TheMalcolmConnection Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Same. If God forbid, he busts, I don't him to still be affecting our cap if he's not on the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koolblue13 Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 If he has a career ending injury and we can't afford to sign his replacement, that sucks. If he is the greatest thing ever after three years, I don't want to hear **** about his contract in year 4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmchairRedskin Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 I don't even understand why offset language is a thing. If a player is cut and paid by the next team, why should the cutting team pay him also? Why should the player get to double dip? I'm sure it won't matter in Griff's case, but you're never 100% sure on first rounders. I realize CAA wants to set precedent and the team wants to set it's own precedent, but I think should Griff say just take the deal, then at least further down the line CAA can tell the next player that it was Griff's decision and not that CAA's failing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice_of_Reason Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 This will get done. Any time there are millions of dollars on the table, there's going to be a little bit of back and forth. The team needs to protect itself, Griffin needs the best deal he can get. Both sides want to get it done, it will get done. Probably today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IrepDC Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 I thought teams already protected themselves by creating the rookie pay scale.. a four year 21 mil contract for a top 3 pick is already a bargain. Just pay them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unforgiven Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Yeah, like most people have said this seems like a pretty trivial issue that in the end won't hold things up. It's easy to understand each sides point though, smart business. Obviously if RG3 isn't here in a few years then we have a lot bigger problems than the money from the contract... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard Washington Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 It's amazing that FO and agents still found something to delay negotiations over. Headline: "Colts and Luck haggle over ownership of the pen to be used to sign contract" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arundelredskin Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 I know we give away half the team,whats with all the indecision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KCClybun Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 The front office has an incentive to protect itself. RG3 shouldn't bust, but you don't want to have to pay him IF---and it's a big IF--he does. The claims of "JUST GIVE HIM WHAT HE WANTS!" landed us in some pretty miserable contract situations before. We have to cover our ass. RG3 isn't going to have some Brady Quinn-esque hold out, and it''s not like out front office is doing what the Colts tried with Andrew Luck when it comes to trying to more or less control his entire marketing image. At the most, he might---might---miss a couple days with the rookies. But Kerrigan and Trent's deals both pretty much came right before training camp (if I recall Trent's deal was finalized the first day camp opened), so this isn't shocking. No need to panic, people. ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfansince1988 Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 This is all so stupid, we are not cutting RG3 in four years, even if he struggles, which I would be stunned if he does, we would still keep him, we gave up too much for him. Can't they just split the difference and have off set language in two of the four years of the contract. He has to be at camp tomorrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins2victory Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Im not worried..... He will be signed...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vicrodjr Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Would love to see him signed and get the season started. We dont need him missing ANY time with his teammates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 rg3 will be in camp on time. bookmark it. This. I think this is a non-issue. RG3 inks and shows up to camp. I have some friends in N'Orleans who were fretting over Brees, like the Saints weren't gonna get that deal done. Yeah right. Bruce is the man. Getting the #2 pick was the hard part. This is just crossing i's and dotting t's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
authentic Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 We all know that RG3 will be done by TC... but rookies report tomorrow.. and it would be nice if he signs by the time they report so he can take advantage of the early start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWAI Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 The front office has an incentive to protect itself. RG3 shouldn't bust, but you don't want to have to pay him IF---and it's a big IF--he does. The claims of "JUST GIVE HIM WHAT HE WANTS!" landed us in some pretty miserable contract situations before. We have to cover our ass.] You are presenting a warped view of this situation. You are misrepresenting this. You apparently believe RG3 should be treated with caution because Albert Haynsworth burned the Vinnie Cerrato organization. You are under the misconception that the rookie wage scale is not in place. Rookies are not allowed to sign 5 year deals for $60 million dollars. Lets get down to reality and I will illustrate how rediculous it is that the contract has not already been signed. There is no covering one's *****. There are no "MISERABLE" contract situations available with 4 year rookie contracts. Read and understand: Drew Brees just signed a 5 year deal for 100 million dollars and the Saints must pay him a $37 million dollar bonus, plus a salary of $3 million dollars THIS SEASON. $40 million dollars they must hand out this year. RG3 will sign a 4 year deal for around $22 million dollars. That is an average of around 5 million dollars per year as a cap hit but with a $10 million dollar bonus the Skins will be about $11 million dollars out of pocket in actual cash this year. Next year, who knows. Maybe $3 million, or about what Drew Brees earns in salary. The point is that even in an ABSOLUTELY ABSURD scenerio in which the Skins cut Griffin in year 3, they would experience a cap hit of maybe 3-4 million dollars. These are approx. figures but they are close to what will occur. It's pretty darn unlikely that RG3 is getting cut so this whole scenario just makes the signing delay seem as though the Redskins are incompetent and the delay becomes unnecessary. If RG3 is not signed and under contract by Monday afternoon, I will have to wonder if Vinnie Cerrato has somehow gotten involved once again in the Redskins front office? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky52Mc Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 You are presenting a warped view of this situation. You are misrepresenting this. You apparently believe RG3 should be treated with caution because Albert Haynsworth burned the Vinnie Cerrato organization. You are under the misconception that the rookie wage scale is not in place. Rookies are not allowed to sign 5 year deals for $60 million dollars. Lets get down to reality and I will illustrate how rediculous it is that the contract has not already been signed. There is no covering one's *****. There are no "MISERABLE" contract situations available with 4 year rookie contracts. Read and understand:Drew Brees just signed a 5 year deal for 100 million dollars and the Saints must pay him a $37 million dollar bonus, plus a salary of $3 million dollars THIS SEASON. $40 million dollars they must hand out this year. RG3 will sign a 4 year deal for around $22 million dollars. That is an average of around 5 million dollars per year as a cap hit but with a $10 million dollar bonus the Skins will be about $11 million dollars out of pocket in actual cash this year. Next year, who knows. Maybe $3 million, or about what Drew Brees earns in salary. The point is that even in an ABSOLUTELY ABSURD scenerio in which the Skins cut Griffin in year 3, they would experience a cap hit of maybe 3-4 million dollars. These are approx. figures but they are close to what will occur. It's pretty darn unlikely that RG3 is getting cut so this whole scenario just makes the signing delay seem as though the Redskins are incompetent and the delay becomes unnecessary. If RG3 is not signed and under contract by Monday afternoon, I will have to wonder if Vinnie Cerrato has somehow gotten involved once again in the Redskins front office? So what exactly is Griffins cap hit this year on the salary cap? and how much was actually left after FA + draft signings? I heard Skins are around 7 mil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KCClybun Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Ridiculous bullcrap. Easy does it, Chicken Little; the sky is not falling. The top 8 draft picks are ALL unsigned, because they are ALL dealing with this issue. Unless Vinny Cerrato is working in 8 different front offices right now and every front office is incomptent, it's just a matter of waiting for this one issue to get resolved. He's going to be in camp, so why the panic? Every organization has to cover it's ass. Is it likely that RG3 gets cut? No. Is it possible? Yes. And in that case, you don't want to be on the hook for his salary, no matter how big or how small it is. Just look at the Broncos; they fired Mike Shanahan but still owed him a buttload of money that was guaranteed. Then they fired Josh McDaniels and still had to pay HIM money. Last year, the Broncos were essentially paying three head coaches. Now this situation isn't entirely the same, but you don't want to have to pay someone not on your roster. It doesn't matter if it's unlikely, you still have to protect your own interest. It's a business. At the end of the day RG3 isn't going to have some Brady Quinn style hold out and the Redskins won't let it get to that point. That's what happens in negotiations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWAI Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Hey NLC 1054 you just quoted me with the following: Originally Posted by MWAI "Ridiculous bullcrap". Only I never said that. Where did you get that from? Why did you misquote me? Aren't there rules about that". And why did you call me Chicken Little, since you are the one worrying about RG3 getting cut and paid after the fact. I am not. I think you have things backward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KCClybun Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Hey NLC 1054 you just quoted me with the following:Originally Posted by MWAI "Ridiculous bullcrap". Only I never said that. Where did you get that from? It saved me the trouble of quoting your whole paranoid rant about how and why this is some weird signal of incompetence on the part of the Redskins, despite it happening to eight other organizations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyandSam Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 I'm with NLC154 on this. Why should any team have to pay the remaining money on the contract for a player if he has been cut and signed by another team? Why should the player get paid by both teams? There is a principle involved here that is going to set a precedent for future player signings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Tater Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 I'm with NLC154 on this. Why should any team have to pay the remaining money on the contract for a player if he has been cut and signed by another team? Why should the player get paid by both teams? There is a principle involved here that is going to set a precedent for future player signings. Because they want the player to play? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWAI Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 It saved me the trouble of quoting your whole paranoid rant about how and why this is some weird signal of incompetence on the part of the Redskins, despite it happening to eight other organizations. I am not paranoid but YOU are. You have wrapped yourself up in some delusion that RG3 will get cut in the first 2 years. You must have skipped football 101 because that never happens with 1st round QB's....not even with the nutty Ryan Leaf. You have got to be one paranoid guy to think that RG3 is going to sign a contract and then get cut by the Redskins within 2 years. And you further display your lack of knowledge by stating that 8 other organizations have the same problem....WRONG. 8 other organizations did not trade 3 number 1 draft picks and a #2 pick for a guy, and then have them sitting at home during rookie training camp. In fact, Luck doesn't report until NEXT week so the Colts also do not represent the same situation. Please get your facts straight before you post because it is getting tiring correcting you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinC Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Actually I can see the player/agents point of view here. With the rookie scale if RGIII is even close to what we hope we are getting a bargain on this rookie deal. I can understand why the player would want the whole of the contract to be fully guaranteed with no caveats like offset language. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MWAI Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Actually I can see the player/agents point of view here. With the rookie scale if RGIII is even close to what we hope we are getting a bargain on this rookie deal. I can understand why the player would want the whole of the contract to be fully guaranteed with no caveats like offset language. I couldn't agree more. The player and agent want to benefit especially now with limited resources due to the rookie wage scale. My point is that this is such a small amount of money for a team and such a short term contract (4 years), and year number 4 is VOIDABLE anyway, that the Redskins are just wasting their time with haggling. If this were the old days and a 6 year contract and 50 million dollars were up for grabs, SURE, I could see it. But as I said, if he is not in camp then I will label this whole process "rediculous", because in the end, whether it is Monday or in 2 weeks, RG3 is going to get signed and the Redskins and fans are the only ones who lose because time is more valuable than money when it comes to a rookie QB's season. Especially when a team mortages their future with 3 number one draft picks for only ONE guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeluCopter29 Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 The team, any team, has a right to protect itself. This language is just for the very small chance that (God forbid) RG3 doesn't work out. I also disagree with those who say he is waiting on Luck. If they are happy with the contract, will RG3 hold out because Luck is holding out? Doubtful. The deal will get done and soon. They are just working on the language of the contract right now. PFT is just trying to make sound more dramatic than it really is. I guess I question how much protection we truly need/can get. The contract was basically written when the new CBA was written. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.