Washington Post:T eam's Cap May Come to a Head

[LaTunaNostra]

Long, but A GOOD ONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
____________________________________)

Team's Cap May Come to a Head

Many Skeptical That Commanders Can Spend Now Without Paying Later
By Jason La Canfora and Nunyo Demasio

Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, July 18, 2004

After another offseason of lavish spending on free agents, the Washington Commanders have assembled the highest-paid team in NFL history, leading officials with several NFL teams to predict that Coach Joe Gibbs has a two-year window to win a fourth Super Bowl before facing a salary cap crisis that would force him to jettison many of his best players.

Officials around the NFL are watching the developments in Washington with interest, several of them said, as Commanders owner Daniel Snyder pushes the boundaries of the salary cap, the annual limit on the amount each team can spend on salaries and bonuses, by deferring payments until the out-years of players' contracts.

The Commanders' payroll in 2004 will exceed $110 million, breaking the previous record of $102 million set by the Denver Broncos in 2001, according to the NFL Players Association, but through prorated bonuses and other accounting devices Washington still will manage to come in under this year's $80.6 million salary cap. The average NFL payroll last season was $71.77 million.

Commanders officials refute the notion that they are mortgaging the team's future and say they are positioned to avoid running up against cap problems at least through 2007.

"Every move we make is done looking three years down the road," said Vinny Cerrato, Washington's vice president of football operations. "When we sign a free agent we know exactly how it's going to affect us and how it will count against the salary cap, and we're not going to do something that will put us in salary-cap jail or salary-cap hell."

Yet, several officials from other NFL clubs who have looked at Washington's salary structure said they believe the bills on the Commanders' offseason spending will come due sooner than the Washington front office predicts.

"To me what they're saying is they are banking on really winning in the next two years," said an executive who manages the salary cap for one NFL club, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "They just aren't going to be able to keep all those guys, they really aren't. There's nothing wrong with building for a run to the Super Bowl, but you're only kidding yourself to say you're not going to suffer the consequences of overextending in the free agent market. It's mathematically impossible."

Whether the Commanders' strategy pays off remains to be seen. But with the team preparing to open training camp on July 31, an examination of its salary structure provides a window into how the NFL salary cap system works and how Snyder has sought to push its limits.

The salary cap was created in 1993 -- the year after Gibbs first retired -- as part of an agreement between NFL owners and the players' association. The concept was simple: Players gained the right to become free agents in exchange for allowing the league to limit the amount each team could spend on salaries each year. The cap is credited as a major reason for the NFL's competitive balance and financial success, and other professional sports leagues hold it up as a model for limiting salary escalation and promoting competition.

While the idea behind the cap was relatively straightforward, its execution has become exceedingly complex as teams experiment with ways to manipulate it. In recent years, for example, the league has been forced to add specific restrictions on teams providing perks such as free trips or transportation to circumvent the limit. The salary cap has spawned a new breed of NFL executive, the cap expert, a position that requires the cunning of a lawyer, the wiles of an accountant and the football instincts of a general manager. Careful management of the cap has become a prerequisite for success on the field.

As teams have learned to massage the cap, they have found more creative ways to assemble highly paid talent and still stay within its limits. It has become routine for clubs to give star players healthy signing bonuses that, for bookkeeping purposes, are prorated annually for several years, while paying them minimal base salaries. The prorated bonuses and small base salaries work to lessen, or delay, the full impact on the cap.

This season, all 32 NFL teams must be under an $80.6 million salary cap, but in reality teams are able to spend well beyond that -- this is referred to as spending cash over the cap -- given the way signing bonuses are computed.

The problem is that deferred payments cannot be pushed down the road forever. They ultimately come due. And, according to a variety of NFL experts, no team owner has been more proactive in trying to structure cap-friendly contracts that delay the eventual financial consequences than Snyder since he bought the Commanders five years ago.

"It doesn't surprise me at all [the way the Commanders have operated], and it's all worth it if you have a winning team," said Jerry Jones, who has won three Super Bowls as owner of the Dallas Cowboys. "I'm not criticizing the Commanders at all for spending. I've done it both ways: I've spent a lot of money and not won anything at all, and I've spent a lot of money and really gone for it and won it all.

Page 2 of 4
Team's Cap May Come to a Head

"I've watched with interest what the Commanders have done for the last four or five offseasons, especially because of our great rivalry and all that comes with it, but I also keep a close eye on what all of the teams in the league are doing in terms of the salary cap and how they make decisions with regard to the [economic] system we have in place. And there are mixed reviews around the league about how strong to go in spending over the cap."


Juggling Numbers

During the first three days of the NFL free agency period in March, the Commanders doled out $50 million in signing bonuses to six players -- quarterback Mark Brunell, running back Clinton Portis, defensive lineman Phillip Daniels, defensive tackle Cornelius Griffin, cornerback Shawn Springs and linebacker Marcus Washington. The Commanders also signed linebacker LaVar Arrington to an eight-year, $68 million contract extension in December. The deal led to an arbitration dispute between Arrington and the club, with Arrington claiming the team has reneged on paying him a $6.5 million bonus.

In all, the Commanders signed more than 30 free agents since last season ended, awarding them more than $70 million in bonus payments, according to team officials. And Washington still must sign safety Sean Taylor, its No. 1 draft pick, and two other selections.

Just how the Commanders can have a payroll well in excess of $110 million yet still fit under an $80.6 million salary cap illustrates how the cap system works, and how it ultimately could come back to haunt the team.

"There are always guys that are here and gone because of cap reasons," said offensive lineman Jon Jansen, the Commanders' longest-serving player. "But we're in the business of trying to win now. I'm sure down the road we'll have to make some difficult decisions and hopefully -- I don't know that much about it -- but hopefully they do, and they've got it figured out."

By design, the Commanders negotiated low base salaries in virtually all of its offseason contracts and rewarded the free agents with significant signing bonuses to minimize the salary cap impact, at least for the first few years. Signing bonuses are lump-sum payments made when the contract is signed, or in the early years of the contract. For salary cap purposes, however, they are often spread over the duration of the deal. Signing bonuses for players signed in 2004 can be prorated for a maximum of six years.

Contracts in the NFL are not guaranteed, and a player can be cut before any season, allowing teams to alleviate his salary cap hit; this explains why the market often is filled with quality free agents each offseason. However, even if a player is released, his original signing bonus is counted against the team's cap each year until the original contract expires.

The Commanders, among other teams, have added another wrinkle. To further minimize the cap impact, the Commanders often compensate free agents with bonuses scheduled to be paid in later years of their contracts in addition to the standard signing bonus. Washington structured an additional bonus, called a roster bonus, into all of its larger contracts this offseason, with the bulk of most of those bonuses slated to be paid in 2006. A roster bonus counts against the salary cap in its entirety for the season in which it is issued.

The abundance of roster bonuses for the 2006 season is the primary reason why league officials who have looked over the Commanders' contracts predict salary cap trouble for Washington that year.

This season, Portis, Brunell, Springs, Washington, Daniels and Griffin will combine for $13.17 million against the salary cap limit. That figure rises by a mere $10,000 in 2005. But in 2006, a steep increase begins due to roster bonuses. Arrington, Springs, Portis, Griffin, Washington and wide receiver Laveranues Coles, who was inked to a seven-year, $35 million deal a year ago, each has roster bonuses ranging between $2 million and $6.5 million due in 2006.

These roster bonuses would appear to be a major hurdle to staying under the salary cap, but the Commanders also worked language into the contracts that gives the team the option to convert the roster bonuses into a signing bonus when they come due. As a signing bonus, that money could then be prorated over the remainder of the contract, thus further deferring the impact on the salary cap, according to numerous sources who have seen the contracts.

This technique was first used by San Diego in 2000 when it re-signed linebacker Junior Seau, according to NFL sources, and was included in quarterback Payton Manning's new seven-year, $99 million contract with Indianapolis. But the Commanders have used this technique with much greater regularly than other teams, according to several executives with other NFL teams.

Commanders officials maintain that the club began to implement this contract structure two years ago after considerable study of the salary cap and applied it more broadly this offseason after Gibbs came out of retirement in January.

The Commanders' front office remains confident its contract maneuvers will ensure at least a three-year run with the current roster and allow for more free agent spending in future years if need be. "By the time we get to 2006 it will be clear that we knew what we were doing in 2004," Cerrato said.

Page 3 of 4
Team's Cap May Come to a Head

Snyder declined repeated requests to be interviewed for this story.

Several officials with other NFL clubs said they were skeptical Washington can pull it off.

"Our [personnel] guys say it's a two-year plan in Washington," said a high-ranking official of one NFL team who, like others, requested anonymity so as not to impede future dealings with the Commanders. "It could be they will cut some good veterans before then [2006] to try to stretch it out -- I don't know what they will do with a guy like [offensive lineman Chris] Samuels, for instance -- but ultimately you have to pay. You can't restructure forever." Samuels is entering the fifth year of a seven-year, $47 million deal.

"You have to recognize that if you are spending heavily in one year, it will be spread over for years from now, and you will have less money to spend in the future -- period. That is our system," said Jones, who had to raze an aging dynasty in Dallas after he could no longer fit all of his stars under the cap. "There is no amount of creativity or ingenuity that will allow you to overcome that fundamental reality. I've lived through it."

Can't Have it All

In 1997, Jones and the Cowboys had a day of reckoning.

The Cowboys had won three Super Bowls in four years and, with quarterback Troy Aikman, running back Emmitt Smith, wide receiver Michael Irvin and cornerback Deion Sanders, had the most star-studded lineup in the league. But years of eye-popping spending to keep these players took a toll, and Jones found his options under the salary cap becoming more limited.

The Cowboys' nucleus was declining, but Jones was still heavily invested in them. One season, a third of his salary cap was already tied up by old contracts of players who had been released by the team, he said, and no amount of finagling could change that fact.

"It's just like in everyday life," Jones said. "You can't always buy the most expensive thing all the time and still have enough money left over to spend on all the other things that you really need to get by. In our system you can't have it all."

The Cowboys, who had a winning season last year with virtually a no-name lineup led by new coach Bill Parcells, are not the only NFL club demonstrating a newfound sense of caution about overspending.

According to Joe Banner, Philadelphia's team president and salary cap guru, the league recently conducted a computer study to determine if there was any relationship between aggressive salary cap spending and winning.

"There was only one thing that really directly correlated with any consistency," Banner said, "and that was the teams with the smallest amount of miscellaneous charges made the playoffs and advanced in the playoffs, way more than the teams that had the larger miscellaneous charges."

In 2000, the Baltimore Ravens won their first Super Bowl and were loaded with veterans and facing cap problems. But they decided to sign free agent quarterback Elvis Grbac and push for back-to-back titles; instead, they lost early in the 2001 playoffs, had to release nearly all of their starters and entered the 2002 season with the youngest roster in NFL history.

"We did whatever we had to do with restructuring contracts to be able to make one more run," Ravens General Manager Ozzie Newsome said, "but we knew full well that we were going to have to blow things up after the 2001 season. If we would have tried to stretch it out for another year, all that would have done is taken us another few years longer to get back to becoming competitive again."

New York Giants General Manager Ernie Accorsi put it this way: "You can mortgage the future for the short term, but sooner or later you're going to have to pay for whatever you do. "

Page 4 of 4
Team's Cap May Come to a Head

Dead Money

Early in his tenure as Commanders owner, Snyder signed many veterans like Sanders, Jeff George and Mark Carrier whose best playing days were behind them. Many were not around long -- Sanders lasted one season -- but their large signing bonuses still counted against Washington's salary cap for years, eating up valuable room.

NFL people refer to this as "dead money" or "miscellaneous charges," and the Commanders faced as much as $27 million in such figures in one of Snyder's first seasons; last year the Commanders led the league with $14.5 million in dead money, according to league sources.

Snyder has altered his tactics in recent years. In the past two offseasons Washington has sought players in their mid-20s -- largely restricted free agents who require the Commanders to send their former teams a draft pick. Brunell, who turns 34 in September, is the lone exception. The 11-year veteran signed a seven-year, $43.36 million contract in February, including an $8.6 million signing bonus. The contract is prorated over six years, and will cost the club $1.43 million against the cap each year.

Commanders management projects a median age for the team of around 27 for the upcoming season; the league average in 2003 was 26.5.

"We've learned from our mistakes," one Washington team official said. "Look at the age of the players we sign now. There's the difference."

The Commanders generally have been able to steer clear of cap-induced salary purges under Snyder, although they have parted with pricey veterans with some regularity. Linebacker Jeremiah Trotter was cut in June to avert a more serious cap hit, and finances played an integral role in the decision to trade cornerback Champ Bailey to Denver for Portis. Quarterback Brad Johnson, tailback Stephen Davis and fullback Larry Centers have shined elsewhere after being salary cap casualties in Washington.

But those cuts have not deterred Snyder's spending this year. Snyder, who works on the salary cap daily and handles major contract negotiations, retains the final say on spending.

Gibbs, who is also the team president, said he took a "crash course" on the salary cap upon returning to the Commanders and knew he needed a sense of present day NFL economics after 11 years away from the game. His glory days in Washington came at a time when clubs could stockpile talent at all positions and retain players for virtually their entire career. Now, teams overhaul key players with regularity, and finances play a part in virtually every move an NFL club makes.

"I understand the basics of" the cap, Gibbs said. "I think I understand how to get more cap room, and I kind of see, 'Hey, we sign this guy now, and it impacts you down the road.' But like I've said, most of our stuff is a three-year plan, and I think I understand the general workings of it."

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Thanks Barb.

That was a good one!

 

[Henry]

LTN, from our conversation in the other thread:

Clearly the players the FO want to keep will have their roster bs converted to signing bs. So the hit can be somewhat delayed further. But there appears just too much due come 2006 not to consider that year the watershed. Rosters turn over quite a bit from year to year, but will Joe Gibbs have the energy to hang around to see a large number of the players he trained cut loose for another bunch of newbies?

Gibbs has said he wants to find about 15 players that he considers 'Commanders,' keep them as the core of the team, and let the rest turn over every couple years. That's pretty much how it went during his first tenure here. I'm guessing there will be a few players on the above list that Gibbs will decide do not, in fact, fit in with his philosophy *coughspringscough* and will be gone before those roster bonuses kick in. But like you, I'm guessing on a lot of this.

BTW, what's this buzz I keep hearing about Snyder selling the team in a few years anyway? Making a tidy profit then cashing it all in? Any truth to that? He certainly isn't a Mara or Rooney, generations of football families, and he doesn't seem to have the passionate love for all things football Jerry Jones and his son have, but it's a bit shocking to hear he may be in it just for the quick turnover.

Where did you hear this? I havent' heard anything about Snyder selling the team, but if you have, I'd be interested to know where. Snyder may have his shortcomings (ahem) but passion for the team has never been one of them.

 

[Danny White]

Gibbs has said he wants to find about 15 players that he considers 'Commanders,' keep them as the core of the team, and let the rest turn over every couple years. That's pretty much how it went during his first tenure here. I'm guessing there will be a few players on the above list that Gibbs will decide do not, in fact, fit in with his philosophy *coughspringscough* and will be gone before those roster bonuses kick in. But like you, I'm guessing on a lot of this.

I'm curious why he allowed Bailey to get away then. He was an elite player at a crucial position, and a high-character guy as well. I would have tried at all costs to keep him as part of my "core" if I were him.

I know there were problems between Champ and the team, but I'd have thought with Gibb's "aura" he could have patched that up.

Time will tell if Portis makes it all worthwhile. I just don't see him as a kind of "core" guy the way Bailey was.

I suppose Arrington is the #1 piece of the core, correct? Are you comfortable building the team around that guy?

I also would have pegged Ramsey as part of that core, but with Gibbs' early actions, he's kind of put him on the outs as well.

Who would you place as your 15-player core, if you were making the decisions?

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

I'm curious why he allowed Bailey to get away then. He was an elite player at a crucial position, and a high-character guy as well. I would have tried at all costs to keep him as part of my "core" if I were him.

I know there were problems between Champ and the team, but I'd have thought with Gibb's "aura" he could have patched that up.

Time will tell if Portis makes it all worthwhile. I just don't see him as a kind of "core" guy the way Bailey was.

I suppose Arrington is the #1 piece of the core, correct? Are you comfortable building the team around that guy?

I also would have pegged Ramsey as part of that core, but with Gibbs' early actions, he's kind of put him on the outs as well.

Who would you place as your 15-player core, if you were making the decisions?

Well....In Champs case...If you are the skins you either get something now...or nothing later.

They, from what I remembered, made him a very nice offer and he basically laughed at him and then made up his mind that he was not staying.

Now I still think it is funny that they gave up him AND a 2nd round pick...but in the end Champ basically had them over a barrel IMO.

 

[LaTunaNostra]

LTN, from our conversation in the other thread:



Gibbs has said he wants to find about 15 players that he considers 'Commanders,' keep them as the core of the team, and let the rest turn over every couple years. That's pretty much how it went during his first tenure here. I'm guessing there will be a few players on the above list that Gibbs will decide do not, in fact, fit in with his philosophy *coughspringscough* and will be gone before those roster bonuses kick in. But like you, I'm guessing on a lot of this.

Henry. In the year before the cap, Gibbs "pretty much" kept only 15 players in any given year? That doesn't sound right. That means in his first tenure he had the roster turning over by over two thirds? I guess what he means is 15 players is the core of starters and special teams guys and depth he just can't lose. But in all honesty, if it came down to losing 70% of his roster each year (which of course it will NOT), he'd retire again like any sane man would.

Where did you hear this? I havent' heard anything about Snyder selling the team, but if you have, I'd be interested to know where. Snyder may have his shortcomings (ahem) but passion for the team has never been one of them.

I first heard the scuttlebutt from a financial advisor (and no I most certainly don't run in Snyder's circles, lol) who knows I am a football fan . A while back, when Snyder restructured his debt, (a biggee even by big boy standards), he sold a fifth of the franchise via Banc of America management (BoA is into stadium funds financing) to three dudes, one of whom I know is the guy who founded Fed Ex. I think earlier Snyder had bought out a minority partner, I believe his name was Zuckerman.

I was told the Skins value is now over a cool billion and a half, and that some type a "corporate" buy out of Snyder is coming, the question is just when. The NFL has to okay new ownership, but this will just mean the trio of minority partners end up majority, and Snyder has some nominal input. These aren't your everyday minority partners. They are the primo wheeler and dealers.

The franchise is a cash cow that Snyder will most certainly take full advantage of but I was told Snyder isn't it it for the long haul. It's strictly "business".

I've also heard this rumour from Giants fans, whom I automatically discount.

 

[Danny White]

Well....In Champs case...If you are the skins you either get something now...or nothing later.

They, from what I remembered, made him a very nice offer and he basically laughed at him and then made up his mind that he was not staying.

Now I still think it is funny that they gave up him AND a 2nd round pick...but in the end Champ basically had them over a barrel IMO.

A "nice" offer might be something that you or I would jump at... but I think it was considerably less than what the Broncs ended up giving him.

He knew he was worth it, so he was understandably upset when Snyder didn't show him the love.

Still, if Gibbs is all he's cracked up to be (team savior) I think he could have changed Champs mind if he tried.

 

[Henry]

So Danny, you are of the opinion that everyone the Commanders released was an amazing player and everyone we signed or re-signed is a bum/headcase? How can I argue with that?

Gibbs has said he prefered Springs at less than half the price of Bailey. He's not sold on Ramsey. Those are his calls. You are free to disagree with them, but that doesn't mean he's lying when he says he wants to find a group of players to make up the core of his team.

I would like to note that I find it amusing that the very fans that were lambasting the Commanders for letting Davis go now find criticism in landing the best running back available this offseason. We've got a coach who's one of the best in the history of the business at establishing the run aquiring a top-flight, 22 year-old RB and there are still people out there questioning the reason? I really don't get that.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

So Danny, you are of the opinion that everyone the Commanders released was an amazing player and everyone we signed or re-signed is a bum/headcase? How can I argue with that?

Gibbs has said he prefered Springs at less than half the price of Bailey. He's not sold on Ramsey. Those are his calls. You are free to disagree with them, but that doesn't mean he's lying when he says he wants to find a group of players to make up the core of his team.

I would like to note that I find it amusing that the very fans that were lambasting the Commanders for letting Davis go now find criticism in landing the best running back available this offseason. We've got a coach who's one of the best in the history of the business at establishing the run aquiring a top-flight, 22 year-old RB and there are still people out there questioning the reason? I really don't get that.

Well....it IS funny...when you have a very good RB and let him go...only to turn around a year later and acquire another RB....of course that was just spurriers fault right? OK sure it was.

Secondly....lets make no mistake Portis is a good RB...the question becomes this...was he more of a product of the system.....I think he is very good, but his last system did not hurt...EITHER way you still get better by leaps and bounds then what you had last season.

THe thing is...you gave up one of the top CBs in the league for one of the top RBs last year....yet you also gave a 2nd round pick along with the top CB you had.

I would think even some hardcore Skins fans had to cringe at the idea of giving up both (one could argue) one of the top 3 CBs in the league AND a 2nd round pick...for a RB that is in the top ten (I doubt many other then Broncos fans then and skinz fans now would argue he is a top 3 rb).

 

[Danny White]

So Danny, you are of the opinion that everyone the Commanders released was an amazing player and everyone we signed or re-signed is a bum/headcase? How can I argue with that?

Gibbs has said he prefered Springs at less than half the price of Bailey. He's not sold on Ramsey. Those are his calls. You are free to disagree with them, but that doesn't mean he's lying when he says he wants to find a group of players to make up the core of his team.

I would like to note that I find it amusing that the very fans that were lambasting the Commanders for letting Davis go now find criticism in landing the best running back available this offseason. We've got a coach who's one of the best in the history of the business at establishing the run aquiring a top-flight, 22 year-old RB and there are still people out there questioning the reason? I really don't get that.

You're on to me! Abort mission! Abort mission!

Seriously, all I was saying is that if you're going to build a core, a shut down corner is a good place to start.

People were critical of letting Davis go because he had a great year last season, and you let him go over money. Then, because you let him go, you had to give up a draft pick for Trung, and now a franchise player for Portis.

It's going to be fun seeing the Fit hit the Shan if Portis can't duplicate his Denver numbers.

I'm still interested to hear your nominations for the core of the team.

Arrington
Coles
Portis
Taylor

Smoot?
Samuels?

Everyone else, (including the two question marks) seem very expendable.

 

[Henry]

Henry. In the year before the cap, Gibbs "pretty much" kept only 15 players in any given year? That doesn't sound right. That means in his first tenure he had the roster turning over by over two thirds? I guess what he means is 15 players is the core of starters and special teams guys and depth he just can't lose. But in all honesty, if it came down to losing 70% of his roster each year (which of course it will NOT), he'd retire again like any sane man would.

I don't think he meant every year. Just that the team would turn over, over the course of several years, but he'd make sure a certain few would remain. I assume he's planning on seeing some of his roster turn over next offseason, some more the offseason after that, etc. But that he'd peg a few players he'd like to keep. That is how it happened last time around. For example, when he won the SB in 1991 he only had one defensive player left from his 1982 SB team. That one player, Monte Coleman, was a core player. Coleman, even today, would never have commanded a huge contract from anyone, but he knew his job, did it well and stuck around. I have NO idea who those types of players are on this team. But Gibbs wants to find them. And he's good at it.

As far as Snyder selling the team, well, like I said I hadn't heard anything about it, so i can't really comment. It is certainly food for thought, though. In any event, I have not seen any lack of enthusiasm on Snyder's part. He has arguably made his share of mistakes, but I have never before seen any evidence to question his desire to field a winner.

 

[SoTex]

I would like to note that I find it amusing that the very fans that were lambasting the Commanders for letting Davis go now find criticism in landing the best running back available this offseason. We've got a coach who's one of the best in the history of the business at establishing the run aquiring a top-flight, 22 year-old RB and there are still people out there questioning the reason? I really don't get that.

I don't blame Gibbs for getting Portis. He was just playing the hand he was dealt. It would have been nice, however, to still have Davis (Historically, a Gibbs type back) and be able to keep Champ. I am unaware of the behind the scenes Champ situation. Maybe he would have left regardless. Gibbs being run oriented did what he thought was best. Either way the Skins lost one great player and received a damn good one. Only time will tell if this was a good move. This is just my humble opinion though.

 

[Henry]

Well....it IS funny...when you have a very good RB and let him go...only to turn around a year later and acquire another RB....of course that was just spurriers fault right? OK sure it was.

In that particular case, yes, it was Spurrier's fault. His philosphy didn't require a top RB, so he didn't see the need to pay a lot of money to keep one. Unfortunately, his philosphy sucked.

I will say this though. What has REALLY killed us is not one coach. I agree that's too easy. It's been the coaching turnover. We go from Turner, who's a verticle pass-oriented offense-first coach, to Marty, a field position defense-oriented coach to Spurrier, a pass-first, second and third coach ... all over the span of four years. Our personnel has been a terrible fit for our coach from one year to the next. This is the big problem. We lose good players who no longer fit the new system, and the good players we keep underacheive because they never know what the hell they're supposed to be doing.

And that is all on Snyder.

Now, hopefully, Snyder has FINALLY found a coach he won't question after a few losses. Snyder did manage to keep from firing the horrid Spurrier (remember, Snyder was prepared to keep Spurrier around for another year, God help us) so perhaps the man is finally learning the value of patience. And I suspect Gibbs will get a lot more leeway than any of his predecessors.

This team desperately needs continuity. And I think we'll now get that.

Secondly....lets make no mistake Portis is a good RB...the question becomes this...was he more of a product of the system.....I think he is very good, but his last system did not hurt...EITHER way you still get better by leaps and bounds then what you had last season.

I think some of it was the system. I also think some of it was talent. I'm guessing Portis will gain 1100-1300 yards this season. Not exactly what he enjoyed in Shanny's system, but good enough for us.

THe thing is...you gave up one of the top CBs in the league for one of the top RBs last year....yet you also gave a 2nd round pick along with the top CB you had.

I would think even some hardcore Skins fans had to cringe at the idea of giving up both (one could argue) one of the top 3 CBs in the league AND a 2nd round pick...for a RB that is in the top ten (I doubt many other then Broncos fans then and skinz fans now would argue he is a top 3 rb).

Yes, I cringed at the trade. I was fine with it straight-up, but the 2nd rounder was a steep price, IMHO.

Bailey a top three CB? Ok. This is not a knock on you or your board, but I have noticed that practically noone thought that highly of Bailey when he was a Commander. Sure, he was a good player and all, but the best of the best? Never saw that until this offseason. And he didn't even have that good a season last year.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

In that particular case, yes, it was Spurrier's fault. His philosphy didn't require a top RB, so he didn't see the need to pay a lot of money to keep one. Unfortunately, his philosphy sucked.

I will say this though. What has REALLY killed us is not one coach. I agree that's too easy. It's been the coaching turnover. We go from Turner, who's a verticle pass-oriented offense-first coach, to Marty, a field position defense-oriented coach to Spurrier, a pass-first, second and third coach ... all over the span of four years. Our personnel has been a terrible fit for our coach from one year to the next. This is the big problem. We lose good players who no longer fit the new system, and the good players we keep underacheive because they never know what the hell they're supposed to be doing.

And that is all on Snyder.

Now, hopefully, Snyder has FINALLY found a coach he won't question after a few losses. Snyder did manage to keep from firing the horrid Spurrier (remember, Snyder was prepared to keep Spurrier around for another year, God help us) so perhaps the man is finally learning the value of patience. And I suspect Gibbs will get a lot more leeway than any of his predecessors.

This team desperately needs continuity. And I think we'll now get that.



I think some of it was the system. I also think some of it was talent. I'm guessing Portis will gain 1100-1300 yards this season. Not exactly what he enjoyed in Shanny's system, but good enough for us.



Yes, I cringed at the trade. I was fine with it straight-up, but the 2nd rounder was a steep price, IMHO.

Bailey a top three CB? Ok. This is not a knock on you or your board, but I have noticed that practically noone thought that highly of Bailey when he was a Commander. Sure, he was a good player and all, but the best of the best? Never saw that until this offseason. And he didn't even have that good a season last year.

You probably did not see that (about champ) because some are homers and he was on the Skinz....Now some people still may not think that he is a top three guy so that does not mean all people were just hating him because he was on the skins.

However I have always thought he was a great player.

Either way they were better off getting something now instead of nothing later in the trade.



Oh and one last thing to ponder.....do you think Snyder would have lost his patience and fired Spurrier...if he knew Gibbs was ready to come back?

One of those things that make you go...Hmmm and may be nice for a seperate thread.

Take care.

 

[LaTunaNostra]

Henry, three points on three separate posts.

1) That is somewhat amazing Gibbs only had one defensive starter in 92 that he had in 82. But that is a nine year span. What would be worrying me more than anything else were I a Skins fan, is the rather cavalier way Snyder SEEMS to regard holding onto draft picks. You can come back from a year or two of harsh cap hits (the 49ers are once again trying to do so), but it makes it a lot easier if you have at the core of your roster good young players with five year deals that are not yet due.

2) Excellent point on the many coaching changes that have negatively impacted your team. The musical chairs hasn't just been head coaches and their staffs, it's been wholesale schemes and even philosophies. It's freaking Alice in Wonderland stuff.

3)On your QB situation. The one Gibbs quote stuck in my head re the qbs was "the second most important player on your team is the back up quarterback". Nothing very original there, but I felt at once it was Joe's way of saying it doesn't matter if its Brunell or Ramsey starting, I want that security of the second guy. Therefore, I really feel your qb competition is going to be as wide open as it gets, and Ramsey has a very good chance of starting come Sept. if he looks good this summer.

Your usual great job of holding the Commanders fort, Henry. You are without a doubt the least delusional Commanders fan I've encountered since Snyder bought the team. Probably why you're not adverse to coming here.

 

[Danny White]

Listening to Sportstalk 980 here in D.C. on the way home from work and they start talking about the article La Tuna posted.

They must be surfing this board, because they started discussing the possibility that Snyder is just in this for the short-term and may just be looking to drive up the team's price and sell.

All three analysts on the show are big Commanders fans, and two of the three agreed that this could be a possiblity. Thom Loverro of the Washington Times was on and pointed out that this is Snyder's MO as a business man.

Steve Szaban is the biggest "homer" of the bunch and said that "no way would Snyder ever sell the team." He thinks Snyder's too big of a fan to sell. But the others were more skeptical.

I thought it was funny because I listen to a lot of football talk in this area, and that was the first time I've ever heard that opinion floated around here. And it just happened to be the same day that La Tuna introduces the topic.

Being a Commanders hater and cynic, I've thought for a long time that Snyder was just in this to bilk the fans out of money and make a fortune for himself, and that his act of being "world's biggest fan" was just that, an act. But like I said, I'm a Commanders hater, so I didn't give myself much credence.

They also were much more concerned about the cap situation than Henry is. They weren't so willing to blame the crisis on the new Wash Post beat writer. They made fun of Snyder and Vinny Cerato saying they "have a plan" and then noting how many times the plan has changed over the past 5 years.

They concluded that this team is built to compete for a title in the next two years, and if they don't acheive it, it'll have to be blownup due to bloated salary and Gibbs burn-out.

 

[LaTunaNostra]

Listening to Sportstalk 980 here in D.C. on the way home from work and they start talking about the article La Tuna posted.

They must be surfing this board, because they started discussing the possibility that Snyder is just in this for the short-term and may just be looking to drive up the team's price and sell.

All three analysts on the show are big Commanders fans, and two of the three agreed that this could be a possiblity. Thom Loverro of the Washington Times was on and pointed out that this is Snyder's MO as a business man.

Steve Szaban is the biggest "homer" of the bunch and said that "no way would Snyder ever sell the team." He thinks Snyder's too big of a fan to sell. But the others were more skeptical.

I thought it was funny because I listen to a lot of football talk in this area, and that was the first time I've ever heard that opinion floated around here. And it just happened to be the same day that La Tuna introduces the topic.

Being a Commanders hater and cynic, I've thought for a long time that Snyder was just in this to bilk the fans out of money and make a fortune for himself, and that his act of being "world's biggest fan" was just that, an act. But like I said, I'm a Commanders hater, so I didn't give myself much credence.

They also were much more concerned about the cap situation than Henry is. They weren't so willing to blame the crisis on the new Wash Post beat writer. They made fun of Snyder and Vinny Cerato saying they "have a plan" and then noting how many times the plan has changed over the past 5 years.

They concluded that this team is built to compete for a title in the next two years, and if they don't acheive it, it'll have to be blownup due to bloated salary and Gibbs burn-out.

Danny, I never noticed your location on your avatar. In the very belly of the beast, eh? I lived in DC (37th and O) for several years, (mid-late eighties) while going to school, and was always amazed at what a serious football town our nation's capital was. It was a kinda provincial side of DC that I really loved.

I didn't do a very good job of recollecting for Henry because there were several other places I heard this "sell" buzz, as well, but I just can't remember where.

Give yourself more credence, Danny. All your negative instincts about Snyder are probably correct. And then some. I've even got some cynical thoughts about Gibbs.

 

[Danny White]

Danny, I never noticed your location on your avatar. In the very belly of the beast, eh? I lived in DC (37th and O) for several years, (mid-late eighties) while going to school, and was always amazed at what a serious football town our nation's capital was. It was a kinda provincial side of DC that I really loved.

I didn't do a very good job of recollecting for Henry because there were several other places I heard this "sell" buzz, as well, but I just can't remember where.

Give yourself more credence, Danny. All your negative instincts about Snyder are probably correct. And then some. I've even got some cynical thoughts about Gibbs.

Love to have you back down to the Nation's Capital for my big Monday Night Tailgate! Having a celebrity like LaTuna Nostra attend is all I need to make this the hottest event in town!

I don't know about Gibbs, he's such a nice guy. Don't get me wrong... I'm ready and willing to hate... but what's your suspicion?

Snyder's such a weasel that I wouldn't put anything past him.

I'm actually pretty far outside the beltway in Northern Virginia, so I'm not exactly in the "belly" -- more like the spleen -- but I'm still firmly in the Commanders media market and surrounded by Commander heathens.

 

[LaTunaNostra]

Love to have you back down to the Nation's Capital for my big Monday Night Tailgate! Having a celebrity like LaTuna Nostra attend is all I need to make this the hottest event in town!

I don't know about Gibbs, he's such a nice guy. Don't get me wrong... I'm ready and willing to hate... but what's your suspicion?

Snyder's such a weasel that I wouldn't put anything past him.

I'm actually pretty far outside the beltway in Northern Virginia, so I'm not exactly in the "belly" -- more like the spleen -- but I'm still firmly in the Commanders media market and surrounded by Commander heathens.

I'd love to be back too Danny (I miss DC), but I teach on Monday evenings, and I've just returned after a sabbatical . Just read your tailgate thread and I hope you guys make some serious NOISE down there. Let those Skins fans see how it's, uhh, done.

I won't be satisfied with anything less than a total thrashing of the Skins. A humilation, in fact. I especially want to see Portis shut down (and shut up).

I never cared for Gibbs, and I've always felt he's as phony as a three dollar bill. Over-rated, if such a thing can apply to a HOF coach. Yes, he is a fine coach, but he can't shine Tuna's shoes, imo. Another reason I want to see them CRUSHED, and Gibbs back to NASCAR in two, wailing about the royal thumping he took four straight times from Bill Parcells.

 

[Henry]

BP, it has definately occured to me that Spurrier's 'resignation' was very convenient. But I have no proof of nothin, so I can only go by what the parties involved claim. I can say that before Spurrier left, the debate was raging as to whether or not he should be fired. While pretty much all of us Commander fans thought he was a disaster, about half of us (me included) thought he should stay on another year simply to keep the coaching turnover from getting out of hand, while the other half favored axing Spurrier anyway. Let's just say Spurrier resigning and Gibbs signing on was beyond my wildest hopes for the coaching spot.

LTN, trading away our draft picks does worry me a bit. I have hope that this is the last year we go into the draft with as little as three picks. We did have ten picks in 2002, and we did trade for another pick this year, so things are evening out a little, but yes, it's a concern. Next year we have six (all but our second rounder I think) and I'd like for us to keep them. As I have mentioned in another post, though, Gibbs has a history of trading picks for players. He only drafted four first rounders in his 12 years as our coach (none from 84-90), and usually had fewer picks than rounds. The practice is nothing new to him.

DW, I'm not a big fan of the Sports Reporters. They will pretty much say anything to get an audience. Szaban's job is apparently to disagree with anything Andy Pollin says. And I have never been under the impression that any of them are very big Commander fans. They basically parrot the headlines of the day and then think of a way to argue about it. It's ok stuff to listen to on the way home from work, but I don't think they've ever once come up with a subject that hadn't been bounced around on these boards of ours about fifty times first.

If they did talk about Snyder selling the team that IS something, because they are usually the last to know. Maybe they are reading this board.

But they b!tch about the cap ALL the time. If I cared enough to yawn I would.