Gibbs seeks harmony with player issues

[harryskin]

Gibbs seeks harmony with player issues

http://washingtontimes.com/sports/20040117-121626-1511r.htm

No blame. No politics. No divisiveness. And no problems.

At least that's coach Joe Gibbs' plan for a harmonious union of Washington Redskins coaches and scouts in the personnel process.

The plan has begun in recent days as Gibbs and his staff review tape from last season and meet with the personnel department to identify the types of players they are seeking.

From the personnel department's standpoint, the coaches' input is viewed as a positive step. Sources in the department complained last season that coach Steve Spurrier and his staff weren't sure of the types of players they were seeking and that they often changed their minds once those players were signed.

The best examples were players like tight end Byron Chamberlain and defensive tackle Darrell Russell, who were acquired amid high publicity and then contributed virtually nothing. Coaches blamed the personnel department and the personnel department blamed the coaches, and the only sure thing was that the club was fractured.

Although Gibbs hasn't been given contractual control of personnel, he has authority for the current vision of the roster. Having reviewed only a fraction of last season's tape by the time he spoke at a news conference yesterday, he wasn't able to give many specific opinions. But he was extremely clear in describing a process very different from last year's mess.

"Here's what we want: When we take a player, we want it to be our player," Gibbs said. "Everybody's had their input. Everybody's helped put the grade on it. Then when he comes here, he's our player. We'll find that we'll make mistakes. But it was our mistake. Not me. Not some of the coaches. Not some of the scouts. It was all of us together."

The actual scouting process intensifies next week when the Redskins staff watches Senior Bowl practices in Mobile, Ala. — Gibbs doesn't plan to go. Washington traded away three of next year's picks (in the fourth, sixth and seventh rounds) but still has its top three selections, including No. 5 overall.

Gibbs' power in the organization, according to team sources, is identical to what Spurrier had last season. Gibbs even has admitted that his title of "president" is superfluous. However, Gibbs' history of success in the league and specific vision for the types of players he wants will allow him far greater — and, in the short term, almost total — sway.

The subject of selecting players was discussed at length, Gibbs said, in his interviews with owner Dan Snyder before taking the job. He exited those meetings "convinced" that vigorous debates could be resolved through consensus and remain safeguarded from public scrutiny.

"What I became convinced of, it's going to be a total team effort," Gibbs said. "We're all in this together. I want guys just busting it. If we have discussions back there, arguments, it's between us. And then when we take the guy, it's our guy."

Vice president of football operations Vinny Cerrato emphasized that he is on board with the group process.

"It'll be a team effort," Cerrato said in recent days. "That's what everyone believes in. We all believe in working together and coming out with the Redskins' type player. That's the nice part about it. Everyone's on the same page, everyone's looking for the same thing."

Gibbs and his staff, especially once they've watched all the tape, should give Cerrato and his scouts fairly detailed information on the personnel they are seeking. Gibbs knows what types of players were successful for him from 1981 to 1992 as Redskins coach, and he knows what type of character his roster as a whole must possess.

Washington's pursuit of high-character players fell into doubt last season. Chamberlain had been suspended for testing positive for ephedra. Russell had been suspended for a pair of positive drug tests and had been accused of drugging a woman and videotaping two friends raping her. Offensive lineman Kenyatta Jones, who went on injured reserve shortly after signing, awaits trial for throwing boiling water on his personal assistant.

Gibbs didn't say he wouldn't sign risky players per se, but he did say, "I think we start with character."

"What I've found is this," Gibbs said, "when you take players, and you have 80-some players, it's almost like having a big family. Are you going to have disappointments at times? Yeah. As best you can, you're trying to evaluate the player, his heart, his character. Sometimes there's circumstances there, but you say, we think this guy's a very good person. And sometimes you get disappointed."

In the 11 years since Gibbs left the Redskins, no change to the NFL has been bigger than the implementation of the salary cap. He only has begun to learn the cap and its complexities, but his knowledge so far has left him with the impression that the fundamentals of constructing a team remain the same.

"Even though there's a salary cap, I'm getting convinced that there's a core group you can work with, [and] you can keep that core group," Gibbs said. "Once you've got the core group, the young guys come in and say, 'If I want to be a Redskin, that's the guy who's a Redskin.' I think we've got some of those [core] guys here."

Notes — Gibbs said he knows what he wants to do with the offensive coordinator post. Speculation continues to be that he will share those duties with offensive assistants Don Breaux and Ernie Zampese. ... Gibbs indicated Washington will use the franchise tag to prevent cornerback Champ Bailey from becoming a free agent. When it was mentioned that Bailey was set to become an unrestricted free agent, Gibbs replied, "I don't think that's going to happen. I'd say that's probably one we don't have to worry about."

[Heavy Jumbo]

Originally posted by harryskin

Gibbs indicated Washington will use the franchise tag to prevent cornerback Champ Bailey from becoming a free agent. When it was mentioned that Bailey was set to become an unrestricted free agent, Gibbs replied, "I don't think that's going to happen. I'd say that's probably one we don't have to worry about."

What kind of affect does using a franchise tag have on a playrs salary? With the tag, doesn't Bailey get a minumum salary of some sort? What other areas does it affect?

[Chrisbob74]

He's sure of receiving a salary which is an average of the top five cornerbacks in football. If he signs the tender and plays next year on a one year contract he will have a big cap hit but we can take it. If he resigns a long term deal then we will be better off in cap room as his hit will be lower due to the signing bonus being pro rated over the contract length and the first years salary will likely be very low.

[Larry]

Franchise Tag as I Know It

(Aparantly there's a higher level franchise tag called the exclusive franchise tag. All I've heard about it is one line in an article, saying that you must pay a player 125% of his previous year's cap hit, and nobody else can have him. What I'm talking about is the "other" tag.)

• The player must be paid a salary equal to the average of the top five salaries at his position in the NFL.
  
• Each team has only one tag.
  
• Once tagged, if the player signs a longer-term contract (for example, to get a signing bonus, and a smaller cap hit for the team), then that tag is stuck on the player until the new contract runs out, or the player quits or is fired.
  
• Other teams can still make offers to the tagged player, butif an offer is made, then the owning team can chose to match the offer (in which case, the player is then locked in and cannot be stolen, but the tag is also locked up for the duration), or if the owning team doesn't match, the bidding team must also give up their next two first-round draft picks to the losing team.
  

Now, as to "the way the tag works in the real world".

• Very few teams are willing to give up a contract that's so big that the owning team won't match and two first-round picks. (As far as I'm aware, the Skins are the only team to ever get that price, for Sean Gilbert). Instead, what typically happens is, a bidding team will offer the owning team a lesser draft pick, and a clause where they'll take the player if he agrees to this contract. However, in that situation, the owning team doesn't have to match the offer: they can just say "No".
  
• As near as I can tell, it's just about impossible to "tag" a player without ticking him off.
  To use Champ as an analogy, right now, he 's (or his agent's) negotiating with the 'Skins. (Officially, he's not allowed to be negotiating with other teams, but in practice, his agent and other teams are allowed to discuss "hypothetical" deals so the agent can "assess what his client's worth".) He's likely got at least one offer (from the 'Skins), and maybe a few "hypothetical" offers to consider. These offers may well include paychecks, this year, of $10-$15M for signing bonuses (all of that is guaranteed).
  Then, BOOM, May 1st (or whatever the date is). "The Tag" gets applied. Now Champ, instead of looking at (say) $12M in guaranteed money, is looking at a salary of $4-6M. (And if he gets injured or cut part-way through the season, he doesn't even get all of that.
  In addition, instead of Champ's agent talking to other teams about $15M signing bonuses, now the agent's got to talk to the other teams about a $15M bonus and two draft picks. The tag means less money (this year) for Champ, and makes it tougher for him to find work elsewhere.
  And, to make things really irritating, the instant the 'Skins put the tag on Champ, not only does it become harder for him to get an offer elsewhere, The Skins suddenly stop negotiating with him, too, because if the 'Skins talk him into s new contract now, the the team loses the tag for the duration of his contract. (The Skins would much rather, in that case, have him play out the tag, and sign a new contract next year).
  In short, from Champ's viewpoint, once the tag goes on, he goes from a man with four offers in the $12M range to having only one offer, for $4-6M, and even his own team has left the negotiating table. (Or, at least, it's not a priority any more).
  

Or, at least, that seems to be the effect I've observed.

[LPlantar]

Originally posted by Larry

Then, BOOM, May 1st (or whatever the date is). "The Tag" gets applied. Now Champ, instead of looking at (say) $12M in guaranteed money, is looking at a salary of $4-6M. (And if he gets injured or cut part-way through the season, he doesn't even get all of that.

Or, at least, that seems to be the effect I've observed.

Actually, veterans of 4 years or more have their contract guaranteed for the whole season if they are on the opening day roster, so he would get paid if he was injured or cut. That is why we paid Rob Johnson the whole year and why it was weird to cut him.