Mahomes yearly roster guarantees are not for the upcoming season he is to play, they are for the season following that. There is not a single year where they would not incur a crippling dead money hit cutting Mahomes because of that. Tannehill copied it and did something similar with his 3 year deal where the 3rd year salary was guaranteed after the first week of the league year of his 2nd season into the deal so he always had 1+ year of guaranteed salary.
I am trying to think offhand though the last time I saw a team cut a player that made the team lose cap space. Outside of when the player is a PR disaster I just cannot remember seeing it. These teams throw cash at players without hesitation but structure the cap around having to deal with it later. Void years and minimum salaries have been the rage the past few years for this exact purpose.
1. That's true on the bonuses, except that's also plenty of time for them. It's not like he's going to fall off a cliff in one season. Even if he had an Alex-Smith level injury during the season, it'll only set you back one year, because the following year, you can decline bonuses and get off free. Not a franchise killing move.
2. You're describing two different things. Cutting a player where there's negative cap savings is an entirely different thing than cutting a player where dead money > cap savings. A player can have a $16M cap hit, with $10M in dead money, and $6M in cap savings, and the player will get cut. Happens all the time. If you're talking straight negative cap savings, then again, I don't see how the Mahomes deal has anything to do with that. Even in an Alex Smith scenario, they've got an easy out in year 2. They have no multi-year obligation to him beyond 2024. Do they have to pick up the option before the prior season? Sure, but that's nothing new. Plenty of contracts are like that. But that only leaves them on the hook for one more year, nothing more.
The overall premise of the discussion was on the perceived influx of WR salaries. It's mostly fictional. We're talking about large roster bonuses becoming guaranteed a year before, and none of the high end WRs have that.
Tyreek Hill has a 5 year deal, where the 3rd year base salary becomes guaranteed before year 2. That's it. Year's 4 and 5 are total pencil years. The Dolphins can simply opt to get rid of him after year 3, and not pay over 50% of his contract. There's no roster bonuses or anything that guarantees. It's just fictitious salaries.
Davante Adams is no different. His is actually worse, because he has no guaranteed money after year 2 (on a five year deal). He'll get year 3, but on an alleged $140M deal, the Raiders can erase two years and $71M off of it with no consequences whatsoever. At no point in time does any of the money become guaranteed.
That's the point of the argument. You can literally make these guys the highest paid for ego, but none of it is real. They'll never see it. You can offer a WR $200M over five years and never pay him more than a third off, depending on the structure. And I'm not totally unconvinced, based on some of these deals they're signing, that these players aren't stupid enough to take it.
As got Christian Kirk, it's a two year deal. He has almost no guaranteed money beyond year 2, and they get $11.5M in cap savings with $10M in dead money in 2024 if they move on. That would be an easy decision if he doesn't produce. You can also spread that $10M over two years if you want to, which makes it easier.
And if he does produce, a $16M compensation in three years will be a bargain for a WR who's playing well, which is what they'll be paying him that year. Cap hit will be higher, but cap is fictional. It's not a reflection of actual cash flow. He's getting $22.5M this year in cash flow, which is the most he'll get throughout the contract.
