Current Redskins Salary Cap Status - 2009

I actually think you gave a very clear explaination of the point. You did pique my curiosity though: Do you think McIntosh is a starting-caliber LB?In ideal conditions, yes. Put talent in front of him and when healthy, he's a league average linebacker. He actually fits our system pretty well. Problem is, if his knees aren't 100%, he usually can't recover from the mis-steps he's prone to taking, and get back into position.

Therefore, while the answer to your question is 'yes' I would not re-sign him unless he makes noticible improvement this year.

In ideal conditions, yes. Put talent in front of him and when healthy, he's a league average linebacker. He actually fits our system pretty well. Problem is, if his knees aren't 100%, he usually can't recover from the mis-steps he's prone to taking, and get back into position.

Therefore, while the answer to your question is 'yes' I would not re-sign him unless he makes noticible improvement this year.

That's his main problem: bad knees. We should've drafted Thomas Howard instead. That kid is a beast!

So, salary cap gurus (since I'm not anywhere close to a guru nor do I pretend to be), what does this potentially mean for the Skins? Are we aware of this loophole? Could we use it to our benefit this year with any of our current players?

“COMPLETION BONUS” GIVES CAP FLEXIBILITY IN 2009, POSSIBLE SECURITY IN 2010 (http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/03/21/completion-bonus-gives-cap-flexibility-in-2009-possible-security-in-2010/)

Posted by Mike Florio on March 21, 2009, 11:01 p.m.


With the intricacies of the last capped year restricting the devices that teams have used in the past to stay on the right side of the per-team spending limit, the New Orleans Saints have developed an innovative way to push money into future years without running afoul of the special accounting rules that apply as the NFLhttp://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/mag-glass_10x10.gif (http://www.profootballtalk.com/category/rumor-mill/#) transitions to a season without a salary cap in 2010.
But, frankly, we think there’s a deeper motivation at play.
According to Mike Triplett of the New Orleans Times-Picayune, the Saints are using “completion bonuses” in 2010 (http://blog.nola.com/saintsbeat/2009/03/uncapped_year_forcing_new_orle.html) as a tool for giving guaranteed money to players without driving up the 2009 cap numbers arising from their contracts.
Per Triplett, the Saints used a completion bonus in contracts paid to linebacker Jonathan Vilma, tackle Jon Stinchcomb, and cornerback Jabari Greer.
The device provides guaranteed money upon the “completion” of the 2010 season, if the players don’t skip or otherwise miss any mandatory team activities during the 2010 season.
One league source believes that the real aim of the completion bonus is to protect teams against holdouts or other player misbehavior. If the motivation was cap compliance, teams would still be able to use option bonuses with a non-exercise fee in the form of guaranteed base salaries.
The only difference is that a 2010 option bonus would most likely require option bonuses in future years, due to the rule prohibiting an increase in base salary of more than 30 percent in an uncapped year.
But, frankly, it’s an easy thing to do.
A league source tells us that the possible application of the Ashley Leliehttp://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/mag-glass_10x10.gif (http://www.profootballtalk.com/category/rumor-mill/#) grievance was discussed during one or more of the negotiations resulting in the use of completion bonuses by the Saints. Though a player’s entitlement to a completion bonus would likely be subject to the grievance process if, for example, he is suspended for violating the substance abuse policy and then gets stiffed out of the bonus, it seems fairly clear to us that the Saints believe that they’ve found a way to ensure that money isn’t “earned” until the player completes the season in which the completion bonus is to be paid.

btw, (tangent) i do believe that those option bonuses (like the 20+mill one haynesworth has) are truly guaranteed... if he starts up a dog fighting ring and smoking crack, the skins can't go back and try to recoup any of that money (whereas the non-option vick money was sued for by the falcons after his indiscretions came to light).

as far as what this means for us... almost nothing, since i don't think that's standard practice in skinsland. It's an interesting concept, but i don't know why it wouldn't be considered as a likely-to-be-earned/not-likely-to-be-earned bonus, since that's essentially what it is.

Could the Redskins rework some of the current contracts, pushing the money to the uncapped year if the contract isn't extended? What if they added a year to say Clinton Portis' contract with a relatively low salary with him having a void option?

Could the Redskins rework some of the current contracts, pushing the money to the uncapped year if the contract isn't extended? What if they added a year to say Clinton Portis' contract with a relatively low salary with him having a void option?Money can only be prorated through, I believe 2012. So any player whose contract already extends past that date can't get any money pushed into future years, at least via extension.

There's pretty much no place left to go to free up cap space. There's Rabach, and there's Thrash. Either could be released (or extended, in theory) to lower their 2009 cap number. Santana I believe is another option, but the team seems to be specifically avoiding guarenteeing any more money to him. Simply put, if Kelly or Thomas breaks out as a top target this year, Moss is gone at seasons end.

Money can only be prorated through, I believe 2012. So any player whose contract already extends past that date can't get any money pushed into future years, at least via extension.

There's pretty much no place left to go to free up cap space. There's Rabach, and there's Thrash. Either could be released (or extended, in theory) to lower their 2009 cap number. Santana I believe is another option, but the team seems to be specifically avoiding guarenteeing any more money to him. Simply put, if Kelly or Thomas breaks out as a top target this year, Moss is gone at seasons end.

why release Moss? 2010 is uncapped. The point would be to free money for this year. Rogers is due to be a RFA next year, right? Couldn't we extend him if he'd lower this year's salary?

why release Moss? 2010 is uncapped. The point would be to free money for this year. Rogers is due to be a RFA next year, right? Couldn't we extend him if he'd lower this year's salary?Rogers simply isn't making enough to save money when extending him.

If he got a Hall-type deal, it would raise his 2009 cap number by 1.0-1.5 million.

Cutting Moss would be more of a football decision, based on what he is/isn't needed for. He'll be here until a better option comes along. He won't be here as long as Randle El will be.

Here are the pre-draft salary cap figures:

Amazing that the Eagles went deeper in the postseason than any NFC East team, yet they lead the league with $35M in pre-draft cap space. Meanwhile there are only 6 teams with less space than the Skins.

(http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/04/22/salary-cap-space-as-of-april-22/#)
Arizona Cardinalshttp://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/mag-glass_10x10.gif (http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/04/22/salary-cap-space-as-of-april-22/#): $1.29 million.
Atlanta Falconshttp://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/mag-glass_10x10.gif (http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/04/22/salary-cap-space-as-of-april-22/#): $23.67 million.
Baltimore Ravenshttp://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/mag-glass_10x10.gif (http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/04/22/salary-cap-space-as-of-april-22/#): $968,000.
Buffalo Billshttp://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/mag-glass_10x10.gif (http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/04/22/salary-cap-space-as-of-april-22/#): $11.82 million.
Carolina Panthers: $2.69 million.
Chicago Bears: $20.96 million.
Cincinnati Bengals: $16.26 million.
Cleveland Browns: $20.27 million.
Dallas Cowboys: $10.35 million.
Denver Broncos: $16.3 million.
Detroit Lions: $10.72 million.
Green Bay Packershttp://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/mag-glass_10x10.gif (http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/04/22/salary-cap-space-as-of-april-22/#): $27.89 million.
Houston Texans: $10.75 million.
Indianapolis Colts: $7.10 million.
Jacksonville Jaguars: $16.94 million.
Kansas City Chiefshttp://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/mag-glass_10x10.gif (http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/04/22/salary-cap-space-as-of-april-22/#): $32.3 million.
Miami Dolphins: $13.19 million.
Minnesota Vikings: $17.32 million.
New England Patriots: $4.67 million.
New Orleans Saints: $4.29 million.
New York Giants: $4.37 million.
New York Jets: $12.62 million.
Oakland Raiders: $9.33 million.
Philadelphia Eagles: $37.44 million.
Pittsburgh Steelers: $440,000.
San Diego Chargers: $8.56 million.
San Francisco 49ers: $26.11 million.
Seattle Seahawks: $7.41 million.
St. Louis Rams: $10.67 million.
Tampa Bay Buccaneers: $35.54 million.
Tennessee Titans: $13.05 million.
Washington Redskins: $5.96 million.

The reason the Will is a more difficult position than either the Mike or the Sam, at least as I understand NFL defenses, is that the Will is many times more likely to find himself caught in space against a receiver.

Since the Sam always goes to the tight end side, the Will is always responsible for the slant to the isolated receiver, as well as slow developing plays out of the backfield. Rocky was a disaster in this role, for when he was able to diagnose the plays, he tended to not be fast enough to make a difference.

His shortness won't necessarily play better at any position (although you are right about the TE matchup, but remember that in pretty much any scheme except cover two, the strong safety tends to line up to the TE side as well [hense: 'strong'], mitigating the role of the SLB even further).

Grilliams and Blache both are big fans of simplifing the roles of the OLBs against the run. They share the same philosophy: they'd rather see the OLBs take out the lead blocker and open up a clean lane for the MLB to make the play than have the OLB take the blocker head on and try to beat him one on one. It's one of the biggest reasons for Fletcher's success here, I think.

I hope that answered your question. It probably didn't, but maybe there was something valuable in there anyway.

Yes. I'd add that the Will is sometimes matched in pass coverage against a running back. Maybe that's what you meant by "slow developing plays," anyway.