P. Ram Restructures!

[JudgeJebus]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

What I don't understand is why would a player NOT want to restructure?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the basics of it is the player gets a bonus up front, which is guaranteed money in the bank in exchange for lowering their base figures for X amount of years.

Are they potentially losing any money by doing this?? After all, the only guaranteed money in these contracts are the bonuses, so I would think players would jump at these opportunities.

I'm sure there's a reason players sometimes balk at restructuring, I just understand why.

One reason why a player would not want to restructure is that it often entails an extension of the contract. For example, Samuels' current contract is only through 2006. Thus, even if he were to restructure and convert all of his 2005 salary to bonus, it would still only be spread out over 2005 and 2006. To really get the benefit of a restructuring, we would need to extend his contract. This is something he might not want to do if he thinks his value is not as high now as it would be later.

You are right, though, that in many cases the player should not care about a restructuring. Where the contract is long enough so that it is just a simple conversion of salary to bonus, then the player still gets the same amount of money at the same time (sometimes earlier)--all that changes is the accounting (the bonus is amortized over the life of the contract).

[joethiesmanfan]

Samuels is a bigger disappointment than Gardner for real. He needs to restructure or get rid of him he is average anyway. and Brunnell if i ever see hime put on the field with a Redskins uniform again, i don't want to see him with a Redskins helmet on. how is he a big time character guy. He knows he is not deserving what he is getting he needs to retire. Joe Gibbs needs to be realistic Brunnell is done. He is the most overpaid player in NFL history damn!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[MTK]

Gotta disagree on the Samuels-Gardner comparison. Samuels has been to the Pro Bowl and was once a top 5 LT, his game has fallen off a bit but he was pretty solid overall last season and looks like he's on the right path with Bugel coaching him back up.

[CrazyCanuck]

Originally Posted by smootsmack

According to Hail Redskins this is what the link says:

The full post:

Ramsey's new figures:

2005: Base salary dropped from $1.602M to the 4th-year minimum of $455,000
2006: Base salary INCREASED from $1.188M to $1.688M

This could be a couple things:

1. It could be a simple restructuring with his 2005 base salary being reduced from $1.602M to $455,000 with the difference being made up via a signing bonus, with the increase in 2006 due to an escalator (his 2005 base salary recently increased $500,000 from $1.102M to $1.602M because of an escalator, so another $500,000 escalator for 2006 would make sense). In this case, the $1.147M bonus he would receive would be prorated $573,500 for 2005 and 2006. Along with the $620,000 allocation from his 2002 rookie signing bonus and adjusted base salary, his 2005 cap number would be $1.649M, a savings of $573,000 from his previous 2005 cap number of $2.222M.

2. He could have reduced his base salary from $1.602M to $455,000 with SOME of the difference being paid via a signing bonus, and the rest being transferred to his 2006 base salary. In this case, he would have received a $647,000 signing bonus with the remaining $500,000 being pushed to his 2006 base salary. In this case, the $647,000 bonus would be prorated $323,500 for 2005 and 2006. Along with the $620,000 allocation from his rookie signing bonus and adjusted base salary, his 2005 cap number would be $1.399M, a savings of $823,000 from his previous 2005 cap number of $2.222M; this would save $250,000 more from his 2005 cap number than the first scenario, but would cost $250,000 more on his 2006 cap number.

Your scenario definitely sounds feasible.

I'm still trying to figure out the point of Ramsey restructuring without an extension. It seems all we're doing here is moving some money from 2006 to 2005 (which doesn't make sense).

Nevertheless this is a good sign. I hope PR isn't still bitter about the Brunell signing.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Patrick steppin up to the plate, very nice to see guys we didn't expect to restructure take one for the team.

Chris Samuels where are you in all this? Mark Brunell?

HERE, HERE!

[offiss]

Originally Posted by SKINSnCANES

this is all very encouraging for next year. It looks like Gibbs is really making a huge impression on these players and promoting the team spirit. HAIL TO THE REDSKINS!!

Its been along road for all of us fans, but you cant help but beleive we are finally on the right track

I was just about to post that very thing good job SC, it's Gibb's at his finest bringing people together for team unity, all for 1 and 1 for all, perhap's Gibb's finest coaching quality.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Gotta disagree on the Samuels-Gardner comparison. Samuels has been to the Pro Bowl and was once a top 5 LT, his game has fallen off a bit but he was pretty solid overall last season and looks like he's on the right path with Bugel coaching him back up.

Agreed, I think the disapointment in Samuel's comes from the fact we all thought he would be better than he has turned out to be, I think he has the physical tool's to be one of the best, I just don't know if he has the heart?

[CRT3]

Thanks Patrick!!!

[jbcjr14]

The transformation to greatness continues.....stay tuned!

[monk81]

Originally Posted by BrudLee

In a simple restructure, you're right. It's simply guaranteeing as much of a year or two's salary by converting it into signing bonus, and then spreading the burden of that money onto future years. It also reduces the chance of a later release or trade, because there is additional bonus to accelerate.

I don't understand why players backload their salaries and move the money to future years and then the teams cut or trade them......wouldn't you want to STAY employed.........or stick with a team that's successful. And if I were a player, I think I'd keep my salary reasonable in order to stay in the NFL and with a winning team or a team that is moving towards success and a Super Bowl..........Guess some are money hungry and make hay while the sun is shinning.....

[monk81]

Every little bit helps...............

[CRT3]

Originally Posted by monk81

I don't understand why players backload their salaries and move the money to future years and then the teams cut or trade them......wouldn't you want to STAY employed.........or stick with a team that's successful. And if I were a player, I think I'd keep my salary reasonable in order to stay in the NFL and with a winning team or a team that is moving towards success and a Super Bowl..........Guess some are money hungry and make hay while the sun is shinning.....

They actually don't backload, what they do get is alot of upfront cash which counts against the cap over the period of the contract. So instead of making 1 million a year for 5 years, they get paid the minium salary allowed and take the remaining right there and then. So if the min was $500,000 then they would get 2.5 million guarenteed right then and there.

[MTK]

CRT3, what's up with the pics all over the place?

This isn't extremeskins or hailredskins. C'mon now.

[Daseal]

He's rebelling because he's stuck with Chad Morton...

[CRT3]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

CRT3, what's up with the pics all over the place?

This isn't extremeskins or hailredskins. C'mon now.

Sorry about that, I will make them smaller. Just experimenting a bit. But please no more Morton. What post number to I have to reach to get rid of him?