Sportstalk 980: Samuels offers to restructure

[Warpath81]

Samuels is walking the walk.

Will we be seeing Samuels dance with Rogers?

What a 'team player'. Samuels just moved into my Top 10 favorite 'Skins. :notworthy

[Warpath81]

Anoter note, if this team now fails to sign Dockery - I will never listen to anything Gibbs says about 'Core Redskins'.

[Skin Patrol]

Let's be careful about sainting Samuels until it is clear what kind of restructure this is. Is he offering to take a pay cut so that we sign Dockery? If so, that's very admirable and I truly appreciate what he brings to this franchise.

If he's just restructuring unguaranteed salary from the end of his contract (as if we're going to pay a 34 year old Chris Samuels 7.5 mil in salary alone anyways in 2011, sh'yea...) to guaranteed money prorated over the course of his career, he isn't exactly helping the front office. The reason we don't have money to sign players like Dockery is because Samuels has, so "benevolently", restructured his contract so often that he's getting 4.6+ mil a year in bonuses alone. That's well over twice as much as anyone else on the team besides CP who, incidentally, gets 2.6 mil.

He's going to cost this team 8.6 million in salary next year, which is about 8% of our total salary cap space. This is also more than any other player on the team. Perhaps the reason we're having trouble resigning Dockery at all is because we pay Chris Samuels so much (because he restructures every year...).

Let's go through some numbers: in 2007 Chris Samuels will cost this team 8.6 million. In 2008 he will cost this team over 10 million. In 2009 he will cost this team over 10.5 million. In 2010 he will cost this team 11 million. In 2011 he will cost this team 13 million. Someone has to get cut or lose pay to account for those millions of dollars. It cannot be Chris Samuels because we owe him so much guaranteed salary that we'd take like 10-15 million dollar dead space hit to do so until like 2009. That number goes up everytime we "restructure" by converting unguaranteed money (we all know he isn't going to earn anyways in 2011 salary) into money we owe no matter what.

Now, as regards whether this is a benevolent move or not, what we know is that Chris Samuels holds all the chips in negotiation. If he does anything that helps the team in aggregate, it will be an enormous act of benevolence on his part. We cannot negotiate with Chris Samuels on Washington Redskins terms anymore because we've restructured his contract so much.

[Sebowski]

To Samuels

:point2sky :applause: :notworthy

[fansince62]

great for Samuels.....of course...the reality impaired back slappers miss asking the pertinent question: why was this necessary in the first place?

why...you ask? because....Skins FO = DUMB ARSES!!!!!!!!!!

and spare me the drippy optimism and sanctimonious putdowns. the ONLY demand that ought to be repeated day in and day out is that this team get its act together once every 15 years to make a run at being respectable. we are long past the time of looking for positive needles in the losers' haystack.

[fansince62]

" agree completely. There are a few posters in here that only post negative comments about the team. I can understand being frustrated, or not agreeing with the way the team is run, but at some point you have to recognize something positive with the team. If you hate everything about the Skins, why bother being a fan anymore."

just out of curiousity...are you a man or a woman? When there is logic, purpose, thought.....GOOD MANAGEMENT......then there will be time for optimistic reflection on money shell games wrought by fiscal ineptitude.

[deejaydana]

our Pro Bowler offers this? how great is that?

[Warhead36]

Core Redskin. I told ya so.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Core Redskin. I told ya so.

He'd better be. He is uncuttable for the next five years.

Maybe I've been too harsh, but Samuels contract is one of my greatest sources of frustration with how this team operates. As someone else posted, he got $6.5 million in bonus money last year. He alone constitutes nearly 9 percent of the cap and his contract more or less guarantees that he can never be released.

And on top of all of that, I think he is simply a very good tackle, not an exceptional one.

So, yea, I guess it's great that he is willing to re-structure every year. But he's got the team pinned to the ground on this one. They have to write him a big bonus check every off-season just to do business.

[Skins n' Bones]

I think this is great news. From how I heard it, Samuels said that he is willing to restructure so they can re-sign Dockery and keep the O-line intact. What is wrong with that? Of course this will likely benefit him too, but point is that he wants to do it to help the team. And as far as what kind of restructure, I'm sure that is undetermined at this point. He just wants to keep continuity on the line, which is leading the #4 rushing offense and has also really stepped up in pass protection with the third best in sacks allowed. How can people have a problem with that?

[stwasm]

This, folks, is a TRUE Redskin!

[illone]

That is great news. We need to keep this oline in tact. Respect out to you, Samuels. Let's hope Brunell follows suit.

[drowland]

Good for Chris...but let's be honest. We know how the Redskins restructure contracts. They'll turn is 2007 salary into a bonus and simply push the cap hit back into later years. I'd volunteer too if I was him.

[Warhead36]

Every year this team is in dire cap shape and every year Samuels helps them by restructuring his contract in some way shape or form. Most guys would have been fed up with this organization by now but Samuels has stuck it out while guys like Lavar and Champ quit. How can you not like him for that?

[Skin Patrol]

Every year this team is in dire cap shape and every year Samuels helps them by restructuring his contract in some way shape or form. Most guys would have been fed up with this organization by now but Samuels has stuck it out while guys like Lavar and Champ quit. How can you not like him for that?

Because one reason "this team is in dire cap shape... every year" is because Samuels "helps them" by restructuring his contract. He's the highest paid player on the team because of the restructures. He makes nearly double what everyone else on the team makes in annual bonuses. He's uncuttable because of these restructures.

IF he is taking a pay cut, then I love the man. But everytime Samuels has restructured in the past, it's screwed over the Redskins. Should this be any different? I don't know.

Is Chris Samuels the most valuable player on the Redskins? He might be. He's certainly the highest paid, by over a million dollars.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Every year this team is in dire cap shape and every year Samuels helps them by restructuring his contract in some way shape or form. Most guys would have been fed up with this organization by now but Samuels has stuck it out while guys like Lavar and Champ quit. How can you not like him for that?

He makes money everytime he does this. He's not Ghandi. If Lavar had gotten the $6 million he thought he was entitled to, he would be probably still be a happy camper here too.

[illone]

He makes money everytime he does this. He's not Ghandi. If Lavar had gotten the $6 million he thought he was entitled to' date=' he would be probably still be a happy camper here too.[/quote']

Who cares? If it frees up the space to get Derrick signed then it's a good thing, right?

[VegunN]

I think he's one of the only guys who deserves NOT to restructure his contract. He's a multiple pro-bowler, and he's going to restructure to keep a team mate and friend?

That's amazing, that's a true Redskin.

[Skin Patrol]

Who cares? If it frees up the space to get Derrick signed then it's a good thing, right?

Because he doesn't. It "frees up space" right now yet the only reason we have to "free up space" in 2006 is because we restructured Samuels in years past. In 2007 and 2008, when we're trying to sign core Redskins, someone is going to have to pay for Chris Samuels 3 million salary increase + his ludicrously high guaranteed annual bonus money. 4.6 million per year in bonus is 2 million higher than any other player on the team.

I think we need to at least question whether it is in the team's best interest to restructure Samuels' contract to guarantee later moneys. We know it is in Samuels best interest.

This all presumes he isn't taking a pay cut, in which case I'd have to applaud him as a hero.

[Skin Patrol]

I think he's one of the only guys who deserves NOT to restructure his contract. He's a multiple pro-bowler, and he's going to restructure to keep a team mate and friend?

That's amazing, that's a true Redskin.

When someone "restructures" it might not necessarily mean they are taking a pay cut. It might mean they are simply guaranteeing later money so that it can be paid out over a longer period of time. But it is almost always in the player's best interest to do so since it turns unguaranteed salary (that the team might never pay the player) into guaranteed salary that they have to pay no matter what.

This is exactly why he is the highest paid player on the team, because he cleverly restructures his contract.

When the team asks players to take pay cuts, it is because their salaries are no longer justified against their guaranteed moneys, which all have to be paid if you cut the player. As Chris Samuels has the highest cap hit of any player on the team, it's fairly obvious that EDIT: WE ARE NOT in a position to negotiate a lower salary. Until we know that Samuels is taking a pay cut, let's not presume that fact.

More likely he is asking to guarantee later portions of his salary, which puts us in a deeper hole than we are already in and is PRECISELY WHY we have to restructure contracts to resign our players. Had we acted fiscally responsibly in years past, we wouldn't have any trouble resigning a core Redskin-on-the-rise like Derrick Dockery.

[Thanos]

Who the hell cares.We need more bodies and players who can execute.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I think he's one of the only guys who deserves NOT to restructure his contract. He's a multiple pro-bowler, and he's going to restructure to keep a team mate and friend?

That's amazing, that's a true Redskin.

Sigh.

He's most likely not taking a pay cut. In fact, he is probably making money on the deal.

[AzSkinsFan63]

Way to go CS!!!!

[cosmopolitianbloodloss]

Man there are some negative Nancy's around here :doh:

Forget the money, the important thing is that Chris wants to keep this line together.

[Pocono]

I believe Samuels has a 3M roster bonus due in 2007 that probably has language in it that allows the team to guarantee the bonus and then prorate it over the rest of the years in his contract without having to ask him first. This would be the same language that was in 5 or 6 player's contracts last year. He is also due 2.45M in salary in 07. With his permission they can guarantee everything over the minimum salary for a player with his years of service and prorate that over the term of his contract. So instead of getting a 3M roster bonus he will get a check for a 3M signing bonus and instead of getting 2.45M spread over the 17 weeks of the season he will get another check for about 1.7M before 3/1 and the rest will come over the 17 weeks of the season.

Unless the player wants to force the team to cut him there is absolutely no downside for him in doing this gambit. He gets the use of his money much earlier and it removes any chance he may be cut that year and the increase in future proration makes it much less likely he will be cut in the next couple of years. Many teams used to do this all the time but few do now because of the effect it has on future cap years and the effect this security has on the player's attitude and preparation.