Latest on Coles

MTK · 02-24-2005, 05:14 PM

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/column...len&id=1998972

INDIANAPOLIS -- Several league and team sources attending the annual NFL predraft combine workouts confirmed for ESPN.com Thursday that the Washington Redskins have at least three franchises legitimately interested in trading for unhappy wide receiver Laveranues Coles.

But even with no lack of suitors for Coles, the Redskins still face this knotty problem in trying to strike a deal, one which would likely bring a high-round draft pick in return: Because of the convoluted salary cap ramifications, the Redskins can't peddle Coles to another club until they sell offensive tackle Chris Samuels on restructuring his current and burdensome contract.

And while the Redskins have crept a bit closer to Samuels on a reworked contract, which would extend his current deal and provide Washington much-needed cap relief for 2005, there remains plenty of work to be done to consummate an agreement.

"Right now," said a high-ranking official from one of the franchises attempting to acquire Coles from Washington, "the Redskins are (stuck). They simply can't absorb, at least not yet, the cap hit they'll take from trading Coles. They need to find room and the obvious way is to finish off a new deal with Samuels. But I guess that's not done yet."

The salary cap math involved in the Coles mess: If Washington trades the wide receiver, whom they signed as a restricted free agent in 2003, forfeiting a first-round draft choice to the New York Jets in that transaction, they face a cap impact in excess of $9 million. Efforts to have Coles bypass a $5 million deferred signing bonus due him on April 1, a move that would have dramatically decreased the cap hit, seem to have fallen apart. Coles had originally agreed to forfeit the $5 million, but only as part of an agreement that he would be released, and able to choose his next team.

The Redskins don't have the cap space sufficient to afford the $9 million charge that would accompany a Coles trade. But Samuels, whose cap charge for 2005 is $9.5 million and who is due $6.5 million in base salary and bonuses, can provide desperately needed room if he agrees to a new deal.

Samuels, 27, is agreeable to an extension but the numbers must be right before the five-year veteran, a first-round pick in the 2000 draft, signs off on a reworked contract. As of Thursday afternoon, despite accelerated negotiations between the Redskins and Samuels' agent, an accord was not imminent.

Agent Jimmy Sexton in January sent the Redskins a contract proposal that was rejected by Washington officials. A month later, the Redskins would love to strike a deal based on those January figures. Problem is, with the big-money contracts already signed during this offseason by Walter Jones of Seattle and Indianapolis' Ryan Diem, the financial landscape for offensive tackles has been significantly altered.

Jones received a signing bonus of $16 million on a seven-year contract with total value of $52.5 million. Although he is one of the better left tackles in the league, Samuels does not rate in Jones' elite class, but still will merit a contract with a signing bonus close to what Jones received an a per-year average of at least $6 million.

Until the Redskins come up with the right figures, though, the three teams interested in acquiring Coles figure to be cooling their heels. Len Pasquarelli is a senior NFL writer for ESPN.com. To check out Len's chat archive, click here .

SKINSnCANES · 02-24-2005, 05:17 PM

very good read.

I trust Snyder, mabye more than I should. So heres to hoping he gets done what he has to, we end up with a second first round pick by trading coles and we can absorb his cap hit for this year. that way we build through the draft with two rookie first rounders and have a ton of cap savings for next year.

Beemnseven · 02-24-2005, 05:19 PM

I wonder who those teams are. And what they're willing to part with.

Samuels must agree to restructure. There's simply no other way to do it if they want something in return for Coles. If Chris Samuels is interested in winning a championship, or at least put his team in position to contend for one, he would restructure without blinking.

This is going to be interesting.

Daseal · 02-24-2005, 05:23 PM

Because god knows -- being on the Redskins is insta-championship.

MTK · 02-24-2005, 05:30 PM

I think we can safely say the Jets are one team that's interested.

Beemnseven · 02-24-2005, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daseal

Because god knows -- being on the Redskins is insta-championship.

Nobody's saying that. But clearly, Samuels has to realize that the Skins are in a much better position if they can get something in return for Coles.

SKINSnCANES · 02-24-2005, 05:39 PM

Jets, Ravnes. I would even say the cowboys, although i dont know if we would trade with them.

GoSkins! · 02-24-2005, 06:39 PM

If they are going to get it done, we should know soon. March 1 is just around the corner.

BigSKINBauer · 02-24-2005, 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

. If Chris Samuels is interested in winning a championship, [.............] he would restructure without blinking.

Seems to me u r saying that.

But it is nessessary to rework that contract by tuesday and if not we could be looking at a trade or realease. "Samuels's salary is scheduled to count $9.5 million against the cap, easily the highest on the club, in 2005. That number grows to $11.3 million in 2006. However, Samuels has a clause in his contract that will void the deal in 2006, making him an unrestricted free agent after this season. The voided contract will increase his 2005 cap number to $12 million."
This is to much but he is sorta getting greedy ( I would to on this team) he is looking around and other linemen are getting big deals so he wants in. I hope that we can get an agreement but otherwise I am willing to see him go for that amount of breathing room.

"On winning NFL teams, players sometimes take less money to stay. On this team, they're willing to forfeit good money to leave. We have to wonder why."
Sally Jenkins

BigSKINBauer · 02-24-2005, 07:10 PM

what trade value do you think coles will have.
"THEY" say high draft pick but i don't think that is worth it. I think we may end up keeping him, someone on the redskins team said that he talked to coles and coles said he would play if he was on this team next year.

He won't be upset when we win the superbowl!....... I HOPE?!

BigSKINBauer · 02-24-2005, 07:29 PM

i think coles will still be with us and be BIG #80, i don't see anything that will work for both the skins and Coles. Wait.. will coles be #87 if Gardner leaves b/c he was 87 with the jets, but i think crebet is 80 on the jets was he there before coles that guy is old ? if anyone know the answer please post somin

bigm29 · 02-24-2005, 07:34 PM

they gotta just release coles cuz id rather have that 5 million dollars then a high round draft pick and no money to spend

BigSKINBauer · 02-24-2005, 09:12 PM

True That

diehardskin2982 · 02-24-2005, 10:19 PM

Coles won't get released, just because he is that good, and we won't let him go to Dallas. I hope we send him to Baltimore and we get their first. Samuels needs to stop b.s.ing and restructure

Schneed10 · 02-24-2005, 10:46 PM

OK here's the thing. If you can restructure Samuels then you end up making the Redskins a good $8 million or so under the $85 million cap. Then if you trade Coles, you get hit with the 9.28 million, but 3.5 of that was already going to the cap. So the additional hit to our cap would amount to 5.5 million or so. Subtracting the 5.5 from the 8 million we'd have after restructuring Samuels, we'd end up with about 2.5 million in wiggle room. So with that, you sign Antonio Pierce, and you live with your WR situation. Or you say goodbye to Pierce and you bring in a free agent WR (but Gibbs said he wouldn't do that on the radio). Those moves would pretty much eat up the rest of the cap room. Free agency will be dull for us this year if Coles gets traded.

But the bright side, you will have freed up tons of cap room in 2006, getting rid of Coles' ~$5 million, and reducing Samuels from $11 million down to like $6 million. That's a gain of $10 million in cap room, taking them down to $96 million in 2006. Figure the cap keeps increasing at the rate it has been, to about $90 million next year, and they're only over by $6 million or so instead of the Titans disaster they were headed for next year. Then, restructure a few contracts and you can manage to keep your core together.

So trading Coles actually may have some long-term viability. And if we get a high pick, like late 1st or early 2nd rounder, that player will hopefully be making a long-term contribution.

Sorry to beat you over the head with numbers, but I'm liking the way it would shape up for a few years down the road. I was fearing a dismantling of the team in 2006, but trading Coles would seem to help that situation. We'd be limited in what we can do this year, and we'd have to basically get our new talent through the draft instead of free agency, but that's probably exactly what the team needs.

02-24-2005, 05:14 PM	#1
MTK \m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: NY Age: 51 Posts: 99,427	Latest on Coles http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/column...len&id=1998972 INDIANAPOLIS -- Several league and team sources attending the annual NFL predraft combine workouts confirmed for ESPN.com Thursday that the Washington Redskins have at least three franchises legitimately interested in trading for unhappy wide receiver Laveranues Coles. But even with no lack of suitors for Coles, the Redskins still face this knotty problem in trying to strike a deal, one which would likely bring a high-round draft pick in return: Because of the convoluted salary cap ramifications, the Redskins can't peddle Coles to another club until they sell offensive tackle Chris Samuels on restructuring his current and burdensome contract. And while the Redskins have crept a bit closer to Samuels on a reworked contract, which would extend his current deal and provide Washington much-needed cap relief for 2005, there remains plenty of work to be done to consummate an agreement. "Right now," said a high-ranking official from one of the franchises attempting to acquire Coles from Washington, "the Redskins are (stuck). They simply can't absorb, at least not yet, the cap hit they'll take from trading Coles. They need to find room and the obvious way is to finish off a new deal with Samuels. But I guess that's not done yet." The salary cap math involved in the Coles mess: If Washington trades the wide receiver, whom they signed as a restricted free agent in 2003, forfeiting a first-round draft choice to the New York Jets in that transaction, they face a cap impact in excess of $9 million. Efforts to have Coles bypass a $5 million deferred signing bonus due him on April 1, a move that would have dramatically decreased the cap hit, seem to have fallen apart. Coles had originally agreed to forfeit the $5 million, but only as part of an agreement that he would be released, and able to choose his next team. The Redskins don't have the cap space sufficient to afford the $9 million charge that would accompany a Coles trade. But Samuels, whose cap charge for 2005 is $9.5 million and who is due $6.5 million in base salary and bonuses, can provide desperately needed room if he agrees to a new deal. Samuels, 27, is agreeable to an extension but the numbers must be right before the five-year veteran, a first-round pick in the 2000 draft, signs off on a reworked contract. As of Thursday afternoon, despite accelerated negotiations between the Redskins and Samuels' agent, an accord was not imminent. Agent Jimmy Sexton in January sent the Redskins a contract proposal that was rejected by Washington officials. A month later, the Redskins would love to strike a deal based on those January figures. Problem is, with the big-money contracts already signed during this offseason by Walter Jones of Seattle and Indianapolis' Ryan Diem, the financial landscape for offensive tackles has been significantly altered. Jones received a signing bonus of $16 million on a seven-year contract with total value of $52.5 million. Although he is one of the better left tackles in the league, Samuels does not rate in Jones' elite class, but still will merit a contract with a signing bonus close to what Jones received an a per-year average of at least $6 million. Until the Redskins come up with the right figures, though, the three teams interested in acquiring Coles figure to be cooling their heels. Len Pasquarelli is a senior NFL writer for ESPN.com. To check out Len's chat archive, click here . __________________ Support The Warpath! \| Warpath Shop

02-24-2005, 05:17 PM	#2
SKINSnCANES Pro Bowl Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: New Jersey Age: 42 Posts: 5,453	Re: Latest on Coles very good read. I trust Snyder, mabye more than I should. So heres to hoping he gets done what he has to, we end up with a second first round pick by trading coles and we can absorb his cap hit for this year. that way we build through the draft with two rookie first rounders and have a ton of cap savings for next year. __________________ "I'm used to winning, coming from the University of Miami. " Clinton Portis

02-24-2005, 05:19 PM	#3
Beemnseven Pro Bowl Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Virginia Beach Age: 50 Posts: 5,311	Re: Latest on Coles I wonder who those teams are. And what they're willing to part with. Samuels must agree to restructure. There's simply no other way to do it if they want something in return for Coles. If Chris Samuels is interested in winning a championship, or at least put his team in position to contend for one, he would restructure without blinking. This is going to be interesting.

02-24-2005, 05:23 PM	#4
Daseal Puppy Kicker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Arlington, Virginia Age: 41 Posts: 8,341	Re: Latest on Coles Because god knows -- being on the Redskins is insta-championship.

02-24-2005, 05:30 PM	#5
MTK \m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: NY Age: 51 Posts: 99,427	Re: Latest on Coles I think we can safely say the Jets are one team that's interested. __________________ Support The Warpath! \| Warpath Shop

02-24-2005, 05:39 PM	#7
SKINSnCANES Pro Bowl Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: New Jersey Age: 42 Posts: 5,453	Re: Latest on Coles Jets, Ravnes. I would even say the cowboys, although i dont know if we would trade with them. __________________ "I'm used to winning, coming from the University of Miami. " Clinton Portis

02-24-2005, 06:39 PM	#8
GoSkins! The Starter Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Yorktown, Va Age: 55 Posts: 1,587	Re: Latest on Coles If they are going to get it done, we should know soon. March 1 is just around the corner. __________________ Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts. A. Einstien

02-24-2005, 07:10 PM	#10
BigSKINBauer Pro Bowl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Washington, DC Age: 36 Posts: 5,688	Re: Latest on Coles what trade value do you think coles will have. "THEY" say high draft pick but i don't think that is worth it. I think we may end up keeping him, someone on the redskins team said that he talked to coles and coles said he would play if he was on this team next year. He won't be upset when we win the superbowl!....... I HOPE?!

02-24-2005, 07:29 PM	#11
BigSKINBauer Pro Bowl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Washington, DC Age: 36 Posts: 5,688	Re: Latest on Coles i think coles will still be with us and be BIG #80, i don't see anything that will work for both the skins and Coles. Wait.. will coles be #87 if Gardner leaves b/c he was 87 with the jets, but i think crebet is 80 on the jets was he there before coles that guy is old ? if anyone know the answer please post somin

02-24-2005, 07:34 PM	#12
bigm29 Special Teams Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Mt. Laurel, NJ Age: 36 Posts: 353	Re: Latest on Coles they gotta just release coles cuz id rather have that 5 million dollars then a high round draft pick and no money to spend

02-24-2005, 09:12 PM	#13
BigSKINBauer Pro Bowl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Washington, DC Age: 36 Posts: 5,688	Re: Latest on Coles True That

02-24-2005, 10:19 PM	#14
diehardskin2982 Another Year, another mess. Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 3,581	Re: Latest on Coles Coles won't get released, just because he is that good, and we won't let him go to Dallas. I hope we send him to Baltimore and we get their first. Samuels needs to stop b.s.ing and restructure __________________ That got ugly fast

02-24-2005, 10:46 PM	#15
Schneed10 A Dude Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Newtown Square, PA Age: 44 Posts: 12,416	Re: Latest on Coles OK here's the thing. If you can restructure Samuels then you end up making the Redskins a good $8 million or so under the $85 million cap. Then if you trade Coles, you get hit with the 9.28 million, but 3.5 of that was already going to the cap. So the additional hit to our cap would amount to 5.5 million or so. Subtracting the 5.5 from the 8 million we'd have after restructuring Samuels, we'd end up with about 2.5 million in wiggle room. So with that, you sign Antonio Pierce, and you live with your WR situation. Or you say goodbye to Pierce and you bring in a free agent WR (but Gibbs said he wouldn't do that on the radio). Those moves would pretty much eat up the rest of the cap room. Free agency will be dull for us this year if Coles gets traded. But the bright side, you will have freed up tons of cap room in 2006, getting rid of Coles' ~$5 million, and reducing Samuels from $11 million down to like $6 million. That's a gain of $10 million in cap room, taking them down to $96 million in 2006. Figure the cap keeps increasing at the rate it has been, to about $90 million next year, and they're only over by $6 million or so instead of the Titans disaster they were headed for next year. Then, restructure a few contracts and you can manage to keep your core together. So trading Coles actually may have some long-term viability. And if we get a high pick, like late 1st or early 2nd rounder, that player will hopefully be making a long-term contribution. Sorry to beat you over the head with numbers, but I'm liking the way it would shape up for a few years down the road. I was fearing a dismantling of the team in 2006, but trading Coles would seem to help that situation. We'd be limited in what we can do this year, and we'd have to basically get our new talent through the draft instead of free agency, but that's probably exactly what the team needs.

Latest on Coles

Locker Room Main Forum