|
That is exactly the point why they can not come to an agreement. The NFLPA want the haves, such as the Redskins, Cowboys, Texans, to include more of their revenue stream in the calculation. Local advertising, local TV, suites, and club seats are among the items that teams are exempt from sharing. Since Danny and Jerry have come to town they have found ways to raise that revenue stream. Now the players want a share of that to. Since the CBA already states that there will be a no cap year at the end of the agreement, 2007 has always been in play. Thats why I have been constantly stating the Redskins based on there contracts last year and this year have been angling fo the 2007 season. I believe if you ask Crazy he also sees the wisdom in this.
Skinsfanatic 03-17-2005, 09:29 AM If there is an uncapped year, we need to sign all of the players we would like to keep to long term contracts that year. NO SIGNING BONUSES. Huge 1st year money with minimum salaries over the remainders of the contracts. Then, we pay a huge amount one year to keep the core guys we want while arranging for lots of cap space in upcoming years.
For example, take Samuels new contract. Currently he makes 52 million over the next seven years. We could rework his contract to be 46 million in base salary in the uncapped year and 1 million per for the next 6 years. If we take that same type of approach with our top 5 contracts (Samuels, Arrington, Griffin, Portis and Springs **leaving out the Brunell contract for obvious reasons**), then we would play these 5 players around 150 million in base salary in the uncapped year and we get to keep them for another 6 years past the uncapped year at 5 million per year for all 5 of them. Thats around 20-30 million per year in extra cap space that we would save by taking a huge hit in the uncapped year.
Of course, I don't actually think there will be an uncapped year, but here's to delusions of grandeur.
If there is an uncapped year, we need to sign all of the players we would like to keep to long term contracts that year. NO SIGNING BONUSES. Huge 1st year money with minimum salaries over the remainders of the contracts. Then, we pay a huge amount one year to keep the core guys we want while arranging for lots of cap space in upcoming years.
For example, take Samuels new contract. Currently he makes 52 million over the next seven years. We could rework his contract to be 46 million in base salary in the uncapped year and 1 million per for the next 6 years. If we take that same type of approach with our top 5 contracts (Samuels, Arrington, Griffin, Portis and Springs **leaving out the Brunell contract for obvious reasons**), then we would play these 5 players around 150 million in base salary in the uncapped year and we get to keep them for another 6 years past the uncapped year at 5 million per year for all 5 of them. Thats around 20-30 million per year in extra cap space that we would save by taking a huge hit in the uncapped year.
Of course, I don't actually think there will be an uncapped year, but here's to delusions of grandeur.
I was just going to post the same idea. Sign everyone to long term deals with it heavily loaded in the '07 season.
Seems like the league is asking for trouble, I'm sure Snyder is drooling at the idea of an uncapped year.
saden1 03-17-2005, 09:44 AM What happens if one of those players gets disgruntled? ala Coles.
BrudLee 03-17-2005, 09:45 AM I was just going to post the same idea. Sign everyone to long term deals with it heavily loaded in the '07 season.
Seems like the league is asking for trouble, I'm sure Snyder is drooling at the idea of an uncapped year.
LDS wouldn't even have to come up with the cash. I believe he could defer payment of the base salary over the length of the deal - Samuels would count for 46 million, but he could still get paid 6-7 million a year.
The uncapped year is perhaps the greatest potential boon to players currently in the league - ever. 2008 rookies will do better as well, since current players will all average, oh, league minimum if the system is abused to its full advantage. A free agent in 2007 will actually walk around making "cha-ching" noises.
Skinsfanatic 03-17-2005, 09:51 AM Question: What happens if one of those players gets disgruntled? ala Coles.
Answer: F'Em. At that point, they play or they sit. They are only making 1 mil per after the first year, so if they become disgruntled, they can come to the games and watch from a good seat on the bench. And if that makes them sad, then boo hoo.
cpayne5 03-17-2005, 09:55 AM We could also dump Brunell in '07 (if he's not already gone) and take the cap 'hit' then too.
BrudLee 03-17-2005, 09:57 AM We could also dump Brunell in '07 (if he's not already gone) and take the cap 'hit' then too.
Oh. My. God.
So interested in acquiring players that I forgot about cleaning house.
Skinsfanatic 03-17-2005, 10:10 AM Dump Brunell in the uncapped year?! Brilliant.
The way things have been set up already with contracts screams this is their intention. Dan is a wizard in working the system.
|