snowfamily1 Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 Here is a article that address the Redskins 2006 salary cap situation. This article gives me hope for the Skins in 2006 than most articles. HTTR...Gibbs and company will bring in the talent necessary... http://redskins.scout.com/2/482405.html :eaglesuck :gaintsuck :dallasuck :point2sky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsngibbs4life Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 this is a good article, i advise anyone with doubts about our offseason read this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen-like Todd Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 That article doesnt mention Brandon Noble. He has a 1.7 million dollar base salary in the final year of his contract. His career may well be over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDirtbags Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 i hope noble retires... he has had a good run.... and he shouldnt put himself through another potentionally "injured reserved" season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlinginSammy HOF '63 Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 I didn't read it but is it the one that points out a few restructures and a few cuts and we're in good shape? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boobiemiles Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 Doesn't Coles contract take 9 million off the books? Also I don't like the idea of trading Ramsey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
england Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 dont know how you guys feel about salaries but here in england our soccer players are grossly over paid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordy Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 dont know how you guys feel about salaries but here in england our soccer players are grossly over paid They bring the fans to the stadium don't they? Compared to how much the owners make I don't mind the saleries in football. however it's rediculous how much they get payed in MLB because it's not even as popular a sport. Basketball salaries are very high to, but the NBA is more popular than baseball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westbrook36 Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 I don't understand that article. It says with restructuring and releases, you can get under the cap. Noone disagrees with that. But, it says the top 46 players equal 110 million or whatever. That means you have to take into account the other 7 players who will make up the rule of 53. Even if all 7 make the minimum (which would hamper depth) thats another few million. Basically, looking at the numbers right now, there will be no way to make free agent acquisitions or even sign your own FAs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsngibbs4life Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 I didn't read it but is it the one that points out a few restructures and a few cuts and we're in good shape? i think that your thinking of something else. This one basicly says that we can get rid of 15 million in cap by paying bonuses up front, instead of spreading then out over the next 2 years Doesn't Coles contract take 9 million off the books? Also I don't like the idea of trading Ramsey. we are only going to have like 3.6 million taken off the books from the coles trade... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CLBinMD Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 Interesting article. The link to a who-counts-what-against-the-cap chart was particularly helpful. Two quick thoughts: 1. It would be EXTREMELY helpful to add a column or two to that chart that outlines - total years / years into current contract - SB of current contract - 2006 Cap # if released I seem to recall that there are a number of implications to releasing a player before his current contract expires. For example, ALL of his remaining SB is counted in the current year in some situations, or the following year in other circumstances. That would be helpful for us "arm chair GMs" to know.... 2. Everyone's been speculating re what to do about LA....yet - AGAIN - Chris Samuels deal manages to make him a HUGE number against the cap. This seems to be an annual occurrence..... Cheers, CLBinMD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westbrook36 Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 i think that your thinking of something else. This one basicly says that we can get rid of 15 million in cap by paying bonuses up front, instead of spreading then out over the next 2 years I can't quote it exactly but on another thread on the Eagles board, people were saying that there is a 30 percent rule, meaning a players salary cannot decrease by 30 percent from one year to the next. They were saying the Skins would not be able to restructure many contracts because of this rule. It is also screwing the Eagles on a few contracts.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tenken627 Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 Just a question that I was wondering about. I do not want Brunell to leave, but how much of a cap hit would we take if he was to get cut and how much cap space would be saved? The only reason why I was wondering about this was because during last offseason when everyone wanted Brunell to be gone, we were told we would have to wait "this" offseason to do it because the cap hit would be too big last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsngibbs4life Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 Just a question that I was wondering about. I do not want Brunell to leave, but how much of a cap hit would we take if he was to get cut and how much cap space would be saved? The only reason why I was wondering about this was because during last offseason when everyone wanted Brunell to be gone, we were told we would have to wait "this" offseason to do it because the cap hit would be too big last year. well, it has to do with how long the contract is. the longer, bigger the contract is, the more cap you will have to endure. If im not mistaken, brunell signed a pretty big 4 or 5 year deal? so, the cap hit would probably be really high Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skins3000 Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 well, it has to do with how long the contract is. the longer, bigger the contract is, the more cap you will have to endure. If im not mistaken, brunell signed a pretty big 4 or 5 year deal? so, the cap hit would probably be really high Brunell reconstructed his contract last year which saved the team about a million dollars. So I do not see the Skins releasing Brunell next year or renogiating his contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pocono Posted January 16, 2006 Share Posted January 16, 2006 I can't quote it exactly but on another thread on the Eagles board, people were saying that there is a 30 percent rule, meaning a players salary cannot decrease by 30 percent from one year to the next. They were saying the Skins would not be able to restructure many contracts because of this rule. It is also screwing the Eagles on a few contracts.... The 30% rule says that no player's salary[not including signing bonus] can rise from year to year in uncapped years more than 30% of that player's salary[not including signing bonus] in the final capped year. That's why those roster bonuses and fake incentives are in these contracts in 06... to build up salary in 06. I believe a team can only turn roster bonuses into signing bonuses and salary into signing bonuses if what's left in salary in 06 still meets the 30% rule. This will be very difficult and should yield nowhere close to the cap savings Mr Large predicts. It's funny how he knows about the other rules designed to prevent teams from moving cap hits due in the last capped year into presently uncapped years but thinks they can just restructure and move tons of cap space from the last capped year into uncapped years. If teams were allowed to do this wouldn't they just restructure every penny they could and move the cap hit into presently uncapped years and then their motivation to keep the cap wouldn't be as strong. That's the exact effect these rules are meant to prevent. I still believe we will see an extension before 3/1/06 and make this moot but anyone who believes teams that are over-extended in the final capped year have an easy road ahead of them without an extension is fooling themselves. ( No NFL Player Contract entered into in a Capped Year and extending into the Final League Year or beyond may provide for an annual increase in Salary, excluding any amount attributable to a signing bonus as defined in Section 7((iv) above, of more than 30% of the Salary provided for in the Final Capped Year, per year, either in the Final League Year or in any subsequent League Year covered by the Player Contract. For example, without limitation on any other applicable example, if neither party exercises any right to cancel the extension of this Agreement, a four-year Player Contract signed in the 2003 League Year (assuming it is a Capped Year) may not provide for annual increase of more than 30% of the 2003 League Year Salary, excluding amounts treated as a signing bonus, in each of the three additional League Years covered by the Contract. *Extension Agreement 2/25/98 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.