Should We Go After Another QB in Offseason

Unless your Peyton Manning or Ben R., it takes some time to play QB (as in several-seven yrs). Lets give P. Ramsey some time under this system. Make a decision after the season. If Ramsey shows some good signs lets not go out and spend more $. Keep Hasselbeck as the 2nd!! Brunell 3rd.

Two points here:

POINT # !: Someone said that Brunell was being paid like Manning. You must be referring to Archie Manning and his pension from the NFL.

I'll defer to Crazy Canuck here for the exact numbers but I believe that Peyton Manning got a $34M signing bonus in his last deal. The total value of the deal is somewhere north of $100M. Brunell's bonus was about $8M and the total package was probably not worth $34M. Danny Boy has been known to overpay for players, but even he did not bid that high for Mark Brunell.

Eli Manning got a $20M signing bonus with the Giants and something on the order of a $40M total package. Once again, that is more than Brunell got.

So he isn't getting "paid like Manning" and it would have been folly for anyone to believe that he would perform like Peyton Manning this year.


POINT #2: Brees stunk last year and now is having a great year in his "contract year". That is exactly the pattern followed by Brian Griese in Denver and that did not work out very well once he signed and got his big contract. Brees is probably better than Griese but I do not think he is the reincarnation of Johnny Unitas. Someone will overpay for him in the off-season and don't bet against Danny Boy being the one with the drooling wallet.

You guys made a lot of good points in this thread. Here's my take.

Brunell - He's a $3.4M cap hit in 2005, so to eat $7.1M in dead cap to cut him doesn't make much sense. 2006 is our trouble year so pushing the bulk of the dead money there doesn't help either. I agree with Ramseyfan that the only logical solution would be to keep Brunell on as a backup in 2005, then cut him after June 1st 2006. We'd eat $1.4M in dead cap in 2006 and $4.3M in 2007.

Ramsey - We have Ramsey signed through 2006. But I think Gibbs will know sooner than that if Ramsey has a future with the Skins. Hopefully PR steps up and shows Gibbs he's the QB of the future. If he plays well enough they sign him to an extension in the offseason or midway through next year and everyone's happy. :food-smil

If not, the Skins will have to make some decisions. I can't see Gibbs going back to the draft for a QB and starting all over. I figure they give Ramsey until midway next year to show what he's got, and if he's not the man they trade him and bring in another vet QB for 2006. :doh:

If Gibbs really sees nothing in Ramsey the rest of this year it is conceivable they could go after a QB in the offseason. Believe it or not, they could probably afford it since the cap hits are usually smallest in the first couple years of the contract.

You guys made a lot of good points in this thread. Here's my take.

Brunell - He's a $3.4M cap hit in 2005, so to eat $7.1M in dead cap to cut him doesn't make much sense. 2006 is our trouble year so pushing the bulk of the dead money there doesn't help either. I agree with Ramseyfan that the only logical solution would be to keep Brunell on as a backup in 2005, then cut him after June 1st 2006. We'd eat $1.4M in dead cap in 2006 and $4.3M in 2007.

Ramsey - We have Ramsey signed through 2006. But I think Gibbs will know sooner than that if Ramsey has a future with the Skins. Hopefully PR steps up and shows Gibbs he's the QB of the future. If he plays well enough they sign him to an extension in the offseason or midway through next year and everyone's happy. :food-smil

If not, the Skins will have to make some decisions. I can't see Gibbs going back to the draft for a QB and starting all over. I figure they give Ramsey until midway next year to show what he's got, and if he's not the man they trade him and bring in another vet QB for 2006. :doh:

If Gibbs really sees nothing in Ramsey the rest of this year it is conceivable they could go after a QB in the offseason. Believe it or not, they could probably afford it since the cap hits are usually smallest in the first couple years of the contract.
Nice info CC, thanks

What happens if Brunell retires? Do we still take a cap hit?

What happens if Brunell retires? Do we still take a cap hit?

Good question. I heard that there might be a "Barry Sanders" rule where you could get cap relief if a player retires, but I'm not sure.

And by the way SC is right, Peyton's deal is nowhere near Brunell's.

The Redskins will definitely go after an experienced QB. Could be Kitna, Brees or someone else. Hasselbeck deserves a chance as well as Ramsey for 1# spot because up until now there has been no efficient passer for this team since Brad Johnson. If you compare the successful QB's in the past, we are not even close with the QB's we have now.

I saw this on Ask the Commish:

What happens if a player is traded or retires?

Answer: In most cases, if a player retires, the remaining signing bonus that has not been included in salary “accelerates” and is included in that year’s team salary. Thus, the team will take an immediate salary cap hit of the remaining signing bonus.

Here's the Brunell situation as reported by the Post, does this sound about right CC? From this it sounds like cutting him after June 1 might not be all that bad, especially when the cap goes up from the TV money.

Brunell is due to receive a $500,000 roster bonus on April 1, league sources said, and the Redskins would face a steep $7.165 million salary cap hit in 2005 if he retires or the team releases him before then; if Brunell is cut or retires after June 1, Washington would be penalized $1.93 million against the 2005 cap and another $5.7 million against the 2006 cap. Before this season began, many NFL executives believed the Redskins already were headed to a salary cap crisis by 2006.

Either way, the cap hit is going to be painful. We wouldn't be able to afford a free-agent QB even if we wanted one.

Brunell is due to receive a $500,000 roster bonus on April 1, league sources said, and the Redskins would face a steep $7.165 million salary cap hit in 2005 if he retires or the team releases him before then; if Brunell is cut or retires after June 1, Washington would be penalized $1.93 million against the 2005 cap and another $5.7 million against the 2006 cap. Before this season began, many NFL executives believed the Redskins already were headed to a salary cap crisis by 2006.

This is exactly right Matty.

Like I wrote above I still think it makes more sense to cut Brunell after June 1 2006. It all comes down to when the Skins want to eat the bulk of the money, and 2006 would seem to be the worst time to do it, cuz our cap number takes a big spike that year. It would make more sense to eat the bulk of the money in 2007. Of course a lot will depend on the new salary cap figures.