Brunell and Redskins Reportedly Close to Restructured Deal

[irish]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

I think the whole coaching staff is sold on JC. You could tell by the way Al Saunders was talking about him from his interview at the combine. I think he played well enough, and made enough plays with his 06 performace to validate that. He still has to work on his mechanics a bit.

I'm not saying JC is not going to be the starter but I think as long as Gibbs and MB are around there is a good chance that MB will become the starter at the first opportunity.

[irish]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

Except he's not younger

I did not realize that. Wow MB looks even worse now. Garcia can move and throw the ball, MB has a hard time doing either.

BTW, what QB has looked good in Detroit & Cleveland?

[MTK]

Originally Posted by irish

I'm not saying JC is not going to be the starter but I think as long as Gibbs and MB are around there is a good chance that MB will become the starter at the first opportunity.

If Campbell is injured or really struggles I'd expect to see MB, otherwise I wouldn't worry. Campbell is the starter.

[MTK]

What quality backups are out there?

Forget about Garcia. He wants to start.

[724Skinsfan]

Originally Posted by irish

I did not realize that. Wow MB looks even worse now. Garcia can move and throw the ball, MB has a hard time doing either.

BTW, what QB has looked good in Detroit & Cleveland?

What QB has looked good in DC?

[irish]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

If Campbell is injured or really struggles I'd expect to see MB, otherwise I wouldn't worry. Campbell is the starter.

I wonder if your definition of "really struggles" and Gibbs definition are the same. I doubt Gibbs will let JC get to what you and the rest of us consider really struggling.

[Schneed10]

Let's shed a little salary cap light on the subject. Cutting Brunell would save the team $2.1 million in 2007.

But if he drops his base salary down from $5 million to the vet minimum, he saves us $4 million. Then of course you have to add in any incremental signing bonus he's getting as part of this restructure. If it's a $2 million bonus, then we can spread that over the 4 years he's still with us, adding $500 K to his cap figure. All in all, this method would create $3.5 million in cap space, that's quite a bit more than the $2.1 we'd get from axing him.

Doesn't make sense to cut the guy. Not when he's still more than capable of playing a backup role very well. All you can ask of a backup QB is to come in when you need him and not lose games. You can have a McNabb and Garcia situation for half a year, but if your backup is that good, you either can't afford him or he finds a starting job. Brunell is a solid backup, and this has all the makings of the smartest move possible given the circumstances.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by irish

I wonder if your definition of "really struggles" and Gibbs definition are the same. I doubt Gibbs will let JC get to what you and the rest of us consider really struggling.

That remains to be seen.

I'm confident that the permanent switch to Campbell has been made.

Didn't you say that Gibbs would go back to MB last year even after JC was named the starter?

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by irish

I wonder if your definition of "really struggles" and Gibbs definition are the same. I doubt Gibbs will let JC get to what you and the rest of us consider really struggling.

I think you are overrating Gibbs' current opinion of Brunell. The team needs salary cap space and went to Brunell to get it. They could have cut him and gained $2.1 million in space, or they could ask him to take a paycut and gain even more space.

Gibbs is the team president. He went to Brunell knowing that at the very least, he was going to get that $2.1 million in space. That's what is motivating Brunell to accept the paycut. Brunell knows that he's not worth much on the open market these days, and that whatever he could get from the Skins in this restructured deal would be the most $ he could get in 2007. What was the catalyst to make Brunell realize that? The team, and it's team president, had to make it real clear: "Mark, accept a pay reduction so we can save more than $2.1 million. Or we're going to cut you and save the $2.1 million. Those are your options."

In the words of AC/DC, "listen to the money talk." It says it all. When Brunell was signed to a $42 million deal, we all knew what that meant for Patrick Ramsey, and look what happened to him. Now, Gibbs is cutting Brunell's salary. Campbell is the guy.

[irish]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

That remains to be seen.

I'm confident that the permanent switch to Campbell has been made.

Didn't you say that Gibbs would go back to MB last year even after JC was named the starter?

I did and for once I was wrong (LOL).

I think when JC was brought in last year the season was over and the team had nothing to lose no matter how he played. Now in 2007 the slate is clean and in Sept everyone will have a shot again so JC's play will be looked at with a different mindset by Gibbs. I believe that Gibbs will be a little quicker to pull the pin on JC if he sees the offense sputter and the season looks like its slipping away. I'm sure the switch has been made to JC but I'm not sure thats its permanent.

[irish]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I think you are overrating Gibbs' current opinion of Brunell. The team needs salary cap space and went to Brunell to get it. They could have cut him and gained $2.1 million in space, or they could ask him to take a paycut and gain even more space.

Gibbs is the team president. He went to Brunell knowing that at the very least, he was going to get that $2.1 million in space. That's what is motivating Brunell to accept the paycut. Brunell knows that he's not worth much on the open market these days, and that whatever he could get from the Skins in this restructured deal would be the most $ he could get in 2007. What was the catalyst to make Brunell realize that? The team, and it's team president, had to make it real clear: "Mark, accept a pay reduction so we can save more than $2.1 million. Or we're going to cut you and save the $2.1 million. Those are your options."

In the words of AC/DC, "listen to the money talk." It says it all. When Brunell was signed to a $42 million deal, we all knew what that meant for Patrick Ramsey, and look what happened to him. Now, Gibbs is cutting Brunell's salary. Campbell is the guy.

I understand MB's motivation for taking the deal but I dont understand the Redskins' motivation for the offer. It seems that the $ saved by restructure or cut is about the same so why was option 1 needed? IMO, because Gibbs loves MB and still thinks he can play.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by irish

I did and for once I was wrong (LOL).

I think when JC was brought in last year the season was over and the team had nothing to lose no matter how he played. Now in 2007 the slate is clean and in Sept everyone will have a shot again so JC's play will be looked at with a different mindset by Gibbs. I believe that Gibbs will be a little quicker to pull the pin on JC if he sees the offense sputter and the season looks like its slipping away. I'm sure the switch has been made to JC but I'm not sure thats its permanent.

For once? At least you can admit it, there are plenty of people here that don't.

Gibbs let him work through his struggles last year so I don't see why he would have a quick hook with him this year. Besides, I think Campbell is going to be so improved that Gibbs won't even have to think twice about it.

Brunell is 37 and coming off shoulder surgery... I think even Gibbs can see the writing on the wall. Gibbs wants to win at any cost, and I think it's clear Campbell gives the team the best shot at winning. Campbell is in year 3 and he's a guy that Gibbs gave up alot to get... it's time to see if this investment is going to pay off.

[diehardskin2982]

he is a good locker room precense and our focus this year is rebuild the defense and keep the offense the same

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by irish

I understand MB's motivation for taking the deal but I dont understand the Redskins' motivation for the offer. It seems that the $ saved by restructure or cut is about the same so why was option 1 needed? IMO, because Gibbs loves MB and still thinks he can play.

Are you mathematically challenged? The difference between $2.1 million (savings if cut) and $3.5 million (savings under my restructure scenario) is big. $1.4 million to be exact.

$3.5 million is 67% more than $2.1 million. About the same? Wha??

You can do a lot with $1.4 million. You can fit the first year of a 2nd round pick's contract in that amount of space.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by irish

I understand MB's motivation for taking the deal but I dont understand the Redskins' motivation for the offer. It seems that the $ saved by restructure or cut is about the same so why was option 1 needed? IMO, because Gibbs loves MB and still thinks he can play.

He saves us more by restructuring vs. cutting him.