Buddha Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 Newly posted at NFLPA.org-- Flemister's base salaries are as follows: 2003-- $450K 2004-- $575K 2005-- $1.05M Also, for you "We're Going Straight to CAP HELL!" guys, LaVar's base salaries in 2003 and 2004 have been escalated: 2003-- $5.96M (was $4.973M) 2004-- $6.36M (was $5.74M) I still say we should show tremendous patience and restraint by working around these base numbers, guaranteeing all or part ONLY if we ABSOLUTELY need the cap space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen-like Todd Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 Let's trade Lavar for a 6th rounder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRMADD Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 Lavar's too expensive! Let's trade him for a first rounder that we can use on a WR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRMADD Posted January 2, 2003 Share Posted January 2, 2003 Probably should have used one of those "smiley"things -- someone's gonna take me seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montilar Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 Flem's not going to see that 1.05 million unless he improves significantly. Good way to do the deal. He earns the 1 million or gets cut before when he doesn't cut the mustard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 LaVar fumbles too often. Cut him! I'm with Buddha: The way to stay out of Cap Hell is to pay salary, rather than bonuses. That way, if the player doesn't earn his pay, you can cut him (or threaten to cut him if he doesn't take a cut) without ruining things later. A guy who's scheduled to make a big paycheck next year can be negotiated with, but a guy who got a big bonus two years ago has already got the money: it's gonna count against the cap whether he's here or not. (Now, I don't have a problem with guaranteeing a salary: We all know the only way LaVar isn't going to be worth $5M for the next two years is if there's a bad injury.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 Lavar is the star of the LB corps Champ is the star of the CBs And if healthy Gardener is going to be te star of the D Line So an average of $5 mil annually for each star at those positions isnt that bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 Originally posted by NavyDave Lavar is the star of the LB corps Champ is the star of the CBs And if healthy Gardener is going to be te star of the D Line So an average of $5 mil annually for each star at those positions isnt that bad. Not bad a'tall. What aboutthe future star of the safeties? Draft or FA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 LaVar's salary and the point made about not spending too much money on any one unit are the reasons I was somewhat hesitant about the money paid to Trotter. Last year we had a good linebacking corps of Arrington, Mitchell and Pierce. Were both Mitchell and Pierce outstanding? No. Mitchell was solid against the run but is a step slow in coverage. Pierce was a rookie that was learning, although the coaches admitted he was ahead of most rookies in terms of his curve in the NFL. So, bringing back that trio to me, with the addition of Armstead for leadership, would have been enough to field a very good unit for 2002 and 2003. That extra money could have been spent on the DL, where it clearly now needs to be spent. I agree that you need a superior player on each of the defensive units. The last time the Redskins won the Super Bowl we had pro bowl caliber players in Mann at DE, Marshall at LB and Green at CB. We built the defense around them. We now have two players that dominate their opposite numbers on defense, Bailey and Gardener. Arrington is close to becoming that kind of player as well. To me in that scenario and with some competent help at LB already, Jeremiah Trotter was a hood ornament of an addition Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlobberknockerSkinsFan Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 If anyone can get ahold of Champ, tell him that his little brother needs to convert to a Safety so we can draft him and get rid of Terrell's non tackling butt. That would be a backfield that no one would want to throw to. Could you imagine having Bailey, Smoot, Bailey and Ohalete. Oh to be able to dream........ HAIL TO THE REDSKINS HAIL VICTORY :notworthy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 Bulldog, Don't be a revisionist. Last year when Jones came in he so thoroughly outplayed Mitchell we were all begging to retain him and not Mitchell. Mitchell is a nice backup type player. He does a fine job and we're lucky to have him. But, saying he's good enough is just revisionist history at its finest. Trotter is an elite player. You got him and hope to have him at least for the next five years. It's a no-brainer to get a young player with that pedigree. Especially on a team that just saw the middle backer it had under contract thoroughly outplayed by a guy we had no intention of keeping around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
masaemaya Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 I gotta agree with Art. Mitchell is a great player. His play has been as good as or even better than Trotter's. That said, however, Trotter is an elite player. He is one of the top 5 MLBs in the league. The Skins couldn't afford to pass him up. Next year that should be very evident. This was by far his worst year (even worse than his early college days).... Well, I guess that's what M. Lewis will do to ya. As far as LaVar, he is THE ****ING BEST! He contains more energy inside of him than all the other players on the field COMBINED. He has the ability to completely dominate a game -- a feat which no other football player can (well, maybe you could make a case for Ray Lewis). If he is injured, the front office better stay by his side and keep him as happy as he can be. If they decide to cut a few things here or there to save some cash and LaVar decides he'd rather be somewhere else, I will never come back to this franchise. I think a lot of other fans will echo my comments. inv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted January 3, 2003 Share Posted January 3, 2003 the problem with that thinking is that with the contracts we have tied up in the linebacking corps we now are strapped in attempting to add DL help. I would rather have Arrington, Armstead, Mitchell and Pierce and THEN have a nice DT to pair with a resigned Gardener, then have Trotter with those other LBs but either miss out on Gardener or have to pass on another DT Look folks. Defense starts up front. You have to have a front four that can pressure the qb and stop the run. Often overlooked in looking at outstanding linebackers like Mike Singletary or even LT, is the fact they had outstanding players in front of them that allowed them the freedom to use their skills to maximum effect. One year, the Bears put 3 defensive linemen in the pro bowl in Hampton, McMichael and Dent. The Giants sent George Martin, Leonard Marshall and Jim Burt to a number of pro bowls as well. Having LT and Carl Banks and Harry Carson was a luxury that could be afforded in the days BEFORE the cap Today, you could keep LT but would probably have to jettison Banks or Carson to be able to afford your DL and CBs. That's just the way it is. I would rather have a solid middle linebacker and an outstanding pair of DT's, than a hodgepodge up front and an elite player behind them. Brian Urlacher made a lot more plays last year when he had Washington and Traylor in front of him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.