Deadskins are apparently not in "Cap Hell"

[Gryphon]

http://redskins.scout.com/2/490049.html

Cap Hell is just a myth. Every team has easy ways of getting out of cap problems.

We're just lucky enough to find a very easy solution.

No cap hell we can end this subject now.

[BigDFan5]

http://redskins.scout.com/2/490049.html

Cap Hell is just a myth. Every team has easy ways of getting out of cap problems.

We're just lucky enough to find a very easy solution.

No cap hell we can end this subject now.



http://dallascowboyszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=705187&postcount=26


The article was already debunked by our very own Adam


If the CBA is extended before March (thus extending the cap), the 30 percent rule won't apply to this season, and they'd be able to do all of the normal renegotiations, etc.

If not, they won't be able to do a lot of those things, and they'll have to do some things differently and for less cap savings. Let's look at some specific players, for example.

The article at Scout.com says the Skins could save $2.4 million with a simple restructuring of Mark Brunell's contract (lowering his base salary to the veteran minimum and giving him the difference as a signing bonus). Normally, they'd be able to take his $4 million base salary, renegotiate it to $770,000 and pay him a $3.23 million bonus, which would be prorated. That would reduce his cap number by $2,422,500. But his $4 million base salary allows his salaries for 2007 through 2010 to go up by $1.2 million per season, which is exactly what they do. If his base salary drops to $770,000 in 2006, his total salaries couldn't go up by more than $231,000 per season. So instead of having a salary of $5.2 million for 2007, it couldn't be higher than $1.001 million. And instead of $6.4 million in 2008, he couldn't make more than $1.232 million. Over the life of his contract, he'd have agree to take a pay cut of $22.61 million! Granted, he'd probably never play through 2010 anyway, but it would be foolish for him even to agree to take a pay cut of more than $4 million for 2007, when he still might be playing.

The ONLY way for the Skins to reduce Brunell's cap hit AT ALL is for Brunell to agree to a pay cut of some sort, although they could convince him to take a pay cut for future years -- when he might not even be playing -- in exchange for more money now. For example, let's say Brunell thinks he'll be able to play at least two more years. Under his current contract, he'd get $4 million in 2006 and $5.2 million in 2007. Of that $9.2 million total, the Skins could prorate no more than $7.429 million, leaving him with base salaries of $770,000 in 2006 and $1.001 million in 2007. The cap savings would be $1,372,750 -- more than $1 million less than the $2,422,500 that could have been saved without the 30 percent rule. And Brunell would still have to accept big pay cuts for 2008 through 2010, which he might not see anyway. So by paying Brunell and extra $4.199 million this season, the Skins could save $1,372,750 of cap room. But to save any more than that, they'll have to convince Brunell to take less money over the next two years, as well as from 2008 through 2010.

The article at Scout.com also says the Skins can save $4.9 million by guaranteeing and prorating LaVar Arrington's $6.5 million roster bonus. Normally, guaranteeing and prorating his bonus would save $4.875 million. But that $6.5 million roster bonus and his $545,000 base salary allow his total "salaries" (not just base salary) from 2007 to 2011 to increase by as much as $2,113,500 per year (30 percent of $7.045 million), and indeed, the increases from 2007 to 2008 and from 2008 to 2009 are $2.1 million apiece. But guaranteeing and prorating the bonus removes it from the 30 percent rule calculation, making his maximum increase a mere $163,500 per season, starting from $545,000 in 2006. His pay cut would be monumental -- more than $39 million, plus incentives.

In order for the Skins to comply with the 30 percent rule without having Arrington agree to accept less money, they couldn't guarantee and prorate more than $2.045 million of his roster bonus. That would save $1,533,750 -- a far cry from the $4.875 million they'd be able to save if the CBA is extended before March. They'd also have to adjust his total salaries for 2007 through 2011, increasing it by $1.4 million for 2007, increasing it by $800,000 for 2008, increasing it by $200,000 for 2009, lowering it by $400,000 for 2010 and lowering it by $500,000 for 2011. That would give him the exact same amount of money, but distributed differently, and it would comply with the 30 percent rule. It would increase his cap numbers for 2007, 2008 and 2009, but in this case, at least 2007 would be uncapped, anyway. And if the cap returns after that, they can go back to prorating money and putting off the cap hits.

So, just in those two examples, unless Brunell and Arrington accept pay cuts, simply restructuring their contracts will save no more than $2,906,500 of cap room -- not anywhere close to the $7,297,500 suggested in the article.

[BAZ]

http://redskins.scout.com/2/490049.html

Cap Hell is just a myth. Every team has easy ways of getting out of cap problems.

We're just lucky enough to find a very easy solution.

No cap hell we can end this subject now.

While that list is nice, it doesn't mean it will be played out like that. They also have to sign FA's and draft picks.

They might not be in hell but they are not the best of either. Every franchise makes bad decisions and they can still make a balls of things.

[Gryphon]

Thanks for the info.

[Gryphon]

While that list is nice, it doesn't mean it will be played out like that. They also have to sign FA's and draft picks.

They might not be in hell but they are not the best of either. Every franchise makes bad decisions and they can still make a balls of things.

I hope so, especially with the Cap ending in 2007.

[BigDFan5]

Another thing with his list he is saying the Skins would have 12 mill in cap room, but fails to adress that he is 9 players short of 51 He is saying they would be 12 mill under with only 42 players

[Chuck 54]

They've managed to avoid cap problems so far by reworking contracts and cutting guys with big salaries who seem easily replaced. Arrington, Ramsey, and others will go this year...others will rework contracts...they have no first round pick to sign...did that with last year's money...just watch...they'll survive it.....#$%$#

[silverbear]

http://redskins.scout.com/2/490049.html

Cap Hell is just a myth. Every team has easy ways of getting out of cap problems.

We're just lucky enough to find a very easy solution.

No cap hell we can end this subject now.

Gryph, that article is an old one, that has been posted on these boards before... problem is, the guy makes a whole bunch of highly optimistic/improbable assumptions that render the whole exercise specious... I have dissected that article before, and won't go to all the time and trouble of pointing out its fallacies to you again, except to point out a couple-three of the more egregious mistakes contained therein... those should be sufficient to cause you to look suspiciously at the rest of his theories... note that I pointed out my criticisms to the author directly, and he never bothered to dispute my arguments:

1) PcinOz (that's the online name of Robert Large) is a Skins fan, not a capologist... you need to keep that in mind, you're reading the musings of a Skins fan, not an acknowledged expert on the cap... he starts out badly, talking about how the top 48 salaries on the Skins total up to 113.8 million, thus the Skins are "only" 18.8 million over the cap... problem is, when calculating a team's situation versus the cap in the offseason, you total up the top FIFTY ONE salaries on your roster... so even if those other 3 contracts are street free agent minimum wage-type deals (as is likely), you need to add another half mil, maybe more, to the deficit...

A minor thing, perhaps, but indicative of the slipshod approach PC took to his flight of fancy...

2) PcinOz totally neglected to factor in what happens if the league and the NFLPA does not reach a new collective bargaining agreement in the next 17 days... if that does not happen, the Skins' ability to convert base salary into signing bonus, thus spreading that base salary out over x number of years, will be eliminated altogether... he has allotted nearly 7 million dollars in cap savings for such moves...

In case you're not up on why that is, let me explain how it works-- if there is no CBA in place by March 1st, something called the Rule of 30 Percent kicks in... this rule specifices that a player's base salary can only go up by 30 per cent per year...

So, if a player is currently making 5 mil a year, under the rule of 30 he could make 6.5 mil next year in base salary, 8.45 mil the following year... but if he allows the team to convert 4 million of that to signing bonus, leaving him a base of 1 million, then his 2nd year salary could only increase to 1.3 mil, then to 1.69 mil the following year... IOW, though he'd still be making the same 5 million in year 1, he'd be SEVERELY screwed in the following years... no player is gonna sit still for that, so you can expect that nobody would be willing to convert base salary to signing bonus absent a new CBA...

This might not happen, in fact I hope it doesn't happen, but his failure to factor that in renders his theorizing shaky at best...

3) Nowhere in his analysis does he factor in the price tag for re-signing their OWN free agents... there are a couple-three of them that they're gonna want to bring back, and that will cut into their cap...

Those are three of the more glaring flaws in that "analysis"... he's also quite vague in places about specifics:

"Other smaller amounts from various players – save $1.7m"

"This is by no mean an exhaustive list, but just the major savers."

It's not an "exhaustive list", it just considers 15 of the 48 players he has on the roster... LOL...

Again, I pointed out all of these criticisms-- and more-- to the guy, and his response was a deafening silence... I wasn't rude, I like him, and I tried not to be confrontational, but his lack of response suggested to me that he hadn't considered the things I'd pointed out...

Now, I'm not saying that the Skins are going into "cap hell", I don't think they're quite there yet... but by the time they do enough roster maneuvering to get under the cap, there won't be much left for any moves in free agency... and as I pointed out the first time around, the party line out of Redskins Park, from Joe Gibbs right on down to the players, is that the top priority this year is going to be to keep the current roster together... to me, this is the Skins telling their fans that they shouldn't expect them to be major players in free agency this offseason, and the reason for that is cap constraints... they may be good for a couple-three lesser free agent moves, but unless they're contemplating some unexpected, highly draconian cuts, they won't have the wherewithal to pursue the top name, top dollar free agents...

It ain't cap hell, but I'd call it cap heck, LOL...

[AdamJT13]

I've explained to PCinOz that his plan for the Redskins won't be possible if the CBA isn't extended (thus eliminating the 30 percent rule) unless the Skins find players who are willing to take major pay cuts with no guarantee of getting anything in return. He's convinced the players will be willing to do it, because they know Daniel Snyder will make up for it in the future.

[silverbear]

I've explained to PCinOz that his plan for the Redskins won't be possible if the CBA isn't extended (thus eliminating the 30 percent rule) unless the Skins find players who are willing to take major pay cuts with no guarantee of getting anything in return. He's convinced the players will be willing to do it, because they know Daniel Snyder will make up for it in the future.

Ahhh, that ol' starry-eyed dreamer... :D

[burmafrd]

I always ask these morons this question: The NFL, if nothing else, is known as a copy cat league. If one team is successful doing something a certain way, others follow. So why is it that NO OTHER TEAM does what the skins do - not even close. Because they know that sooner or later it will all fall down and you will spend years as a total doormat. Simple as that.

[mbanx]

I've explained to PCinOz that his plan for the Redskins won't be possible if the CBA isn't extended (thus eliminating the 30 percent rule) unless the Skins find players who are willing to take major pay cuts with no guarantee of getting anything in return. He's convinced the players will be willing to do it, because they know Daniel Snyder will make up for it in the future.

Breaking news: AdamJT13 is really Stephen Jones:D

[RiggoForever]

I always ask these morons this question: The NFL, if nothing else, is known as a copy cat league. If one team is successful doing something a certain way, others follow. So why is it that NO OTHER TEAM does what the skins do - not even close. Because they know that sooner or later it will all fall down and you will spend years as a total doormat. Simple as that.

Actually Denver has been doing what we do, we have been in "cap hell" for the past couple of years, yet our success on the field has proven itself.

[burmafrd]

No one goes to the lengths the skins do. Not even close.

[dstew60105]

Actually Denver has been doing what we do, we have been in "cap hell" for the past couple of years, yet our success on the field has proven itself.

What success on the field? The Redskins have been doormats for as long as I can remember. This year was a fluke.

[lcharles]

Adam Is Stephen Jones? :eek: :bow:

[david_jackson]

I wouldn't be at all surprised to read soon that the CBA has been extended and that the % of shared revenue going to the players via the cap will increase. Unfortunately for Cowboy fans this give the Skins additional cap dollars to leverage. If this happens Cap Hell is postponed for several years or they could change thier practices (not likely) and smooth out thier diffuiculties over several years to become an inconvenince.

If I were a betting man I would bet the CBA will be extended and the Redskins wll continue current proctices and go into cap hell in abouth 2009 or 2010.

[preacher238]

Actually Denver has been doing what we do, we have been in "cap hell" for the past couple of years, yet our success on the field has proven itself.

???:lmao2:

Are you high?? A winning record, this year only, qualifies as success on the field?? You, moron, are high!

[clayman]

???:lmao2:

Are you high?? A winning record, this year only, qualifies as success on the field?? You, moron, are high!

High yes but not a moron. The Skins under Joe Gibbs have become a more structured team that could lead to continued success. They have cut malcontents even by taking a cap hit (see Coles who is off their books now) and have been taking a quieter approach to free agency by looking for blue collar type additions (rabach, patten) that aren't way costly stars and building a team aura in the likes of NE where no one person makes the team. Not comparing them to NE of the past 5 yrs just stating it looks as though they are more team focused thru consistency of players and coaches and not just costly stars at every position. They could regress and crumble but Gibbs builds organizations (see Gibbs 1.0 and his Nascar team) that tend to last and he is definitely intent on leaving the franchise as a whole better off for the future than after his first time around.

[leotisbrown]

That PC in Oz a knucklehead type who dont not understand the minushia of the salary caps with details insight to boot.

I laughs at his lacking inteligents.

Cap hell for the Skins begin in 2006!!!

[silverbear]

I wouldn't be at all surprised to read soon that the CBA has been extended and that the % of shared revenue going to the players via the cap will increase. Unfortunately for Cowboy fans this give the Skins additional cap dollars to leverage.

Yeah, but it'll give us equal additional cap dollars... I'll take my chances with that... the Boys will still be in the more enviable cap situation...

[david_jackson]

I like our chances too. Unfortunately that would keep them out of cap hell for awhile though. That would be very unfortunate as I was really looking forward to watchng them struggle with the cap this year!

[AsthmaField]

and have been taking a quieter approach to free agency by looking for blue collar type additions (rabach, patten) that aren't way costly stars

It's funny. All skins fans are saying this same thing.

However, the Redskins didn't take a quieter approach by design... they simply didn't have the cap room to do anything more than sign a couple of role players.

They couldn't even keep Smoot/Pierce who they needed. Had they been able to keep Smoot, they could've used last years 9th overall draft pick on Merriman or Ware instead of Rogers. That would've given them the edge rusher they so desperately need and given them a better combo at CB than they had last year (Harris/Rogers and Springs).

It's a pretty transparent attempt to make themselves feel better when Skins fans start saying they took a low-key approach. The team just didn't have the cap dollars to do any more than they did.

[RiggoForever]

What success on the field? The Redskins have been doormats for as long as I can remember. This year was a fluke.

Doormats before Joe Gibbs came back, yes. If we bomb in 2006, and the year after I'll concede this year was a fluke. But we are on an upswing as far as I'm concerned.

[RiggoForever]

???:lmao2:

Are you high?? A winning record, this year only, qualifies as success on the field?? You, moron, are high!


Denver has had success for many years...and Joe Gibbs taking a 6-10 team that went 1-5 in the NFC East to a 10-6 team that went 5-1 in the division in my mind, with a win in the playoffs, qualifies as success.

All I have to say is that we are now a legitimate contender, a threat in the NFL. You can't expect your two freebie wins when you play us anymore, not anymore.

The rivalry is back and fiercer then ever.

[RiggoForever]

It's funny. All skins fans are saying this same thing.

However, the Redskins didn't take a quieter approach by design... they simply didn't have the cap room to do anything more than sign a couple of role players.

They couldn't even keep Smoot/Pierce who they needed. Had they been able to keep Smoot, they could've used last years 9th overall draft pick on Merriman or Ware instead of Rogers. That would've given them the edge rusher they so desperately need and given them a better combo at CB than they had last year (Harris/Rogers and Springs).

It's a pretty transparent attempt to make themselves feel better when Skins fans start saying they took a low-key approach. The team just didn't have the cap dollars to do any more than they did.

Can't argue with the results of the moves we have made in the past 2 years, and the major trades Coles for Moss and Bailey for Portis...have made a pathetic offense respectable again.

[clayman]

It's funny. All skins fans are saying this same thing.

However, the Redskins didn't take a quieter approach by design... they simply didn't have the cap room to do anything more than sign a couple of role players.

They couldn't even keep Smoot/Pierce who they needed. Had they been able to keep Smoot, they could've used last years 9th overall draft pick on Merriman or Ware instead of Rogers. That would've given them the edge rusher they so desperately need and given them a better combo at CB than they had last year (Harris/Rogers and Springs).

It's a pretty transparent attempt to make themselves feel better when Skins fans start saying they took a low-key approach. The team just didn't have the cap dollars to do any more than they did.



Considering I am not a Skins fan that is funny...I am just a realist yet loyal to my Boyz. Put it this way, would you have paid Smoot or Pierce MORE money than their Pro Bowl counterparts Springs or Marcus Washington???? I don't think any sane person would have done that...its fiscally irresponsible and would set a tone and bad taste over the two probowl players and the roster in general. If you look at the offers given to both players they weren't insults just not as gawdy as what the received elsewhere so Kudos to them as this is a league that the career span isn't too long so players have to get their money when they can. But continue to paint anyone as not blindly loyal to the Boyz as a Skins fan if you must. Carry on.

[AsthmaField]

Can't argue with the results of the moves we have made in the past 2 years, and the major trades Coles for Moss and Bailey for Portis...have made a pathetic offense respectable again.

Getting Portis and Moss has helped the offense get better. The last couple of games this year showed that you still have a long way to go on offense though.

Now, should the skins have made the Bailey - Portis trade? I don't think so, because running back is probably the easiest position to find a good player at, IMO. Good backs can be found all the way to the 3rd and 4th rounds.

Take Marion Barber III for example. I think Gibbs would love to have him and I think he'd be very good in Gibbs system. He's tough and had plenty of speed and power. Parcells picked him up in the 4th round... and the fact is, you can find guys like him all day long. I know that many Redskins fans have questioned if Betts might not be a better fit in Gibbs system. Do I think that? No, but the difference would be small enough as to probably not matter. Throw in Portis' quirky, gansta nature, and his incredibly high salary and I think it was foolish to trade for Portis. He's just not that much better than most NFL backs.

Bailey would've been fine staying in DC if you guys would've paid him and to me, CB is one position that you should pony up the $$ for... whereas RB just isn't. You'll see that teams agree this year when S. Alexander and E. James are cut loose from their respective teams. RB's are just too easy to come by to break the bank for one.

Had the skins played it smart, here's what they would've done. And this really isn't hindsight because it's all things that are just common sense with how it should be done in the NFL.

First, they would've paid the big money to Bailey instead of Arrington. It's common sense and pretty much convention around the NFL that real good corners are pretty had to come by and is a position that you pay at. On the other hand, 4-3 LB's are a dime a dozen. Just get an instinctive, fast athlete and plug him in and you're good to go. In the 4-3, the sacks come primarily from the DL while the LB's simply cover the backs and TE's and make tackles in the run game. Dexter Coakley, Antonio Pierce, Randall Godfrey and Johnathan Vilma are all good examples of this. You can find good one's from round 1 all the way to round 4 or 5. They're usually available in free agency too. They're just too easy to come by to spend big dollars on one. That's not just my opinon either... it's pretty much convention in the NFL.

So I'm not sure why the skins decided to pay the huge contract to Arrington and let Bailey go.

Had they paid Bailey and not Lavar, they wouldn't have traded for Portis, but that wouldn't be a big deal since good backs are pretty easy to find. They could've then taken the money they spent on Shawn Springs and instead spent it on a free agent RB, or taken the 2nd round pick they used for Portis and find a running back like say Tatum Bell or with a little manuevering Steven Jackson (who would be dynamite in Gibbs sytem).

Without Portis' huge contract, the would've then had money to spend on Pierce and Smoot this season and so would've had a very good pair of CB's and a very good MLB instead of going with whoever at MLB and Harris at CB.

Then, with no need to draft Rogers last year, they could've gone with Merriman or Ware at DE at pick #9... maybe even Mike Williams who would be a great complement to Moss at the other WR spot.

So, by paying Champ istead of Lavar, they could've ended up with:

Bailey and Smoot at CB.
Pierce at MLB.
Steven Jackson or Tatum Bell at RB.
Shawne Merriman at DE next to Griffin.
or
Mike Williams at the 2nd WR spot.
and
More cap space.

Instead they have:
Springs and Rogers at CB.
Marshall at MLB
Portis at RB
Nobody at DE.
or
Nobody at the 2nd WR spot.
Very little cap space.

Still, that isn't what I was talking about. I was saying that so many skins fans say they got smart and didn't go on a spending spree this year when in reality, they simply didn't have the money to do much. In other words... the skins may not be in cap hell... but they're at least in cap purgatory.

[AsthmaField]

Put it this way, would you have paid Smoot or Pierce MORE money than their Pro Bowl counterparts Springs or Marcus Washington???? I don't think any sane person would have done that...its fiscally irresponsible and would set a tone and bad taste over the two probowl players and the roster in general. If you look at the offers given to both players they weren't insults just not as gawdy as what the received elsewhere so Kudos to them as this is a league that the career span isn't too long so players have to get their money when they can. But continue to paint anyone as not blindly loyal to the Boyz as a Skins fan if you must. Carry on.

That's BS. Every year salaries go up and if they had to pay a little more to Smoot than to Springs to keep him then that's what they should've done. Look at what Dallas paid for Henry. Look what Lucas got... look what Baxter got. That was just the going rate for good corners in last years free agent market. Springs apparently was happy with what he signed for... Smoot's contract would've been exclusive of Springs' contract. If players got upset over that, the whole league would always be mad.

Gibbs and the skins were saying they didn't want to pay Smoot more that Springs when the truth is, they just didn't have the money and they were spinning to the media... which I can tell you bought hook, line and sinker. What were they supposed to say? We spent irresposibly over the past few years and now we can't afford to pay Smoot and Pierce? No, they're not going to say that.

Those two guys would've helped, and if they didn't have to go CB with the 9th pick they could've either gotten the 2nd WR they so desperately needed or they could've gotten the edge rusher they lack.

Considering I am not a Skins fan that is funny...I am just a realist yet loyal to my Boyz. But continue to paint anyone as not blindly loyal to the Boyz as a Skins fan if you must. Carry on.

I never called you a skins fan... I simply used your quote to show how skins fans are always saying they were frugal when they were cheap because they had no money to spend. By your line of thinking, the homeless people who are sleeping in the streets must be financially brilliant.

How am I being blindly loyal to the Cowboys when I'm not even talking about them? I'm talking about the Redskins and their cap situation.

And thanks for letting me know that I could carry on... I've been waiting to get your OK on that all day.

[Bob Sacamano]

have been taking a quieter approach to free agency by looking for blue collar type additions (rabach, patten)

you lost all credibility when you brought up Patten :laugh2:

that's all the Skins are able to do, it wasn't planned, it came about because of circumstance...Daniel Snyder

[Yakuza Rich]

For the most part, I could care less what team is or isn't in cap hell. I'm more concerned about Dallas being a good team and from there, I'll let the cards fall where they may. You're not going to make the Super Bowl by having every team roll over for you.

Even still, PCinOz's plan is rather preposterous and I don't know why they still have his article up on scout.com Web site. And even with that, I'd say that that in the past 10 years the Super Bowl teams were made by their quality drafting and development of young, and rather cheaply priced free agents.


Rich..................

[Bob Sacamano]

It's funny. All skins fans are saying this same thing.

However, the Redskins didn't take a quieter approach by design... they simply didn't have the cap room to do anything more than sign a couple of role players.

They couldn't even keep Smoot/Pierce who they needed. Had they been able to keep Smoot, they could've used last years 9th overall draft pick on Merriman or Ware instead of Rogers. That would've given them the edge rusher they so desperately need and given them a better combo at CB than they had last year (Harris/Rogers and Springs).

It's a pretty transparent attempt to make themselves feel better when Skins fans start saying they took a low-key approach. The team just didn't have the cap dollars to do any more than they did.

:hammer:

losing Smoot and Pierce, isn't exactly what I call, "keeping the core together"

[Bob Sacamano]

have made a pathetic offense respectable again.

we saw your "respectable" offense in the playoffs...

[Bob Sacamano]

would you have paid Smoot or Pierce MORE money than their Pro Bowl counterparts Springs or Marcus Washington????

well, isn't that trying to keep the core together? see, Gibbs saying he wants to keep the core together is just what Silverbear said, a euphanism, a euphanism for, "we have no money to spend"

[RiggoForever]

Getting Portis and Moss has helped the offense get better. The last couple of games this year showed that you still have a long way to go on offense though.

Now, should the skins have made the Bailey - Portis trade? I don't think so, because running back is probably the easiest position to find a good player at, IMO. Good backs can be found all the way to the 3rd and 4th rounds.

Take Marion Barber III for example. I think Gibbs would love to have him and I think he'd be very good in Gibbs system. He's tough and had plenty of speed and power. Parcells picked him up in the 4th round... and the fact is, you can find guys like him all day long. I know that many Redskins fans have questioned if Betts might not be a better fit in Gibbs system. Do I think that? No, but the difference would be small enough as to probably not matter. Throw in Portis' quirky, gansta nature, and his incredibly high salary and I think it was foolish to trade for Portis. He's just not that much better than most NFL backs.

Bailey would've been fine staying in DC if you guys would've paid him and to me, CB is one position that you should pony up the $$ for... whereas RB just isn't. You'll see that teams agree this year when S. Alexander and E. James are cut loose from their respective teams. RB's are just too easy to come by to break the bank for one.

Had the skins played it smart, here's what they would've done. And this really isn't hindsight because it's all things that are just common sense with how it should be done in the NFL.

First, they would've paid the big money to Bailey instead of Arrington. It's common sense and pretty much convention around the NFL that real good corners are pretty had to come by and is a position that you pay at. On the other hand, 4-3 LB's are a dime a dozen. Just get an instinctive, fast athlete and plug him in and you're good to go. In the 4-3, the sacks come primarily from the DL while the LB's simply cover the backs and TE's and make tackles in the run game. Dexter Coakley, Antonio Pierce, Randall Godfrey and Johnathan Vilma are all good examples of this. You can find good one's from round 1 all the way to round 4 or 5. They're usually available in free agency too. They're just too easy to come by to spend big dollars on one. That's not just my opinon either... it's pretty much convention in the NFL.

So I'm not sure why the skins decided to pay the huge contract to Arrington and let Bailey go.

Had they paid Bailey and not Lavar, they wouldn't have traded for Portis, but that wouldn't be a big deal since good backs are pretty easy to find. They could've then taken the money they spent on Shawn Springs and instead spent it on a free agent RB, or taken the 2nd round pick they used for Portis and find a running back like say Tatum Bell or with a little manuevering Steven Jackson (who would be dynamite in Gibbs sytem).

Without Portis' huge contract, the would've then had money to spend on Pierce and Smoot this season and so would've had a very good pair of CB's and a very good MLB instead of going with whoever at MLB and Harris at CB.

Then, with no need to draft Rogers last year, they could've gone with Merriman or Ware at DE at pick #9... maybe even Mike Williams who would be a great complement to Moss at the other WR spot.

So, by paying Champ istead of Lavar, they could've ended up with:

Bailey and Smoot at CB.
Pierce at MLB.
Steven Jackson or Tatum Bell at RB.
Shawne Merriman at DE next to Griffin.
or
Mike Williams at the 2nd WR spot.
and
More cap space.

Instead they have:
Springs and Rogers at CB.
Marshall at MLB
Portis at RB
Nobody at DE.
or
Nobody at the 2nd WR spot.
Very little cap space.

Still, that isn't what I was talking about. I was saying that so many skins fans say they got smart and didn't go on a spending spree this year when in reality, they simply didn't have the money to do much. In other words... the skins may not be in cap hell... but they're at least in cap purgatory.

Are you Bobby Beathard?

[RiggoForever]

we saw your "respectable" offense in the playoffs...

I just knew you were gonna say that. Our offense was ranked #11 in the NFL which is alot better then #24 in the 2004 season. To me, losing to the #1 seed, at their place, coming off a tough physical game and battling injury, isn't an embarrassment.

I can't wait for next season to begin...would love to discuss games with you guys as the season goes along.

[RiggoForever]

well, isn't that trying to keep the core together? see, Gibbs saying he wants to keep the core together is just what Silverbear said, a euphanism, a euphanism for, "we have no money to spend"

Isn't keeping the core together tantamount to success? After all its what all the great dynasties have done.

[Bizwah]

I have to agree with YR....I really don't care about how other teams measure up against the cap. All I care about is us having a good team again.

I think we're darn close. Actually, I think we're a Flo knee injury away from a birth in the NFC Championship game.

About Cap-Hell. I just don't think it exists anymore....at least not how we went through it. The cap was new when we won our last SB. It's sad, but we were just too good. There was no way to keep all of our good players. JJ did his best, but even though we could keep our core of superstars, we couldn't keep quality supporting players. Teams hadn't figured out how to massage the cap.

Now teams do.......I don't see why we're on pins and needles waiting for the Skins to fall into the abyss. They won't. I think Snyder and Co. have it figured out. Whether their system is legit or not, I can't tell. There may be some "under-the-table" dealings.

But it works.....

[Idgit]

Isn't keeping the core together tantamount to success? After all its what all the great dynasties have done.

I suppose it depends on the core. To answer your question, yes, we kept our cores together for our great dynasties.

[clayman]

You got me on David Patten....I site corrected. :) but it wasn't like Brunell would look past Moss, Cooley and a RB....but good point...Patten was not the player they envisioned as #2 and that was great for us.

[Bob Sacamano]

Isn't keeping the core together tantamount to success? After all its what all the great dynasties have done.

Gibbs is talking about keeping the core together, but they couldn't afford to spend money to retain Smoot and Pierce, c'mon now, it's a euphanism, a very nice way of calmly saying, "we're broke", cuz you're basically broke, you're on a very expensive budget, remember that commercial about the guy with all the nice stuff, and he's like, "how do I do it? I'm in debt up to my eyeballs", that's your guy's situation hehe

[Fmart322]

Here's something I dug up @ the post.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/18/AR2006011802276.html

[BigDFan5]

Here's something I dug up @ the post.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/18/AR2006011802276.html

That article has bween debunked also, nowhere does it say what happens if the CBA is not extended

[Fmart322]

They also don't give a single name either. Plus they have to have everyone fall in line for it to work for them. I guess if you TRY to get it out there for everyone to see it, they'll beleive it. ;)

[RiggoForever]

http://dallascowboyszone.com/forums/showpost.php?p=705187&postcount=26


The article was already debunked by our very own Adam


If the CBA is not extended, and 2007 is an uncapped year, we just restructure contracts via the 30% rule, then create new contracts for the 2007 season with no cap.

[BigDFan5]

If the CBA is not extended, and 2007 is an uncapped year, we just restructure contracts via the 30% rule, then create new contracts for the 2007 season with no cap.

Sounds nice to bad thats not how it works

[jterrell]

The problem really lies in the obvious: The sKins have been in cap hell much of the last 5 years and every move makes it worse not better.

They had 1 professional WR this year. When they benched Arrington they had a solid defense but didn't make many plays then he comes back and they are vastly better. But to Redskins fans this guy sucks and will be no loss if cut. hahaha. That is cap hell.

Ramsey is a decent prospect and a very good NFL backup. The Skins are looking to move him for a box of rocks because they can't afford him.

So all in all even if all these players get base converted to SB and magical cap savings appear the Skins will be mortgaging the future for a shot at a Super Bowl. And it hasn't worked any of the other 5 times they have tried; in fact they have only made the playoffs in 1 of those attempts and amazingly that came the year after they stopped trying that madness.

The Skins are not adding solid free agents. They are trading for them. They lack depth and youth and traditional building blocks. In short they are just a poorly run team where the cap is concerned.

The only 2 Super Bowl teams who havent been good drafting teams in the last 5 or 6 years were the Raiders and Bucs and those teams got 1 shot a piece then hit toiletsville. You simply can not sustain a decent much less winning team without drafting. The Skins dont even have picks much less good ones.

[Cowboys&Caps]

I hope so, especially with the Cap ending in 2007.


not gonna happen

[RiggoForever]

The problem really lies in the obvious: The sKins have been in cap hell much of the last 5 years and every move makes it worse not better.

They had 1 professional WR this year. When they benched Arrington they had a solid defense but didn't make many plays then he comes back and they are vastly better. But to Redskins fans this guy sucks and will be no loss if cut. hahaha. That is cap hell.

Ramsey is a decent prospect and a very good NFL backup. The Skins are looking to move him for a box of rocks because they can't afford him.

So all in all even if all these players get base converted to SB and magical cap savings appear the Skins will be mortgaging the future for a shot at a Super Bowl. And it hasn't worked any of the other 5 times they have tried; in fact they have only made the playoffs in 1 of those attempts and amazingly that came the year after they stopped trying that madness.

The Skins are not adding solid free agents. They are trading for them. They lack depth and youth and traditional building blocks. In short they are just a poorly run team where the cap is concerned.

The only 2 Super Bowl teams who havent been good drafting teams in the last 5 or 6 years were the Raiders and Bucs and those teams got 1 shot a piece then hit toiletsville. You simply can not sustain a decent much less winning team without drafting. The Skins dont even have picks much less good ones.

Dude, never said that Lavar sucks...but we did have an even higher ranked defense in 2004 when he was basically out the whole season with injury.

[Yakuza Rich]

The only 2 Super Bowl teams who havent been good drafting teams in the last 5 or 6 years were the Raiders and Bucs and those teams got 1 shot a piece then hit toiletsville. You simply can not sustain a decent much less winning team without drafting. The Skins dont even have picks much less good ones.

The Bucs actually drafted very well over the years before they won the Super Bowl, especially on defense. Practically their entire defense, sans Simeon Rice, were guys they drafted.

However, they lost a lot of picks by making Gruden their head coach and that wound up hurting them because in the subsequent years they eventually lost their best players and they weren't able to find suitable replacements. It wasn't until this year that they got better again. And you guessed it, that was largely due to them building up through the draft again.

The 2002 Raiders weren't as free agent prone as many would think. By my count, 13 of their 22 starters were guys they had drafted. And that also doesn't include guys like Jerry Porter, Phillip Buchanon, Shane Lechler, and Sebastian Janikowski.

Right now, only 6 out of their 22 Redskins starters are guys the Skins drafted. (Doesn't include Carlos Rogers).

Rich.......

[RiggoForever]

The Bucs actually drafted very well over the years before they won the Super Bowl, especially on defense. Practically their entire defense, sans Simeon Rice, were guys they drafted.

However, they lost a lot of picks by making Gruden their head coach and that wound up hurting them because in the subsequent years they eventually lost their best players and they weren't able to find suitable replacements. It wasn't until this year that they got better again. And you guessed it, that was largely due to them building up through the draft again.

The 2002 Raiders weren't as free agent prone as many would think. By my count, 13 of their 22 starters were guys they had drafted. And that also doesn't include guys like Jerry Porter, Phillip Buchanon, Shane Lechler, and Sebastian Janikowski.

Right now, only 6 out of their 22 Redskins starters are guys the Skins drafted. (Doesn't include Carlos Rogers).

Rich.......

We have drafted or picked up undrafted the following starters/major role players, actually 9:

Lavar Arrington
Ladell Betts (starts in 2 RB sets)
Chris Cooley
Derrick Dockery
Taylor Jacobs
Jon Jansen
Carlos Rogers
Robert Royal
Sean Taylor

[Bob Sacamano]

Taylor Jacobs

:laugh2: :laugh1: :lmao2: :lmao:

[RiggoForever]

:laugh2: :laugh1: :lmao2: :lmao:

Yeah yeah yeah hes a bust I know lol. He was a Spurrier pick though and he saw him through rose-colored glasses as a former Gator.

[KINGBRICE_28]

I'm not going to read all this crap again but if you ARE still talking about cap ****

Adam is right......:) I remember that thread.....

[CowboyMark]

I hope so, especially with the Cap ending in 2007.
Cool now the cowboys can have another dynasty. One dynasty after another.