Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Quick question about Bailey trade for people with a good memory


Sebowski

Recommended Posts

Did we have to officially franchise him before we traded him, or did we just trade his rights?

Did he have to sign the tender before the trade went through?

I traded to search this and couldn't find it.

I need to know.

Any proof would be greatly appreciated

Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found this...not sure if it will help much

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=1742003

"Two player agents who represent NFL running backs that will become unrestricted free agents next month"

"Since then, the Redskins have designated Bailey a "franchise" player, the equivalent of making him a one-year qualifying offer worth $6.801 million."

"Obviously, for a trade to be consummated, Bailey, ostensibly a limited free agent, would have to sign a new contract."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

franchised then traded. He did not have to sign the tender I don't think. By franchising him, we retianed his rights.

We then traded him, though of course he wouldn't agree unless the Broncos gave him a contract, so that was done on their side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure the franchise tag doesn't have the salary cap ramifications of a guaranteed signing bonus. Therefore, when he was traded, there was no dead cap space due to the tag.

We did need to tag him as the franchise player to retain his rights, as others mentioned. Otherwise, he would've been a free agent and we wouldn't have given him his record-breaking (at the time) contract.

That's what a lot of people tend to forget. Many teams lose top all-pro players for nothing in return in free agency (Asante Samuel from Patriots, Nate Clements from Bills). We ended up getting our franchise RB with giving up Champ Bailey's rights and the 2nd round pick.

Also, if we signed Bailey, we wouldn't have been able to sign the other key pickups that 2004 offseason in Springs (who played better in 2004 than any of Bailey's previous Redskins seasons, unfortunately got injuries afterwards), Washington, and Griffin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure the franchise tag doesn't have the salary cap ramifications of a guaranteed signing bonus. Therefore, when he was traded, there was no dead cap space due to the tag.

We did need to tag him as the franchise player to retain his rights, as others mentioned. Otherwise, he would've been a free agent and we wouldn't have given him his record-breaking (at the time) contract.

That's what a lot of people tend to forget. Many teams lose top all-pro players for nothing in return in free agency (Asante Samuel from Patriots, Nate Clements from Bills). We ended up getting our franchise RB with giving up Champ Bailey's rights and the 2nd round pick.

Also, if we signed Bailey, we wouldn't have been able to sign the other key pickups that 2004 offseason in Springs (who played better in 2004 than any of Bailey's previous Redskins seasons, unfortunately got injuries afterwards), Washington, and Griffin.

We paid Portis a pile too, and still signed Washington, Griffin, etc. There's no way to paint that trade as a good move. Without the 2nd round pick, perhaps, but good running backs are way easier to find than shutdown corners. Over the duration since the trade, even though he may be overrated, I would have taken Bailey over Springs/Rogers hands down. You also have to ask who we would have picked instead of Rogers, and with the 2nd round pick we'd still have, and if Smoot would have been willing to stay with a true shutdown corner on the other side, and if we would have used 3 1st round picks on the Secondary, had it been solidified by Bailey all that time. Keep in mind, Springs is gone soon, and we will STILL have to draft another corner.

So let's look at an alternate Universe: Bailey our #1 corner. #2 pick, #1 pick used on Rogers used elsewhere, Betts starting RB, Mason, Cartwright, and another RB picked with #2 pick or #1 pick, for half the price of Portis or less. Would this RB be as good as Portis? No. Are there lots of other very productive backs for 1/2 his price or less? Yes.

Some teams let top players go for nothing, most don't. The Bills are notoriously cheap, and the Pats pay very few players big money deals. Not exactly representative examples.

We got heisted in the Bailey trade, pure and simple, and only someone with blinders would argue otherwise. That being said, the past is the past. I agree that Portis was misused under Gibbs, but it still seems like there is always something preventing him from being a top-5 back like LT, which is what he is paid like. I hope this new WCO results in a breakout year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We paid Portis a pile too, and still signed Washington, Griffin, etc. There's no way to paint that trade as a good move. Without the 2nd round pick, perhaps, but good running backs are way easier to find than shutdown corners. Over the duration since the trade, even though he may be overrated, I would have taken Bailey over Springs/Rogers hands down. You also have to ask who we would have picked instead of Rogers, and with the 2nd round pick we'd still have, and if Smoot would have been willing to stay with a true shutdown corner on the other side, and if we would have used 3 1st round picks on the Secondary, had it been solidified by Bailey all that time. Keep in mind, Springs is gone soon, and we will STILL have to draft another corner.

So let's look at an alternate Universe: Bailey our #1 corner. #2 pick, #1 pick used on Rogers used elsewhere, Betts starting RB, Mason, Cartwright, and another RB picked with #2 pick or #1 pick, for half the price of Portis or less. Would this RB be as good as Portis? No. Are there lots of other very productive backs for 1/2 his price or less? Yes.

Some teams let top players go for nothing, most don't. The Bills are notoriously cheap, and the Pats pay very few players big money deals. Not exactly representative examples.

We got heisted in the Bailey trade, pure and simple, and only someone with blinders would argue otherwise. That being said, the past is the past. I agree that Portis was misused under Gibbs, but it still seems like there is always something preventing him from being a top-5 back like LT, which is what he is paid like. I hope this new WCO results in a breakout year.

Nope, not even close. Alternative Universes exist only on the Sci-Fi Channel.

Keping Bailey was not an option. Not at any price, not in any universe. He hated the team, he hated Dan Snyder, he had done his best to force a move - and reduce his trade value to zero - by publicly airing his gripes and his intention to leave as soon as his contract was up. His value to us as a cornerback was nothing, because he was not going to play for us. And his value as a trade asset was severely lessened because the league knew he would be available as a free agent in a matter of months.

You can fault the Redskins organization for letting the situation with one of their prime assets deteriorate to the point of no return, and you'd be justified. It was ridiculous, and probably avoidable. But the trade itself? We achieved as much value in that deal as we could possibly have hoped for. No masked bandits involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the actual alternative that there was: Denver offered their 1st round pick straight up for Bailey - no Portis involvement. If we had done that deal we could have kept our 2nd round pick, saved the money we spent on Portis and drafted Steven Jackson who was available at the Broncos pick. He would have fit much better into Gibbs' power running scheme and he would have been MUCH cheaper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We paid Portis a pile too, and still signed Washington, Griffin, etc. There's no way to paint that trade as a good move. Without the 2nd round pick, perhaps, but good running backs are way easier to find than shutdown corners. Over the duration since the trade, even though he may be overrated, I would have taken Bailey over Springs/Rogers hands down. You also have to ask who we would have picked instead of Rogers, and with the 2nd round pick we'd still have, and if Smoot would have been willing to stay with a true shutdown corner on the other side, and if we would have used 3 1st round picks on the Secondary, had it been solidified by Bailey all that time. Keep in mind, Springs is gone soon, and we will STILL have to draft another corner.

So let's look at an alternate Universe: Bailey our #1 corner. #2 pick, #1 pick used on Rogers used elsewhere, Betts starting RB, Mason, Cartwright, and another RB picked with #2 pick or #1 pick, for half the price of Portis or less. Would this RB be as good as Portis? No. Are there lots of other very productive backs for 1/2 his price or less? Yes.

Some teams let top players go for nothing, most don't. The Bills are notoriously cheap, and the Pats pay very few players big money deals. Not exactly representative examples.

We got heisted in the Bailey trade, pure and simple, and only someone with blinders would argue otherwise. That being said, the past is the past. I agree that Portis was misused under Gibbs, but it still seems like there is always something preventing him from being a top-5 back like LT, which is what he is paid like. I hope this new WCO results in a breakout year.

You can't argue that Portis dosen't bring character, personality and humor to the team which Bailey did not. Bailey was about Bailey, he did not seem to like the players on the team or the team itself. Also its hard to find a running back that will do things like lay people out when blocking and sacrifice there shoulder and body to make a tackle. I would take a player like Portis any day of the week over a Hollywood want to be pretty boy like Bailey. One more thing, how many playoff appearances has Bailey helped Denver to achieve?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bailey did not want to be a Redskin and the Mediots do not mention that when they talk about the trade.

They make it seem like we wanted Clinton Portis so bad that we just traded the NFL's "Premier CB" for him. They do not talk about how before the 2003 Season we offered Champ a contract that would make him the highest paid D Back in NFL History and how he turned it down. Then once again when Coach Gibbs returned the offered Champ another huge contract, Champ turned it down again and then Joe told him he can look else where.

But that is the Mediots for you, always coming down on the Redskins! :mad:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uhhh, the reason Bailey didn't want to be a Redskin was mostly due to the money.

Dan Snyder had to choose between paying Lavar Arrington or Champ Bailey the big bucks, and he chose Lavar.

There is also talk that it was impossible for Champ Bailey to remain a Redskin because his wife was pissed at his extramarital affairs, but that makes no sense as the Redskins wouldn't have gone through the whole charade of contract negotiations and actually franchising him. What if Denver didn't want to trade for him? Then what?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is also talk that it was impossible for Champ Bailey to remain a Redskin because his wife was pissed at his extramarital affairs, but that makes no sense as the Redskins wouldn't have gone through the whole charade of contract negotiations and actually franchising him. What if Denver didn't want to trade for him? Then what?

It might be the worst secret in DC. Multiple people who hung out around town in the early part of the decade can verify this, Champ liked his women :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's the basic run-down:

August 2003

Champ Bailey is offered the "largest" contract for a cornerback up to that point. $55M contract over 9 years including a $14.7M signing bonus.

However, in comparison, Ty Law received a 7-Year $50M contract including a $14.3M signing bonus from the Patriots in 1999 (four years prior). Terence Newman received a rookie contract that year with the Cowboys worth $33M over 7 years including $13M in bonuses.

Champ Bailey considered himself the best cornerback in the league, and the contract offered to him is actually worse than Ty Law's contract if both were to live out their entire deals. Champ Bailey's contract would have been worth $6.1M per year. Ty Law's contract from four years earlier is worth $7.1M per year.

To put things in perspective, Nate Clements signs a contract with the San Francisco 49ers four years later in 2007 worth $80M over 8 years including $22M in guarantees. Basically $10M per year if he lives out the entire contract.

December 2003

Lavar Arrington signs a 8-Year $68M contract with a $13M signing bonus.

February 2004

Champ Bailey is franchised, which entitles the Redskins to match any offers from other teams or else receive two first rounders as compensation.

March 2004

Champ Bailey + 2nd rounder traded for Clinton Portis. Champ Bailey signs a 7-Year $63M contract including a $18M signing bonus with the Denver Broncos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couple things here...

Let's get something straight about Bailey: While he's definitely one of the top CBs this decade, he's had his ups and downs.

His rookie year here he was excellent.

In 2000 he was unreal, not allowing a TD all season.

In 2001 he got off to a slow start and then came on toward the end.

In 2002 and 2003 he was gambling a lot (probably to pad his INTs for the big upcoming contract) and the inconsistencies started.

In 2004, his first year in Denver he flat out stunk. He was beaten deep early and often.

In 2005, he was injured for much of the year, but gutted it out and had a solid if unspectacular season.

2006 was his best year. He had the best season of any CB ever. I don't believe he allowed a TD and he picked off every pass that came his way.

2007 he was excellent though not quite at his 2006 level

__________________________________________________________

Even if you want to consider Bailey a "shut down" CB because he's the closest thing we have to it in today's NFL, I'd argue that that type of player doesn't have the impact that he used to.

While it's counter-intuitive that today's spread em out passing game would make the great CB less valuable... think about it. In the old NFL, you'd have 2 maybe 3 receiving threats to defend because there was a blocking TE and a FB in the game. You could put your shut down CB on one WR and double the other WR with your lesser CB and Safety over the top. These days, teams are breaking out empty backfields with 4 WRs and a great pass-catching TE. Take Moss and Stallworth out of the game but Wes Welker will catch 9 passes for 115 yards and a couple scores.

In today's NFL, I'd rather have 3 solid CBs than 1 great one and 2 average joes. And if I was going to pay a big fish on defense, I'd rather lock up a young Jason Taylor or Dwight Freeney. I think a disruptive edge rusher is always going to be more valuable to stopping a passing game than a great CB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In today's NFL, I'd rather have 3 solid CBs than 1 great one and 2 average joes. And if I was going to pay a big fish on defense, I'd rather lock up a young Jason Taylor or Dwight Freeney. I think a disruptive edge rusher is always going to be more valuable to stopping a passing game than a great CB.

I posed this before, but what if we chose to pay Champ Bailey what he wanted... And then still got Shawn Springs. That would've been a great tandem.

With that said, I rather have Jason Taylor or Dwight Freeney over Champ Bailey as I agree that defenses start at the front and not the back.

Also, the Broncos defense was ranked 4th in the year prior to Champ Bailey and was also ranked 4th when Champ Bailey arrived. It started spiralling into crappiness once they decide to replace their line with former Browns, despite picking up Bailey, Lynch, and Bly. Probably more damning evidence that a superstar secondary is overrated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sweet post, alot of pretty cool statistics and opinions posted. Champ was the man, but I just can't stop thinking about Champ always getting burned deep lately. Monday night this year vs the packers? He got burned in OT. I think him and bly got burned all game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it was a great trade for us (though I have previously pointed out that one overlooked reason we had to sweeten the pot w/ a 2d is that Portis had another cheap year left with the Broncos on his rookie contract).

I'm also not much convinced by the "he would never play for us" argument. He wanted to move on (at least in part b/c we wouldn't pay him as much as he wanted), but he was franchised. That means his options were to threaten and grouse, then slink in and play (see Briggs, Lance, in Chicago); work out a trade amenable to him, the Skins, and another team; or sit out the year and not get paid and (I think this is permissible) get franchised again the next year so be back in the same position. So he might not have been happy, but he didn't have all that much leverage in terms of leaving.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...