Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

What Are the Skins doing to get under cap: We got 12 days to FA


Rdskns2000

LaVar or Sean  

99 members have voted

  1. 1. LaVar or Sean

    • Sean Taylor in B&G
      123
    • LaVar Arrington in B&G
      14
    • Neither of them in B&G
      0


Recommended Posts

Well- right now we are assuming Free Agency starts on time in 12 days: March 3.

So what are we doing to get under the cap of $93 million. You have to assume that's the number and 2007 being a no-cap year.

Of course this could change before MArch 3rd- if a new deals gets signed. thing is, we should be making plans now - even if we don't do things until March 2nd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's something that I read on another site: http://mb20.scout.com/fcpndhardcorefrm1.showMessage?topicID=55403.topic

"As it stands now, without a CBA extension, the cap will reportedly be between $92 million and $95 million. I currently have us with $115.606 million committed to the 2006 cap. As PC has done before, I broke down all of the roster bonuses due players and figured they would be guaranteed, then prorated the remaining number of years on their contract up to a maximum of 4-years. They read:

Player: 2006 roster bonus due; length/amount it would be prorated; how much it would save in 2006

Lavar Arrington: $6.50 million; prorated 4-years/$1.625 million; saves $4.875 million

Shawn Springs: $3.10 million; prorated 4-years/$775,000; saves $2.325 million

Clinton Portis: $3.0 million; prorated 4-years/$750,000; saves $2.25 million

Cornelius Griffin: $2.50 million; prorated 4-years/$625,000; saves $1.875 million

Marcus Washington: $2.50 million; prorated 4-years/$625,000; saves $1.875 million

Santana Moss: $910,000; prorated 4-years/$227,500; saves $682,500

Sean Taylor: $640,000; prorated 4-years/$160,000; saves $480,000

Phillip Daniels: $500,000; prorated 3-years/$166,667; saves $333,333

Renaldo Wynn: $500,000; prorated 2-years/$250,000; saves $250,000

If all of the roster bonuses are converted to signing bonus and prorated, it would save $14.946 million in 2006.

The list of players that we could cut/trade and save notable money by doing so is:

Player: How much we would save in 2006

Matt Bowen: $2.0 million

Walt Harris: $2.0 million

Brandon Noble: $1.70 million

Patrick Ramsey: $1.688 million

John Hall: $1.030 million

Corey Raymer: $985,000

Combined, we could save $9.403 million with the release/trade of those six players, but once the "Rule of 51" is factored in, the savings would be $7.543 million.

With the $14.946 million we could save by guaranteeing the roster bonuses and the $7.543 million we could save by releasing/trading the aforementioned six players, it would save a total of $22.489 million on the 2006 cap, putting us at $93.117 million.

But keep in mind, Mark Brunell will likely have $1.0 million added to his 2006 cap figure because last season he took a pay-cut of $1.0 million; in exchange, the team had to improve in just one of eight specified offensive categories. While nothing is known at this point, it's almost impossible that he didn't earn back that money. So assuming he did, it would put us at $94.117 million -- barely squeaking by."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah if you check later in the same thread AdamJT13 sets him straight and the same poster says

"Thanks for the clarification, Adam. I had sort of spotted the flaw in my scenario of restructures and have been going back and forth with PC on it. It dawned on me that once the roster bonuses are guaranteed and prorated, that, technically, they would be deemed signing bonus; therefore, violating the 30 percent rule as long as future salaries remain intact."

And BTW....FA starts on the 3rd but teams have to be under the cap limit by 3/1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes jim, that's true, but we are the most aggressive team as far as as using cash to circumvent the cap. The lack of CBA effects us more because of the way we use signing bonuses. Other teams with more traditional approaches can simply guarantee more money to get under the cap. It appears to me the issue is we've already used our maximum allotment under the "new" rules. Therefore we are screwed in a way no other team is.

I'm sure it won't be doomsday, but it will be painful in 2006 without a CBA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the 51 rule?

Whatever we have to do, we's better start doing it. MArch 1 is only 10 days away.

Salary cap is the salary of the 51 highest paid players on the team.

By cutting some of the players mentioned (Bowen, Raymer, et. al.),

you change the people in the list of 51--and change the salaries used to compute the cap--and therefore, change the total averages and cap savings.

..I think that's the 51 rule he alludes to...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I look at it this way:

Why are we trying to figure out how we could get under the cap? I know this is the offseason, but we could figure out a piece of the puzzle by doing some wacky hair-brianed restructure, cut and dump. Yet, it would not make any sort of differecne because the FO has it figured out already and we are fretting over nothing.

This is the same old song and dance that we have heard since Snyder has taken office. Yet, we always seem to aadd key free agents and sign our rookies and end up barely under the cap. I am not worried and I have the faith in my team to improve because we have all of the keys to a winning football team in place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I look at it this way:

Why are we trying to figure out how we could get under the cap? I know this is the offseason, but we could figure out a piece of the puzzle by doing some wacky hair-brianed restructure, cut and dump. Yet, it would not make any sort of differecne because the FO has it figured out already and we are fretting over nothing.

This is the same old song and dance that we have heard since Snyder has taken office. Yet, we always seem to aadd key free agents and sign our rookies and end up barely under the cap. I am not worried and I have the faith in my team to improve because we have all of the keys to a winning football team in place.

One thing- the rules have changed. We aren't facing the same rules-unless a miracle happens and a new labor deal occurs before March 1. The flexibility we had in the past is gone. We can get under the cap but we will have to make some cuts where we might not otherwise make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember, we can't get under the cap by cutting players. The only players we can cut are:

Jansen (save 750K)

Marcus Washington (save 499K)

Wynn (save 350K)

Ramsey (save 1.5m)

Harris (save 2m)

Noble (save 1.7)

Daniels (save 800K)

Bowen (save 2m)

Hall (save 1m)

Thrash (save 875K)

Raymer (save 985K)

Tupa (save 601K)

Prioleau (save 550K)

Jacobs (save 117K)

Salave'a (save 500K)

Betts (save 545K)

You do the math!

Hey, who thinks that cash still creates cap space?

I think that Snyder/Gibbs/Cerrato need to get their heads out of their a---s and start behaving like responsible adults. The fact that so much salary cap money has been pushed into the future means that there is a REAL possibility that this team may go into March OVER THE CAP. This team will become the laughingstock of the NFL. I hope you enjoyed that rousing playoff victory in Tampa, because it may be a while before we're in the postseason again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well- right now we are assuming Free Agency starts on time in 12 days: March 3.

So what are we doing to get under the cap of $93 million. You have to assume that's the number and 2007 being a no-cap year.

Of course this could change before MArch 3rd- if a new deals gets signed. thing is, we should be making plans now - even if we don't do things until March 2nd.

I'm very worried that we haven't resigned Clark and Evans yet. We need to do so before March 3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think with all the talk of teams sueing the league, that if the league fails to come to terms on a new CBA because of the fight over revenue sharing and tries to impose draconian penalties for failure to comply, you could see a suite brought over that. In what form the action would take I have no idea. But with the amount of cash some of these wealthy owners have who knows what might happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, I once thought not that long ago that a deal would certainly be in place in time. But the closer we get to the deadline, the less sure I am. Not to say it can't happen, just not sure it will. I worry that Snyder and his cap men just assumed a new deal would be in place that closely resembled the last deal. If he did this, and it doesn't happen, we are playing under a whole new set of rules. We could be in some serious trouble. This does concern me a great deal, and I am a little puzzled as to why we have not made any moves at all to address these potential problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe the option is to not get under the cap. Just take the fine and loss of draft picks and suck it up.

http://www.atlantafalcons.com/team/article.jsp?id=2695

But with the cap being a limit, what would happen if a team spent more than the cap allowed? The short answer is: no team is able to. This is due in most part to the fact that teams have to have all player contracts approved by the league.

"By the first day of the new league year (which this year it's March 2) we have to be in compliance," Xanders said. "Our salary cap has to be under $78.7 million. If you're not in compliance by March 2, you have seven days to be."

And if you're not in compliance after those seven days?

"The last contracts that you signed players to automatically become void and those players become free agents until your charges do come under the cap," Xanders replied. "But that's never happened."

"It's different from the NBA where, if you go over, you have to pay a luxury tax," Beadles echoed. "In the NFL, if you're over the salary cap, then they start making contracts void.

"If you don't decide which players you don't want on your roster, the league will."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"It's different from the NBA where, if you go over, you have to pay a luxury tax," Beadles echoed. "In the NFL, if you're over the salary cap, then they start making contracts void.

"If you don't decide which players you don't want on your roster, the league will."

But what if Snyder then hired the player as his assistant for the same terms until all this (the CBA) is all worked out?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The last contracts that you signed players to automatically become void and those players become free agents until your charges do come under the cap," Xanders replied. "But that's never happened."

Okay. So let's sign Ramsey, Jacobs, Hall, Harris etc to new contracts on 2/28. Then on 3/2, by your theory, being the last contracts signed those players would become free agents and we can bid farewell to the dead wood and be under the cap before the draft.

:applause:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...