Rufus T Firefly Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 I never said anything about extra money. In fact, what you are explaining is what I was referencing. Right now it would cost a minimum $4.167 which is what we have left on the books from Lloyd's signing bonus. What's in question is if his deal is structured like Arch's, which many believe it is, then you would have to add the additional $5 million, making a total $9.167 million cap hit. When he initially signed, it was reported that there was $10 million guaranteed, which leads me to the conclusion that the bonus is guaranteed in one form or another. If we guaranteed it and we trade/cut him, we owe him the money. I believe that I am right, and that if we cut/trade Lloyd we will incur a $9.167 million cap hit. Believe what you will. Yes, he was paid $5 mil last year, 1 mil of which counted in 06, 4 mil left to be accounted for, and will get $5 mil more this year. As I said (clearly, I thought), if the other $5 mil is payable after he's traded, then the new team would be on the hook for it. If not, it would be easy to insert a change in laguage so they would be. For some reason, you're acting as if that's not even possible, and that we would have to take a $9 mil hit. Don't know why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xameil Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Thats right. I forgot what happens to ES'ers who think outside the box. Sue me. I probably could for wasting my time...search is your friend...THe randy moss thing has been discussed..at least once in the past few weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurd Cudins Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Yes, he was paid $5 mil last year, 1 mil of which counted in 06, 4 mil left to be accounted for, and will get $5 mil more this year. As I said (clearly, I thought), if the other $5 mil is payable after he's traded, then the new team would be on the hook for it. If not, it would be easy to insert a change in laguage so they would be.For some reason, you're acting as if that's not even possible, and that we would have to take a $9 mil hit. Don't know why. Of course it's possible, but the original terms of the contract suggest that it's highly unlikely. We are invested in Lloyd and Arch and cutting/trading either one would be catastrophic. The option always remains that a trade could take place after June 1st, which would alleviate the hit this year, but add a huge debt to next year. It just doesn't seem wise or feasible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrimmage Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 He is not a FA, so we would not be required to pay him 40 mil per day. Only if there was a trade. The Raiders are going to cut him anyway, so he comes much cheaper than his current contract would call for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Passizle Posted February 21, 2007 Author Share Posted February 21, 2007 The Redskins are in a sorry state because of the highlighted reason that you wrote.So what's your point? Does not compute. Die Hard has been insulting my intelligence, character and values (even down to the point of how I raise my children) becasue he/she thinks that Moss is the devil basically, and he would bring this entire team down with his lack of character/values/integrity. My point is that if he holds these values so high, then how could he/she stand to watch Redskin football, let alone be a fan, for the past 15 years? The FO has had everything but high values. According to his/her beliefs, he/she should be very distanced from Redskin football. In fact, he/she should be distanced from pro sports in general. I created a thread to intelligently discuss the pros and cons of this imaginary trade possibility. Die Hard has turned it into a holy war on personal values and has attacked me personally. He/she has the balls to say that anyone who had this thought, or agrees with it, must have character flaws, no values and probably should not be allowed to rasie children in a nutshell. Its pathetic IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Passizle Posted February 21, 2007 Author Share Posted February 21, 2007 I probably could for wasting my time...search is your friend...THe randy moss thing has been discussed..at least once in the past few weeks. Show me. I am on here every day and have not seen it once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rufus T Firefly Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Of course it's possible, but the original terms of the contract suggest that it's highly unlikely. We are invested in Lloyd and Arch and cutting/trading either one would be catastrophic. The option always remains that a trade could take place after June 1st, which would alleviate the hit this year, but add a huge debt to next year. It just doesn't seem wise or feasible. I really don't know what "terms of the contract" you think make it that another team couldn't pay his bonus. I tried to explain how that would either be automatic or easily worked out. But you're only choosing to look at it in terms of a $9 mil hit, so not worth discussing any further. In fact, I KNOW it's easily done with Archuleta, since we can decline his bonus and a trading team would then take on his guaranteed salary for 3 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurd Cudins Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 I really don't know what "terms of the contract" you think make it that another team couldn't pay his bonus. I tried to explain how that would either be automatic or easily worked out. But you're only choosing to look at it in terms of a $9 mil hit, so not worth discussing any further.In fact, I KNOW it's easily done with Archuleta, since we can decline his bonus and a trading team would then take on his guaranteed salary for 3 years. The verbage "guaranteed" leads me to my conclusions. When one team guarantees money, it becomes responsible no matter what. You CAN'T transfer guaranteed money. Therefore, we owe Lloyd $9.167 of that $10 no matter what. There is no way of getting another team to pay that off for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xameil Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Show me. I am on here every day and have not seen it once. OK...once the search function starts working I will :doh: ok, I guess I was mistaken and there is no thread named after Randy Moss about this. I could have sworn it has been talked about in the past week about him coming to the skins. But Oh Well, I stand by my orignal post...the other person had more wisdom then the one who started the thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongLostSkin Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Well count me as at least one fan that supports Passizle here. Calling into question someone's morals, intelligence, and integrity because of a hypothetical to improve a football team? Unreal. It's not like Lloyd is a saint, or Dexter Manley was, etc. etc. If you don't like Randy Moss, just say it. If you don't think it is feasible, then say it. If anything, questioning Passizle's post in the manner that some have says more about their character than Passizle's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ldysknzfn1 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 If you don't like Randy Moss, just say it. It!..It!...It!..:laugh: I don't like Randy Moss. Never have. No reason really. Just don't care for him. So hopefully not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsGuy Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 There is no way Randy Moss comes here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Passizle Posted February 22, 2007 Author Share Posted February 22, 2007 well you better remember next time. This is a terrible idea. Don't you remember Randy Moss walking to the locker room with minutes left in the game? Then he pushed the camera out of the way? Terrible idea. It wouldn't be a good idea even if were Sanata and Sinorice. Bad move on his part but... there were 2 seconds left in the game. Minny had to gain possesion of the onside kick (next to impossible). I think Moss was just frustrated. But 2 seconds, come on! I think showing some emotion, albeit bad, is better than someone laughin it up on the sidelines ...cough...brunell...cough..ahem, as i was saying. I dont think he is a dream character guy, but compared to some of the people we haveon the team now, he is no demon either. I just think we would be able to use his talents well. Image S Moss and how dangerous he is in the short passing game, couple that with R Moss who has the deep threat. nice combo IMO. whether he would fit in with our standup guys? Thats an entireley different question that I dont have an answer to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreamingwolf Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 a winning team gathers no randy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desertfox59 Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 Randie Moss????? Who the hell is that guy?:whoknows: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dinzelwashington Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 i said this in one of the post. moss could be that possesion reciever we always needed. who cares if he walked off the field earliy when we beat their butts. and when he goes to oakland. cmon, theres always drama there. so just forget he ever went to oakland. if gibbs got a hold of him, he could change moss. moss is more discliple than loyld and owen. man if we could get this trade off, that would be awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BAFGA Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 Randy is not a team destroyer. The only person or team he is destroying is himself. He seems to project his frustration inward instead of outward, like Owens does. He wasn't a bad guy in Minnesota. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 Personally I think picking up Randy Moss is a terrible, terrible idea. However, I'd like to think we could discuss the topic without questioning the original poster's life choices. Everyone is entitled to a terrible idea now and then. Lighten up people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.