BD Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 I keep reading this crazy stuff about what the Redskins will look like under a "Plan B" non-CBA scenario. Can someone intelligent and responsible please sketch out the likeliest candidates to be cut, and how significant those cuts will really have to be? I honestly think a lot of this stuff is just ridiculous predictions... see Pasquarelli's "20 rookies" rumor. The amount we need to cut is roughly 20 million without a CBA, correct? Don't we get more than 2/3rds of that by trading Ramsey and cutting Matt Bowen, Walt Harris, Brandon Noble, Cory Raymer, Renaldo Wynn, and John Hall? Because honestly, only Wynn had a decent season last year - the rest are all overpaid given their performance. Those cuts combined with cutting/trading LaVar - what does that actually do for us? Because while that's not the kind of turnover we like, it only ends up with two new starters (at DE and OLB). BD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whiskeypeet Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 As this thread slides down the front page it becomes obvious that no one can post either a sane or rational, much less realistic, thought on the cap situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooka Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 http://redskins.scout.com/2/501659.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBoys Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 Redskins will probably cut Matt Bowen, Walt Harris and James Thrash. If you cut Lavar you would lose and not gain anything. If you reduced everyone to the vet minimum you will still be $4 million over the cap. It's not base salaries that you should be concerned with. You have 3 players with base salaries higher than $1.7 million. The problem is $19.51 million in roster bonuses that they thought they'd be able to prorate once the CBA was extended. They can still get under the cap, but they'll have to cut 12 players (no starters, unless you count the kicker and punter) and get 12 more players to renegotiate and extend their contracts just to put them about $530,000 under the cap -- which is barely enough cap room to sign the draft picks they'd have right now. They'll basically have no money to sign anyone but rookies for the entire offseason. And they won't have too many options left that would create any more cap room. This was taken from another board. It's no joke you guys are in a tough spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hooper Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 Our starting team could look the same -- meaning Taylor Jacobs will still be getting jammed at the line of scrimmage. But our bench is going to look radically different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaylorPickSix Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 Our starting team could look the same -- meaning Taylor Jacobs will still be getting jammed at the line of scrimmage.But our bench is going to look radically different. No way. TJ and JT are both gone I think. Expect Patten to start again with a draft pick as the #3 and A-Brown as the #4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilbur58z Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 It comes down to what kind of job the FO does in getting players to restructure their deals. If they get an optimum restructuring result, nobody major will be cut. But if players and their agents refuse certain restructures, then the Redskins will have to start cutting players they wouldn't want to cut. Presumably players who refused to rework their deals. So things *could* get bloody if we aren't successful restructuring some player's deals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 To break it down as simply as possible, if there's a CBA extension, the cap spikes and we are in glorious shape to do pretty much anything we need to do without a whole lot of work. If the CBA doesn't get extended, we will have a harder time with a lot more work to do and we'll have to make some key cuts as not everything will fall into place soon enough. But, with the glut of good players on the market suddenly, you'll find teams sweeping in for a lot of bargains with guys then banking on a bigger check next year in an uncapped year. If we get a great degree of cooperation, we can essentially return our whole team next year -- starters -- though if there's no CBS extension, we should expect some dramatic moves to expedite the situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba9497 Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 though if there's no CBS extension we still have a chance of signing a FOX or NBC extension any wonder why I'm still on the JV team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 And considering that because of no extension, this is going to be happening with all the teams, I think its likely players will agree to restructure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BD Posted March 1, 2006 Author Share Posted March 1, 2006 Redskins will probably cut Matt Bowen, Walt Harris and James Thrash. If you cut Lavar you would lose and not gain anything.If you reduced everyone to the vet minimum you will still be $4 million over the cap. It's not base salaries that you should be concerned with. You have 3 players with base salaries higher than $1.7 million. The problem is $19.51 million in roster bonuses that they thought they'd be able to prorate once the CBA was extended. They can still get under the cap, but they'll have to cut 12 players (no starters, unless you count the kicker and punter) and get 12 more players to renegotiate and extend their contracts just to put them about $530,000 under the cap -- which is barely enough cap room to sign the draft picks they'd have right now. They'll basically have no money to sign anyone but rookies for the entire offseason. And they won't have too many options left that would create any more cap room. This was taken from another board. It's no joke you guys are in a tough spot. That? Not what I was asking for. Just as much info as my own post included. Duuuuuuhhh. Thank you, come again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pocono Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 You need players to restructure their whole contracts because of the 30% rule and you need them to take less through their entire contracts and that's unlikely to happen. Failing cooperation from the players the results will be extreme. You will retain about 15 players from last years roster and the rest will be replaced by players making 230K which are street FA's and undrafted rookies. Those bargain players Art is talking about will be too expensive. It's also likely they will have to keep only 40 players on the roster and hope for an extension after 3/3. Here are the players that are safe because they use more cap space to cut them then to keep them. Brunell Cambell Portis Moss Patten Sameuls Rabach Thomas Jansen* Griffin Arrington Washington* Taylor Springs Rodgers * Jansen and Washington could go also but I'm assuming they will be kept because their contracts can produce a small savings by being restructured within the 30% rule. The rest of the team will be minimum salary first year players unless the league allows the Skins to go over the cap and pay some sort of penalty. They'd have to trade their 06 draft picks for 07 picks because the signing bonuses would take the draftees above the minimum level. They could also pick up 6-7 07 picks by trading players like Ramsey and Betts and Salavea. The big problem is there is very little salary in the Skins players contracts so there is very little cap savings in cutting them once you get past Bowen Harris and Noble and just about all the contracts are already written right up against the 30% rule. Only KC comes close to being in this position and even they have more room to play with than the Skins. There's still hope for an extension and there's also the possibility the league may see it in their best interest not to let this happen and make some sort of special allowance but if you look at the contract numbers this is where they lead unless the players step up big time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsman4u Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 I keep reading this crazy stuff about what the Redskins will look like under a "Plan B" non-CBA scenario.Can someone intelligent and responsible please sketch out the likeliest candidates to be cut, and how significant those cuts will really have to be? I honestly think a lot of this stuff is just ridiculous predictions... see Pasquarelli's "20 rookies" rumor. Those cuts combined with cutting/trading LaVar - what does that actually do for us? Because while that's not the kind of turnover we like, it only ends up with two new starters (at DE and OLB). BD Well, if it's not coming from Schaffner (Redskins capologist--or whatever his title is), but if its not coming from him, then its all a bunch of smoke filled coffee house BS, so stop reading it. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bedlamVR Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 It is in the leagues best interests to get a deal done but is it in the NFLPA best interest . No Cap meens sky high salaries for the stars and indeed a strike season in 2007 where players no matter what team will be holding out for more money because more money is suddenly available. Owners can forget relying on only having to pay 50-60% of thier revenue to players if the high revinue teams like the Skins have an owner who is turning over in some cases 3 times more money and has no quarms about breaking the bank if it is the right player . Of course the scrubs may loose out somewhat with no cap comes no minumum salary so what is stopping a team from filling abench with makewieghts @20K a year . NAd what about the fans in all this . In a few years it could get to the point of games baring a striking resemblence to Madden in fantasy draft mode where some "have" teams are regulary putting up 30-40 point leads on the "have nots" 2006 is a bad year to be a skins fan with no CBA but 2007 onwards bad year for everyone . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.