No Shanahan doesn't deserve a free pass because of the cap penalty

[Rufus T Firefly]

Disclaimer: let me apologize for starting another thread on this. But I have, I believe, more in-depth thoughts on this than are being presented in some of the other discussions on it. And I started typing this and had a good deal done yesterday, before a number of more threads popped up. And I decided to finish my work and post it. Apologies if you think I shouldn't have, but I think there are a few other posters who agree with my thoughts, and though I don't speak for anyone but myself, I thought there were others who would like me to post this.

 

Lots of people on this board argue that Shanahan deserves a 5th year because it isn't fair to expect him to turn around such a terrible team in only 4 years, and more to the point of this post, he was unfairly punished with the $36 mil cap penalty and that's why the team hasn't been fully built yet. I don't believe he deserves ANY sympathy based on the cap penalty, and have multiple reasons for saying that:

 

 

1. The cap penalty was partly (mostly?) a result of his incompetence/arrogance in the first place. First off, let's walk and chew gum at the same time- yes, the league absolutely screwed us with the cap penalty, but that doesn't mean it wasn't also the result of bad decision making by Shanny. Both things can be, and are, true.

 

The team Shanahan took over was, indeed, a disaster on multiple levels. But he also inherited a chance at a total rebuild, something many NFL execs and coaches would drool over. What Shanny walked into was both the necessity and the opportunity for a real rebuilding project.

 

Necessity- The team he took over was terrible. And it was old, loaded with bad contracts, with very little young talent to build around (Orakpo, Hall and Davis are probably it). It needed to be torn down. And his first year was the uncapped year, which meant very, very few FAs of any note. This meant any thought of a quick turnaround would be that much harder to pull off. The first thing Shanahan did was to release a bunch of vets (Smoot, Betts, Randle El, Cartwright, etc), a smart move but one that would also mean that first year's team would be a little weaker. A bigger decision was the switch to a 3-4 defense. I actually like that move, but am not so concerned with that debate. The point here is that it, again, pointed to a long-term rebuild. You don't make that switch in one year seamlessly. It meant a project. Finally, he took over a team with no 3rd round draft pick that year.

 

Opportunity- The fans, for once, were pretty much screaming for a rebuilding project. Snyder was OK with it. This is why all the talk about Shanahan needing 5 years has started. Because Snyder and everyone else saw the need for it. Everyone seemed willing to wait for it. This is a chance NFL regimes don't get. Most are expected to produce in 2 years or else.

The uncapped year of course brought with it the opportunity to dump contracts without penalty. Cut players, no cap hit at all. What could be more perfect for a team in our situation? And then the lack of free agents that year made for a brisk trade market. We had plenty of veteran players who had some trade value- Cooley, Moss, Fletcher, Carter. And of course, Albert Haynesworth and DeAngelo Hall. (let's keep in mind that 'trade value' and 'worth first round picks' are not the same thing, please).

 

So, that's what Mike was presented with- the necessity of a full rebuild and the opportunity to oversee one. And what did he do? That's right, he not only pissed away that chance but further hurt a chance at a rebuild with the truly nit-witted trades for the aging, fading Donovan McNabb and injured and twice-benched Jammal Brown. That's what he chose over the necessary rebuild.

 

Even when Haynesworth ( a well-know mental case) let it be known he wanted no part of the 3-4, Shanahan insisted on sticking with him. Even with trade offers coming in (reports were offers for AH from Detroit, New Orleans, Tennessee and Minnesota at the time, IIRC) he stuck with him. I should mention that the way the contract was structured, Shanahan would have only had probably 3 years of Haynesworth before we would have had to dump him anyway. For teams in need of a rebuild, making sacrifices in order to get a max of 3 years from a player is, let's just say, questionable logic.

 

Now, that path he chose led him to take a chance- the accounting tricks on the Haynesworth and Hall deals. Those were an attempt to get out from under the deferred bonus hits we had to take on the cap. The NFL warned him if he did this they would find a way to punish him. Shanahan did it anyway. The result is the cap penalty. 

 

You can, as I am, be mad at the NFL for imposing those penalties, and still be mad at Shanahan for taking such a reckless and foolish route. The cap penalty was always going to be a risk, and in fact, it could have been much worse (yes, the league could have taken draft picks). The fact that a sane course of action that offseason would have precluded any need for the risk just makes it all the worse. 

 

When you add it all up- the desperate need for a rebuild, the cries for it to happen, the golden opportunities for it to be done right, the obvious downside to keeping Haynseworth, the extremely low upside to the McNabb and Brown trades, the risk of the cap penalty- that's why I have often said that in total it's got to be one of the worst offseasons any NFL GM has ever executed (at least up until he drafted Trent Williams).

 

And when you realize that without such a dumb plan the cap penalty wouldn't even be possible, then yes, I blame Shanahan for putting us in that position. Why wouldn't I?

 

 

2. We wouldn't have had the current team plus $18 mil in players. This is one I read on this board a lot: "Without the penalty, we would have player x plus player y plus player z...". Unfortunately, it just isn't true. Shanahan reacted to the cap penalty with a bunch of moves that wouldn't have been necessary otherwise. These moves created more cap space last year and this, moving cap hits into 2015 and beyond. So we wouldn't have 18 mil per year to spend. A lot of that cap space wouldn't have been there to spend at all (though we would conversely have more cap space in 2015 and beyond- mostly 2015).

 

Things were done to make cap space that just wouldn't have without the penalty. Some of the things we have done:

 

Voidable years contracts. Fletcher, Morgan and Meriweather received these. What these did was to get the cap hits from those two year contracts to be spread out over 3 years. That's a little more than 7 mil in cap space from 2012-13 contracts that will hit us in 2015, when those players are gone. So, if we still had the 36 mil total from the penalty, we never would have created the 7 mil and hence would have 7 mil less total this year and last. Forgive me if I'm over-explaining that idea.

 

Backloaded deals. Garcon got a deal that had a cap hit of a little over 4 mil last year, a bit over 8 mil this year and then jumps to nearly 10 next year.  In the case of Will Montgomery, after the cap penalty his 2.75 mil roster bonus (which would have counted all in 2012) became a signing bonus, and the cap hits  were then spread over 4 years. Heck, even Sav Rocca's deal (I'll get to that genius move later) counts more than 300K more next season than this.

 

It's impossible to know how much less of that backloading would have been done without the cap penalty, but honestly I bet it's a good deal north of $5mil.

 

Restructured contracts. This year, to deal with the penalty, the Skins re-did some deals to create room. The deals with Cofield, Bowen and Carriker created about 4 mil in cap space.

 

So my guesstimate there is that roughly half the 36 mil was offset with cap tricks that wouldn't have happened without the cap penalty. So, if we're playing that game, it's probably more accurate to imagine what we could have done with not 18 mil more this year, but 9 because that's the extra space we would have had.

 

Or would we?.........

 

Pay cuts. Also this offseason we asked several players to take pay cuts to get us under the cap. Moss and Wilson each cut $2 mil off their deals this year. Now, it's reasonable to think these would have happened without the penalty, which is why this section isn't included above. But those were two contracts Shanahan signed two years earlier, and he had never shown any inclination to ask for those kind of pay cuts before.

The bigger one was Hall. Would anything have been done with his contract without the penalty? Would Mike have risked losing him? Not only did Shanahan  choose the risk of the cap penalty in order to keep Hall on that huge deal, but even a year earlier, when cutting Hall would have saved us a seemingly much-needed 7 mil or so, nothing was done. Suddenly, this year we cut him and eventually he comes back for about 6 mil less. 

I'm not going to assume anything, but I would personally bet that at least a good amount of the money saved by these pay cuts never would have happened without the cap penalty.

 

 

3. We have no reason to think he would have spent the extra cap space wisely. In order to think the cap penalty is what kept us from being a good deal better, you have to believe we would have done something with the money to make us better. Obviously.

 

First off, I'm not convinced he would have done much of anything with extra space. He seemed to make his only priority bringing players back. Giving multi-year deals to guys who didn't need them, like Logan Paulsen and Darrel Young, big money to keep Kory Lichtensteiger from hitting the market (a market that I don't believe would have been terribly interested in him). Even Sav Rocca, but I'll get to him in a minute.

 

If he had gone after FAs, what kind of job would he have done? Naturally, we need to base that off his history. So let's look at the players he's brought in. I count 8 high-priced FAs (I'm going to be nice and leave Larry Johnson out of it). I'm going to rate all his signings with whether I consider them to great, poor or in-between. 

 

Great- none

Very Good- Garcon. (I can't call this a great signing, because you expect a highly productive player for 8.5 mil a year. But certainly very good.)

Good- Cofield. (good player, but 6 mil to play NT, which he just isn't. It's a good signing at best).

Fair- Bowen, Chester, Wilson 

Poor- Meriweather, Morgan, Hicks.

 

That's really just not an inspiring history. If we go into players he has re-signed for multi-years and multi-millions per, they vary from the questionable (Lichtensteiger, Montgomery, Carriker) to the ill-conceived (Fletcher, Moss) to the just plain dumb (McNabb, Brown).

 

And then, in a special category I must again bring up Sav Rocca. SAV FREAKING ROCCA for the love of God!!! 2 years, 2.24 mil. Is that a huge amount of cap? No, not really. But it is a large outlay for a P. Most Ps are paid the league minimum. Rocca gets more than 3 times that. Watch him and think on that. And that was a contract signed the offseason, in the midst of trouble with the cap penalty. Words fail me for that deal.

 

So, there is really nothing in Shanahan's history here that leads me to believe he would have done anything good with whatever extra cap he could have had.

 

 

That's my conclusion. I blame him for the stupid decisions that led to the cap penalty. He wouldn't have had as much extra to spend as most think, and I have real doubts he would have done anything special with the space he had. 

[Momma There Goes That Man]

Bravo, well done.

[HeluCopter29]

I'm not saying Mike is perfect, but there is a thread on this board started by a well respected member saying he's as bad as Zorn.

 

Until I see the swinging gate make a return that's just not true.

 

Can we just see something through for once?

 

Unless you've got an alternative.

[elkabong82]

There are threads on this, and this post could have gone right in any one of them and elevated the level of discussion in those threads. 

 

$36 million cap penalty over 2 years has a major impact, no matter how much you try to explain it away. I have yet to see anyone suggest Shanny gets a free pass for the cap penalty though. That is a strawman. What is said is that it should bear consideration when evaluating what he's done here, and that expectations should be lowered somewhat because of the impact the cap penalty has had. 

 

1. Bruce Allen does contracts.

2. Regardless of moves not being made without cap penalty, losing 18 million has a big impact in who you can sign, retain, and let go. Ignoring this does your opinion a great disservice.

3. It's hard to look at free agents acquired with a clean slate because the cap penalties did limit who we could get, there's no way around that.

 

-Garcon was a great pick up and he is producing. Slighting him based on contract is silly, he's earning it.

-Cofield and Bowen are ok, Chester would have been replaced by now if not for the cap penalty, Shanny views him as depth. 

-Wilson is terrible and was a bad signing. We should have re-signed Rogers, despite many on ES wanting him gone. Morgan also was a bad signing. Merriweather, never would have been signed if we weren't desperate for safety help and strung by the cap penalty. 

 

Hicks goes in the same pile as Willie Parker: only signed because the uncapped year took away almost all of the free agent market.

 

Shanny has made mistakes, and made good moves as well. All coaches make mistakes on free agency, even the Patriots. 

 

The only technically clean year was 2011, and even then the cap space was tight due to Cerrato, so we released vets like Portis, Dockery, and Rabach, and signed Atogwe. We traded down in the draft and used that to add to the roster, which most on here clamor for, that we build through the draft and not free agency.

 

I, and I assume others, want to see what Shanny can do with an untainted 2014 because of what he has managed to do with the restraints of the past regime, the uncapped year's affect on free agency, and the cap penalty. RG3, Morris, Helu, Young, Trent Williams, I'll throw in Monty simply because he is average and could be fine with good guard play, Jordan Reed, Pierre Garcon. This is an offense you can build off of and have success with. We already have and, despite its recent struggles and RG3 coming back from injury, it is still ranked higher up in the league. 

 

Defense I don't think there is a person on ES who would want Shanny on next year if he is determined to keep Haslett. He would have been fired last season but the 7-0 run saved him. Given Shanny's past with DC turnover and the impact of cap penalty and uncapped year, it is understandable him being hesitant to do so but now there is no excuse even with those considerations given the consistent bottom of the barre; rankings.

 

As I've asked in these similar threads: If RG3 was never injured, are we even having this conversation right now? Probably not. We're likely talking about us vying for division lead or retaining it but also talking about getting Haslett out of here. There are reasons to move on from Shanny, there are reasons to retain him. I won't fault the team for moving in either direction.

[Rufus T Firefly]

elkabong, you ignored most of the substance of my post, so I won't spend a lot of time responding.

 

Yes, the phrase "free pass" has been used. I am not going to waste my time searching for it, but it has. Even if it hadn't, the sentiment is clear in many posts. Don't use the term "straw man" if you don't understand what it means.

 

In fact you post is very symptomatic of the idea. You pretty much excuse away multiple mistakes by claiming (with nothing to back it up) that they would have not been done, or would have been fixed, without the cap penalty. While ignoring his complicity in it. And then saying you want to see what he can do next year, largely because you want to give him a chance free of the cap penalty. That is th epitome of the "free pass" idea.

[elkabong82]

I'm not saying Mike is perfect, but there is a thread on this board started by a well respected member saying he's as bad as Zorn.

 

Until I see the swinging gate make a return that's just not true.

 

Can we just see something through for once?

 

Unless you've got an alternative.

 

I think kicker is microcosm of this. Novak, Suisham, Gano all doing well with other teams now. But fans and then coaches did not have the patience to see them through. Booing at games on a missed FG didn't help either. Now they all want them back, and despite Forbath's potential there are some already wanting him replaced. 

 

I'm not necessarily against moving on from Shanny, but the pitchfork mob seems to be going out of control yet again. When the cap penalty is being minimized to suit their agenda, that's when you know rational thought is waning.

 

I see the Saints and Packers with great offenses and mediocre defenses that they are starting to address now that the offenses are established. I see us with an offense that has great potential, and call me crazy but I don't want to move on from that just yet. If RG3 were 100% healthy and all this were still going on, then it would be a different story. But everyone's expectations, or most everyone, myself included, with RG3's recovery were grossly inflated and now there is seemingly a glut of fans unwilling to acknowledge that this same team from last season is essentially down a QB and an all-pro LBer/leader of defense and thus can't match its performance from last season. You bring Singletary in to DC this offseason, you have RG3 100% with a full offseason under him, and the draft and unhindered free agency, and you have a playoff team, or at least one capable of such. If Mike can't deliver at that point then you move on and the coaching vacancy is a good landing spot.

[elkabong82]

elkabong, you ignored most of the substance of my post, so I won't wast e a lot of time responding.

 

Yes, the phrase "free pass" has been used. I am not going to waste my time searching for it, but it has. Even if it hadn't, the sentiment is clear in many posts. Don't use the term "straw man" if you don't understand what it means.

 

In fact you post is very symptomatic of the idea. You pretty much excuse away multiple mistakes by claiming (with nothing to back it up) that they would have not been done, or would have been fixed, without the cap penalty. While ignoring his complicity in it. And then saying you want to see what he can do next year, largely because you want to give him a chance free of the cap penalty. That is th epitome of the "free pass" idea.

 

I ignored most of the substance because the premise is nonsense. 

 

The phrase ":free pass' is nowhere near common enough usage to warrant starting a thread about it. You are arguing as if that is the belief of most of the pro-Shanny crowd when it isn't, hence a strawman. Don't argue against an argument if you don't understand it.

 

Re-read my post because you obviously missed a bunch if you are going to claim I excused away a bunch of mistakes. I clearly pointed out several mistakes made by the team. You, on the other hand, only pointed out one real positive (Garcon) and even that was jaded with the contract jab.Your post is very symptomatic of the pitchfork mentality around here. It is the same mentality Snyder used to have that led to the coaching carousel. 

 

I didn't say free pass, I laid out the foundation of players Shanny has built that shows potential and said I believe it is worth seeing him build upon further, and without the previous restrictions, but you ignored that and claimed I was basically saying he gets a free pass. There's a word for that. i think it's called strawman.

 

 If RG3 was never injured, are we even having this conversation right now?  Wondering why you ignored this question.

[PapaLazarou]

 

 If RG3 was never injured, are we even having this conversation right now?  Wondering why you ignored this question.

 

This is reality. 3-8. Terrible team. You can come up with a plethora of hypotheticals to your hearts content.

[elkabong82]

This is reality. 3-8. Terrible team. You can come up with a plethora of hypotheticals to your hearts content.

 

You could say this about the Packers right now. Guess it's time to fire McCarthy.

[Boss_Hogg]

To me the most damning aspect of the cap penalty was the fact that the Skins got league approval for all roster moves in the uncapped year.

How you going to approve a roster move then wait a whole year and one hour before free agency to punish said team with a $36 million penalty? All because the "spirit " of a non-existent cap was violated.

Vinny and Dan took a huge **** with the Haynseworth contract. Mike and Bruce had no choice but to front load the contract in the uncapped year. They were going to lose money and cap space anyway; why not take advantage of the uncapped year to get ahead?

[Rufus T Firefly]

To me the most damning aspect of the cap penalty was the fact that the Skins got league approval for all roster moves in the uncapped year.

How you going to approve a roster move then wait a whole year and one hour before free agency to punish said team with a $36 million penalty? All because the "spirit " of a non-existent cap was violated.

Vinny and Dan took a huge **** with the Haynseworth contract. Mike and Bruce had no choice but to front load the contract in the uncapped year. They were going to lose money and cap space anyway; why not take advantage of the uncapped year to get ahead?

Once again, the way to get out from that contract was to cut or trade him in 2010. That would have removed the contract with no consequences and no chance of the cap penalty happening. 

[chipwhich]

Vinny and Dan took a huge **** with the Haynseworth contract. Mike and Bruce had no choice but to front load the contract in the uncapped year. They were going to lose money and cap space anyway; why not take advantage of the uncapped year to get ahead?

 

Because the had a gentlemens agreement not to.

This has been hashed over, we get it.

[SkinsFTW]

Well he is right that everybody was ready for a full rebuild of a crap team, some of us knew Shanahan was a sham in Denver and even we were willing to wait for his rebuild, which never happened. He brought in a crap DC, Al Davis'/Grudens's Puppet GM, etc. Then traded a 2nd for McNugget at 35, paid Haynesworths 20+mil bonus when he already KNEW the dude was a POS who has no purpose in his new 3-4, let go of and then watched Rogers and Landry put up career years elswhere while we now have the worst secondary in the league. ROFL

Meanwhile bad teams like Indy, Seattle, Arizona, Cinci, Denver (w/Tebow LOL), KC, become playoff teams overnight. The Jets continue being .500 with the worst roster in the NFL, we lose at home to Detroit for the first time ever, we score 0 1st half offensive points in 1/2 our games. Hell our garbage defense outscored our offense in the first half until about week 9. We haven't seen the swinging gate yet, but we have seen a 3rd and 18 up the gut run while down 20 late in the game, multiple shanked punts, blocked chip shot field goals, with Shanahan saying basically "**** happens" and we are supposed to assume this guy came here for more than just a final paycheck from the guy known to give out record paychecks expecting nothing in return other than media hype and filling the stands?

[chipwhich]

Once again, the way to get out from that contract was to cut or trade him in 2010. That would have removed the contract with no consequences and no chance of the cap penalty happening. 

 

They couldn't, it would have interfered with their plan on spending. 

[wit33]

The NFl is an offensive league and we have one of the best offensive minds in the game as the head coach. Just last year the team was historically good in many categories and the staff did an amazing job putting it all together. More talent will be added and a first full offseason with Griff will do wonders. 

 

Things have been far from perfect, but when is that the case for teams without a franchise QB in the fold. Shanny finally found his guy in year 3; in his first year with a franchise guy he produced a juggernaut on offense. Give him a healthy Griffin, full offseason and an abundance of financial resources and things will be back on track. 

 

Many point to the expectation that coaches are expected to turn around franchises in 2-3 years, but how has that method proved to be a good one? Just because a few succeed quickly (rarely do these turn arounds last for me than a year though) doesn't mean those exceptions should be the standard. Patience!

 

*Root for Rex Ryan to lose his job and bring him in.... Please!!!! This would be the biggest offseason pick up (no impact on the salary cap )

[Boss_Hogg]

Once again, the way to get out from that contract was to cut or trade him in 2010. That would have removed the contract with no consequences and no chance of the cap penalty happening.

I thought cutting or trading a player still counts against your cap?

I could be way wrong as I'm just a fan and not a front office guru.

[chipwhich]

I thought cutting or trading a player still counts against your cap?

I could be way wrong as I'm just a fan and not a front office guru.

 

It would have which is why they couldn't cut him or trade him.

[Rufus T Firefly]

I thought cutting or trading a player still counts against your cap?

I could be way wrong as I'm just a fan and not a front office guru.

It does. But if you do it in an uncapped year there's nothing for it to count against.

[Boss_Hogg]

So they jettisoned Albert after front loading his contract. I wonder if this was the only way they could get something in return?

Do you think the NFL would've let the Skins get away with it by just cutting him? Or would they impose another penalty?

[chipwhich]

So they jettisoned Albert after front loading his contract. I wonder if this was the only way they could get something in return?

Do you think the NFL would've let the Skins get away with it by just cutting him? Or would they impose another penalty?

 

They couldn't cut him because his salary cap would have hit them right away.

The tried and failed to circumvent the system with a horrible contract for a free agent.

 

[PapaLazarou]

You could say this about the Packers right now. Guess it's time to fire McCarthy.

 

[Rufus T Firefly]

So they jettisoned Albert after front loading his contract. I wonder if this was the only way they could get something in return?

Do you think the NFL would've let the Skins get away with it by just cutting him? Or would they impose another penalty?

They could have cut him in 2010 without any penalty. Or traded him, which was the smart course.

They couldn't cut him because his salary cap would have hit them right away.

The tried and failed to circumvent the system with a horrible contract for a free agent.

One more time, 2010 was an uncapped year. If they traded or cut him that year the bonus proration would have accelerated into 2010, and "counted" against a cap that didn't exist.

[chipwhich]

They could have cut him in 2010 without any penalty. Or traded him, which was the smart course.

One more time, 2010 was an uncapped year. If they traded or cut him that year the bonus proration would have accelerated into 2010, and "counted" against a cap that didn't exist.

 

Dog chases tale.  Wow.

[Momma There Goes That Man]

Yep no other trades or cuts were punished from 2010, not even front loading 2010 free agent contracts like the Bears did with Peppers. It was specifically for moving future years into the uncapped year. While technically not illegal, teams were warned not to do it.

We had options and had we pursued it is likely we wouldn't have been penalized.

[Rufus T Firefly]

Yep no other trades or cuts were punished from 2010, not even front loading 2010 free agent contracts like the Bears did with Peppers. It was specifically for moving future years into the uncapped year. While technically not illegal, teams were warned not to do it.

We had options and had we pursued it is likely we wouldn't have been penalized.

Yeah, even we dumped a bunch of players and had their bonuses "count" in 2010 (Betts, Randle El, Griffin, Collins, Cartwright, Smoot, Thomas) and we weren't punished for it. The proration for those cuts would have been over 30 mil I believe.

 

The numbers you read on Peppers' contract were probably false, btw. They didn't do anything fishy with that deal. The have been some fictitious numbers spread about some contracts from that year.