That's why when you see info about contracts/salaries, it is usually according to "team sources" or the agents. nfl.com, obviously, is under the auspices of the NFL and has access to all kinds of first hand information that beat reporters don't have. Am I wrong?

[Lester]

The other side of the coin is that the Bucs are being wise with their money. Haynesworth said the Bucs offered more than anyone - a player they targeted and were willing to pay for. I would rather be thrifty than get locked in to overpaid talent for years to come. We'll see how it goes and determine if they are being thrifty or cheap - there is a difference.

[Drew]

Malcolm and Joel taught me a really cool trick. You take a $1 dollar bill and fold it four times. You then squeeze it as hard as you can and it turns into a $100 bill.

[Drew]

Lester, did you look at the other side of the coin. There was nothing on it right? Which deflates its value.

[Drew]

Has anyone else noticed in the picture associated with this article. The football Glazer gave to Raheem has no air in it. Now that's cheap!

[Drew]

There's a lot of reference given to Man-U. If I posted Buc-U, do you think they'd ban me from posting in the future?

[Joe]

So the Cowboys have spent more than any other team and they have zero play off wins this decade, the Bucs have spent the least since 2004 and don't have any playoff wins. Who cares how much they spend.

[OAR]

We are under cap, because of Allen. Allen's spending did exactly what they wanted, get out of cap hell and stay out. Now it does make you wonder. Since they have the money, why are there still glaring holes that need to be filled? Or why Ruud and Byrant aren't re-signed/extended yet?

[OAR]

Spin-DR "Dallas Retard" extrodinaire, How bout dem Cowboys?

[NJ BUC]

Is no one here smart enough to realize that when the Bucs got Gruden they gave up 2 first and 2 second round picks? Excluding the cost of these four players and assuming the dexter jackson thing was once in a lifetime, all four high salaried players would have been included in the 2004 analysis. The guy that wrote the original article isn't very smart. Neither is anyone who takes it at face value.

[Greg Auman]

NJ Buc, check your facts. The Bucs gave up first-rounders in 2002 and 2003 for Gruden, and second-rounder in '02 and '04. So all the signing bonuses (except a million or so for the '04 second-rounder) from those lost picks were before the time period that's being discussed here.

It's just not a huge factor in how much the Bucs spend over a five-year span.

[jerseybuc]

OK Greg. So tell me why we are not re doing Ruud's contract? The only starting linebacker left, the guy who is the signal caller on the D, and he is making a mill and half. Team leader in tackles, and he makes less than most of the players on the team... Plenty of money left supposedly, they re did Winslow's contract, who hasn't played a down for the team. You want to buy the company line fine, I don't.

[Kurt]

No surprises here. I'm sure Allen was directed by management to re-structure the cap situation and Gruden had to live with meager purchases (while still winning a few division titles.) Their reward was to get canned. Gruden probably asked for a few players to help keep the team from dismantling late in the season and was shown the door for such disobedience. Just sayin.

[Greg Auman]

Jersey, I didn't say anything about buying the company line. Just wanted to make it clear the picks lost in the Gruden trade didn't have a significant impact on how much the Bucs paid out from 2004-08.

Just my opinion, but I think the Ruud deal will get done before camp starts a month from now. If the Bucs had done that a month ago, they wouldn't be hearing as much criticism for not spending much money on free agents ...