ESPN: How Washington approaches free agency is anyone's guess

[WoodysGirl]

By Mike Sando
ESPN.com

Updated: February 15, 2008

Comment
Email
Print

The NFL salary cap has swelled 44 percent in five years, from $80.5 million per team in 2003 to an expected $116 million this year.


The growth has left even some playoff teams flush with tens-of-millions in cap space as free agency approaches, but one team needs to trim another $6 million or so to live within the rules.

That team is the Washington Redskins, of course.

While at least a half-dozen other organizations lack sufficient cap room to operate comfortably, none can touch the Redskins for sheer largesse. Even after reworking several deals, the Redskins remained the only team above the projected cap, according to league sources.

We wonder what owner Daniel Snyder has planned for the start of free agency Feb. 29. The team's month-long search for a head coach, punctuated by the surprise hiring of Jim Zorn, proved most anything is possible.

If the Washington Post's sources are correct, the Redskins will make a run at Cincinnati's Chad Johnson. While the Bengals insist their leading receiver is not available, the Redskins do not discourage easily. In 2006, they committed $10 million in bonuses to Brandon Lloyd after acquiring him from San Francisco for third- and fourth-round draft choices.

Imagine what the Redskins might offer for a receiver who actually can play.

Lloyd might have become an All-Pro if he could have drawn Adam Archuleta exclusively in coverage. Archuleta, effective as an in-the-box safety early in his career, collected $5 million in bonus money from the Redskins in 2006 before the team realized almost immediately that he wasn't right for their defense.

The Redskins showed relative restraint last offseason.

They signed linebacker London Fletcher and cornerback Fred Smoot to deals that together count less than $6 million against the 2008 cap. The team signed no other big-name free agents in 2007. But with Lloyd and third-string quarterback Mark Brunell eating more than $10 million of cap space between them, the Redskins need to clear room.

And for what?

Snyder's spending has bought two playoff victories since he purchased the team for $800 million in 1999. Money does not always buy championships.

Additional proof lies in the NFL Players Association's annual rankings of best-compensated players. The list ranks the 10 highest earners at each position, based on 2007 payouts. The numbers -- released to the media during Super Bowl week -- help determine how much teams must earmark for franchise and transition players, but they are instructive for another reason.

The three highest-paid players at each position played for teams that won 219 games and lost 309 last season. Exclude the quarterbacks, who are often worth top dollar, and that 219-309 (.415) mark becomes 189-291 (.393).

San Francisco's Nate Clements, Baltimore's Chris McAlister and Kansas City's Patrick Surtain were the highest-paid cornerbacks. Their teams were a combined 14-34 last season.

Archuleta, now with Chicago, Oakland's Michael Huff and San Francisco's Michael Lewis were the highest-paid safeties. Their teams were a combined 16-32 last season. Clements played well in his first season with the 49ers, but what were his contributions ultimately worth? His coach, Mike Nolan, lost authority over personnel, while the team's record tanked.

The Redskins have managed to remain more competitive despite leading the NFL in "dead" money since 1994 with nearly $128 million, an average of more than $9 million per year, according to an NFL executive with access to league salary information.

Dead money piles up when teams release players before enough time has passed to spread the impact of large signing bonuses across multiple salary caps.

If the Redskins release Brunell, for example, they'll be able to subtract his base salary from the cap, but they'll still have to account for more than $3 million in "dead" bonus money that has yet to count.

The Redskins' dead-money totals have accelerated dramatically since Snyder purchased the team.

Their annual totals were $780,000 in 1994, $1.1 million in 1995, $1.4 million in 1996, $4.2 million in 1997 and $1.3 million in 1998. Subsequent totals have jumped to $7.6 million (1999), $5.7 million (2000), $14.8 million (2001), $13.2 million (2002), $14.4 million (2003), $11.2 million (2004), $20.1 million (2005), $21 million (2006) and $10.7 million last season.

That's an average of $1.75 million in annual dead money during the five years before Snyder purchased the team, but $13.2 million per year during his nine seasons of ownership.

Dead money isn't always fatal.

The New York Giants ranked among the league leaders with $18.8 million in dead money last season, and they still won Super Bowl XLII.

Dead-money figures for 2008 are too tenuous to project because teams are still shaping their rosters.

The Redskins are famous for paying massive signing bonuses, accompanied by low base salaries in the first few years of contracts. The strategy suppresses cap numbers early in the deal, but the dead money piles up if the team parts with the player earlier than anticipated. The Redskins frequently have reworked deals, pushing cap-related consequences into the future.

They cleared about $9 million in cap space this week by adjusting tight end Chris Cooley's contract, converting an $11 million roster bonus to signing bonus.

The Giants, meanwhile, curtailed their free-agent spending before last season. They committed a relatively modest $7.5 million in bonuses during the first month of free agency in 2007. The Redskins, despite what qualified for them as restraint, committed about $22 million in bonuses over the same period.

Fletcher proved to be a worthy addition. His production and leadership helped the Redskins fight through a season marked by key injuries and the tragic death of safety Sean Taylor.

Washington has enjoyed other offseason successes. Marcus Washington, Clinton Portis, Phillip Daniels, Casey Rabach and Todd Collins proved to be valuable additions in free agency, regardless of price.

But as the Redskins proved during their improbable playoff push, and as the Giants affirmed, winning requires more than fielding a high-priced roster. Some teams seize the moment and refuse to let go, often counter to spending totals.

San Diego, Jacksonville, Indianapolis, Green Bay and the Giants added no big-name players from other teams during the initial wave of free agency last offseason. They combined to win three division titles while posting a combined record of 58-22 (.725). They won eight playoff games.

The Redskins are fortunate to have an owner willing to spend whatever it takes to improve his roster. They'll be even better off when Snyder proves he knows when to keep the checkbook in his suit pocket.

Mike Sando covers the NFL for ESPN.com.

[BigDFan5]

Brunell can not save them any money since he is a free agent

[JPM]

I still can't believe Fred Smoot has an energy bar.....

[BraveHeartFan]

I don't understand how they're able to get under the cap every year and still sign a player or two. Either way there is no way I see them getting Johnson or briggs like they'd been rumored to be hoping for.

[khiladi]

I don't understand how they're able to get under the cap every year and still sign a player or two. Either way there is no way I see them getting Johnson or briggs like they'd been rumored to be hoping for.


They were talking about getting Briggs last year... They couldn't afford him then, they can't now...

[DeepBleu]

on the espn front page where this article appears, who is that guy shaking hands with dan snyder? sure look like tom cruise to be, but i could be wrong.

[mwj473]

Brunell can not save them any money since he is a free agent

No he isn't. He is not one of the FA listed for the Redskins.

http://was.scout.com/a.z?s=71&p=9&c=12&yr=2008&nid=83&lnid=83&rc=16&cti=w

[Dat mans bro]

they are going to have to trim more than $6M if they want to sign their rookies and try to sign some big names.

I'd be interested to know how they intend on doing that.

[5Stars]

they are going to have to trim more than $6M if they want to sign their rookies and try to sign some big names.

I'd be interested to know how they intend on doing that.




They will find a way to at least field a team. I feel very sorry for Zorn.

But, if next year there is no cap then the RedSkins will be saved by the bell...that is probably what the Midget is counting on.

[apickmans]

They were talking about getting Briggs last year... They couldn't afford him then, they can't now...

this deal came very close to happening. The only thing was the Bears wanted Rocky McIntosh included in the trade. We wouldnt include him so that trade didnt happen.

[5Stars]

this deal came very close to happening. The only thing was the Bears wanted Rocky McIntosh included in the trade. We wouldnt include him so that trade didnt happen.


And tell us why you could not include him....

:laugh2:

[Woods]

this deal came very close to happening. The only thing was the Bears wanted Rocky McIntosh included in the trade. We wouldnt include him so that trade didnt happen.

I don't think you guys could afford to keep Dockery either last year . . . .

[apickmans]

I don't think you guys could afford to keep Dockery either last year . . . .

did you SEE what he got paid to go to Buffalo?

[apickmans]

And tell us why you could not include him....

:laugh2:

quite simple. Rocky was obviously seen as someone valuable to the team and was going to contribute as a starter. After moving up in the draft to Select Rocky it wouldnt make much sense to trade him away the season after, now would it?

[Chocolate Lab]

did you SEE what he got paid to go to Buffalo?

Translation:

We couldn't afford him.

[5Stars]

Translation:

We couldn't afford him.

:laugh2: :laugh2: :laugh2:

[5Stars]

quite simple. Rocky was obviously seen as someone valuable to the team and was going to contribute as a starter. After moving up in the draft to Select Rocky it wouldnt make much sense to trade him away the season after, now would it?


Sorry, apickmans for the confusion on my part, but, nothing your team does MAKES MUCH SENSE!

:laugh2:

[Woods]

did you SEE what he got paid to go to Buffalo?

Yes, but the problem is that while the Redskins couldn't afford Dockery, they couldn't really compete with Dallas to afford Davis either.

And I think this is where the Skins salary cap problems show.

If two teams are interested in the same player in FA, it's going to be more difficult for the Skins to be as competitive for a big name player.

Using C Johnson or whoever as an example, if the Giants, for example, wanted him as much as the Redskins, it would be very difficult for the Redskins to compete without hurting their roster down the line.

[apickmans]

Translation:

We couldn't afford him.

I know there was a long thread about this last year when Buffalo signed him up. I'm not gonna get into a pissing match. They were negotiating with Dockery's people and were never close on an agreement. Why pay someone a crazy deal like the one Dockery got when you dont deem that as nearly as valuable. He got a deal similar to Dielman and Steinbach if I recall right, and I think its safe to say Dockery is nowhere close to as good as they are. Why dont you go and ask Buffalo fans if they are happy with that signing a year later.

[apickmans]

Sorry, apickmans for the confusion on my part, but, nothing your team does MAKES MUCH SENSE!

:laugh2:

I know 5stars, and trust me, it can get quite frustrating at times.

[apickmans]

Yes, but the problem is that while the Redskins couldn't afford Dockery, they couldn't really compete with Dallas to afford Davis either.

And I think this is where the Skins salary cap problems show.

If two teams are interested in the same player in FA, it's going to be more difficult for the Skins to be as competitive for a big name player.

Using C Johnson or whoever as an example, if the Giants, for example, wanted him as much as the Redskins, it would be very difficult for the Redskins to compete without hurting their roster down the line.

This is another topic that was discussed to no end last year. IMO I dont think Davis ever intended on signing with the Redskins. He always wanted to go home to Texas. I'm thinking he just used us to get a better deal with you guys. Thats all. Do I think the Skins were interested in signing Davis? Sure, it was gonna fill a need, but deep inside im sure they knew he was going to sign with Dallas all along. As for CJ....hes not a FA, but I know what youre saying. 2 more weeks and Im sure there will be a thousand more threads brought up about "idiotic" our signings are.

[Woods]

This is another topic that was discussed to no end last year. IMO I dont think Davis ever intended on signing with the Redskins. He always wanted to go home to Texas. I'm thinking he just used us to get a better deal with you guys. Thats all. Do I think the Skins were interested in signing Davis? Sure, it was gonna fill a need, but deep inside im sure they knew he was going to sign with Dallas all along. As for CJ....hes not a FA, but I know what youre saying. 2 more weeks and Im sure there will be a thousand more threads brought up about "idiotic" our signings are.

No, I'm saying whether the signings are idiotic or not, that's a topic for a different thread. :D

I'm just saying if one team is well under the salary cap and if one team is well over the cap, and if both teams have genuine interest in a player, the team that is well under the cap is going to have a lot more flexiblity in signing the "name" player WITHOUT compromising their roster as much down the line.

I was just using a player like C Johnson as an example. But whether it's him or Moss, or A Samuel . . . . you know what I mean - any name player who generates interest.

[apickmans]

No, I'm saying whether the signings are idiotic or not, that's a topic for a different thread. :D

I'm just saying if one team is well under the salary cap and if one team is well over the cap, and if both teams have genuine interest in a player, the team that is well under the cap is going to have a lot more flexiblity in signing the "name" player WITHOUT compromising their roster as much down the line.

I was just using a player like C Johnson as an example. But whether it's him or Moss, or A Samuel . . . . you know what I mean - any name player who generates interest.

Sure they might have more flexibility, but their owners might also be very cheap, something which Snyder is not. I know what youre saying though, and I'm down as not wanting CJ because I think Snyder will give up too much for him. We'll see how big of a player in FA we really are once we restructure some more players. Last offseason was relatively quiet for us and I liked the signings.

[Woods]

Sure they might have more flexibility, but their owners might also be very cheap, something which Snyder is not. I know what youre saying though, and I'm down as not wanting CJ because I think Snyder will give up too much for him. We'll see how big of a player in FA we really are once we restructure some more players. Last offseason was relatively quiet for us and I liked the signings.

Yes, let's see how it works out.

It's only another 2 weeks or so until it begins!

[Skinsmaniac]

the team that is well under the cap is going to have a lot more flexiblity in signing the "name" player WITHOUT compromising their roster as much down the line.
This isn't true if the salary cap continues to rise. Essentially the Redskins are using the 2009 cap in 2008, while other teams that pay large salaries and small bonuses are stuck with the 2008 cap number. Since the 2009 cap will probably be 10% bigger than this year's cap, the Redskins are able to get more money into their players hands AND get it there earlier which allows the players to invest it. So having a lot of cap space now does not necessarily give a team an advantage over the Redskins if that team wants to pay the player in salary not signing bonus.

The risk with the Redskins approach is that the cap will not continue to go up. That would be Armageddon.

[Bob Sacamano]

Archuleta, now with Chicago, Oakland's Michael Huff and San Francisco's Michael Lewis were the highest-paid safeties. Their teams were a combined 16-32 last season.

it makes you wonder if it's worth it to re-up Hamlin to the big-money deal he's worth, since we already re-upped Roy Williams to one

[Bob Sacamano]

Sure they might have more flexibility, but their owners might also be very cheap, something which Snyder is not. I know what youre saying though, and I'm down as not wanting CJ because I think Snyder will give up too much for him. We'll see how big of a player in FA we really are once we restructure some more players. Last offseason was relatively quiet for us and I liked the signings.

what are you arguing here?

really?

that what you guys are doing w/ the cap is making sense?

[apickmans]

what are you arguing here?

really?

that what you guys are doing w/ the cap is making sense?

No need to put words in my mouth. Just stating that we are not in in bad of shape as some of you think we are/will be.

[Bob Sacamano]

No need to put words in my mouth. Just stating that we are not in in bad of shape as some of you think we are/will be.

20 mil over the cap

yeah, not in bad shape

[apickmans]

20 mil over the cap

yeah, not in bad shape

20 mil over the cap?? you need to get your facts straight. Expect better from you BOB.

[Bob Sacamano]

20 mil over the cap?? you need to get your facts straight. Expect better from you BOB.

aren't you guys set to be 23 mil over the cap?

[skinfan2k]

aren't you guys set to be 23 mil over the cap?


right now we are only $7 over and we are expected to be 10-15 million under. Read how we do the cap and youll understand. Dan knows how to use the cap effectively. His personnel decisions may not be right but the cap is one thing dan knows how to use

[Bob Sacamano]

right now we are only $7 over and we are expected to be 10-15 million under. Read how we do the cap and youll understand. Dan knows how to use the cap effectively. His personnel decisions may not be right but the cap is one thing dan knows how to use

where did the 23 mil thing come from, then?

[skinfan2k]

where did the 23 mil thing come from, then?

we were $23 over. Now we are $7 over

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/7796664/'Skins-rework-Cooley-deal-to-save-cap-space

FOXSports.com has learned Washington converted an $11 million roster bonus Cooley was scheduled to receive into guaranteed money. The move is believed to have lowered Cooley's 2008 cap number from a team-high $12.2 million to $4.4 million.
Other highly-paid Redskins are expected to accept restructured contracts as Washington works to get under the 2008 projected salary cap of $116 million by February 28. Reserve quarterback Mark Brunell ($6.5 million cap number) also is likely to get released.
The Redskins are currently $7 million over the cap, but that figure doesn't include calculations on contract clauses from 2007 like incentives that are still being finalized.

[Bob Sacamano]

we were $23 over. Now we are $7 over

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/7796664/'Skins-rework-Cooley-deal-to-save-cap-space

FOXSports.com has learned Washington converted an $11 million roster bonus Cooley was scheduled to receive into guaranteed money. The move is believed to have lowered Cooley's 2008 cap number from a team-high $12.2 million to $4.4 million.
Other highly-paid Redskins are expected to accept restructured contracts as Washington works to get under the 2008 projected salary cap of $116 million by February 28. Reserve quarterback Mark Brunell ($6.5 million cap number) also is likely to get released.
The Redskins are currently $7 million over the cap, but that figure doesn't include calculations on contract clauses from 2007 like incentives that are still being finalized.

ah, I missed that then

thanks

[skinfan2k]

ah, I missed that then

thanks

We had plenty of money to sign Dockery. We simply thought that we weren't gonna pay our 5th best OL the 2nd most money. Samuels #1. Rabach, Thomas and Jansen get paid. We thought we had something with Todd wade at LG unless we got davis or dockery for near $25 which we offered in mid season.

We signed alot of guys last offseason like London Fletcher, Fred Smoot.

[BigDFan5]

No he isn't. He is not one of the FA listed for the Redskins.

http://was.scout.com/a.z?s=71&p=9&c=12&yr=2008&nid=83&lnid=83&rc=16&cti=w

Yes he is a FA, and I dont need a list to tell me that.

He restructured his deal last February (2007)


The restructure turned his salary into bonus and made the last 3 years of the deal void based on snaps taken

He took 0 snaps, the deal voided hence he is a FA

[Bob Sacamano]

BigD breaking out the stats/period

[BigDFan5]

BigD breaking out the stats/period

Watch out I will show you a link that says you are wrong ;)

[Bob Sacamano]

Watch out I will show you a link that says you are wrong ;)

oh, I believe you

[silverbear]

right now we are only $7 over and we are expected to be 10-15 million under.

According to some wildly optimistic projections on a few Skins boards...

But let's say those optimists are absolutely correct, that still leaves one, LITTLE point that you homers don't seem to address:

You still haven't set aside money for your draft picks, and you still haven't set aside money to sign any of your own, 15 unrestricted free agents that you might want to keep around... you know, guys like LS Ethan Albright, P Derrick Frost, K Shaun Suisham... if you let any of these guys get away, you have to go out and pay the same kind of money for a replacement... when you watch Todd Collins hit the free agent highway, you're then gonna have to assign some money to sign a replacement for him, too...

Other players that y'all might want to keep include WRs Reche Caldwell and Keenan McCardell, TE Brian Kozlowski, OLs Rick DeMulling, Jason Fabini, Ross Tucker and Mike Pucillo, DL Ryan Boschetti, OLB Randall Godfrey and S Pierson Prioleau...

The Skins might be willing to let some of those guys get away, but engaging in a little guesswork there, they'd probably prefer to keep:

P Frost, or sign a replacement...

K Suisham, or sign a replacement...

A replacement for Collins at backup QB will be necessary...

LS Albright...


Two of the four OL-- DeMulling, Fabini, Tucker or Pucillo (especially Pucillo)...

LB Godfrey

S Prioleau...

That's 8 players, and you can figure that signing them (or in a coupla cases, a competent veteran replacement for one of them) will run you about 10 million dollars combined, perhaps a little less... throw in what it will take to sign the draft picks, and you're pushing 12 mil in cap room eaten up...

Suddenly, you don't have NEARLY as much cap room left, do you??

Read how we do the cap and youll understand. Dan knows how to use the cap effectively. His personnel decisions may not be right but the cap is one thing dan knows how to use

No, he doesn't... as a result of how he's used the cap, the Skins were restricted in what they could do in free agency last offseason, and they'll be restricted in what they can do again this offseason...

Even if he has left himself enough wiggle room to get under the cap, he's still left his team with less cap flexibility than virtually every other team in the NFL this offseason... it's laughable to say that he's using the cap effectively...

[silverbear]

where did the 23 mil thing come from, then?

The Skins have already started the renegotiation game...

[silverbear]

We had plenty of money to sign Dockery. We simply thought that we weren't gonna pay our 5th best OL the 2nd most money. Samuels #1. Rabach, Thomas and Jansen get paid. We thought we had something with Todd wade at LG unless we got davis or dockery for near $25 which we offered in mid season.

We signed alot of guys last offseason like London Fletcher, Fred Smoot.

Fletcher and Smoot were it as far as "quality" free agents, and calling Smoot "quality" is pushing the envelope...

It won't be much more of a free agent haul this offseason...

[Skinsmaniac]

It's tiresome to have to repeat over and over how the Redskins manage the cap, how it differs from other teams, and how any economist worth his salt would do what the Redskins do. We get more money into the hands of our players than any other team. That's a good thing. The lack of success we've had is not due to our handling of the cap but due to the choice of which players to pay. It's absurd for some people to criticize the Redskins for overpaying and then turn around and criticize us for not matching the Bills' offer to Dock or the Boys offer to Davis. Those two players, while very good (Davis is better than Dock IMO) are interior line players, not worth 50 million when you can get someone 95% as good for half the price or less.

In response to Silverbear, those players you listed (albright, suisham, frost, godfrey, pucillo, fabini, tucker, demulling, collins, and prioleau) counted $7.5 million against the cap last year. Assuming a 15% increase to their salaries or their replacements' salaries that would be $8.6 million against this year's cap. Our rookie pool hasn't been set but will likely be anywhere from $3million to $4million. So that is about $12 million in cap room we need to find. How do we do it? I'm going to copy and paste from another site with salary cap numbers taken before the recent reworkings. It shows that the Skins, if they so desired could get themselves $20.8 million under the cap (I don't expect us to release Springs, for example, but that is the only questionable move listed here). That's right, from $20 million over to $20 million under. If you doubt any of the details, I can explain them to you tomorrow.

Start: $20.4 million OVER cap

Potential Roster Cuts:
Phillip Daniels - $3.0 million saved
Shawn Springs - $2.5 million saved
Pete Kendall - $1.8 million saved
Todd Wade - $700K saved
Total Savings for Cuts: $8 million

Keeping These Players, Restructuring 2008 Base Salary, Prorating over Remaining life of Contract:
Randy Thomas - $3.7 million saved
Clinton Portis - $3.2 million saved
Jon Jansen - $3.2 million saved
Chris Samuels - $2.8 million saved
Cornelius Griffin - $2.6 million saved
Santana Moss - $1.9 million saved
Casey Rabach - $1.4 million saved
Total Salary Restructure Savings: $18.8 million

Keeping These Players, Restructuring 2008 Roster Bonuses, Prorating over Remaining life of Contract:
Ladell Betts - $1.7 million saved
Clinton Portis - $0.4 million saved
Chris Cooley - $9.2 million saved
Andre Carter - $1.9 million saved
Antwaan Randle-El - $1.2 million saved
Total Bonus Restructure Savings: $14.4 million

Total Potential Cap Reductions: $41.2 million

Maximum Cap Room for 2008: $20.8 million

[silverbear]

It's tiresome to have to repeat over and over how the Redskins manage the cap, how it differs from other teams, and how any economist worth his salt would do what the Redskins do.

That's right, Danny Boy is a visionary, who's figured out a revolutionary new approach to dealing with the cap, one that nobody else in the league has been able to figure out (even though the Skins have been doing this for some years now)...

The NFL is a copycat league, and if the Skins' approach really worked, other teams would fall all over themselves to copy it... the fact that the Skins are the only team trying this approach ought to tell you-- if you could take off those maroon and black blinders you're wearing-- that this is because the approach is fundamentally unsound...

That's a good thing.

For the players, not for the team...

The lack of success we've had is not due to our handling of the cap but due to the choice of which players to pay.

That's partially true, but not entirely true... even if y'all made good choices in free agency, your approach would still leave you with a team lacking quality depth, and so more vulnerable to injury than most teams are...

And of course, if their personnel decisions have been so questionable, what makes you optimistic that they'll make good decisions in free agency THIS year??


In response to Silverbear, those players you listed (albright, suisham, frost, godfrey, pucillo, fabini, tucker, demulling, collins, and prioleau) counted $7.5 million against the cap last year. Assuming a 15% increase to their salaries or their replacements' salaries that would be $8.6 million against this year's cap. Our rookie pool hasn't been set but will likely be anywhere from $3million to $4million. So that is about $12 million in cap room we need to find.

Which is roughly what I projected, isn't it??

How do we do it? I'm going to copy and paste from another site with salary cap numbers taken before the recent reworkings. It shows that the Skins, if they so desired could get themselves $20.8 million under the cap (I don't expect us to release Springs, for example, but that is the only questionable move listed here). That's right, from $20 million over to $20 million under. If you doubt any of the details, I can explain them to you tomorrow.

The problem is, your projection assumes that ALL of these moves will be made, which of course assumes that all of the players who might renegotiate will wish to do so... you'll also have to replace Daniels, Springs, Kendall and Wade if you cut them (though I could see the Skins letting Wade get away without putting up too much of a fight)...

You're gonna spend 8 million trying to replace Daniels, Springs and Kendall if you let them hit the open market (either that, or accept a downgrade to your roster at their positions)... so basically, you're spinning your wheels there...

Now, even you project that the Skins will keep Springs (if they don't, I hope the Cowboys jump all over him), so that would leave you with 18.3 mil in cap room under your rosy scenario... take away the 12 million you admit you'll probably need to resign your own veteran free agents and sign your draft picks, now you're down to 6.0-6.5 million in cap room...

Now, go sign a backup QB to replace Todd Collins... there goes another million, million and a half against the cap... suddenly you're down to the 4.5-5.0 million range...

Which leaves you about enough to sign the number and quality of free agents y'all signed last year... for sure, you'll be unable to be major players for any of the marquee free agents, unless you're willing to make further, more draconian cuts in your roster...

Spin it any way you want, but the fact that the Skins started out 20 mil over the cap handicaps how much your favorite team will be able to do in free agency... spin it any way you want, but going into the offseason with the least cap room of any team in the NFL is not a good thing, no matter how many funny contracts you guys have to play around with...

[silverbear]

Keeping These Players, Restructuring 2008 Roster Bonuses, Prorating over Remaining life of Contract:

Chris Cooley - $9.2 million saved

In my last post, I mentioned some skepticism about your cap numbers as posted here... this is a good example of that, you claim that the Skins realized a 9.2 mil cap savings here, but the Washington Post reported that his cap hit was reduced from 12.2 mil to 4.4 mil... that's a 7.8 million dollar savings, not 9.2 million...

You can probably imagine that I now doubt the numbers listed for the other players...

[FuzzyLumpkins]

In my last post, I mentioned some skepticism about your cap numbers as posted here... this is a good example of that, you claim that the Skins realized a 9.2 mil cap savings here, but the Washington Post reported that his cap hit was reduced from 12.2 mil to 4.4 mil... that's a 7.8 million dollar savings, not 9.2 million...

You can probably imagine that I now doubt the numbers listed for the other players...

Its pretty obvious that they are making the assumption that the total salary is what is to be saved when it is really just reducing the figure to the salary divided by the number of years remaing on their contract. There is still money even if you mortgage off the rest.

That being said I dont see how they can prevent the dead money from escalating with this policy. I guess its the only way that Lil Napoleon feels that he can 'assist' with the team so he plays his little money games. He keeps digging out of his holes but Zorn isnt moving into a pretty situation. That coaching staff had a major brain drain.

[Skinsmaniac]

The cap numbers I cited represent the maximum that the Skins could get from reworking the deals. For example, in the Cooley deal, I believe that the Skins didn't shift the entire bonus and base salary to a signing bonus. Instead, Cooley still has a base salary significantly above the vet minimum - that explains the difference between the numbers I cited which demonstrate the max amount the Redskins can get under the cap and the numbers cited by the Post which is how the Redskins actually chose to rework his deal.

[Skinsmaniac]

That being said I dont see how they can prevent the dead money from escalating with this policy.
Read my post earlier in this thread and you will see that the Skins have no problem with dead money because for every dollar of dead money, they open up one dollar and ten cents by their policy of borrowing against future caps to use now.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Read my post earlier in this thread and you will see that the Skins have no problem with dead money because for every dollar of dead money, they open up one dollar and ten cents by their policy of borrowing against future caps to use now.

Undoer the assumption that the cap grows. That is the only reason youve been keeping your head above water.

[Skinsmaniac]

Undoer the assumption that the cap grows. That is the only reason youve been keeping your head above water.
Yeah, you're absolutely right. If the cap level didn't grow, or maybe even if it didn't grow as fast as the Skins expect it to, they would be in serious, serious trouble.

[mwj473]

Yes he is a FA, and I dont need a list to tell me that.

He restructured his deal last February (2007)


The restructure turned his salary into bonus and made the last 3 years of the deal void based on snaps taken

He took 0 snaps, the deal voided hence he is a FA

Read the article from Fox in post #34. If he is a FA, then how is Washington going to release him? You can't release someone who is going to be a FA.

Edit: I do see where is now listed as a FA to be for 2008, but will still count $3.4M against there cap.

[silverbear]

The cap numbers I cited represent the maximum that the Skins could get from reworking the deals.

Which renders your conclusions invalid... IOW, it's highly unlikely that the Skins will be able to clear the cap room you projected... which means, of course, even less room to pursue free agents from other teams, without more draconian cuts...

[Hostile]

The way the Skins manage the cap is roughly equivalent to Vinnie and Danny Boy playing pin the tail on the donkey. One of them is blindfolded and the other is trying to give directions. Wherever the tail gets stuck, that's what they do.

[firehawk350]

The way the Skins manage the cap is roughly equivalent to Vinnie and Danny Boy playing pin the tail on the donkey. One of them is blindfolded and the other is trying to give directions. Wherever the tail gets stuck, that's what they do.
I like you as a poster Hos, but this is the worst analogy I've ever heard any one ever say in relation to football. It might be valid in FA or the draft, but the cap? Cmon dude. If anything, we use the cap like credit cards. We pay off one credit card with another one with a higher limit and then spend up to that limit, relying on the fact that our credit will keep improving and we'll keep getting higher and higher limit cards. I think, in this case, Danny thinks also he'll get a Visa Black (uncapped year) eventually.

*massages temples* I've got quotes from two GMs that say none of this means a single thing. Cash over cap anybody? We could save more money by counting Brunell as a June 1st and same thing with Brandon Lloyd. Albright will sign for the vet min, same thing with those two linemen we decide to keep. That right there is only $3M for 4 players. Frost and Suisham are more vet min guys and so are Prioleau and Godfrey (maybe a small bonus for Prioleau). That gives you about $3M for 4 more guys.

Caldwell might stay on (another vet min guy, maybe a little more) and Collins is as good as gone. For a back-up QB, I don't think we'll spend very but I think $1M is a good cap number to keep in mind. So let's say, $2M for those two. I would say $8M and we're only letting 5 guys go. Tucker got cut last year BTW. He's writing for ESPN (or maybe SI, I'm not sure) now.

Also, we can resign other guys to contracts (Portis for one) to significantly reduce their cap hits (Portis said he'd be for this). That could take Portis' cap hit from 8M to about 2-3M, saving more than the aforementioned 0.4M.

Overall, we'd be somewhere around $10-15M under with holes at #3 QB (plenty of guys who could develop and we don't have to draft [$750k]), OLB (Briggs would probably run us about $3M in cap room), OL depth (I remember Vinny saying something about wanting to pick up mid-round guys here [$1M), DE, safety depth, #2 receiver (Chad's not coming, I think we're going to pick up Kelly if he's there but I'd expect $2M in cap room here) and #3 TE (Tyler Ecker would likely come back for $420k in salary), FB depth (I remember Vinny saying he was really high on Schmitt out of WV). All that considered, we'd probably end out a couple mil under. Not much room, but not unmanageable either.

[BigDFan5]

? We could save more money by counting Brunell as a June 1st


Could you explain how you are going to designate a free agent Brunell as a June 1st cut?

[firehawk350]

He's not really a free agent, his deal is voidable. Therefore, if we (or he) voids the deal, we will be hit with the dead cap number like it's a normal cut. I'm not sure on the exact language of the CBA, but I think we can use one of our june 1st designation on him so he counts like a June 1st cut.

[BigDFan5]

He's not really a free agent, his deal is voidable. Therefore, if we (or he) voids the deal, we will be hit with the dead cap number like it's a normal cut. I'm not sure on the exact language of the CBA, but I think we can use one of our june 1st designation on him so he counts like a June 1st cut.


Its already voided, it was an automatic void, nobody had to exercize the option.


He is a free agent and will count 3.14 or so in dead money on the cap.


Now how are we supposed to take your posts at face value and believe them to be correct when you cant get something so easy as a free agent right?

[zrinkill]

Now how are we supposed to take your posts at face value

Does anyone do that with a redskin troll?

[BigDFan5]

Does anyone do that with a redskin troll?

good point lol

[BigDFan5]

some links to help you firehawk


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/28/AR2007022801940.html

Brunell lost his starting position to Jason Campbell last season, but had hoped to stay here. His new contract makes his existing deal obsolete and will make Brunell a free agent following the 2007 season, according to league sources (the new contract technically is for four years, but the final three years will void automatically).



Skins site official enough?

http://www.redskins.com/news/newsDetail.jsp?id=33976

Mark Brunell, QB
After three seasons as a starter, Brunell took a back seat last year. He was a backup to Jason Campbell and Todd Collins. The 37-year-old QB did not see any game action and he could be considering retirement.

[Skinsmaniac]

Which renders your conclusions invalid... IOW, it's highly unlikely that the Skins will be able to clear the cap room you projected... which means, of course, even less room to pursue free agents from other teams, without more draconian cuts...
No, it means that you have no idea how the cap works. The Redskins chose not to pay Cooley purely in signing bonus plus vet min to mitigate the risk that he gets injured or his production falls off. There is absolutely nothing stopping the Redskins from getting 20 million under the cap.

Edit: re-reading your post, I guess we do agree that the Skins won't be big players in free agency, but they won't have any trouble re-signing players that they want to or making a couple of FA deals.

[5Stars]

No, it means that you have no idea how the cap works. The Redskins chose not to pay Cooley purely in signing bonus plus vet min to mitigate the risk that he gets injured or his production falls off. There is absolutely nothing stopping the Redskins from getting 20 million under the cap.

Edit: re-reading your post, I guess we do agree that the Skins won't be big players in free agency, but they won't have any trouble re-signing players that they want to or making a couple of FA deals.


From the article:

They cleared about $9 million in cap space this week by adjusting tight end Chris Cooley's contract, converting an $11 million roster bonus to signing bonus.


Do you even know what you are talking about? Sheesh! You don't even know your own team and you come here telling everyone they don't know what is what?

RedSkin logic...:cool:

[Skinsmaniac]

From the article:

They cleared about $9 million in cap space this week by adjusting tight end Chris Cooley's contract, converting an $11 million roster bonus to signing bonus.


Do you even know what you are talking about? Sheesh! You don't even know your own team and you come here telling everyone they don't know what is what?

RedSkin logic...:cool:
No, you have no idea what you're talking about. Can you find me what his base salary is? Is it the vet minimum? If not, then the Redskins chose not to reduce his cap number as far as possible, so be quiet when the adults are talking.

Edit: I don't believe the details of his contract have been released yet.

[5Stars]

No, you have no idea what you're talking about. Can you find me what his base salary is? Is it the vet minimum? If not, then the Redskins chose not to reduce his cap number as far as possible, so be quiet when the adults are talking.


Look, Mr. Adult! Read the freaking article, OK! It says "signing bonus"...

Not get lost...this board is for kids only.

:cool: :lmao2:

[Chocolate Lab]

It's tiresome to have to repeat over and over how the Redskins manage the cap, how it differs from other teams, and how any economist worth his salt would do what the Redskins do.

:abuseme:

Abso-freaking-loutely unbelieveable.

BTW, I just heard Zorn on The Huddle, and he sounded very in over his head. I never saw his press conference, so this was my first time to hear him.

LOL @ the entire Skins organization.

[Skinsmaniac]

Not get lost...this board is for kids only.
:) Sorry, I got a little testy.

[Skinsmaniac]

Abso-freaking-loutely unbelieveable.

BTW, I just heard Zorn on The Huddle, and he sounded very in over his head. I never saw his press conference, so this was my first time to hear him.

LOL @ the entire Skins organization.
I define "managing the cap" as putting the most money into players pockets for the purposes of convincing them to come/stay in Washington. The Redskins do this better than any other team. However, they don't put that money into the right players' pockets.

Zorn's press conference was bad. Really bad.

[5Stars]

:) Sorry, I got a little testy.


I don't care what you got! You said "no signing bonus", I showed you where the article said "converted to signing bonus"!

You should be "testy" with that god awful FO of your team...


:cool:

[Skinsmaniac]

I don't care what you got! You said "no signing bonus", I showed you where the article said "converted to signing bonus"!

You should be "testy" with that god awful FO of your team...


:cool:
You misunderstood what I said. What I said was that the Redskins did not pay Cooley (signing bonus plus vet min) but instead paid him in some combination of (signing bonus plus substantial base salary.) For example, they could choose to pay him a 10 million signing bonus and a 1million salary, or a 9million bonus and 2million salary. Under the first salary option, his cap hit this year would be less than the second option. I am saying that the Redskins did not chose to pay him "purely in signing bonus plus vet min" (the first option) but instead paid him a substantial salary. They therefore chose not to create as much cap room as possible. They did this because paying someone purely in signing bonus plus vet min is risky if he gets hurt or his production falls off.

[5Stars]

You misunderstood what I said. What I said was that the Redskins did not pay Cooley "signing bonus plus vet min" but instead paid him in some combination of "signing bonus plus substantial base salary." For example, they could choose to pay him a 10 million signing bonus and a 1million salary, or a 9million bonus and 2million salary. Under the first salary option, his cap hit this year would be less than the second option. I am saying that the Redskins did not chose to pay him "purely in signing bonus plus vet min" (the first option) but instead paid him a substantial salary. They therefore chose not to create as much cap room as possible. They did this because paying someone purely in signing bonus plus vet min is risky if he gets hurt or his production falls off.


Right!


:flipflop:


Get lost and let us kids have some fun!

[Skinsmaniac]

Right!


:flipflop:


Get lost and let us kids have some fun!
You kids need to have a little less fun and maybe open a math book.

[Bob Sacamano]

I define "managing the cap" as putting the most money into players pockets for the purposes of convincing them to come/stay in Washington. The Redskins do this better than any other team. However, they don't put that money into the right players' pockets.

Zorn's press conference was bad. Really bad.

you define it to fit what you're team does, that's what you really do

managing the cap means that you have the money to re-sign most of your free agents, and still have money to make 1 or 2 big signings from time to time, meaning every year you have at least 10 mil heading into the offseason

look at what Dallas does, they're re-signing all of their core players, keeping the nucleus in place, and are making big signings every year, that's what managing the cap is, it is not having to play around w/ it so that you can keep your head above water

you guys think you could pay out 1.1 mil bonues to 2 players, like we have done these past 2 years w/ Terry Glenn and TO last year, and TO and FLozell this year, w/o re-structuring other contracts? not likely

having cap flexibility is manageing the cap, not this desperate crap you guys pull off because that's what you have to do

[Skinsmaniac]

you define it to fit what you're team does, that's what you really do

managing the cap means that you have the money to re-sign most of your free agents, and still have money to make 1 or 2 big signings from time to time, meaning every year you have at least 10 mil heading into the offseason

look at what Dallas does, they're re-signing all of their core players, keeping the nucleus in place, and are making big signings every year, that's what managing the cap is, it is not having to play around w/ it so that you can keep your head above water

you guys think you could pay out 1.1 mil bonues to 2 players, like we have done these past 2 years w/ Terry Glenn and TO last year, and TO and FLozell this year, w/o re-structuring other contracts? not likely

having cap flexibility is manageing the cap, not this desperate crap you guys pull off because that's what you have to do
I'm glad you prefer to have a smaller cap than the Redskins. This gives us a competitive advantage.

[Bob Sacamano]

I'm glad you prefer to have a smaller cap than the Redskins. This gives us a competitive advantage.

not when you have alot more work to do to fix your team

[5Stars]

I'm glad you prefer to have a smaller cap than the Redskins. This gives us a competitive advantage.




:lmao2: :lmao2:


(here come the two playoff games)


It must really suck to be a RedSkin fan! Snyder has them so freaking confused....


:lmao:

[Bob Sacamano]

:lmao2: :lmao2:


(here come the two playoff games)


It must really suck to be a RedSkin fan! Snyder has them so freaking confused....


:lmao:

lol, let's see, 13-3 and one of the most talented and youngest rosters in the league, w/ a great cap situation, and 2 1st round picks

or...9-7?

hmm, who has the competitive advantage? I wonder

[Skinsmaniac]

Glad to see you guys don't even understand the term "competitive advantage." It doesn't mean we WILL be better, only that how we use the salary cap gives us an advantage. It all comes back to choosing the players to spend the money on, which we haven't done well at. Your front office gives you a "competitive advantage", at least it did before Jones decided to be the man again.

[Bob Sacamano]

Glad to see you guys don't even understand the term "competitive advantage." It doesn't mean we WILL be better, only that how we use the salary cap gives us an advantage. It all comes back to choosing the players to spend the money on, which we haven't done well at. Your front office gives you a "competitive advantage", at least it did before Jones decided to be the man again.

we do understand what competitive advantage is, it's what allows you to compete better than other teams

what you don't get, is having a slightly larger cap situation, right now, it won't always be like that mind you, you're up for another cap wizardry in the next couple of years, is just one facet of competitive advantage, we have more competitive advantages over you guys, such as a better, youthful roster, and right now 2, 1st round picks to get even younger, and better

our future is looking up while you still look like an average team, and probably will remain so until you can get flexible w/ the cap

and Jones being the man signed 2 Pro Bowlers and 2 players in the top 3 or 5 of their positions in Ken Hamlin and Leonard Davis, and was the driving force behind us getting another one, one Terrell Owens

[5Stars]

Glad to see you guys don't even understand the term "competitive advantage." It doesn't mean we WILL be better, only that how we use the salary cap gives us an advantage. It all comes back to choosing the players to spend the money on, which we haven't done well at. Your front office gives you a "competitive advantage", at least it did before Jones decided to be the man again.


:lmao: :lmao2: :lmao:

Check this out, Bob!

[Bob Sacamano]

:lmao: :lmao2: :lmao:

Check this out, Bob!

I know

it's sad

[5Stars]

I know

it's sad


No...it's funny!

:lmao2:

[Bob Sacamano]

No...it's funny!

:lmao2:

I didn't want to state the obvious

ok, so I did, but a double obvious is just too much lol

[5Stars]

I didn't want to state the obvious

ok, so I did, but a double obvious is just too much lol


12 pro bowlers...?

Disadvantage.


:D

I love RedSkins fans...us kids are cant even know wat is a vantage when it com to da salad cap!

[silverbear]

Edit: re-reading your post, I guess we do agree that the Skins won't be big players in free agency, but they won't have any trouble re-signing players that they want to or making a couple of FA deals.

Then I guess we're not arguing any more... I'm merely injecting a note of much-needed reality into the Skins' fans speculation that "OMG!!! We're gonna get Chad Johnson and Lance Briggs"... :D

[silverbear]

I'm glad you prefer to have a smaller cap than the Redskins. This gives us a competitive advantage.

Ahhhh, THAT'S why you guys are so much BETTER than we are...

ROTFLMAO...

I'm quite impressed with our ability to go 13-3 and win the NFC East, in spite of the huge competitive advantage the Skins have...

Again, it's common sense time, do take notes:

If the Skins' approach was really sound, other teams would be emulating it... but NOBODY else is doing things that way... so either Danny Boy is a genius, recognizing truths that nobody else in the league can recognize, or he's a fool...

The final proof of that lies in your team's record during the Danny Boy era... a genius, this is not...

[redster]

Then I guess we're not arguing any more... I'm merely injecting a note of much-needed reality into the Skins' fans speculation that "OMG!!! We're gonna get Chad Johnson and Lance Briggs"... :D

We could get Lance Briggs if our FO wanted to. However, just like last year, we will be prudent this year. Cerrato specifically mentioned that if they acquire players through free agency, it's going to be players that our coaches know(what he said was that the Redskins have been more successful when acquiring players that the coaches already know, like Smoot and London Fletcher). According to him, our needs are a big WR, a versatile O lineman, a DT who's good at rushing the passer, a CB, and safety depth.

P.S. I wouldn't be flaunting the 13-3 record if I were you. You haven't won a playoff game for 12 years. The fact that you crushed opponents in the regular season but got stomped in the playoff makes your team a laughing stock.

[Skinsmaniac]

The final proof of that lies in your team's record during the Danny Boy era... a genius, this is not...
Considering the Skins' record and the Cowboys' record during his era are substantially the same, this isn't the strongest criticism.

As for why other teams don't emulate the Redskins' approach, it is all a matter of degree. All teams use signing bonuses to lure players, with the understanding that doing so presents a risk. The Skins are merely less risk averse than other teams and pay out bigger bonuses. Another reason why other teams don't do it is cheap owners. Big signing bonuses allow the players to reap investment rewards. Giving players big salaries instead allows the owners to capture the time value of money.

[Bob Sacamano]

We could get Lance Briggs if our FO wanted to. However, just like last year, we will be prudent this year. Cerrato specifically mentioned that if they acquire players through free agency, it's going to be players that our coaches know(what he said was that the Redskins have been more successful when acquiring players that the coaches already know, like Smoot and London Fletcher). According to him, our needs are a big WR, a versatile O lineman, a DT who's good at rushing the passer, a CB, and safety depth.

prudent, is that what Gibbs meant when he said he wanted to keep the core redskins like Antonio Pierce?

P.S. I wouldn't be flaunting the 13-3 record if I were you. You haven't won a playoff game for 12 years. The fact that you crushed opponents in the regular season but got stomped in the playoff makes your team a laughing stock.

we lost to the Super Bowl champions, barely, in fact we did more to lose that game than they did to win it

Considering the Skins' record and the Cowboys' record during his era are substantially the same, this isn't the strongest criticism.

As for why other teams don't emulate the Redskins' approach, it is all a matter of degree. All teams use signing bonuses to lure players, with the understanding that doing so presents a risk. The Skins are merely less risk averse than other teams and pay out bigger bonuses. Another reason why other teams don't do it is cheap owners. Big signing bonuses allow the players to reap investment rewards. Giving players big salaries instead allows the owners to capture the time value of money.

wow, the spin cycle is in full effect

need some more Downey w/ that?

no other team is emulating the Skins cap management, or lack thereof, because it's stupid, it's not a grand strategy, it's desperation, that leaves your team w/ a ****ty roster w/ no future, you're not progressing, you're spinning your wheels, yeah, you might win 10 games and a playoff game 1 year, then you will quickly slink to mediocrity for a season, then mildly accomplish something again

your handling of the cap situation has gotten you nowhere, and there's no end in sight

[big dog cowboy]

P.S. I wouldn't be flaunting the 13-3 record if I were you. You haven't won a playoff game for 12 years. The fact that you crushed opponents in the regular season but got stomped in the playoff makes your team a laughing stock.
I wouldn't use the word "stomped" to describe our loss to the eventual Super Bowl champions. Especially since most of that loss was self inflicted.

[Skinsmaniac]

no other team is emulating the Skins cap management, or lack thereof, because it's stupid, it's not a grand strategy, it's desperation, that leaves your team w/ a ****ty roster w/ no future, you're not progressing
You are just demonstrating your financial illiteracy. There's nothing inherently wrong about redoing contracts. It just means borrowing against future caps (which are larger every year) to pay players now. This means that every year our cap is larger than yours. If you actually have a concrete criticism of the Skins cap methods, backed up by some basic comprehension of math above the first grade level, I'd love to hear it.

[Bob Sacamano]

You are just demonstrating your financial illiteracy. There's nothing inherently wrong about redoing contracts. It just means borrowing against future caps (which are larger every year) to pay players now. This means that every year our cap is larger than yours. If you actually have a concrete criticism of the Skins cap methods, backed up by some basic comprehension of math above the first grade level, I'd love to hear it.

no, ****smaniac, the only thing wrong here is you trying to spin the Skin's cap situation

here's concrete criticism

your roster is the exact opposite of our's

[hendog]

You are just demonstrating your financial illiteracy. There's nothing inherently wrong about redoing contracts. It just means borrowing against future caps (which are larger every year) to pay players now. This means that every year our cap is larger than yours. If you actually have a concrete criticism of the Skins cap methods, backed up by some basic comprehension of math above the first grade level, I'd love to hear it.

If you are so secure with yourself and your team why do you spend so much time on our site enamored with anything and everything Cowboys?

[BigDFan5]

Still nobody to explain how cutting a free agent brunell helps the skins?


On a more serious note, if you guys need anymore help learning about your team let me know :)

[Skinsmaniac]

Still nobody to explain how cutting a free agent brunell helps the skins?


On a more serious note, if you guys need anymore help learning about your team let me know :)
You're right - Brunell is a FA. I never claimed otherwise. However, it's not hard for Skins fans to be confused about his situation when the media reports it incorrectly, like ESPN just yesterday:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=sando_mike&id=3247587

[BigDFan5]

You're right - Brunell is a FA. I never claimed otherwise. However, it's not hard for Skins fans to be confused about his situation when the media reports it incorrectly, like ESPN just yesterday:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=sando_mike&id=3247587


My post was mainly meant for the Skins fan who was just making **** up so he didnt appear to be so wrong.

As for ESPN, I dont need them to tell me about my own team. I mean damn man it was on the redskins website, as well as front page at ES :laugh1:

[REDVOLUTION]

ESPN: How Washington approaches free agency is anyone's guess



They put some BIG NAME Free Agents names in a hat and pick and then roll the truck up to their house.

Its not frickin Rocket science

http://www.magicsoil.com/MSREV2/BRINKS_INC_truck01.gif

[random Cs]

RIP Salary Cap

- 2012


You are just demonstrating your financial illiteracy. You tell em.

It only becomes a problem if we don't keep that player.

[silverbear]

We could get Lance Briggs if our FO wanted to. However, just like last year, we will be prudent this year.

And just like last year, you'll only be "prudent" because you HAVE to be...

P.S. I wouldn't be flaunting the 13-3 record if I were you.

As long as some braindead fan of a 9-7 team wants to talk trash about my team, I'll "flaunt" it... if and when your team's better, then maybe you'll have something to say about it that I'll care to listen to...

The fact that you crushed opponents in the regular season but got stomped in the playoff makes your team a laughing stock.

And yet, the rest of the league is currently laughing at the dysfunctional family that is the Washington Redskins...

[silverbear]

Considering the Skins' record and the Cowboys' record during his era are substantially the same, this isn't the strongest criticism.

Except I freely admit that until 2 or 3 years ago, the Cowboys weren't doing things the right way... they are now, which is why they're improving at a fairly brisk clip...

Besides, are you suggesting that your only goal as a Skins fan is to have a team as good as the Dallas Cowboys?? I would have thought that your kind would still have Super Bowls as their ultimate goal... LOL...

As for why other teams don't emulate the Redskins' approach, it is all a matter of degree.

No other team in the league spends more money on mediocre free agents than the Skins do... no other team in the league trades away draft picks as if they're radioactive the way the Skins do... no other team in the league was so "generous" with their past deals that they started this offseason 20 million over the salary cap...

No other team in the league does things the way the Skins do it, period...

Another reason why other teams don't do it is cheap owners.

Some owners are cheap, a lot of 'em aren't... but NONE of them does things the way Danny Boy does...

[silverbear]

You are just demonstrating your financial illiteracy. There's nothing inherently wrong about redoing contracts. It just means borrowing against future caps (which are larger every year) to pay players now.

Which carries with it an inherent risk you're apparently incapable of recognizing... if one of those players suffers a career ending injury, then you get KILLED by the cap that next season, in the form of the rest of his signing bonus accelerating onto the cap... as long as those bonuses are in the form of roster bonuses to be paid periodically throughout the deal, you can cut a player loose and not incur a hit for those later roster bonuses, but the second you convert them to a regular bonus, you're on the hook for that money, regardless...

This is basically what happened to the Cowboys after their run of Super Bowls, first Jay Novacek then Charles Haley came down with bad backs and had to retire, the Cowboys had to eat their hit... shortly after that, Troy Aikman's concussions put an end to his career, and they had to eat his hit as well...

Ultimately, though, the Skins are going to have to account for every nickel of every signing bonus they give their players... but they're already doing that, over the last nine years they've had an average of over 13 mil a year in dead money on their cap...

This means that every year our cap is larger than yours.

Not when you factor in the dead money, it doesn't...

It's a measure of YOUR financial ineptitude that you don't realize that mortgaging your cap future for short term cap gratification will eventually come back to bite you in the butt... yes, the cap keeps going up each year, but so do player salaries...

[Skinsmaniac]

Not when you factor in the dead money, it doesn't... It's a measure of YOUR financial ineptitude that you don't realize that mortgaging your cap future for short term cap gratification will eventually come back to bite you in the butt... yes, the cap keeps going up each year, but so do player salaries...
First of all, in a couple of my posts I have pointed out the risks of doing it the Redskins way, one of which is injury. However, if you take a team that pays its players only in signing bonus and vet min salary in a league where the salary cap increases by 10% each year, then in any given year, that team will have a salary cap anywhere from 20% to 40% bigger than a team that only pays in base salary. They will have that 20% to 40% advantage EVERY YEAR. Now, you raise the point of dead money. This is the most overblown idea tossed around in salary cap discussions. As long as the team paying signing bonuses keeps its dead money to 20% to 40% of that year's salary cap, then they will still come out ahead compared to a team that only pays base salaries. Considering the Redskins dead money is about 6% of this year's cap, their strategy still beats a team that only pays base salaries.

No other team in the league does things the way the Skins do it, period...
No other team offered Leonard Davis $49.6 million. Does that mean it was a bad decision? This "no other team" argument is ridiculous.

[silverbear]

No other team offered Leonard Davis $49.6 million. Does that mean it was a bad decision? This "no other team" argument is ridiculous.

Actually, Danny Boy offered Davis the same money, or a little more...

And I'll repeat, the NFL is a copycat league; if anybody tries something and it WORKS, other teams are quick to jump on the bandwagon... the fact that after 9 years of doing it Danny Boy's way, no other team is attempting to emulate his approach ought to tell you that their way hasn't worked, and can't work...

It can't work because if you throw away draft picks, and shove big money at name free agents, you don't have enough room left under the cap to build decent depth...

[Skinsmaniac]

Actually, Danny Boy offered Davis the same money, or a little more...

And I'll repeat, the NFL is a copycat league; if anybody tries something and it WORKS, other teams are quick to jump on the bandwagon... the fact that after 9 years of doing it Danny Boy's way, no other team is attempting to emulate his approach ought to tell you that their way hasn't worked, and can't work...

It can't work because if you throw away draft picks, and shove big money at name free agents, you don't have enough room left under the cap to build decent depth...
First, I don't know what the Skins offered Davis. Mosley wrote that the Cowboys outbid us, but he might have been assuming that. You get the point that simply because other teams don't follow one team's lead doesn't mean that it was a bad decision. Second, every team in the league pays signing bonuses. The Redskins just pay more, so it's not as if no other team is doing what the Skins are doing. Third, I've been very careful to limit my argument to saying that the Skins put more money into their players' pockets than any other team and that they have therefore in effect raised their cap higher than other teams. This is always a good thing. The Skins may choose to spend that money on overrated players or trade away draft picks, all good criticisms, but in terms of cap maneuvering, the Skins are the best.

[silverbear]

First, I don't know what the Skins offered Davis. Mosley wrote that the Cowboys outbid us, but he might have been assuming that.

It was actually fairly widely reported at the time...

You get the point that simply because other teams don't follow one team's lead doesn't mean that it was a bad decision.

Yeah, in the NFL, it does... if the Skins stumbled onto a good approach, that nobody else had ever thought of trying, other teams would line up to take advantage of that approach... the fact that no other team has adopted that approach tells us that it's a flawed approach...

Unless you'd have us believe that Danny Boy is just smarter than all those other owners, at which point I'd note that if that was true, why aren't the Skins WINNING??

Back in the Jimmuh and Jerruh days, fans of other teams just like you were telling us that we'd eventually have to pay the piper, and I blew them off... I thought that Jerry had it all figured out, and really was smarter than all those other owners...

Then reality set in... so you're talking to the voice of experience here, but of course you're not gonna believe you've got problems until you're smack in the middle of them...

Second, every team in the league pays signing bonuses. The Redskins just pay more, so it's not as if no other team is doing what the Skins are doing.

OK, that argument is borderline dishonest, and I really expected more from you... paying signing bonuses is just one aspect of the Skins' approach to capology, another is trading away draft picks... and no other team uses the roster bonus, as opposed to the signing bonus, the same way the Skins do...

Bottom line, you KNOW no other team in the league approaches cap management in NEARLY the same way the Skins do... this is not a legitimate subject for debate...

Third, I've been very careful to limit my argument to saying that the Skins put more money into their players' pockets than any other team and that they have therefore in effect raised their cap higher than other teams.

Except they haven't, because of all the dead money...

The Skins may choose to spend that money on overrated players or trade away draft picks, all good criticisms, but in terms of cap maneuvering, the Skins are the best.

No, they're not... their approach doesn't WORK... until and unless they have a championship or two to show for that approach, it stands discredited...

[firehawk350]

we do understand what competitive advantage is, it's what allows you to compete better than other teams

what you don't get, is having a slightly larger cap situation, right now, it won't always be like that mind you, you're up for another cap wizardry in the next couple of years, is just one facet of competitive advantage, we have more competitive advantages over you guys, such as a better, youthful roster, and right now 2, 1st round picks to get even younger, and better

our future is looking up while you still look like an average team, and probably will remain so until you can get flexible w/ the cap

and Jones being the man signed 2 Pro Bowlers and 2 players in the top 3 or 5 of their positions in Ken Hamlin and Leonard Davis, and was the driving force behind us getting another one, one Terrell Owens
How have those 1st rounders gone for you in the last 3 years or so? Let's see, Anthony Spencer (how many plays did he play again), Bobby Carpenter (you could get a roast beef sandwich with him at this point), Marcus Spears (worst starting 3-4 DE in the league, and a whiner at that). I give you Ware, he's a beast.

I wouldn't be pimping your 12 men on the pro bowl roster either, the fact that Gurode made it (and Roy Williams only because Sean Taylor died) shows how credible it is. I still can't figure out why anybody thinks Gurode is good.

Weren't the Saints like 10-6 last season and made the NFCCG and everybody was like, OMGZ, look at the YOUNG TALENT on that team!!!1one11! How did that turn out for them? Or how about DA BEARS?! Young, extremely talented defense. What happened there? Somebody should have let the Pats know that they couldn't compete this year either, after all, the average age of their starting roster has got to be like 32 (exaggeration here). They clearly missed that memo.

Either way, until you actually win something or do something of note (like at least make the NFCCG), you are just like the rest of the NFC this year. Unless, of course, 13-3 gives you some kind of advantage next year that I am completely unaware of.

[firehawk350]

It was actually fairly widely reported at the time...

It was pretty obvious that we didn't end up wanting Davis or we didn't see eye to eye on his contract because he left the same day he arrived. For whatever reason, we decided not to go that direction. Pity, because with all the injuries, we could have used him.



Yeah, in the NFL, it does... if the Skins stumbled onto a good approach, that nobody else had ever thought of trying, other teams would line up to take advantage of that approach... the fact that no other team has adopted that approach tells us that it's a flawed approach...

Not completely true. First off, the Pats did trade a bunch of picks for players. They did it better and stole Randy Moss (though, it was a gamble) but who would have thought Wes Welker would be the beast he was? Stallworth ended out sucking though. Regardless, they played big in free agency and almost paid off. Same thing with San Fran. Big players in free agency. Didn't pay off. Either way, we aren't the only big spenders around.

Unless you'd have us believe that Danny Boy is just smarter than all those other owners, at which point I'd note that if that was true, why aren't the Skins WINNING??

Well, we did lose 6 starters to injuries for the season. Dallas lost how many? One? And we still did make the playoffs, despite mourning the loss of our team's best player. You guys folded and the worst distraction you had to deal with was a meddlesome girlfriend. So you take your team of whiny (but talented) pretty boys who falter as the stakes get higher and I'll keep my team of guys who come up biggest when the most money is on the table.

Back in the Jimmuh and Jerruh days, fans of other teams just like you were telling us that we'd eventually have to pay the piper, and I blew them off... I thought that Jerry had it all figured out, and really was smarter than all those other owners...

Then reality set in... so you're talking to the voice of experience here, but of course you're not gonna believe you've got problems until you're smack in the middle of them...

No, Jerruh pissed off one of the best talent evaluators in NFL history and drove him away, replacing him with yes men. That was the problem.



OK, that argument is borderline dishonest, and I really expected more from you... paying signing bonuses is just one aspect of the Skins' approach to capology, another is trading away draft picks... and no other team uses the roster bonus, as opposed to the signing bonus, the same way the Skins do...

I run a bit different from other people. My feet move out to the side more so than up but I've run a sub-5 minute mile. Do I win races, more often than not, no I don't. That's not because the way I run is wrong or bad, it's just that I don't have the same lung capacity and endurance that those that win the race do. I'm not elite. But that's okay, because I've beat more than I've lost against.

Bottom line, you KNOW no other team in the league approaches cap management in NEARLY the same way the Skins do... this is not a legitimate subject for debate...

No, you're right, it's not. But the subject of the debate is will it work? Can it possibly work? The answer, irrefutably, is yes, it can. Provided we scout and recruit better. Until we make better personnel decisions though, we're going to have this stupid debate every year.

In that same vein, Vinny said something interesting I heard yesterday. Somebody asked him if he changed the way he approached FA and he said, one thing we learned was to not pick up players that one of our coaches don't already know. There's too much we don't know about their personality, work habits or "fire" to make an accurate judgment. He said the guys we've brought here that have been successful, they already knew (Fletcher for example) and the busts have been guys they didn't know (Lloyd and Arch).

So it sounds like he did at least learn something, so maybe we see a scaled down FA from now on (slowly rebuilding our cap situation as dead money comes off). We'll see...

No, they're not... their approach doesn't WORK... until and unless they have a championship or two to show for that approach, it stands discredited...

A lot of teams approaches don't work. The Cowboys approach hasn't worked either. The Chargers approach of having the generation's best RB and TE, with good, young talented players on both sides of the ball hasn't worked yet either.

[burmafrd]

Just for the record: who last won the division? Who has won 13 games? Who has 13 in the Pro Bowl (scoff all you want but most of those guys earned being there -not Roy of course). By the way, you have to HAVE draft picks for them to be evaluated. Spears the worst 3-4 DE in the league= what very little credibility you had left there. He is a solid one and thats it and YES that is a disapointment. We give our draft choices 3 years so Carp has one more and Wade admitted they may have given him a raw deal this year. Spencer is going to be a player and the fact that you could not see that tells EVERYONE your ability to recognize talent sucks bowling balls through garden hoses.
You keep avoiding admitting that NO ONE in the League comes even close to the Skins craziness.
And this in a league where copycat is not just a fact but is etched in stone. BY THE WAY: how many division championships or SBs has your way gotten you? Has it even allowed you to win more then 10 games in a season?

[firehawk350]

Just for the record: who last won the division? Who has won 13 games? Who has 13 in the Pro Bowl (scoff all you want but most of those guys earned being there -not Roy of course).

And what did that get you? Did you get some kind of great ring, or trophy for all that? Or did you, just like Tampa Bay and Seattle, just exit from the playoffs with nothing to show (like you have for a while). Saying "well, you got knocked out quicker than we did" proves nothing. Great, you danced around the ring for a round longer.

By the way, you have to HAVE draft picks for them to be evaluated. Spears the worst 3-4 DE in the league= what very little credibility you had left there. He is a solid one and thats it and YES that is a disapointment.

I'll compare our picks to yours for the last 3 years if you want.


Name a worse one.

We give our draft choices 3 years so Carp has one more and Wade admitted they may have given him a raw deal this year. Spencer is going to be a player and the fact that you could not see that tells EVERYONE your ability to recognize talent sucks bowling balls through garden hoses.

Spencer might be good, but you didn't have any real time to evaluate him. I remember, when he was in for that time that Ellis was out to be more of the ehhhh side of things, what exactly did you see that would tell you he's going to be great? Carp isn't going to get into the lineup this year either.

You keep avoiding admitting that NO ONE in the League comes even close to the Skins craziness.
And this in a league where copycat is not just a fact but is etched in stone. BY THE WAY: how many division championships or SBs has your way gotten you? Has it even allowed you to win more then 10 games in a season?

Your right though, Dan hasn't won anything yet so nobody's going to copy it. I need to check it out, but I'm pretty sure 1 division championship, twice we've won more than 10 games and 0 super bowls. Since we're quantifying who sucks less (or who's the smarter retard), in that same time period, how many division champs, how many times over 10 wins and how many super bowls have you won? How many playoff games?

[AmishCowboy]

The Redskins approach to FA?, That's easy enough, Overpay for Average Players, give them a big signing bonus then cut them after 2 years when they finally figured out what the rest of the NFL already knew.

[Woods]

And what did that get you? Did you get some kind of great ring, or trophy for all that? Or did you, just like Tampa Bay and Seattle, just exit from the playoffs with nothing to show (like you have for a while). Saying "well, you got knocked out quicker than we did" proves nothing. Great, you danced around the ring for a round longer.



I'll compare our picks to yours for the last 3 years if you want.


Name a worse one.



Spencer might be good, but you didn't have any real time to evaluate him. I remember, when he was in for that time that Ellis was out to be more of the ehhhh side of things, what exactly did you see that would tell you he's going to be great? Carp isn't going to get into the lineup this year either.



Your right though, Dan hasn't won anything yet so nobody's going to copy it. I need to check it out, but I'm pretty sure 1 division championship, twice we've won more than 10 games and 0 super bowls. Since we're quantifying who sucks less (or who's the smarter retard), in that same time period, how many division champs, how many times over 10 wins and how many super bowls have you won? How many playoff games?

Look, I understand that you're a huge Redskins fan . . . . but the way Sndyer has been running the team is less than ideal.

Everybody in the NFL knows it. Sndyer is the laughing stock of the NFL.

Whether you want to admit it or not, the Cowboys are set up much better for the longer-term than the Redskins.

Go to other teams' message boards and get their opinions, if you don't believe ours.

It was a tribute to Gibbs on what you guys accomplished post-S Taylor's death. He kept the team together.

I can honestly say this: As long as Snyder is involved in running the show, I don't fear the Redskins at all. I worry more about the Giants and Eagles. I really mean that. I have no axe to grind against you or the Redskins. Heck, I don't even view the Redskins rivary as I did 20 years ago.

Just my opinion . . . .

[bigE79]

Look, I understand that you're a huge Redskins fan . . . . but the way Sndyer has been running the team is less than ideal.

Everybody in the NFL knows it. Sndyer is the laughing stock of the NFL.

Whether you want to admit it or not, the Cowboys are set up much better for the longer-term than the Redskins.

Go to other teams' message boards and get their opinions, if you don't believe ours.

It was a tribute to Gibbs on what you guys accomplished post-S Taylor's death. He kept the team together.

I can honestly say this: As long as Snyder is involved in running the show, I don't fear the Redskins at all. I worry more about the Giants and Eagles. I really mean that. I have no axe to grind against you or the Redskins. Heck, I don't even view the Redskins rivary as I did 20 years ago.

Just my opinion . . . .:hammer:

[5Stars]

Let these RedSkins think what they want, it's a hopeless cause anyway.

If they want to sit there in front of their computer with their "6th seed" t-shirts on...:laugh1: and tell everyone how the Midget is the bestest and which of them is going to shine the Midget's shoes tonight...let them have at it!

Not my, or our problem...














(6th seed t-shirts...OMG :lmao2:that be some serious cap management )

[firehawk350]

Look, I understand that you're a huge Redskins fan . . . . but the way Sndyer has been running the team is less than ideal.

Everybody in the NFL knows it. Sndyer is the laughing stock of the NFL.

Whether you want to admit it or not, the Cowboys are set up much better for the longer-term than the Redskins.

Go to other teams' message boards and get their opinions, if you don't believe ours.

It was a tribute to Gibbs on what you guys accomplished post-S Taylor's death. He kept the team together.

I can honestly say this: As long as Snyder is involved in running the show, I don't fear the Redskins at all. I worry more about the Giants and Eagles. I really mean that. I have no axe to grind against you or the Redskins. Heck, I don't even view the Redskins rivary as I did 20 years ago.

Just my opinion . . . .
Most NFL fans, including the experts, are extremely fickle. 2006 (not more than two years ago) how many experts were pimping the Skins and saying they would go to the super bowl? How about the Browns? Or Saints? San Fran? Make some noise in the playoffs or at the very least, win more than one division championship and we'll talk. There are very few consistent contenders (a la the Chargers, Pats, Indy) and a lot of flash in the pan teams that tear it up one year and are expected to do great the next only to post less than stellar records. It funny how all those great players that made the pro bowl and were hyped so much seem to be just average when their team falls (see exhibit Moss here).

I don't get the condescension either. You realize that in the past 10 years, the Cowboys have accomplished, arguably, less than the Skins? Or that it was 16 years ago that we won a super bowl (and played the best quarter of football ever) and it was 11 since you won one? I could understand where you are coming from if you were a Pats fan, or a Colts fan, or even an Giants fan but this is like a blind person telling a deaf person to be more observant.

Like it or not, the Skins and Cowboys are actually, when it comes to the new century, at the bottom of the NFCE in accomplishments. The Eagles have owned consistently up until 05 and the Giants just won a super bowl.

[Woods]

Most NFL fans, including the experts, are extremely fickle. 2006 (not more than two years ago) how many experts were pimping the Skins and saying they would go to the super bowl? How about the Browns? Or Saints? San Fran? Make some noise in the playoffs or at the very least, win more than one division championship and we'll talk. There are very few consistent contenders (a la the Chargers, Pats, Indy) and a lot of flash in the pan teams that tear it up one year and are expected to do great the next only to post less than stellar records. It funny how all those great players that made the pro bowl and were hyped so much seem to be just average when their team falls (see exhibit Moss here).

I don't get the condescension either. You realize that in the past 10 years, the Cowboys have accomplished, arguably, less than the Skins? Or that it was 16 years ago that we won a super bowl (and played the best quarter of football ever) and it was 11 since you won one? I could understand where you are coming from if you were a Pats fan, or a Colts fan, or even an Giants fan but this is like a blind person telling a deaf person to be more observant.

Like it or not, the Skins and Cowboys are actually, when it comes to the new century, at the bottom of the NFCE in accomplishments. The Eagles have owned consistently up until 05 and the Giants just won a super bowl.

Well, if you think that the Cowboys and Redskins are on equal footing going forward, I personally disagree. JJ has learned a lot from his mistakes, IMO, and Snyder hasn't. I thank God that Snyder doesn't run the Cowboys.

But look, don't take my word for it. Go to other message boards of other teams and take an opinion poll on how they think the Redskins are being run.

I don't think my opinion is the minority.

[burmafrd]

You will not find anyone outside of skin homers who would take washingtons team over ours right now. Or their coaching staff. Or their owner. OR their Salary cap situation. Do I have to go on?

[AmishCowboy]

:hammer: You will not find anyone outside of skin homers who would take washingtons team over ours right now. Or their coaching staff. Or their owner. OR their Salary cap situation. Do I have to go on?

[Bob Sacamano]

How have those 1st rounders gone for you in the last 3 years or so? Let's see, Anthony Spencer (how many plays did he play again), Bobby Carpenter (you could get a roast beef sandwich with him at this point), Marcus Spears (worst starting 3-4 DE in the league, and a whiner at that). I give you Ware, he's a beast.

Spears is solid, and him and Ware didn't have somebody like Greg Ellis standing in their way like Carp and Spencer have/had

I wouldn't be pimping your 12 men on the pro bowl roster either, the fact that Gurode made it (and Roy Williams only because Sean Taylor died) shows how credible it is. I still can't figure out why anybody thinks Gurode is good.

because maybe he's the best of pretty, weak C play overall, I mean, who really stands out?


Weren't the Saints like 10-6 last season and made the NFCCG and everybody was like, OMGZ, look at the YOUNG TALENT on that team!!!1one11! How did that turn out for them?

no defense

Or how about DA BEARS?! Young, extremely talented defense. What happened there?

no offense

Somebody should have let the Pats know that they couldn't compete this year either, after all, the average age of their starting roster has got to be like 32 (exaggeration here). They clearly missed that memo.

being old is great for winning now, which you are barely doing

but what about the future? where's your's? you don't even have a QB

Either way, until you actually win something or do something of note (like at least make the NFCCG), you are just like the rest of the NFC this year. Unless, of course, 13-3 gives you some kind of advantage next year that I am completely unaware of.

so the Redskins are comparable w/ the COwboys? ok

again, our cap situation is great, we're young, loaded w/ talented, and came off a great season, we can only get better

idk about you, but winning the division, being the #1 seed, only to be ousted, barely, by the Super Bowl champions is a pretty good start

[Bob Sacamano]

cripes firesquaw, look at the list of teams Zach Thomas wants to go to, to compete for a championsinp

it's not the Redskins, but oh, look the Cowboys are one of them

who was the toughest obstacle that Michael Strahan felt they overcame to win the Super Bowl, yep, those ****ing Cowboys

in most people's lists of the top teams, they don't include the Redsucks, but the Cowboys...

I know we have a rivalry and everything, but you're not on the Cowboy's level

[Woods]

You will not find anyone outside of skin homers who would take washingtons team over ours right now. Or their coaching staff. Or their owner. OR their Salary cap situation. Do I have to go on?

Problem is that this guy is a Redskins' homer. ;)

That's why I keep telling him to check on other teams' message boards on various opinions. He'll find that he's in the minority.