Cooool...E Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Ok, so Clinton Portis has a cap figure of 12 million next year. Tomlinson will have a figure of 8.8 million against the cap. Now, the smart team the Chargers has realized that is to much for an aging RB who was not the player he once was. It looks like LT will stay in San Diego for a reduced salary. The not so smart team the Redskins have not even discussed this for Clinton Portis. I have created this thread because I dont know the answer. What am I missing here? Why would we not ask him to play for a reduced rate? I think this board is 50/50 on CP and his current ability. But I think we are all in agreement that he is is paid too much and we could use some of his salary to address other needs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-Prime Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 You're assuming CP would offer to take a pay cut.. He'd have to agree we can't force it on him.. and frankly why would he agree to less money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jthor99 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Don't get me wrong I like your idea. But, you have to remember that our organization operates much different then San Diego. They value the draft, and they take that philosphy to simply "move on" from players. LT included. We at the moment don't have that luxury. Could things change? Maybe, but I wouldn't bank on it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitnskins Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Because unfortunately, our OWNER and PORTIS area like best friends.....this is one of the real problem areas for our team! Portis doesn't fear anyone, because he and Danny have their own relationship, and that's who Portis answers to, not any of the Coaches. You can't have that type of relationship with the players, because it just undermines every bit of the LITTLE BIT OF LEVERAGE that the Coaches have over these primma donna/egotistical players of today! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSHRedskins3ATLBraves3 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 You're assuming CP would offer to take a pay cut.. He'd have to agree we can't force it on him.. and frankly why would he agree to less money? Did LT offer to take a pay cut? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooool...E Posted January 27, 2009 Author Share Posted January 27, 2009 You're assuming CP would offer to take a pay cut.. He'd have to agree we can't force it on him.. and frankly why would he agree to less money? Why is LT agreeing to take less money? In fear of release? I dont know. I would imagine he would have the same trade value as Portis. Also, San Diego would not want to release him based on the cap ramifications like Portis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jthor99 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Why is LT agreeing to take less money? In fear of release? I dont know. I would imagine he would have the same trade value as Portis. Also, San Diego would not want to release him based on the cap ramifications like Portis. Many people feel that eventually that is how the situation will get handled with LT taking a paycut. But, you never know. He's been on the record saying he wants to stay in San Diego, but money certainly does talk. I've never been the biggest fan of LT, but I do feel he is a "team" guy. I just don't like his crybaby attitude at times Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregpeck99 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 CP has become overvalued malignancy ... surgery is indicated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbs Hog Heaven Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 I like the idea Cooool...E, but even if the Redskins would be willing to do this, (which, bar a COMPLETE change of attitude and strategy, they won't. Danny's not gona' risk upseting one of the guys that brings the most bucks in for him); why would Portis agree to a pay cut? This is a guy at the tail end of his career, who's no real affinity to the 'Skins, outside of the mega bucks he gets paid, and the cosy little arrangement he has with the owner having his back over ANY Coach..... Why would he take a pay cut given we were not only dumb enough to put him on the salary he's currently on, but we'd be as likely to restructure and give him a ton more in gauranteed money before we did anything else. Love the idea, but it aint' happening under the current regime. Sadly. :mad: Hail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stew Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Portis' contract is guaranteed, I don't think LT's is. I think contracts become harder to restructure when the money is guaranteed, but i could be wrong. Can anyone confirm or debunk this? Besides the absurd amount of CP's contract, i think the guaranteed aspect of it also creates a problem for anything other then extending the same money over more years, which solves nothing. Also, do you really see CP taking a paycut? Also, Sproles is pushing for LT's job, who do we have pushing CP??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOF44 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Just a guess, but I'd bet most of Portis's cap figure is pro-rated signing bonus. LT is probably mainly salary. That gives the Chargers much more leverage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jthor99 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Portis' contract is guaranteed, I don't think LT's is. I think contracts become harder to restructure when the money is guaranteed, but i could be wrong. Can anyone confirm or debunk this? Besides the absurd amount of CP's contract, i think the guaranteed aspect of it also creates a problem for anything other then extending the same money over more years, which solves nothing. Also, do you really see CP taking a paycut? Also, Sproles is pushing for LT's job, who do we have pushing CP??? There's always some type of guarantee in an NFL contract. LT got 60M with 21M guanteed. http://www.signonsandiego.com/sports/chargers/20040814-1657-fbn-tomlinsoncontract.html According to what I've read he's owed 8.8M next year, which I would assume some of that is guaranteed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jthor99 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Just a guess, but I'd bet most of Portis's cap figure is pro-rated signing bonus. LT is probably mainly salary. That gives the Chargers much more leverage. I'm not sure how much "leverage" they really have at this point. Heck, every team knows at this point San Diego has atleast flirted with the idea of getting rid of him. From a contract perspective you are 100% correct though Why give up value when San Diego could just cut him? I've never understood why organizations leak out trade rumors like this because from my view point it kills value in return. Look at a team like New England with Randy Moss. They knew one way or another the Raiders were either going to cut Moss, or trade him, but they weren't just going to take any offer. They waited becauase at that point the Raiders were against the wall. I see a similar situationi playing out with LT if they don't re-due his deal, and I see New England being in the mix to get him. Wouldn't that be funny LT ending up in New England after he wined and cryed about them a few years ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-Prime Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Did LT offer to take a pay cut? He must've, you have a contract the team is bound by it.. They just can't come in and say "ok well we're cutting your pay" sorry doesn't work like that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOF44 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 I'm not sure how much "leverage" they really have at this point. Heck, every team knows at this point San Diego has atleast flirted with the idea of getting rid of him. From a contract perspective you are 100% correct though I was speaking of leverage in getting him to take a paycut to stay. I doubt LT will get that amount on the open market. With Portis it's not even an option for us not to keep him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dance04 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Lol, yeah good idea to alienate one of your best players... And just so you know, last year CP restructured his contract to be more cap friendly, to help the team. (and also himself since more of it was guaranteed) So what can Danny say "Hey Clinton, I know we just restructured your contract last year, but would you mind doing it again?" Also, now CP pretty much has the team by the balls. The team can't cut him or trade him, the cap hit would kill us. The Skins have no leverage over CP unless they say we will "Marbury you" which will never happen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilsu Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 More proof why you don't tie up so much money into one runningback... Shaun Alexander, Edgerrin James, LaDainian Tomlinson. Arguably the least durable position... Yet the most replaceable. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Falcons hurting from paying too much for Turner a few years from now, either. He does have the advantage of having fresh legs, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SolidSnake84 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Worst comes to worst, just let portis share carries with another running back, be it Betts or whomever they'd bring in. If portis gripes about or does his usual behavior, then let him ride the pine until this next offseason, at which point the skins can either trade him or release him. We need to get one more year out of this loser before we can finally move on, sadly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#98QBKiller Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Isn't SD attempting to restructure now, i.e. not "reduce his salary?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laxpunk2006 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 He must've, you have a contract the team is bound by it.. They just can't come in and say "ok well we're cutting your pay" sorry doesn't work like that They can't force it but they can suggest it. The only two examples I know of a player giving money back are LaVar buying his way out of Washington, and I believe it was Marco Rivera that offered Jerry Jones his signing bonus back after serious back problems shortly after signing. Our team has zero leverage to change Portis' deal. As has been said, the majority (possibly all) has been guarunteed as part of the FO's strategy to get Portis into workouts last offseason. No one is going to trade for his current salary, and we can't release him for cap reasons. Portis is going to remain a Skin for at least the next 2-3 years at his current salary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rm8899 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Portis def aint taken a paycut to stay. He's probably jump ship before anything, sadly. We do need to take a chance and see if we can find a diamond in the rough RB in the draft. We screwed ourselves with the whole Jason Taylor deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spade Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 why would we trade him now when his cap number is just above 5 million for 09 and it'll take 12 million to get rid of him? Why all the trade Clinton talk anyway, why can't we just draft a running back to share carries with him or ditch Jason Taylor and go after Sproles. Just don't see why we need to trade away are whole pro bowl caliber offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpskins10 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 I love seeing people say how LT is slowing down and he's not the player he once was. Once he gets healthy, he's going to put up huge numbers next year, mark it. The guy is only 30, and while that's the wall for RBs, he takes care of his body better than most runners you'll see. He's got at least 2 or 3 good years left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IbleedBnG83 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Simple. CP's contract is gauranteed. If we cut him, we LOSE big time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IbleedBnG83 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Lol, yeah good idea to alienate one of your best players...And just so you know, last year CP restructured his contract to be more cap friendly, to help the team. (and also himself since more of it was guaranteed) So what can Danny say "Hey Clinton, I know we just restructured your contract last year, but would you mind doing it again?" Also, now CP pretty much has the team by the balls. The team can't cut him or trade him, the cap hit would kill us. The Skins have no leverage over CP unless they say we will "Marbury you" which will never happen CP restructuring his contract helps him MORE than it does the team. Sure we needed to do it. But please don't praise CP for accepting a gauranteed contract because he only benefited from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.