GSF Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 " 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. Are you ****ing kidding me?! You whine constantly post after post how bad everything the Redskins do is, and you call me a woman? Look, I have said many times that the Skins have made plenty of mistakes this year, but I don't understand the need of you and others to put down every single thing they do. Samuels came out and siad he would restructure if it would help the team to keep Dock. That's a good thing. He didn't say, I had a great year, I want more money, or the team is ripping me off like your boy Lavar did. What do you think, that Samuels is trying to trick the team into paying him more? Or maybe he's just trying to capitalize on a bad situation with the cap? Gimme a break man. Samuels offered to try to help the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkforhall Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 I wish I lived in Samuels world. He gets offered by his employer more money to help the team, and then he gets a pat on the back. I at first thought it was great that he offered to restructure, but only if he is sacrificing something for the sake of the teams well being. Which it doesn't sound like he is. So its just a business deal that benefits both parties. At least we hope it benefits the Skins. No one's being negative, its just not really news cause he gave up nothing. The agents and FO did all the work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skin Patrol Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 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. Required reading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illone Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 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. Most NFL contracts are backloaded anyways. How is Samuels any different? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skin Patrol Posted December 28, 2006 Share Posted December 28, 2006 Most NFL contracts are backloaded anyways. How is Samuels any different? Because he's restructured more than other players. Because he gets 4.6 million in annual bonuses (which makes him uncuttable) as opposed to 2.6 mil for CP, who is 2nd highest on the team. Because he'll be the only one costing us over 8.5 million in cap space next year. Usually contracts are merely backloaded BECAUSE OF original signing bonus. Samuels adds to that with additional bonuses thanks to "restructuring" which is why his annual bonus is so much higher than any other player on the team (in the league?) The entire point of BACKLOADING contracts is because the team has no intention of paying the final salary of the contract. What Samuels does when he restructures is convince the team to guarantee the tail end of the contract through bonuses. He turns unguaranteed tail-end salary into guaranteed, prorated bonus. It has been pointed out that most teams don't do this because it makes the team helpless towards that player. We can't cut him because of it. We won't be able to even consider it until 2009, at the earliest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rm8899 Posted December 29, 2006 Share Posted December 29, 2006 that's whats up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCinOz Posted December 29, 2006 Share Posted December 29, 2006 We don't need to restructure Samuels contract for him to save us cap space. He has a $3.0m roster bonus due in 2007, just guarantee that and have it prorate over the remaining term of his contract (2007-2011 - counting $600k per year). That'll save $2.4m in cap space in 2007. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ingtar Posted December 29, 2006 Share Posted December 29, 2006 Honestly, when did Skins fans start sounding like a bunch of whining Eagles fans? This thread has exploded in a blast of negative posts whining about everything you guys always whine about in every other thread. Samuels offered to restructure if it helps the team. Having watched CS for years now, I believe he is a very genuine man who really loves being a Redskin. He wants to help the team. It may not be the correct way to help the team, but that is for the FO to decide. As a player, he is just making a statement that Dock should be back and he is willing to do what he can to get that to happen. And as for posters taking shots at other posters, this is crazy. Calling other people "women" or something else as moronic is childish, does nothing to support your point of view, and is ignorant. We are all Skins fans here!! We can all wallow in each others misery without resorting to name calling or putting someone down to try to make our point. We all have our own opinions (some negative and some optimistic) about the state of the team and they are all valid. :dallasuck:gaintsuck:eaglesuck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tr1 Posted December 29, 2006 Share Posted December 29, 2006 Samuels gets a ton of knocks around here, but he's one of our better players and has one of the best attitudes on the team. I like this guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted December 29, 2006 Share Posted December 29, 2006 We don't need to restructure Samuels contract for him to save us cap space.He has a $3.0m roster bonus due in 2007, just guarantee that and have it prorate over the remaining term of his contract (2007-2011 - counting $600k per year). That'll save $2.4m in cap space in 2007. That's probably what they are going to end up doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illone Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 The entire point of BACKLOADING contracts is because the team has no intention of paying the final salary of the contract. This is where you are way off. The entire reason why teams began backloading in the first place is because players (agents) were loooking for more guarantees in a sport where they might get hurt and never play again. Also, it was a creative way to offer players bigger money in bonus while not taking huge hits on the salary cap. It has nothing to do with the team not having intentions of paying the player. Especially with the Redskins. Teams would just hand out baseball style contracts if there was no threat of injury, and they knew they'd be playing (have a job) 5 years down the road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mania Posted December 30, 2006 Share Posted December 30, 2006 That's impressive........for all the hate that Samuels has gotten early in the season and especially in the Spurrier years he is a true Redskins. Wanting to restructure to keep Dockery a Skin is awesome!!! This is Patriot like......atleast a few years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.