Brunell and Redskins Reportedly Close to Restructured Deal

I think you are overrating Gibbs' current opinion of Brunell. The team needs salary cap space and went to Brunell to get it. They could have cut him and gained $2.1 million in space, or they could ask him to take a paycut and gain even more space.

Gibbs is the team president. He went to Brunell knowing that at the very least, he was going to get that $2.1 million in space. That's what is motivating Brunell to accept the paycut. Brunell knows that he's not worth much on the open market these days, and that whatever he could get from the Skins in this restructured deal would be the most $ he could get in 2007. What was the catalyst to make Brunell realize that? The team, and it's team president, had to make it real clear: "Mark, accept a pay reduction so we can save more than $2.1 million. Or we're going to cut you and save the $2.1 million. Those are your options."

In the words of AC/DC, "listen to the money talk." It says it all. When Brunell was signed to a $42 million deal, we all knew what that meant for Patrick Ramsey, and look what happened to him. Now, Gibbs is cutting Brunell's salary. Campbell is the guy.


I understand MB's motivation for taking the deal but I dont understand the Redskins' motivation for the offer. It seems that the $ saved by restructure or cut is about the same so why was option 1 needed? IMO, because Gibbs loves MB and still thinks he can play.

I did and for once I was wrong (LOL).

I think when JC was brought in last year the season was over and the team had nothing to lose no matter how he played. Now in 2007 the slate is clean and in Sept everyone will have a shot again so JC's play will be looked at with a different mindset by Gibbs. I believe that Gibbs will be a little quicker to pull the pin on JC if he sees the offense sputter and the season looks like its slipping away. I'm sure the switch has been made to JC but I'm not sure thats its permanent.

For once? ;) At least you can admit it, there are plenty of people here that don't.

Gibbs let him work through his struggles last year so I don't see why he would have a quick hook with him this year. Besides, I think Campbell is going to be so improved that Gibbs won't even have to think twice about it.

Brunell is 37 and coming off shoulder surgery... I think even Gibbs can see the writing on the wall. Gibbs wants to win at any cost, and I think it's clear Campbell gives the team the best shot at winning. Campbell is in year 3 and he's a guy that Gibbs gave up alot to get... it's time to see if this investment is going to pay off.

he is a good locker room precense and our focus this year is rebuild the defense and keep the offense the same

I understand MB's motivation for taking the deal but I dont understand the Redskins' motivation for the offer. It seems that the $ saved by restructure or cut is about the same so why was option 1 needed? IMO, because Gibbs loves MB and still thinks he can play.

Are you mathematically challenged? The difference between $2.1 million (savings if cut) and $3.5 million (savings under my restructure scenario) is big. $1.4 million to be exact.

$3.5 million is 67% more than $2.1 million. About the same? Wha??

You can do a lot with $1.4 million. You can fit the first year of a 2nd round pick's contract in that amount of space.

I understand MB's motivation for taking the deal but I dont understand the Redskins' motivation for the offer. It seems that the $ saved by restructure or cut is about the same so why was option 1 needed? IMO, because Gibbs loves MB and still thinks he can play.

He saves us more by restructuring vs. cutting him.

Are you mathematically challenged? The difference between $2.1 million (savings if cut) and $3.5 million (savings under my restructure scenario) is big. $1.4 million to be exact.

$3.5 million is 67% more than $2.1 million. About the same? Wha??

You can do a lot with $1.4 million. You can fit the first year of a 2nd round pick's contract in that amount of space.

Seriously, that's a huge difference.

Let's also consider it adds one less need to our offseason by keeping Brunell. If we cut him we'd have to sift through the scrap heap of NFL backups, bring him in and get him up to speed in this offense that by Collins' account takes a year to learn.

If Brunell reasonably reworks his deal (and he will), only a F... idiot cuts him. Put it to bed

Are you mathematically challenged? The difference between $2.1 million (savings if cut) and $3.5 million (savings under my restructure scenario) is big. $1.4 million to be exact.

$3.5 million is 67% more than $2.1 million. About the same? Wha??

You can do a lot with $1.4 million. You can fit the first year of a 2nd round pick's contract in that amount of space.

I was only looking at post 39 where you say it costs 2.1 to cut or 2.1 to sign. There is a difference and that savings is nice and maybe if the redskins ever hold onto a 2nd round pick that $ will come in handy.

Let's also consider it adds one less need to our offseason by keeping Brunell. If we cut him we'd have to sift through the scrap heap of NFL backups, bring him in and get him up to speed in this offsense that by Collins' account takes a year to learn.

So are we going to keep Brunell and Collins until they are 50 just becasue they know the offense? Eventually we are going to have to bring in someone else to back-up JC.