michael_33 Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Updated: March 6, 2006, 12:59 AM ET Arrington pays 'Skins to become free agent LaVar Arrington has agreed to pay the Washington Redskins over $4 million in cash to get out of his contact with the team and become a free agent. The Redskins have therefore placed Arrington on waivers. A team source said that the move would have been made irrespective of any delay in the waiver deadline Sunday evening. Arrington had a $12.045 million cap number and was due a $6.5 million roster bonus. By taking the money, the Redskins will save approximately $4.2 million with his release. They entered Sunday $17.7 million over the salary cap. In January, the NFL Players Association filed a formal complaint seeking disciplinary action against Carl Poston, Arrington's agent, for "neglect" in negotiating Arrington's contract near the end of the 2003 season, union and league sources told ESPN's Chris Mortensen. The "neglect" had to do with Arrington's $6.5 million bonus. Arrington did not see much playing time early in the 2005 season as he worked his way back from offseason knee surgery and became disgruntled over his diminished role. The three-time Pro Bowl linebacker regained his starting job against Philadelphia on Nov. 6. Arrington played in 11 regular season games for Washington in 2005, recording 47 tackles. He also played in the team's two postseason games, and had 12 tackles. Information from ESPN. com senior NFL writer John Clayton and The Associated Press was used in this report. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenster95 Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 I'm assuming that that figure doesn't include the amounts saved from reworks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimster Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 I'm assuming that that figure doesn't include the amounts saved from reworks. correct, I don't think there's been official numbers released on any of that yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldenster95 Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 correct, I don't think there's been official numbers released on any of that yet. Hell, if that's the case, we might just be under, right? :smile: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shallyshal Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 absolutely does not include the numerous reworks that were agreed upon in principle and will become even greater if the cap goes to 105-108 with the agreement later this week. that would put the skins about 5 under.. lots of room to work with Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinz1972 Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 we should have kept him,but he wasnt gonna get the 6.5 million bonus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scskin Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 So if we're 13.5 over now, and the CBA is approved at 105 mil, we would then be 3.5 over. A few minor cuts/restructures and we will be MAJOR players in the FA market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimster Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 So if we're 13.5 over now, and the CBA is approved at 105 mil, we would then be 3.5 over. A few minor cuts/restructures and we will be MAJOR players in the FA market. with releasing Lavar, the reworks and the cap goes to 105 - we'd be sitting pretty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f_trizzy Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 If we cut that group of Raymer, Harris, Bowen etc. we'd get something like 8 mil. in savings I believe so if the cap goes up we should be around 5 mil under right there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enter Apotheosis Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 But don't most of the restructures depend on the CBA not being extended? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f_trizzy Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 with releasing Lavar, the reworks and the cap goes to 105 - we'd be sitting pretty. I am under the impression that the reworks we have in place now will be void if a new CBA is reached. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enter Apotheosis Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Yeah, that was my understanding of the situation. A few of them might stand irregardless of the CBA but the details on all that still aren't too clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_33 Posted March 6, 2006 Author Share Posted March 6, 2006 I got the impression that if the CBA come to an agreement,that the portis deal would be the only current restructure that would be null/void... Which would be great cause he would go back to his original contract,which would have 6 years remaining on it..! Instead of it ending in 08'...?But I don't know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
33 Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 It wouldn't matter about the re-structures if there was a new deal. It could add as much as $10 million to the cap. $13 million minus 10 puts us right where scskin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spjunkies Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 This whole thing is making me insane. Time to sleep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 But don't most of the restructures depend on the CBA not being extended? YES they do. If there's a deal, those restructures don't take effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spartacus87 Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 If it does get extended though, what's to stop us from restructuring a few of those deals again? Would that be possible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSilverMaC Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Here's another question. I'm sure everyone remembers the article from CPND stating all the moves that could get us close to 10 mil under the originally projected cap of 95 mil, but the flaw was the 30% rule. With a new CBA, there is no longer a 30% rule, correct? So whats to stop us from gauranteeing the money listed, cutting said players, and being potentially close to 20 mil under the cap??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stew Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 He wanted out. Let him go then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OfficerPX Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Basically, here's what you're looking at if the CBA goes through and the cap goes up to $105 million, we'll call it. If we're at 13.5 million over after the Lavar deal, that means our cap number stands at $108 million. Cut everyone previously discuss except for Ramsey, since you'd hold onto him for possible trade value, and you save about 8 million more. (Payroll at $100 million) The restructured contracts for Brunell, Jansen, Portis, etc. are voided due to the CBA extension. However, because of the extension we can automatically convert bonus money to guaranteed money and amortize it. So we don't have to rework the contracts to get those benefits. The X factor is that I don't know exactly how much that saves. My guess would be somewhere in the neighborhood of $4 million. (Payroll at $96 million) The only thing you don't know is the formula for the "cash over cap" deal and if that would change some of the way we structure contracts. But I'd imagine given the optimal scenario we end up around $8-10 million under a new cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubster Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 It looks like L.A. will go where all ex Skins' go to play. The eagles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metalhead Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Basically, here's what you're looking at if the CBA goes through and the cap goes up to $105 million, we'll call it.If we're at 13.5 million over after the Lavar deal, that means our cap number stands at $108 million. Cut everyone previously discuss except for Ramsey, since you'd hold onto him for possible trade value, and you save about 8 million more. (Payroll at $100 million) The restructured contracts for Brunell, Jansen, Portis, etc. are voided due to the CBA extension. However, because of the extension we can automatically convert bonus money to guaranteed money and amortize it. So we don't have to rework the contracts to get those benefits. The X factor is that I don't know exactly how much that saves. My guess would be somewhere in the neighborhood of $4 million. (Payroll at $96 million) The only thing you don't know is the formula for the "cash over cap" deal and if that would change some of the way we structure contracts. But I'd imagine given the optimal scenario we end up around $8-10 million under a new cap. Um, wow. Thanks for clearing that up AND making sense while doing so! Really helpful. So now it's just a "wait and see" on those converted bonuses. Here's to hoping for more caproom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adarsh1 Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 I'm really shocked right now from this whole Lavar thing. I need a Mountain Dew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barefoot Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 It looks like L.A. will go where all ex Skins' go to play. The eagles ding,ding,ding! I wouldn't bet against him staying in the East. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted March 6, 2006 Share Posted March 6, 2006 Clayton said as of March 2nd we were 14.5 million over. This move saves us 4.2 million. That puts us at 10.3 million. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2349505 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.