Gmanc711
10-11-2005, 12:01 PM
To be honest, I miss Fred Smoot when you ask that question. He was one of my favorite players, and I think based on last week we could have used him. In time, Rogers will be better, but i'd take smoot right now.
Gibbs the GMGmanc711 10-11-2005, 12:01 PM To be honest, I miss Fred Smoot when you ask that question. He was one of my favorite players, and I think based on last week we could have used him. In time, Rogers will be better, but i'd take smoot right now. Schneed10 10-11-2005, 12:09 PM you left out a lot of moves too ;) and right now i'd say we ARE missing champ and smoot, at least, we were on sunday. Overall its more positives than negatives, we still throw away draft picks too easily and we gave brunell a bigger contract than he asked for (how often does that happen? "I'd like a 5mill bonus sir"... 'HERE, TAKE 8!!!!!'). fiore, vaughn, barrow, letting wilds go so we could start the ade, wasting our draft picks on people that didn't even make the roster... big lavar contract so he can warm the bench. the bad moves are fairly inconsequential now that brunell has stepped up. But we've still overspent (though not AS zealously) in many cases. I'm not sure how much we were missing Champ and Smoot on Sunday. Harris was out all game, and Springs left in the first quarter. We still held the Plummer under 100 yards passing with Rogers and The Ade starting most of the game. Granted it was wet and difficult to throw, but Brunell managed to throw pretty well. Plummer was stymied. Now looking at next week with Springs in question and Harris just coming back, I'm sure we'd all feel better having Smoot or Champ waiting in the wings. But that's just not practical to have so many stud CBs on one roster. I like Rogers for his cover abilities. I'm not sure he's the greatest in run support yet, I think he was responsible for losing outside containment against Bell on one of those TD runs. But for a nickel he's good, and will only get better. He's no Tom Carter. Schneed10 10-11-2005, 12:18 PM Nice summary there Schneed10, once you see all the moves layed out like that it's tough to argue that the personnel moves haven't been very good. I guess my only complaint would be with our later round picks, we've wiffed on a few like McCune, Newberry, Wilson, etc. I'd add that we miss Smoot a little, but only because of our injuries. If Harris was 100% then no I don't think we miss Smooty at all. I tried not to list the late round picks because IMO the jury is still out on a lot of them. On McCune, I think it was Gibbs' intention all along that the guy would need some serious training before he could be expected to contribute. He's a physical monster but not that polished yet. With time on the practice squad he could still do damage for us next year. On Molinaro and Wilson, it is definitely hard to crack the lineup when Jansen and Samuels are your starters. I know Wilson got cut, so consider him a whiff. But Molinaro is hanging around, and he just might prove himself if one of our starters goes down. I don't like calling guys whiffs without giving them a full chance to prove themselves (ie Mark Brunell last year) Newberry was a definite wiff though. Cutting Chad Morton for Antonio Brown seems like a bit of a whiff too. Certainly Gibbs the GM is not perfect, but given that we're 3-1, and a very competitive and well-balanced team, it's hard to argue that, overall, Gibbs the GM isn't doing a great job. paulskinsfan 10-11-2005, 12:27 PM you left out a lot of moves too ;) and right now i'd say we ARE missing champ and smoot, at least, we were on sunday. Overall its more positives than negatives, we still throw away draft picks too easily and we gave brunell a bigger contract than he asked for (how often does that happen? "I'd like a 5mill bonus sir"... 'HERE, TAKE 8!!!!!'). fiore, vaughn, barrow, letting wilds go so we could start the ade, wasting our draft picks on people that didn't even make the roster... big lavar contract so he can warm the bench. the bad moves are fairly inconsequential now that brunell has stepped up. But we've still overspent (though not AS zealously) in many cases. I agree. While Gibbs definitely has the team going in the right direction, this thread ignores the fact that we have traded away picks like candy and our mid round draft picks have blown. Brunnell trade, and throw in a pick, Portis trade, and throw in a pick. Jason Campbell, how can you say he is a successful pick when he hasn't taken the field? We gave up a HUGE amount to take Campbell, and I still believe we would've been better served drafting a pass rusher. All Im saying is, we as fans are quick to pile on when things are bad, and even quicker to jump aboard the bandwagon when things are good. To blindly say that Gibbs is a great GM because we are 3-1 ignores some of his poor decisions. That being said, I hope mortgaging our future doesn't come back to bite us in the ass. #56fanatic 10-11-2005, 12:43 PM When we keep reworking these deals, like brunell, jansen, and these guys it just keeps putting off the cap hits. The first couple of years on these contracts are so minimal that the salaries dont hurt us that much. Its the 4 and 5th years of these contracts that kills the cap. in the case of some of these players, they never get to the 4th and 5th years because we rework them. LaVar has done it in the past. Twice counting the last contract. Brunell did it this year, and he has only been here 2 years. Dont you remember how long it took the 49ers to straighten out there mess. What I am saying is Gibbs wants somebody and Danny doesn't say no, vinny doesn't say no, they just go get them, then get someone to rework their current deal. We can not keep reworking contracts every year and avoiding those 4th and 5th years. Portis' contract is like that, Moss is like that. All these guys getting these huge contracts have backloaded deals where they are like 1 to 3 million in the first couple then balloon to 6 to 9 million. Like Coles last year, we had to eat what was left on the signing bonus, and that 9 million. We can't keep doing that to try and make a run, I like Dan and wouldn't want a different owner but you can't help but admire teams like the Pats, Eagles, Bengles, that build through the draft, then pick maybe one or two free agents that put them over the top. Dallas just got out of all that cap problem stuff last year. Schneed10 10-11-2005, 12:44 PM I agree. While Gibbs definitely has the team going in the right direction, this thread ignores the fact that we have traded away picks like candy and our mid round draft picks have blown. Brunnell trade, and throw in a pick, Portis trade, and throw in a pick. Jason Campbell, how can you say he is a successful pick when he hasn't taken the field? We gave up a HUGE amount to take Campbell, and I still believe we would've been better served drafting a pass rusher. All Im saying is, we as fans are quick to pile on when things are bad, and even quicker to jump aboard the bandwagon when things are good. To blindly say that Gibbs is a great GM because we are 3-1 ignores some of his poor decisions. That being said, I hope mortgaging our future doesn't come back to bite us in the ass. 1) You're right, I didn't mean to call Campbell a success. I just had to be even handed in listing all of the first-day draft picks under Gibbs. But you can't call it a mistake either, not until Campbell takes the field someday and shows what he can do. 2) I don't think we're "mortgaging the future." We've given away a lot of draft picks, I'll grant you that. And our ability to hit on late round picks has been iffy. But I'd assert that our ability to uncover undrafted free agents and sign low-level free agents and turn them into starters has made up for it. Cedric Killings, Ryan Boschetti, Joe Salavea'a, Ryan Clark, Demetric Evans, guys like that. If you're talking about mortgaging the future as it relates to the salary cap, we're in good enough shape next year to keep the team intact, and we're in tremendous shape for 2007. Schneed10 10-11-2005, 12:48 PM When we keep reworking these deals, like brunell, jansen, and these guys it just keeps putting off the cap hits. The first couple of years on these contracts are so minimal that the salaries dont hurt us that much. Its the 4 and 5th years of these contracts that kills the cap. in the case of some of these players, they never get to the 4th and 5th years because we rework them. LaVar has done it in the past. Twice counting the last contract. Brunell did it this year, and he has only been here 2 years. Dont you remember how long it took the 49ers to straighten out there mess. What I am saying is Gibbs wants somebody and Danny doesn't say no, vinny doesn't say no, they just go get them, then get someone to rework their current deal. We can not keep reworking contracts every year and avoiding those 4th and 5th years. Portis' contract is like that, Moss is like that. All these guys getting these huge contracts have backloaded deals where they are like 1 to 3 million in the first couple then balloon to 6 to 9 million. Like Coles last year, we had to eat what was left on the signing bonus, and that 9 million. We can't keep doing that to try and make a run, I like Dan and wouldn't want a different owner but you can't help but admire teams like the Pats, Eagles, Bengles, that build through the draft, then pick maybe one or two free agents that put them over the top. Dallas just got out of all that cap problem stuff last year. Sorry fanatic, you're just flat out wrong. We can keep reworking the deals. As you rework the deal, it's not like you're kicking 100% of the cap hit down the road. You're kicking a manageable portion of it down the road, because some of the allocated bonus already came off the books in the years between the initial signing and the renegotiation. Crazy Canuck, a little love here? #56fanatic 10-11-2005, 01:02 PM You will see. I am not going to argue over these points. I know what I am talking about. I have a friend that played for the Raiders for 10 years and just recently retired last year. He has explained all this stuff to me. The end of the contracts is where all the money is, thats why players are cut after the first 3 or so years, so they dont see that money, and teams just have to pay the remaining parts of the signing bonuses either in one year or spread it out to the next year. "dead money", we lead the NFL in dead money every year. When you rework these deals, it sets the 1st couple years at very low salaries then the contract money excelerates towards the end of the deal, like the last two years. If the player is not willing the renegotiate, then they get cut, or if they are two old or past their prime they get cut because its not financially in the best interest to extend a contract for a player in their mid 30's. Wait and see, Portis and Moss will have to rework their deals to free up cap space or they will get cut in two to three years. Noway can we keep those huge contracts past that length. skins052bgr8 10-11-2005, 01:44 PM I tend to agree with Matty, Salary cap hell was supposed to be here in 04, 05, 06, 07, Where is it? It is always a year or two away. Some people on here forget these people do this for a living and do have a plan down the road. We may lose one to two people a year Smoot and Pierce (very good salary cap move this year) that we believe are critical due to the salary cap. How many of us would have thought losing Arrington two years ago as a salary cap casualty would have been devastating to this team, I for one would have thought I would just die not the case. These players can be replaced. The raiders are not the best team to talk about salary cap management they could be in worst shape then us and their moves have not panned out anywhere near like ours are starting to. Previous years we spent and spent, but we may have to suffer through a year or two here and there where we are not as flashy and kill the free agent market due to limited cap like this year we took some hits even with Coles, but it seems to be working out. Keep the bulk of the team intact with little turnover and filling with role players will be our key to success, good managing MTK 10-11-2005, 01:52 PM Every team in the league re-works deals and backloads contracts. This isn't an exclusive to the Redskins. #56fanatic, I have to agree with Schneed10 here and say you are flat wrong. Where is this cap hell anyway? Snyder has been managing things since '99... we should have had major problems years ago but we didn't. We've never had to blow up a team like the Titans did this year. We've never had major cap problems that weren't fixable by re-working deals or taking a cap hit (Coles). Your take is right in that contracts are backloaded and guys like Portis will eventually have to re-work their deal, but that's not a secret and like I said not something that only the Redskins do. Think of the cap like a giant puzzle. Snyder always has a 3 year plan in place, and at any given time he is very aware of the cap implications 3 years down the road and contracts are structured accordingly. It's all how you fit the pieces of this 3 year puzzle together. Every year you're going to have a couple of guys that will need to be restructured. Every year there is a rough idea in place of how much dead cap they can carry. It's all carefully planned out and structured. If Snyder knows how to do one thing, it's run a business, and if he's done anything well in his time here, it's manage the cap and manage it very well. |
|
EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum