If the extension to the CBA can't get done, then what?

[Redskins8588]

Someone help me on understanding this one, but if the salary cap is $95 million for 2006, than the Redskins are only over by about $11 million? And if thats the case then we are not really in that bad of shape, like say the jets or oakland, right???

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by Redskins8588

Someone help me on understanding this one, but if the salary cap is $95 million for 2006, than the Redskins are only over by about $11 million? And if thats the case then we are not really in that bad of shape, like say the jets or oakland, right???

The Redskins are over the 2006 cap by $20 million. Plus, they need room to sign Clark and Royal (no biggie). Plus, they need about $2 million to sign rookies. Plus, they need room to sign any free agents to replace cut or traded players and those who replace players whose contracts expired.

Without an extension to the deal, it is going to get REAL ugly (i.e. losing some star players or a bunch of good ones we don't want to lose).

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by 44deisel44

Wish i was your age Guy.....more responsibilities theses days....used to have the energy to be on top of things b4. Long story short...thx 4 your time and KNOWLEDGE...u my new hero and not jokin....appreciate your research dude.
that ramsey fan guy seems to have a I AM RIGHT ALWAYS attitude....nice to hear from a true skins fan.

I am sorry that you feel that way. I definately never wanted to sound like an a-hole. People that know me well definately wouldn't say that I am arrogant. Perhaps I have sounded like that sometimes, but I can assure you that it was not my intent. In point of fact, I have loudly and repeatedly eaten crow about several issues (i.e. Gibbs' decision to bench Ramsey in favor of Brunell). I have a lot to learn about the cap, the front office, the players, the coaches, and the game more generally.

If you point me to any instances in which I sounded arrogant, I would be happy to either clarify my statements, apologize for sounding obnoxious, or both.

[Redskins8588]

Yeah, my bad, I see that now, I must have see different numbers in my mind when I looked at our cap sheets...

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Ramseyfan

I am sorry that you feel that way. I definately never wanted to sound like an a-hole. People that know me well definately wouldn't say that I am arrogant. Perhaps I have sounded like that sometimes, but I can assure you that it was not my intent. In point of fact, I have loudly and repeatedly eaten crow about several issues (i.e. Gibbs' decision to bench Ramsey in favor of Brunell). I have a lot to learn about the cap, the front office, the players, the coaches, and the game more generally.

If you point me to any instances in which I sounded arrogant, I would be happy to either clarify my statements, apologize for sounding obnoxious, or both.

I just can't imagine he's talking about you. It doesn't seem to fit.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

I just can't imagine he's talking about you. It doesn't seem to fit.

Thanks, but I am sure I have said something at some point that sounds obnoxious or arrogrant. My apologies for whatever I did or said.

[Dirtbag59]

So let me get this straight. The reason we want a CBA is because without one we can't restructure deals 3-7 years in the future since their will be no salary cap. And instead of restructuring guys like Jansen, Thomas, Arrington, and Washington we'll have to cut guys like Jansen and Washington to get under the cap. Then we're going to have to carry about 15 rookies on our roster like the Ravens did 2 years removed from the their Super Bowl win.

Also one more question:
Is the reason deals can't be restructured is because its not legal or it would be stupid for the players to do it?

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag359

So let me get this straight. The reason we want a CBA is because without one we can't restructure deals 3-7 years in the future since their will be no salary cap. And instead of restructuring guys like Jansen, Thomas, Arrington, and Washington we'll have to cut guys like Jansen and Washington to get under the cap. Then we're going to have to carry about 15 rookies on our roster like the Ravens did 2 years removed from the their Super Bowl win.

That's how I understand it.

Originally Posted by Dirtbag359

Also one more question:
Is the reason deals can't be restructured is because its not legal or it would be stupid for the players to do it?

Deals can't be restructured like they used to because we can't covert base salaries into bonuses over the next few seasons because there's no cap extension. I think we can just convert salaries to bonuses and prorate them over the next two seasons.

As for whether it makes sense for the players to restructure, I simply don't know. It might make sense for players to renegotiate if they are well paid right now and they wouldn't command comparable money on the free agent market.

Canuck, care to chime in and help out with your expertise?

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Redskins8588

Someone help me on understanding this one, but if the salary cap is $95 million for 2006, than the Redskins are only over by about $11 million? And if thats the case then we are not really in that bad of shape, like say the jets or oakland, right???

116 - 95 = 21$ mill over... the raiders are over by more, but they're MUCH better off, becaue they can release 2 players and clear 18.5$mill in space, even without a new cba... the skins can't do that cause ALL the contracts here inflate at the same time, so there's no big money guys to drop outside of maybe lavar.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag359

So let me get this straight. The reason we want a CBA is because without one we can't restructure deals 3-7 years in the future since their will be no salary cap. And instead of restructuring guys like Jansen, Thomas, Arrington, and Washington we'll have to cut guys like Jansen and Washington to get under the cap. Then we're going to have to carry about 15 rookies on our roster like the Ravens did 2 years removed from the their Super Bowl win.

Also one more question:
Is the reason deals can't be restructured is because its not legal or it would be stupid for the players to do it?

its legal to restructure, but without a cba the bonuses can't be pro-rated like normal and you have to obey the 30% rule (which means converting 2 years from base salary to bonus instead of one... and with limited pro-ration you end up paying a lot of the money you were trying to move down the road immediately anyways).


the skins only have 3 people with base salaries in the 3.5-4mill range right now (jansen, brunell, and thomas), so there's just not much money to move. (the next highest base salary is 1.5mill which is nearly nothing above vet min).

[Redskins8588]

Originally Posted by That Guy

116 - 95 = 21$ mill over... the raiders are over by more, but they're MUCH better off, becaue they can release 2 players and clear 18.5$mill in space, even without a new cba... the skins can't do that cause ALL the contracts here inflate at the same time, so there's no big money guys to drop outside of maybe lavar.

ok, so what would you say would be our worse case plan if there is no cba agreement, like who do you see us getting rid of, or what other options do we have?

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Redskins8588

ok, so what would you say would be our worse case plan if there is no cba agreement, like who do you see us getting rid of, or what other options do we have?

listed this before, but basically, if lavar can be ditched and his bonus withheld, that's the biggest move (5mill i believe).

Lavar - $5mill
Bowen - $2mill
Harris - $2mill
Noble - $1.7mill
Ramsey - $1.6mill
Hall - $1.18mill
Raymer - $985k
Thrash - $875k
Tupa - $601k
Prioleau - $550k

that's about $16mill in somewhat easy cuts...

Frost (P), Brown (WR), Farris (WR), Riley (DE) - 460k each, but would have to be replaced with younger FAs at 235k-310k a pop... at 230k savings each - $920k

5 no names at 385k - 235 = 150k savings each - $750k

up to about 17.7mill, as you can see, its getting harder

only 3 guys on the roster have over 1.5mill in base salary (jansen, thomas, brunell), if you can ask them to each give back (actual give money back, yikes) 500k this year (AND enough money next year to comply with the 30% rule)
jansen - $500k (gives back 500k in 2006 and 0k in 2007)
brunell - $500k (500k in 06 and 650k in 07)
thomas - $500k (500k in 06 and 100k in 07)

up to 19.2mill and we've already had to make huge logic stretches... now it gets really harsh

releasing 16 1st/2nd years and bringing in absolutely NO competition for training camp (10@235k, 6@310k) - $2.35mill + $1.86mill = $4.21mill

23.4mill, just enough to sign rookies and pray no one sucks or gets hurt in training camp

and that's a real stretch, in reality, guys like betts, sellers, and maybe starters like dockery or daniels or patten or wynn all get released too.

[Sean Taylor is God]

can we really afford to get rid of bowen and prioleau with clark as a free-agent and taylor's legal issues? prioleau is a heady guy who can backup both safety positions, i think williams keeps him, and they resign clark. your thoughts?

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Sean Taylor is God

can we really afford to get rid of bowen and prioleau with clark as a free-agent and taylor's legal issues? prioleau is a heady guy who can backup both safety positions, i think williams keeps him, and they resign clark. your thoughts?

The cap may force our hand at safety and other positions as well. All depends on the CBA getting worked out.

[Monksdown]

Originally Posted by Sean Taylor is God

can we really afford to get rid of bowen and prioleau with clark as a free-agent and taylor's legal issues? prioleau is a heady guy who can backup both safety positions, i think williams keeps him, and they resign clark. your thoughts?

If we lost Prileau, I wouldnt feel right having him as my 4th cornerback in Madden anymore. I couldnt cope.