Gibbs the GM
 

[size=3]Moves made under Joe Gibbs:[/size]

[b]Traded for:[/b]
Mark Brunell
James Thrash
Clinton Portis
Santana Moss

[b]Drafted:[/b]
Sean Taylor
Chris Cooley
Carlos Rogers
Jason Campbell

[b]Signed:[/b]
Marcus Washington
Cornelius Griffin
Shawn Springs
Walt Harris
David Patten
Pierson Prioleau

[b]Traded Away:[/b]
Rod Gardner
Laveraneus Coles
Champ Bailey

Numerous undrafted free agents.

[b]Questions answered:[/b]
Do we miss Champ? No.

Do we miss Smoot? No.

Do we miss Antonio Pierce? Maybe just a little, but Marshall is a much better value.

Were the WRs upgraded? Yes, Moss is better than Coles.

Has the game passed Gibbs by? NO WAY.

And most importantly, should we change the current GM alignment where Gibbs makes the calls with input from Cerrato, his coaches, and heavy input from Gregg Williams? NO.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

You could have just said "I told you so." ;)

Seriously though, very good points. I've never really entered into the "Gibbs shouldn't be GM" debate, but if the above is any indication, you MIGHT say he's made some winning moves.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10][size=3]Moves made under Joe Gibbs:[/size]

[b]Traded for:[/b]
Mark Brunell
James Thrash
Clinton Portis
Santana Moss

[b]Drafted:[/b]
Sean Taylor
Chris Cooley
Carlos Rogers
Jason Campbell

[b]Signed:[/b]
Marcus Washington
Cornelius Griffin
Shawn Springs
Walt Harris
David Patten
Pierson Prioleau

[b]Traded Away:[/b]
Rod Gardner
Laveraneus Coles
Champ Bailey

Numerous undrafted free agents.

[b]Questions answered:[/b]
Do we miss Champ? No.

Do we miss Smoot? No.

Do we miss Antonio Pierce? Maybe just a little, but Marshall is a much better value.

Were the WRs upgraded? Yes, Moss is better than Coles.

Has the game passed Gibbs by? NO WAY.

And most importantly, should we change the current GM alignment where Gibbs makes the calls with input from Cerrato, his coaches, and heavy input from Gregg Williams? NO.[/QUOTE]

People are really sleeping on the team that Joe has assembled, don't forget, Nemo is lurking around back there, who knows when he will break out, I'm sure people didn't think Willie Parker would do much ... so lets wait and see.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

The moves most if not all of us questioned last year, seem to be the right ones. I like Portis alot, I think he is a good back, but what if we traded for Alexander instead, and still had the 2nd round pick, or what if we gave Bailey the cash and used Betts as the primary RB. I dont know if it would make a difference or not, but I have thought about that for a while. But I do agree on everything else, great draft picks, good deals w/ Moss. and the free agent pick ups last year for the D have been next to genious.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

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.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

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.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

I don't recall Brunell only asking for $5M... either way I think the hype over his contract is really overblown anyway.

On the surface it was a 7 year deal for $43M with a bonus of $8.6M.

The deal will essentially be a 3 year deal for approx. $10M and we'll end up eating about $4.9M of his bonus.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

thats just it, we eat so much money on these contracts. Coles we ate about 9mil, and with all the LaVar stuff it sounds like we are going to eat aprox. 12mil. what about Brunell, which will be around 4 or 5 mil. This is why I think we need to have a GM or someone more familiar with the cap than Joe. Trotter we ate a bit of that contract too. Not saying Joe can not do this, but somebody that has been in the league the last 5 to 10 years may have a better grasp of the Cap and how it works. And how to spend money WISELY. We all know Dan and Vinny live in a fantasy football world and it is going to catch up with us eventually, like in two years.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10][size=3]Moves made under Joe Gibbs:[/size]

[b]Traded for:[/b]
Mark Brunell
James Thrash
Clinton Portis
Santana Moss

[b]Drafted:[/b]
Sean Taylor
Chris Cooley
Carlos Rogers
Jason Campbell

[b]Signed:[/b]
Marcus Washington
Cornelius Griffin
Shawn Springs
Walt Harris
David Patten
Pierson Prioleau

[b]Traded Away:[/b]
Rod Gardner
Laveraneus Coles
Champ Bailey

Numerous undrafted free agents.

[b]Questions answered:[/b]
Do we miss Champ? No.

Do we miss Smoot? No.

Do we miss Antonio Pierce? Maybe just a little, but Marshall is a much better value.

Were the WRs upgraded? Yes, Moss is better than Coles.

Has the game passed Gibbs by? NO WAY.

And most importantly, should we change the current GM alignment where Gibbs makes the calls with input from Cerrato, his coaches, and heavy input from Gregg Williams? NO.[/QUOTE]

[b]Killer Post S10[/b]. It's easy in the heat of battle to to debate all the "stupid moves Gibbs made". We rarely look back to measure those moves in hindsight! Looks much different than they did a couple of months ago!!!!!!!!!!!!

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

[QUOTE=#56fanatic]thats just it, we eat so much money on these contracts. Coles we ate about 9mil, and with all the LaVar stuff it sounds like we are going to eat aprox. 12mil. what about Brunell, which will be around 4 or 5 mil. This is why I think we need to have a GM or someone more familiar with the cap than Joe. Trotter we ate a bit of that contract too. Not saying Joe can not do this, but somebody that has been in the league the last 5 to 10 years may have a better grasp of the Cap and how it works. And how to spend money WISELY. We all know Dan and Vinny live in a fantasy football world and it is going to catch up with us eventually, like in two years.[/QUOTE]

Gibbs doesn't handle the cap stuff, that's Snyder's department.

People have been saying for years now that the cap will "catch up" with us, well Snyder has been running the team and managing the cap pretty well since 1999. Where is this salary cap hell?? The answer is it's not going to happen because Snyder actually has a clue when it comes to managing the cap and he always has a 3 year plan in place. They know when they sign someone how it's going to effect the cap down the road and they structure the contracts accordingly.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

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.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

[QUOTE=That Guy]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.[/QUOTE]

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.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]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.[/QUOTE]

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.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

[QUOTE=That Guy]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.[/QUOTE]

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.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

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.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

[QUOTE=paulskinsfan]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.[/QUOTE]

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.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

[QUOTE=#56fanatic]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.[/QUOTE]

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?

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

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.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

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

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

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.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

[QUOTE=Gmanc711]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.[/QUOTE]


I do too, Gmanc! I realize that in time, Rogers will be coming into his own, but I really liked Smoot as well! Maybe he'll get mad at the Vikings and head back to D.C. next year! :headbange

We can at least dream!

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

[QUOTE=#56fanatic]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.[/QUOTE]

I think you answered your own question here. By setting the 1st couple years at low cap numbers, you are pushing the money to the future. But in the future, any deadcap hit you take will be offset by more bargains on new guys you sign. Deadcap is a GOOD thing. It's like a growing company. If you finance yourself with too much debt, yes you will get into trouble down the road. But if you have no debt then that's no good either. It means you probably won't be able to grow quick enough. You need a balance between debt and equity. Deadcap is the ONLY way a GM can get any fleixibility or timing into his plans. IMO a team with no deadcap is doing something wrong. I suspect the Skins allocate 10-20% of their annual cap budget on deadcap. The deadcap is offset by "bargains" in the short term. Of course there are limits.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

[QUOTE=skins052bgr8]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[/QUOTE]


Good Post. Unlike myself, who experience salary cap HELL every payday, Snyder did not build his current empire ignorant to creative finance. Suprisingly, as ridiculous as some of the aquisitions have been. Snyder has without fail opened his wallet to make the whatever latest, coach's whim materialize. That AIN'T a bad owner. With Gibbs in place, the BUILDING process has begun for now and the future. In the process, I think the cap situation will be relieved.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

We keep saying we miss Bailey and Smoot, guess what if they were hurt like Champ has been we would not have Shawn Springs as his back up, good ole Ade would be playing. Us missing them is based off injuries which we would be in the same boat if they were here and got injured. We have good starting corners, but like every team you only can have so much quality depth to be dreaming about having Smoot and Bailey Sunday because our starters went down with injury.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

You forgot one question below Smoot:

Do we miss Lavar? No.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

So far most of Gibbs draft picks are no brainers, Taylor, Rogers, just about anyone could make those pick's, and understand that GW talked Gibbs into drafting Taylor, and probably had a big hand in evaluating Rogers as well.

Let's really look at some of the rest of the moves shall we, I don't think giving up 43 mil and a second rd pick for a player in Brunell who was about to be released by the Jags and wouldn't have garnered half the contract he recieved is remotly good GM work, I don't believe giving up Champ, a #2, and 50 mil for a system back is remotly a good trade, I don't believe throwing away next years draft for a projected middle 2nd rd pick in Campbell is a good job, Cooley is THE best pick Gibbs has made in relation to evaluating something other than top 10 talent.

Sorry if I don't buy into the great GM work for signing established talent as has been laid out, Griffen, Springs, Harris, Washington, Moss, Patten, etc. anyone can sign and overpay for established talent, the real talent at GM stems from a gm's ability to evaluate unestablished talent, in which I haven't seen any, the last 2 year's did we draft 1 player other than Cooley who is starting, or even seeing playing time? NO. I don't want to hear about Killings, or Bushetti, GW uses a lot of players along that line when one of these guys does something to become a legitamite starter there nothing more than a temporary fill in's, Newberry, McCune, Wilson, are nothing, Nemo has yet to see the field not even in short yardage, so how good can he be, it's not like we can't use a short yardage back, and yet he sits? Personally I think Gibbs layoff biggest affect is at the GM spot, he doesn't know what's out there, so he's looking at numbers, ala Portis and Brunell.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

[QUOTE=REDSKIN2]You forgot one question below Smoot:

Do we miss Lavar? No.[/QUOTE]

That's gonna' start a war..................Is this the Brunell/Ramsey thread?

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10]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.[/QUOTE]

champ or smoot or harris or springs probably wouldn't have given up that TD, they probably would have had at least one shot on one of the two huge runs as well. If either would have made ONE of those three plays, the game ends with a redskin victory. plummer sucks in the rain, but corners help with run support as well... so, on sunday, i did kinda miss them, cause our depth (ade) truly sucks.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10]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.
[/QUOTE]

every time you re-negotiate you HAVE to add more money, or else the players won't agree to it. so you're replacing one baloon with a slightly bigger one over and over again across multiple players. In the end it DOES mean more wasted money and more dead cap.

[quote]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.[/quote]

the problem is, who's better? taylor, or some guy you've never heard of that may play 30% of the snaps. The best players on our defense were all drafted at one point, the UDFAs are high quality ones, but they're not springs, griffin, washington etc. They may be solid starters, but none have been impact players in the way rod smith has been etc. So I REALLY wouldn't bank on UDFAs as an equivalent to having solid drafts where you can get actual studs for cheap.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

about the cap: this year we've had to back away from a bunch of deals (smoot, pierce, brown, etc) because we've got the second least amount of cap space to work with (besides the raiders) and with the coles incident... I don't think there was really a lot out there out there this offseason (besides the three starters we got), but it has affected us in some ways.

Its good they've decided to start cleaning up now, cause brunell and lavar are going to be big hits when/if they go (portis and samuels have insane contracts too). Tightening up on the huge payoffs (as it seems we have) and not throwing away draft picks are always good things though.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

I just said my friend explained how the cap works, not using the Raiders as an example. The cap problems haven't come because of the contracts getting reworked. Lavar has reworked his twice, Samuels,Brunell did it this past offseason. It saves money, no doubt, but what I am saying is these deals escalete towards the end. Thats why we lose players because we only have so much money. I agree with players being expendable, I dont argue that point(smoot,pierce). I just am saying eventually those reworked deals will have to be run out, or players will be cut. thats all. We will have cap problems at some point. It may not come in next year, two years, 5 years. It depends on contract being reworked, players getting cut, dead money. Eventually, just like the 49ers, Cowboys, Ravens, you have to start paying the bills at somepoint. You can put them off as long as you want, but they have to be paid at some point. I hope I am still on this site when all this happens so I can say I told you so.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

what are you talking about. DEADMONEY is money we are paying players that are not playing with the skins. How is that a good thing? We payed Deon for two years after he wasn't here. Trotter comes off after THIS YEAR. The trade for Coles is another couple of years, or it may all be this year, not really sure about how that one worked out, I know it was 9 million penalty. when Noble retires we pay him, just like Fiore when he retired. How many times have you heard, he reworked his contract to save the team money for this year, or next year. Do you think Peyton Manning is going to play out that outrageous contract, or Donovan McNabb. No they wont. It will be reworked when the cap number get to be too high.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

Another point is that since the cap has been growing every year, it makes even more sense to push some money back. Would you rather take the extra $2M in 2005 when the cap is $85M, or take the $2M in 2008 when the cap might be $100M?

Anyways I don't disagree that you can only play these cap games to a certain point before you start getting burned. 2006 has long been seen as our trouble year, so it will be interesting to see how things play out next year.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

sound like you and I are on the same page, somewhat? LaVar if released on or before a certain date we can spread of next year and the year after, however with the collective barganing agreement running out, Unless its extended we wont be able to, it will all count on the year he is released. If you can get some of the mess out of the now, it does help. But what I am trying to get across is that when you renegotiate contracts, it helps the immediate season or two, but does not take you out of the trouble 3 or 4 years down the road. Now, saying that, it does not include "the assumption" the cap is going to go up a certain percentage. The skins work on that assumption each year. saying the cap SHOULD go up roughly this amount. They dont know for sure until the figure comes out, then they adjust accordingly.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

[QUOTE=That Guy]every time you re-negotiate you HAVE to add more money, or else the players won't agree to it. so you're replacing one baloon with a slightly bigger one over and over again across multiple players. In the end it DOES mean more wasted money and more dead cap.[/QUOTE]

OK, yet another ridiculous innaccuracy in this thread regarding cap management. I think Canuck needs to teach a class (Canuck I had a feeling you were a fellow finance guy, now I'm sure of it after that cost of capital post).

When you RENEGOTIATE a contract you are RARELY adding more money. You're taking the roster bonus or base salary from the old contract and turning it into a signing bonus. The player doesn't care what you call the payment, they just care that they're getting it. They sign a deal for the same amount of money they were previously contracted for, and the cap hit is spread evenly over multiple seasons rather than hitting all that year. Every one of the Skins' big contracts are structured this way on purpose, so that when the big roster bonuses are due they can then be renegotiated into signing bonuses. Brunell and Jansen just restructured in this very manner. Moss, Springs, Portis, and several others will all do the same thing in the next few years.

[QUOTE=That Guy]the problem is, who's better? taylor, or some guy you've never heard of that may play 30% of the snaps. The best players on our defense were all drafted at one point, the UDFAs are high quality ones, but they're not springs, griffin, washington etc. They may be solid starters, but none have been impact players in the way rod smith has been etc. So I REALLY wouldn't bank on UDFAs as an equivalent to having solid drafts where you can get actual studs for cheap.[/QUOTE]

And this I find to be absurd. Football in the NFL is a team game, you need depth more than you need stars. Yes, Sean Taylor does great things for our team, and he's probably the MVP of the defense. But that's not to say guys like Joe Salavea'a and Lemar Marshall aren't incredibly important.

And if I can add one thing, just for a friggin reality check... don't you see a difference between the team this year and the team before Gibbs got here?

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

[QUOTE=#56fanatic]sound like you and I are on the same page, somewhat? LaVar if released on or before a certain date we can spread of next year and the year after, however with the collective barganing agreement running out, Unless its extended we wont be able to, it will all count on the year he is released. If you can get some of the mess out of the now, it does help. But what I am trying to get across is that when you renegotiate contracts, it helps the immediate season or two, but does not take you out of the trouble 3 or 4 years down the road. Now, saying that, it does not include "the assumption" the cap is going to go up a certain percentage. The skins work on that assumption each year. saying the cap SHOULD go up roughly this amount. They dont know for sure until the figure comes out, then they adjust accordingly.[/QUOTE]

But Lavar is due to count $12 million against the team next year, even if he plays. If we cut him before June 1, he'll count about $12 million in dead cap money next year, but he will be totally gone from the books in 2007.

Dead cap money is a part of life in the NFL. You use it to your advantage because of the annual incremental increase in the salary cap.

And figuring out the expected increase in the salary cap is not difficult. It's a direct function of the % of total revenues allocated to the player pool which is being negotiated between 57-60%. Then it's a matter of projecting the total NFL revenues which increase annually 10-15%, plus a big boost this coming year from the new TV deal. For a guy with Dan Snyder's business sense and financial forecasting capabilities, I guarantee you he comes within $1 million of the salary cap every year. And that's the biggest reason we never run into this so called salary cap hell. He is always right on the money with his forecasts and manages the cap accordingly. When they say the NFL is a business, they mean it.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

[QUOTE=offiss]So far most of Gibbs draft picks are no brainers, Taylor, Rogers, just about anyone could make those pick's, and understand that GW talked Gibbs into drafting Taylor, and probably had a big hand in evaluating Rogers as well.

Let's really look at some of the rest of the moves shall we, I don't think giving up 43 mil and a second rd pick for a player in Brunell who was about to be released by the Jags and wouldn't have garnered half the contract he recieved is remotly good GM work, I don't believe giving up Champ, a #2, and 50 mil for a system back is remotly a good trade, I don't believe throwing away next years draft for a projected middle 2nd rd pick in Campbell is a good job, Cooley is THE best pick Gibbs has made in relation to evaluating something other than top 10 talent.

Sorry if I don't buy into the great GM work for signing established talent as has been laid out, Griffen, Springs, Harris, Washington, Moss, Patten, etc. anyone can sign and overpay for established talent, the real talent at GM stems from a gm's ability to evaluate unestablished talent, in which I haven't seen any, the last 2 year's did we draft 1 player other than Cooley who is starting, or even seeing playing time? NO. I don't want to hear about Killings, or Bushetti, GW uses a lot of players along that line when one of these guys does something to become a legitamite starter there nothing more than a temporary fill in's, Newberry, McCune, Wilson, are nothing, Nemo has yet to see the field not even in short yardage, so how good can he be, it's not like we can't use a short yardage back, and yet he sits? Personally I think Gibbs layoff biggest affect is at the GM spot, he doesn't know what's out there, so he's looking at numbers, ala Portis and Brunell.[/QUOTE]

Offiss you make some good points here.

But the draft picks are what they are. You can say that any first round picks are no brainers. Fact is, Gibbs and Co. could have picked someone else and they didn't. Looking back on the class Sean Taylor came out of, he was the best pick for our team. Many rated Rogers behind PacMan and Antrell...one is hurt and Rogers is playing better than Jones. So.....

As far as Cambell, too early to tell. You can't say whether he worth it or not...we don't know. And remember Gibbs doesn't manage cap money, so Brunell's contract wasn't really his doing.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

I am a HUGE skins fan, and I agree with what you are saying. Taylor was a huge nobrainer, as well as Rogers. One might say we could have taken Williams and then drafted a CB in the second round or Campbell in the 2nd round. Hell, maybe even a DB in the second and taken a QB in the later rounds. Thats up for the staff and they felt they couldn't pass on Campbell. But if you are so intent on Brunell being "your guy" this year, why not wait for another year to take a QB. There are some talented QBs coming in the draft next year that could have been taken with our 1st round pick, which we do not have now. I question alot of the moves, as all of us did last year. They would be questioned this year if we were 1-3 instead of 3-1. the two lineman that Bugel called future hogs, one was cut and one is low on the depth chart. The move to cut Trotter, Gibbs said he made a bad decision on that one, one he admitted. I love gibbs, I know it doesn't sound like it. but lets get real, this organization has been a mess for 10 years. I hope Gibbs can get it turned around, which it looks like he is. But with the cap trouble that will hit in a year or two, to next poor coach is going to have a nice little mess to try and clean up. If you remember, Caserly is the one who went out and scouted and picked those players Gibbs COACHED. He had nothing to do with the draft. The HOGGS the smurfs, pose' , all caserly. I think Gibbs has a bit to learn in the GM dept, which I believe he will learn. But Danny is not going to say no to anything Gibbs asks for, you know that. Danny was a Redskin fan before the owner and grew up when Gibbs won the 3 bowls. He is dannys idol.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

[QUOTE=#56fanatic]I am a HUGE skins fan, and I agree with what you are saying. Taylor was a huge nobrainer, as well as Rogers. One might say we could have taken Williams and then drafted a CB in the second round or Campbell in the 2nd round. Hell, maybe even a DB in the second and taken a QB in the later rounds. Thats up for the staff and they felt they couldn't pass on Campbell. But if you are so intent on Brunell being "your guy" this year, why not wait for another year to take a QB. There are some talented QBs coming in the draft next year that could have been taken with our 1st round pick, which we do not have now. I question alot of the moves, as all of us did last year. They would be questioned this year if we were 1-3 instead of 3-1. the two lineman that Bugel called future hogs, one was cut and one is low on the depth chart. The move to cut Trotter, Gibbs said he made a bad decision on that one, one he admitted. I love gibbs, I know it doesn't sound like it. but lets get real, this organization has been a mess for 10 years. I hope Gibbs can get it turned around, which it looks like he is. But with the cap trouble that will hit in a year or two, to next poor coach is going to have a nice little mess to try and clean up. If you remember, Caserly is the one who went out and scouted and picked those players Gibbs COACHED. He had nothing to do with the draft. The HOGGS the smurfs, pose' , all caserly. I think Gibbs has a bit to learn in the GM dept, which I believe he will learn. But Danny is not going to say no to anything Gibbs asks for, you know that. Danny was a Redskin fan before the owner and grew up when Gibbs won the 3 bowls. He is dannys idol.[/QUOTE]

Mark my words. OK, I'm waiting while you write them down. OK, got a pen and paper? Here goes:

THERE WILL BE NO SALARY CAP TROUBLE IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS.

That is unless you consider getting rid of Lavar Arrington this offseason to be cap trouble instead of just a team dumping a bad seed. That's all I'll say on the subject. There will be no trouble.

Re: Gibbs the GM
 

The "experts" have long said the Redskins have some of the best cap people in the business. I believe that. I just find it hard to believe that these same experts who have been doing this for a living are wrong when saying we are getting in trouble at some point the next couple of years. I hope they are all wrong, I hope I am wrong too.