Warhead36 Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 Hype hype hype hype hype. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inmate running the asylum Posted February 18, 2006 Share Posted February 18, 2006 :laugh: What I want Fatso and his expert to explain, is how come the Redskins will have a problem and the Denver Broncos who are $30 million over the cap won't? :laugh: Plus the rumor is that they are also the front runner to sign Terrell Owens (who won't play for peanuts) and/or trade for Ricky Williams. :laugh: How does this expert know what special clauses are written into Samuels, Arrington, and other's contracts, giving the Redskins other options? All the contract fine details is not public information. I trust that the Redskins accountants and FO know what they are doing, rather than Fatso. Now if certain players decline to restructure their contracts, I could see where that would be a problem. That may happen to the Jets with Pennington. :paranoid: -- Broncos to Manage $ 30 Million Cap Overage -- Sun Jan 29, 2006 --from FFMastermind.com The Denver Post reports the Broncos, who are about $30 million over the projected salary cap, which takes effect in March, believe they can get below the cap by restructuring contracts. The Broncos expect to have the cap room to keep key free agents C Tom Nalen, OLT Matt Lepsis and DT Gerard Warren. Perhaps one of the three will look for more money, but cap room will be there if Denver chooses to spend it. Complicating the issue for all teams are the ongoing negotiations between the league and the players' association on a new collective bargaining agreement. The current CBA expires after the 2006 season. Contracts that stretch beyond that will be affected by the yet to be determined CBA because it will set the bar on future salary cap figures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins1972 Posted February 18, 2006 Share Posted February 18, 2006 I ran in to pastabelly yesterday.... Then I backed up and ran him over again!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manasseh Posted February 18, 2006 Share Posted February 18, 2006 I've always wondered what would happen if a team didn't adhere to the salary cap. Would they kick them out of the league? Force them to forfeit draft picks? What's forcing teams to adhere to these rules? And, if by some slim chance this article was accurate (I know words like slim and accurate shouldn't be used to describe an article by Pastabelly but just for the sake of argument), what are the Redskins to do if it comes essentially impossible to get under the salary cap because of the failure to re-negotiate a new CBA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manasseh Posted February 18, 2006 Share Posted February 18, 2006 Just found the answers to my questions here (http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144996) if anyone is interested. It's amazing the amount of information on this board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stew Posted February 18, 2006 Share Posted February 18, 2006 The only thing on Len Pastabelly's tip sheet is a few Ketchup stains, and crumbs from the hamburger bun he ate while waiting for the burger itself to cook. Also a condensation ring from leaving his slushie on top of said tip sheet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dana87 Posted February 18, 2006 Share Posted February 18, 2006 Worry if you want to. My guess is there isn't a damn thing we as fans can do about it even if those two idiots are right. The bottom line is they will agree to a CBA and as usual our premature demise will prove to be exactly what it is wishfull thinking by those people that want to see Snyder fail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roadkill Posted February 18, 2006 Share Posted February 18, 2006 yea but we dan always finds a way to avoid the cap issues every year so im really not that worried Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted February 18, 2006 Share Posted February 18, 2006 Right they can cut a good # of people, but those people have to be replaced. Also the 30 % rule is where the trouble comes from. Most of the restructuring mentioned in older WP articles wouldn't work because of the way the 30% rule is for the last capped year. :doh: wrong The Redskins, like many teams, are over the projected 2006 salary cap of $95 million. Washington has about $113 million committed in players' salaries and bonuses, league sources said, and must be in compliance with the payroll ceiling by March 1.The two sources said Washington could meet its obligation with or without restructuring Arrington's contract by trading or releasing other players, or reworking other contracts. By cutting safety Matt Bowen and offensive lineman Cory Raymer, who played sparingly last season; cornerback Walt Harris, who lost his starting job to rookie Carlos Rogers; and place kicker John Hall, who was injured for large parts of the past two seasons, sources said the Redskins could save $6.5 million in 2006 cap space. Defensive tackle Brandon Noble, coming off career-threatening injuries, could retire or, if not, it is unlikely the team would keep him at his $1.7 million base salary. Trading backup quarterback Patrick Ramsey, as expected, would trim another $1.7 million. Getting quarterback Mark Brunell and tackle Jon Jansen to agree to restructure their $4 million base salaries by converting the money to bonuses that can be spread out over several years against the cap would trim another $5 million. Brunell adjusted his salary last year and Jansen has said he would be open to exploring the idea. Cornerback Shawn Springs, running back Clinton Portis, linebacker Marcus Washington and defensive tackle Cornelius Griffin are among the players who, like Arrington, have large bonuses due in 2006. By restructuring the bonuses, and prorating them, Washington could save about $8 million more under the cap. All of those moves in total would get the team under $90 million, which would allow them to re-sign key free agent safety Ryan Clark, tight end Robert Royal, running back Rock Cartwright and long snapper Ethan Albright, and leave some room for signing other players. While it might not be enough to land a top-tier free agent such as Indianapolis wide receiver Reggie Wayne, the Redskins would still have other options to create more salary cap space, and, should they keep Arrington at a $7 million cap figure, the opportunity to chase a big-name free agent would increase. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/18/AR2006011802276.html how many times have we played this game, the media exaggerate or flat out make **** up, get people in a panic.... and it turned out the Skins knew what they were doing? and the media look like fools? How many times??? we can't trade Coles, we can't sign any player because we're in cap hell, circa 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006....... anyone think Snyder, Gibbs & staff aren't prepared no matter what is fooling themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECU-ALUM Posted February 18, 2006 Share Posted February 18, 2006 After dealing with Salary Cap issues for so many years I like to believe that the Front Office knows what they are doing. Lenny & Pete need to sit-down shut-up and figure out Denver's Salary Cap situation before talking the same old junk about ours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twenty-eight Posted February 18, 2006 Share Posted February 18, 2006 why does everyone in the media hate the Redskins? Is it all because of Daniel Snyder? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twenty-eight Posted February 18, 2006 Share Posted February 18, 2006 Yes he was talking about the cap experts with the Jets :laugh: haha good one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamJT13 Posted February 18, 2006 Share Posted February 18, 2006 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/18/AR2006011802276.html As has been mentioned many times, the Post article doesn't take the 30 percent rule into consideration. If the CBA isn't extended (and I think it will be), then the 30 percent rule will apply, and most of what's mentioned in the Post article won't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamJT13 Posted February 18, 2006 Share Posted February 18, 2006 What I want Fatso and his expert to explain, is how come the Redskins will have a problem and the Denver Broncos who are $30 million over the cap won't? I explained why the Broncos' situation is different earlier in this thread. http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2223854&postcount=23 "With no CBA extension, it'll be much easier for the Broncos to get under the cap because of the way their players' contracts are structured. The Broncos, for example, have three players who are expected to void their contracts, saving about $11.5 million. They can cut Trevor Pryce to save another $8.53 million. They can cut guys like Courtney Brown and Ebenezer Ekuban to save another $5.26 million. And they have other guys they can cut or restructure to save cap room. The Redskins can't cut Arrington to save a bunch of cap room like the Broncos can cut Pryce because Arrington has more than $7 million of bonus prorations that would accelerate into 2006. Pryce has no prorations that would accelerate." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIDETHEWALRUS Posted February 18, 2006 Share Posted February 18, 2006 Wow! I am a bit younger than most of the people that post on this board and I am many years and a vast number of pounds less than Lenny. Maybe this is beneficial because it hasn't been to long since I heard the story of Chicken Little. I won't go in to details, I am sure you have all heard it before. The jist is this, every year someone cries the Redskins will be over the cap! The Redskins will be over the cap! The Redskins will be over the cap! Everyone reacts and freaks out. Oh No! We're going to be over the cap! Then, out of the blue, a new season comes along. And the Redskins are under the cap. We are going to be over the cap? I'll believe it when I see it. (and I don't believe I ever will) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herrmag Posted February 18, 2006 Share Posted February 18, 2006 Wow! I am a bit younger than most of the people that post on this board and I am many years and a vast number of pounds less than Lenny. Maybe this is beneficial because it hasn't been to long since I heard the story of Chicken Little. I won't go in to details, I am sure you have all heard it before. The jist is this, every year someone cries the Redskins will be over the cap! The Redskins will be over the cap! The Redskins will be over the cap! Everyone reacts and freaks out. Oh No! We're going to be over the cap! Then, out of the blue, a new season comes along. And the Redskins are under the cap. We are going to be over the cap? I'll believe it when I see it. (and I don't believe I ever will) Young man, yes.. You got it. We hear the nonsense EVERY YEAR for the past 8 YEARS. But you've got it. After this blows over, just try to remember this nonsense next year. You will see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wahoos911 Posted February 18, 2006 Share Posted February 18, 2006 Wow! I am a bit younger than most of the people that post on this board and I am many years and a vast number of pounds less than Lenny. Maybe this is beneficial because it hasn't been to long since I heard the story of Chicken Little. I won't go in to details, I am sure you have all heard it before. The jist is this, every year someone cries the Redskins will be over the cap! The Redskins will be over the cap! The Redskins will be over the cap! Everyone reacts and freaks out. Oh No! We're going to be over the cap! Then, out of the blue, a new season comes along. And the Redskins are under the cap. We are going to be over the cap? I'll believe it when I see it. (and I don't believe I ever will) :cry: so poetic and moving Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted February 18, 2006 Share Posted February 18, 2006 [quote name=bubba9497 how many times have we played this game' date=' the media exaggerate or flat out make **** up, get people in a panic.... and it turned out the Skins knew what they were doing? and the media look like fools? How many times??? we can't trade Coles, we can't sign any player because we're in cap hell, circa 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006....... anyone think Snyder, Gibbs & staff aren't prepared no matter what is fooling themselves.[/quote] it's that sorry now-typical mainstream media-parrot effect where instead of taking time and energy to work on researching a topic to see what's accurate and what's not, you just do a version of what the guy next to you said. And then pull it out the next time the situation is similar, change a few words and say it again. It’s also had that feel of being similar to the whole genre of apocalyptic predictions; maybe you’re going to right someday. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted February 18, 2006 Share Posted February 18, 2006 As has been mentioned many times, the Post article doesn't take the 30 percent rule into consideration. If the CBA isn't extended (and I think it will be), then the 30 percent rule will apply, and most of what's mentioned in the Post article won't work. the 30 percent rule will have no barring on any move listed in the article. the 30 percent rule apples to any NEW contracts or any renegotiated contracts worked after 3-2-06. The more well-known sticking points: Without an extension to the CBA, teams will be able to amortize signing bonuses over just four seasons, instead of the maximum seven years. Because of the 30-percent rule, which essentially stipulates that a player's basic compensation (his base salary plus the prorated share of his signing bonus for 2006) cannot be increased by more than 30 percent, teams can't make up the difference in smaller signing bonus with fatter base salaries. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/colum..._len&id=2332924 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamJT13 Posted February 18, 2006 Share Posted February 18, 2006 the 30 percent rule will have no barring on any move listed in the article. the 30 percent rule applys to any NEW contracts or any renegociated contracts worked after 3-2-06. The 30 percent rule applies to EVERY contract that extends past the final capped year (2006), no matter when it was signed or renegotiated. There isn't a single NFL contract that violates the 30 percent rule right now, and there won't be one for as long as 2006 is the final capped year. You cannot renegotiate a contract by violating the 30 percent rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.