Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

PFT: Skins expected to bid on Brown (merged--MET)

benskins26

By benskins26
in The Stadium

Recommended Posts

jflow78

jflow78

Posted
Posted

I'm starting to get the feeling that the FO has actually spread out so many feelers that the media honestly has absolutely no idea what they're going to do. It's hilarious because every day there are two or three more players that show up on the signing list of a team that has "no cap room" according to some.

Wouldn't it be great if Friday came and tons of media is hanging out at the park waiting for the first signing, and D&V are gone fishing. Maybe this is all Vinny sticking it to the media.

But it's probably not and we're probably going to sign Haynesworth, Canty, Willis, Dockery, Hall, Brown, and talk coach Cowher, Reeves, Shanahan, and the reanimated corpse of Lombardi into coming back in a consulting team. After that Dan and Vinny will sit in front of Congress and ask for another $25 billion to sign a punter and put a retractable dome over the stadium, at least I think that was the last thing someone reported.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
elkabong82

elkabong82

Posted
Posted

We're expected to bid, that's different than actually landing him. I think his price tag will get up too high for us, especially with Baltimore's recent success. I would see us brining in Dockery, because his price tag will be lower given we were his first team, he wants to play with his buddy Samuels again, and he just got released for not living up to a monster contract. Brown's price is going up, Dock's is going down.

In other words, I think we get outbid for Brown and sign Dockery for less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
redskins0756

redskins0756

Posted
Posted
Per Profootballtalk

The Washington Redskins intend to go after Baltimore Ravens free agent center Jason Brown after midnight when the free agency signing period officially begins unless they re-sign left guard Pete Kendall, according to Adam Caplan of Scout.com.

Per Caplan, Brown could be paid at a level approaching top guard money. That would mean an annual average compensation of $8 million.

The Miami Dolphins, who have been looking to improve at center over starter Samson Satele, and the Buffalo Bills are expected to pursue Brown, too.

According to the article, the St. Louis Rams and the Jacksonville Jaguars are expected to bypass Brown.

The Minnesota Vikings are another possibility if Matt Birk isn’t re-signed.

I personally like this move. But I'm starting to worry that we've got too many irons in the fire. Definitely shouldn't be a quiet offseason this year!

Heard about this too. Apparently a very good blocker against the 3-4 NT because of his strength. Coincidentally we also play a team twice a year that uses that particular scheme ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
redskins0756

redskins0756

Posted
Posted
eh, only if we sign Hall.

Either way Springs costs too much. Injury prone and he's lost a step too in coverage. Just not the same player we initially signed. He's due a boatload of money and this would help us get under the cap to make a few moves in FA and get our rookie deals inked. Also would provide more room if we are looking into an extension for Chris Horton or Rocky.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SkinsMaster88

SkinsMaster88

Posted
Posted
For anyone who has seen Brown play G, is he better suited at G or C? My only concern would be signing him to play G when he's just an ok G but an excellent C. Thoughts?

Brown started 31 games at LG for the Ravens. Only switched over to C this past year. I don't see many Ravens' games though, so I can't comment on his ability as a guard vs. center. Someone else mentioned he was more of a liability at guard, but I'd trust the coaches and scouts. He does have more experience at LG than C in the NFL.

I'd prefer Dockery at a likely lower price, but Brown was near the top of my FA wishlist from earlier on.

Also, if this goes and the Haynesworth move goes down, it means that JLC's initial sources don't really have much control/insight into the organization, are feeding him wrong info, or most of what he comments on is speculation.

Haynesworth on 2/24: Jason La Canfora, of The Washington Post, reports many people inside the Washington Redskins organization say they would be surprised if the team signed Tennessee Titans impending free-agent DL Albert Haynesworth (http://www.kffl.com/gnews.php?id=555536)

On 2/26: "The Washington Redskins plan to pursue Tennessee Titans defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth if he becomes a free agent tomorrow."(http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/25/AR2009022503965.html)

Brown: (from the same WP article today)

"Despite having an offensive line that many in the organization believe is in need of an overhaul, Snyder and Cerrato are not expected to pursue the linemen expected to command big contracts, such as left tackle Marvel Smith and guard Chris Kemoeatu of the Pittsburgh Steelers, and versatile Baltimore Ravens offensive lineman Jason Brown."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
morpheusmeyers

morpheusmeyers

Posted
Posted
Brown started 31 games at LG for the Ravens. Only switched over to C this past year. I don't see many Ravens' games though, so I can't comment on his ability as a guard vs. center. Someone else mentioned he was more of a liability at guard, but I'd trust the coaches and scouts. He does have more experience at LG than C in the NFL.

I'd prefer Dockery at a likely lower price, but Brown was near the top of my FA wishlist from earlier on.

Thanks for the input. I watched Brown at C a little last year and was impressed, but didn't pay much attention to him when he played G prior to last season. IF he is a better C than G I think I would rather sign Dockery to play G, especially if he costs significantly less than Brown.

If anyone else has seen Brown play G, how is he? Worth the loot?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hardcore Zornography

Hardcore Zornography

Posted
Posted
We're 7 million under the cap. Everyone we we're talking about wants 10 mil a year. How the **** is this gonna work?!

Is it 7 mil? It aint far.

When Hall resigns, Springs is gone and Hall will make 2 or 3 base salary in his first year. That gains 5 or 6 mil in cap space right there.

Haynesworths base could be around 3 or 4 for the first year.

Brown and Dock could be in the 1-1.5 range the first year each.

Then Taylor restructures/takes pay cut to around 4 mil.

That frees up money to sign the draftees.

Waalaa.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SkinsMaster88

SkinsMaster88

Posted
Posted

Usually it would be the case of a vet min base for the 1st or possibly 2nd years so that the majority of the cap number is only the signing bonus prorated component in the first few years of the deal. This is how we ended up with high numbers from that 2004 class now, and the reason for all the restructuring as the high base salaries are in later years of the contract.

However, with the CBA expiring and the uncapped year in 2010, there's a new 30% rule exception: (found from http://www.profootball24x7.com/column_view.php?cid=46&id=3261&view=archive)

NEW RULE – 30% RULE: For any new contract signed after the Owner’s opted out in May of 2008, a player’s salary (excluding signing bonus proration), may not increase from one year to the next by more than 30% of the first year salary. This rule also applies to all contracts that are renegotiated in 2009.

Therefore, to still give the massive $100 million type deal, it will be more evenly spread in base salary, so rather than something like this (just using arbitrary numbers):

2009: $500k

2010: $1m

2011: $3m

2012: $5m

2013: $12m

2014: $12m

2015: $15m

It would have to follow that 30% rule.

Also the prorated signing bonus only covers 5 years because of the uncapped year. So if we give a $20 million signing bonus, there's a $4m charge for each of the next 5 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NewCliche21

NewCliche21

Posted
Posted
Hey MODS? Can someone PM on the size of my sig? It changed all of a sudden and I didn't do it. If you guys made it that small I'll just go ahead and get rid of it and go back to the Colt Brennam sig I had. I can't even tell what it is.

I swear, baby! This has never happened to me before!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hardcore Zornography

Hardcore Zornography

Posted
Posted
Usually it would be the case of a vet min base for the 1st or possibly 2nd years so that the majority of the cap number is only the signing bonus prorated component in the first few years of the deal. This is how we ended up with high numbers from that 2004 class now, and the reason for all the restructuring as the high base salaries are in later years of the contract.

However, with the CBA expiring and the uncapped year in 2010, there's a new 30% rule exception: (found from http://www.profootball24x7.com/column_view.php?cid=46&id=3261&view=archive)

NEW RULE – 30% RULE: For any new contract signed after the Owner’s opted out in May of 2008, a player’s salary (excluding signing bonus proration), may not increase from one year to the next by more than 30% of the first year salary. This rule also applies to all contracts that are renegotiated in 2009.

Therefore, to still give the massive $100 million type deal, it will be more evenly spread in base salary, so rather than something like this (just using arbitrary numbers):

2009: $500k

2010: $1m

2011: $3m

2012: $5m

2013: $12m

2014: $12m

2015: $15m

It would have to follow that 30% rule.

Also the prorated signing bonus only covers 5 years because of the uncapped year. So if we give a $20 million signing bonus, there's a $4m charge for each of the next 5 years.

So pardon my ignorance, it has been a long day and I don't feel like thinking too hard.

Are you saying my logic for Fat Albert wouldn't work because of the 30% rule? Or that it could work even with this rule?

I had never heard of such a thing until you posted that. So if that is the case, and my logic doesn't work, then I guess there is no way we can get all the players I mentioned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SkinsMaster88

SkinsMaster88

Posted
Posted
So pardon my ignorance, it has been a long day and I don't feel like thinking too hard.

Are you saying my logic for Fat Albert wouldn't work because of the 30% rule? Or that it could work even with this rule?

I had never heard of such a thing until you posted that. So if that is the case, and my logic doesn't work, then I guess there is no way we can get all the players I mentioned.

Yeah, well, it seems that the rule would prevent the creative cap maneuvering we tend to do with the big FA contracts. That's how we were able to get all those players early in 2003, 2004, and 2006.

With this 30% rule, if you have a 7-year, $100M deal like the rumor for Haynesworth, you'd have a max change from 1st year ---> 7th year of (1.3)^6 = 4.83. If you have $30 million guaranteed, with $20 mil of it SB, and rest as an option/roster bonus (Haynesworth or his agent said he wants $35 mil), then take $4m cost from prorated bonus for 2009.

Then, you have 100-30 = 70 mil in base salaries over the contract. Based again on that 30% rule using summation of 1 + 1.3 + 1.3^2 +...+ 1.3^6 = 17.6. Then, have 70/17.6 = ~4. So multiply all those numbers by $4 million.

Gives:

2009: $4m SB (prorate) + $4m base = $8m

2010: 4m SB, 5.2 base = $9.2m

2011: 4m SB, 6.8 base = $10.8m

2012: 4m SB, 8.8 base = $12.8m

2013: 4m SB, 11.4 base = $15.4m

2014: 5m option, 14.9 base = $19.9m

2015: 5m option, 19.3 base = $24.3m

Note: There's probably lots of exceptions in the system that most NFL teams will use, but that's a brief simple overview into how some of the cap numbers could work. As you can see, a $100 million contract can take up a hell of a lot of space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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