Salary cap expert: Answer to Broncos cap problems is ‘an ascending young quarteback’

When it comes to the Broncos salary cap situation, there is a viable path out of the fog of dead money from Russell Wilson’s contract.

“If they could have an ascending young quarterback, that’s the answer to their problems,” said Andrew Brandt, a longtime sports-business and legal analyst who spent 10 years as the Green Bay Packers’ salary-cap and contracts point person.

“If they want to go veteran, you’re going to cost some money. And you’d like to think with the hold on Wilson, you’re not going to spend more than another $10 million in cap.”

Salary-cap expert @AndrewBrandt joined @DenverSportsCom this morning to discuss the aftermath of the $85 million dead-cap hit for Russell Wilson.

“If they could have an ascending young quarterback, that’s the answer to their problems,” Brandt explained. pic.twitter.com/WyIOFK7gBh

— Andrew Mason (@MaseDenver) March 6, 2024

And the Broncos already have a quarterback with a salary cap figure of $7 million: incumbent Jarrett Stidham. The sixth-year veteran signed with the team last offseason for $10 million over two years. But relative to the salary cap, the Broncos took a $3 million hit last year, punting the larger hit to this season.

If the Broncos draft a quarterback at No. 12 overall, that pick’s cap number is likely to be somewhere in the $4 million range.

Brandt hopped on 104.3 The Fan on Wednesday morning to discuss the aftermath of cutting Wilson. And as he discussed the $85 million of dead money on the Broncos salary cap created by Wilson’s deal, he noted that it was so large, it would change the advice he would give to the team if asked whether to swallow the entire hit in one year or split it over two, as the Broncos will do by releasing Wilson with a post-June 1 designation.

“My normal response — and this is what I always preach in cap management to young cap managers — is, ‘Take your medicine now; keep your flexibility later.’ But that’s when we’re talking about $30 million for Carson Wentz, $35 million for Jared Goff, $40 million for Matt Ryan, $41 million for Aaron Rodgers,” Brandt explained.

“$85 million? I can’t advise that. That’s almost a third of the cap. I can’t advise taking it all this year — which, of course, they could do,” Brandt said.

“But I would spread it out with a bigger hit this year, so, the $50 (million) now, the $35 (million) next year — it’s still a massive amount, but he’s going to be biggest cap number for the next two years on that team while he’s no longer there.”

IN TAKING ON SALARY CAP DEAD MONEY, BRONCOS OWNERSHIP DIDN’T FALL VICTIM TO SUNK-COST FALLACY

… and that should be encouraging, Brandt noted.

“I think so. I think if you ascribe to the theory, ‘If it’s not working, don’t hang on and don’t keep banging your head against the wall,’” Brandt explained.

And whether the Russell Wilson contract didn’t work simply because of the quarterback’s shortcomings, Sean Payton believing he wasn’t a fit or both, going further down the path and the potential to cause more problems.

As @MikeEvans1043 asks on @DenverSportsCom, “Should Broncos fans be encouraged, heartened by the fact that ownership is prepared to take on this kind of a cap hit?”

Salary-cap expert @AndrewBrandt explains why he thinks fans should be encouraged … and what went wrong. pic.twitter.com/J9y0TbCH8n

— Andrew Mason (@MaseDenver) March 6, 2024

“It seemed like this experiment didn’t work, obviously, in year one, and even with the high-experienced, Super Bowl-winning coach, did work year two — or didn’t work to the point where that coach wants it to continue,” Brandt said.

“So, it’s a deference to the coach. It’s a deference to creating a new team after going all-in on this player.”

But the contract remains “a massive mistake,” Brandt said.

“I mean, there’s no other way to look at this,” Brandt said. “A mistake on the trade side and a mistake on the contract side.”