Arrington's contract. Team response. Buddha, and PC, you'll love this.

[Art]

I checked with the team today about the story in the Washington Times and asked about Arrington's cap number. Here's the official response from the the team through Karl Swanson.

"sorry, we don't divulge contract terms.....but the washington times does not know as much as it thinks it does, which has been demonstrated repeatedly."

It's kind of hard to argue with that .

[Thinking Skins]

:laugh: :laugh: :gus: :gus: :gus: :gus: :laugh: :laugh:

[GrimReaper21]

How did u get in contact with the redskins.

[Art]

I e-mailed.

[Burgold]

that response is too funny. whoever emailed that back to you really isn't hiding his opinion of the Times.

[Buddha]

I guess great minds think alike-- I did the same thing yesterday and got the same response. Except for the commentary on the WT. Swanson must like you better. :laugh:

I spent some time trying to dig up articles from the WP on Arrington's signing, but they must be archived and inaccessible by search engines. I'm almost POSITIVE that Arrington's original signing bonus was payable in installments, which may explain why the Times is confused. He may be receiving the final $3 million chunk, but for cap purposes it's already been prorated over the life of the deal when he signed back in 2000.

[NavyDave]

For sports and food coupons you have to go with the posts but for accurate OP Eds I have to go with the times

[Art]

Buddha,

I agree with what you wrote here. Further, the total six-year value of Lavar's contract is worth $33 million. If you factor in his base salary and the numbers already posted on NFLPA you get $32 million already. The total seven-year top value of his deal is $50 million. If you include the voidable seventh year right now you're already at $41 million in bonus and base.

My guess is Lavar has already nearly maxed his earning power on the initial contract by reaching incentives and the next approximately $9 million boost would come if he were named Defensive MVP or something. But, the numbers already reported on NFLPA seem to nearly add up to his contractual maximum for six years. I just don't believe the Times is correct in how it reported this and I believe they mistook something here and have bonked on this.

I allow that they may be right, but, I seriously doubt it.

One interesting note though is we've essentially paid a two-time Pro Bowler a total of $1.6 or so million for THREE years. For those of you hollering at Mendes, perhaps you should factor that in . I have no problem with incentive based contracts. Lavar has been paid very little the last three years and he's earned more. Now, he's getting more. I suspect he only really counts about $7.5 million against the cap next year. And, I'm cool with that.

[PCS]

"sorry, we don't divulge contract terms.....but the washington times does not know as much as it thinks it does, which has been demonstrated repeatedly."

Yep. I'd say that just about covers it. Of course being the Times, why let the truth stand in the way of a "good" story,or at least another pessimistic one about the Skins. Must be the question of the day out at Redskins park. "Okay. What is the Times saying we did wrong today?"

[gridironmike]

Here is the NFL Player Association's breakdown of Lavar's salary. http://www.nflpa.org/members/playerProfile.asp?ID=28753 Hey, he's worth the money and more.:deal:

[Brave]

The Washington Times.

Not as soft as Charmin ... but effective when used similarly. :yes:

[PCS]

Now that's an ouch. In more ways than one.