Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009

New update:

- Sellers 2009 salary raised by $25K.

Rogers, Campbell, and Sellers all hit their salary escalators.

Updated cap room: $9.387M

At least it's a small downward adjustment this time around... I like the trend.

For every player you sign, he bumps somebody else out of the top 51. So each of the four rookies will bump out a guy currently costing us $380K against the cap. Check out the math in the first post in this thread, it has it all there.

Let's not be argumentative if we're not going to look at the information available to us.

I wasnt trying to be argumentative and im sorry if thats how it came off. I was just trying to point out that, based on the only information you guys had at the time, you were adamant about the skins having around 12M in cap space, despite the Times and Post both reporting numbers in the 6-7M range. However, new information came to light (Campbell and Rogers increased base salary for 2009), reducing the cap estimates here from 12M to 9M, so you guys have adjusted your numbers here as well. I'm just saying its possible there is still information out there that you do not have access to yet, and the Times and Post may actually be correct, and we may have around 7M in cap space. The Times and Post are likely not doing any calcuations themselves - they are likely getting numbers from sources within Redskins park and/or the league, who know the real numbers. I have no doubt you guys are providing as accurate of a total as you can given the information you have - but youre still limited by not having full access to the data the team and league have. Its very possible the figures posted in the Times and Post are correct.

I wasnt trying to be argumentative and im sorry if thats how it came off. I was just trying to point out that, based on the only information you guys had at the time, you were adamant about the skins having around 12M in cap space, despite the Times and Post both reporting numbers in the 6-7M range. However, new information came to light (Campbell and Rogers increased base salary for 2009), reducing the cap estimates here from 12M to 9M, so you guys have adjusted your numbers here as well. I'm just saying its possible there is still information out there that you do not have access to yet, and the Times and Post may actually be correct, and we may have around 7M in cap space. The Times and Post are likely not doing any calcuations themselves - they are likely getting numbers from sources within Redskins park and/or the league, who know the real numbers. I have no doubt you guys are providing as accurate of a total as you can given the information you have - but youre still limited by not having full access to the data the team and league have. Its very possible the figures posted in the Times and Post are correct.

Yeah but we do have pretty good info. You can look the salary data up right on the NFLPA website, it's made 100% public. And the information on contract bonuses and the like comes right out of the same articles JLC and David Elfin write for their respective papers. All we do is tally it all up and do the math.

But if it's 7m or 9.4m, isn't the question whether or not that's enough space to do anything? My point is it's plenty. You can add a good starting player in there, like a Dockery, plus get Daniels and Wynn and Campbell, plus sign rookies.

But if it's 7m or 9.4m, isn't the question whether or not that's enough space to do anything? My point is it's plenty. You can add a good starting player in there, like a Dockery, plus get Daniels and Wynn and Campbell, plus sign rookies.

if its 7M, we dont have much room at all. We need 2-3Million for our rookies and we need several million to replace injured players during the season. The way i see it, we are on a very tight budget right now and only have the ability to sign old veterans to minimum contracts with very small, if not non-existant, signing bonuses. We certainly dont have space to sign anyone of Dockerys caliber. Any of the remaining noteable LBs on the market are no doubt out of our price range.

if its 7M, we dont have much room at all. We need 2-3Million for our rookies and we need several million to replace injured players during the season. The way i see it, we are on a very tight budget right now and only have the ability to sign old veterans to minimum contracts with very small, if not non-existant, signing bonuses. We certainly dont have space to sign anyone of Dockerys caliber. Any of the remaining noteable LBs on the market are no doubt out of our price range.

Numerous quarrels with this:


You do need 2-3 million for the rookies, but for every rookie you sign (and later carry onto your 53 man roster) you push out another player from the top 51. We've got 4 draft picks who will push out $380K from the top 51 apiece. So figure the rookies take up $2.5, but they push out $1.5, meaning they only carry a $1.0 net hit to the cap.
I have never seen the Redskins carry $2-3 million just to accomodate injuries. That was a number thrown out there by JLC in his blog and it's just wrong. The Redskins have typically carried $1.0 - $1.5 million in buffer space.
Just with the rookies, as soon as the Redskins sign a Khary Campbell, they push out $380K from the top 51. Campbell can be had for a $1.0 million deal (or less), which pushes out $380K, for a net hit of $620K. Same with Wynn and Daniels.
Here's the math:

Rookies ($2.5)
Players Pushed Out $1.5
Phillip Daniels ($2.0)
Player Pushed Out $0.4
Reynaldo Wynn ($0.8)
Player Pushed Out $0.4
Khary Campbell ($0.8)
Player Pushed Out $0.4
Impact FA ($3.5)
Player Pushed Out $0.4
Total: ($6.5)

So that says we could sign an impact free agent who takes up as much space as a Derrick Dockery, plus sign the rooks, plus get Daniels Wynn and Campbell, all with $6.5 million of cap space.

If you believe the space is $7.0 million, it gets tight but it fits. So you go for a $3.0 free agent instead of a $3.5. If you believe the space is $9.4 like we do here at the Warpath, then you've got oodles of room.

I think you're doing a little talking out of turn when you say our cap space is tight. It's clear your knowledge of the cap is limited. Consider attempting to learn about it more and ask more questions. Otherwise please don't tell me space is tight.

Numerous quarrels with this:


You do need 2-3 million for the rookies, but for every rookie you sign (and later carry onto your 53 man roster) you push out another player from the top 51. We've got 4 draft picks who will push out $380K from the top 51 apiece. So figure the rookies take up $2.5, but they push out $1.5, meaning they only carry a $1.0 net hit to the cap.
I have never seen the Redskins carry $2-3 million just to accomodate injuries. That was a number thrown out there by JLC in his blog and it's just wrong. The Redskins have typically carried $1.0 - $1.5 million in buffer space.
Just with the rookies, as soon as the Redskins sign a Khary Campbell, they push out $380K from the top 51. Campbell can be had for a $1.0 million deal (or less), which pushes out $380K, for a net hit of $620K. Same with Wynn and Daniels.
Here's the math:

Rookies ($2.5)
Players Pushed Out $1.5
Phillip Daniels ($2.0)
Player Pushed Out $0.4
Reynaldo Wynn ($0.8)
Player Pushed Out $0.4
Khary Campbell ($0.8)
Player Pushed Out $0.4
Impact FA ($3.5)
Player Pushed Out $0.4
Total: ($6.5)

So that says we could sign an impact free agent who takes up as much space as a Derrick Dockery, plus sign the rooks, plus get Daniels Wynn and Campbell, all with $6.5 million of cap space.

If you believe the space is $7.0 million, it gets tight but it fits. So you go for a $3.0 free agent instead of a $3.5. If you believe the space is $9.4 like we do here at the Warpath, then you've got oodles of room.

I think you're doing a little talking out of turn when you say our cap space is tight. It's clear your knowledge of the cap is limited. Consider attempting to learn about it more and ask more questions. Otherwise please don't tell me space is tight.

So I have a question on the rule of 51. I understand the rule that only the top 51 count against the cap in the offseason, but when do all 53 count against the cap. And if follow the signings you outline, wouldn't it be possible to go over the cap(if it is 7million) when all 53 are counted?

So I have a question on the rule of 51. I understand the rule that only the top 51 count against the cap in the offseason, but when do all 53 count against the cap. And if follow the signings you outline, wouldn't it be possible to go over the cap(if it is 7million) when all 53 are counted?

You are correct, during the season all 53 guys on your roster count towards the cap. I believe it's cut-down day when this changeover occurs, though I'm not certain. The practice squad also has to count against your cap during the season. That's 8 guys times some number less than $100K. I forget what practice squad guys make.

So you do have to leave a bit more wiggle room. But that's typically accomplished on cut-down day. Inevitably you end up cutting a vet who currently falls in the top 51 and keeping an undrafted free agent or two who currently don't fall in the top 51.

We could sign Renaldo Wynn this week and end up cutting him in August if we discover that the great Alex Buzbee is ready to step up.

Besides, as time goes along here it appears less and less likely that there are any free agents available who are worth a Dockery type contract. The quality linebackers are all on the older side and the tackles seem picked over. The free agent acquisition may be a moot point - it could be the only way to get a quality starter at this point is through the draft.

Thanks as always for the info.
I am still hoping that after the draft we may find someone out there that gets released from a team with an abundance of one our positions of need.

Besides, as time goes along here it appears less and less likely that there are any free agents available who are worth a Dockery type contract. The quality linebackers are all on the older side and the tackles seem picked over. The free agent acquisition may be a moot point - it could be the only way to get a quality starter at this point is through the draft.

We're doomed.

But that's another thread...