Cap Heck in 2006

[CNYSkinFan]

For the Salary Cap Geeks who want to know what our cap actually looks like next year, here is a great article from Scout.com

Cap Heck? (http://redskins.scout.com/2/482405.html)

It goes over how 2006 may be a tough cap year for the Skins but not unmanageable. The reason i am posting this is not because I am looking ahead...not yet anyways. But because as we go deeper in the playoffs 9fingers crossed) you will hear people say how we are in cap hell next year and it is win now or never and everyone will be released blah blah blah

This article backs up some of the things I have been saying about how we may not be in great shap e but nothing drastic needs to be done. A few guarantees of roster bonus' and a couple of cuts (Harris, Bowen) and/or trades (Ramsey) and we can be 15 million under the cap before the draft.

We can bukild on this year, keep almost everyone together and make a great run at 2006 as well.

[danny's stogie]

Are you piggy-backing my posts? Give credit where credits due.

http://hailredskins.com/vbforum/showthread.php?t=31503&page=2

Anyways, it's cool, the article deserves it's own thread.

[CNYSkinFan]

Are you piggy-backing my posts? Give credit where credits due.

http://hailredskins.com/vbforum/showthread.php?t=31503&page=2

Anyways, it's cool, the article deserves it's own thread.

Sorry never saw the post there...good catch as well.

We will be fine cap wise...and keep Lavar, and keep everyone we want to.

[PA Skins Girl]

The only thing that worries me is the time frame. If we are fortunate enough to go deep into the playoffs, it really cuts short the time we have to get all those contracts re-worked by March 1.

[helimech24]

Not to shabby. From the sound of some of the fans, you would think the whole team is leaving the Redskins.

[cal_junior]

I like the idea of QB depth as much as the next guy, but Patrick has got to go. That money could be put to use elsewhere.

[helimech24]

I like the idea of QB depth as much as the next guy, but Patrick has got to go. That money could be put to use elsewhere.

The real question about Patrick is how much is a solid back-up worth? Could we replace him with another veteran QB that can run this system, or do we just use Campbell. I really don't like the idea of depending on a 2nd year guy for a back-up.

[swheeler]

A lot will depend on how he looks Sunday if he plays, and therefore how much it would cost to keep him, and how much we're going to want him around next year. Unfortunately, those two things are going to be related...

[cal_junior]

The real question about Patrick is how much is a solid back-up worth? Could we replace him with another veteran QB that can run this system, or do we just use Campbell. I really don't like the idea of depending on a 2nd year guy for a back-up.

Then why did we go up and draft him where we did?

[PSUredskins]

because he is a quarterback who will eventually (the plan at least) become a solid starter in teh NFL. When you draft a quarterback that high it isn't to be a perennial back-up. In fact he is there to learn under the veterans so that he can take over the reins - when he does we want it to be for good....but we dont want to throw him in the lions den too early

[CNYSkinFan]

because he is a quarterback who will eventually (the plan at least) become a solid starter in teh NFL. When you draft a quarterback that high it isn't to be a perennial back-up. In fact he is there to learn under the veterans so that he can take over the reins - when he does we want it to be for good....but we dont want to throw him in the lions den too early

You are right, but moving from third string to second string is a natural progression for a low 1st round draft pick in his second year. Espescially since Brunell (the projected starter) is getting up there in years and could retire after next year.

Ramsey is the most marketable of all the projected cuts that would save us money. We could use an extrea 3rd or 4th draft pick. It just makes sense, for Ramsey as well, to part ways.

[helimech24]

because he is a quarterback who will eventually (the plan at least) become a solid starter in teh NFL. When you draft a quarterback that high it isn't to be a perennial back-up. In fact he is there to learn under the veterans so that he can take over the reins - when he does we want it to be for good....but we dont want to throw him in the lions den too early

Exactly, thank you. Campbell is the future, and as such, he should be playing in preseason games and holding a clipboard for another year. He is not drafted to take over the back up duties, so that Ramsey doesn't have to hold down the fort. One more year of clipboard duty, and Campbell should be ready to compete.

[chrisbcbu]

This is basically the exact scenerio i was thinking the whole time. And i have not been worried at all about our cap situation.

[CNYSkinFan]

This is basically the exact scenerio i was thinking the whole time. And i have not been worried at all about our cap situation.

I am still a little worried. We don';t have alot of room to go out and sign a big name DE and a big name WR, but we can do one or the other.

[PennSkinsFan]

Free agent splurges eventually catch up and make tough decisions. Remeber, when Gibbs took over there were 31 players new to the roster, a complete roster change. Some were expensive. This all is inherent on why it is absolutely vital to fill roster spots now with guys that may not be super stars, but hunger to oplay and win. Guys like we found in our team, like Ryan Clark, Chris Clemons, Rock Cartwright, Pearson Prioleau. These guys were either cheap, inexpensive, or were nobody's when they got here, but have fit this system well and have a hunger to win. These are the type of WR, DE, OL that we need to look at. We don't need anymore superstars here. Were building toward success and sometimes superstars can derail that.

[chrisbcbu]

I am still a little worried. We don';t have alot of room to go out and sign a big name DE and a big name WR, but we can do one or the other.

See i think we will only go for a DE via FA possibly some depth on the OL but that is it. And we will attempt to draft a big receiver in the 3rd round. I think we will have plenty of cap room for what Gibbs has in mind.

dont forget we dont have a high draft pick this year and we are going to have a low 2nd pick so we wont have to worry about having to spend too much in the draft.

[IHATEDALLAS'82'87'91]

I'm not to worried. Depending on how he plays on sunday w will proberly release Ramsey. We also might relaease LaVar which would create a lot of cap room.

[MoeRedskins]

The real question about Patrick is how much is a solid back-up worth? Could we replace him with another veteran QB that can run this system, or do we just use Campbell. I really don't like the idea of depending on a 2nd year guy for a back-up.

The only other option is to depend on a vet in his first year of the system, so there will be a fair amount of inexperiance ont he bench. It is definate that Joe woun't draft another QB high, maybe a low pick and practice squad him for a few years.

[oldskinfan]

There is a Wash Times article discussing Lavar (another thread) and his quotes about this possibly being his last season in DC and possibly football. Given that bonuses accelerate when someone leaves a team, anyone know the impact on the cap? Can the team even afford the hit of not having Lavar?

Perhaps you it's worth trying to get 1-2 more playing years from Lavar if possible.

[PennSkinsFan]

There is a Wash Times article discussing Lavar (another thread) and his quotes about this possibly being his last season in DC and possibly football. Given that bonuses accelerate when someone leaves a team, anyone know the impact on the cap? Can the team even afford the hit of not having Lavar?

Perhaps you it's worth trying to get 1-2 more playing years from Lavar if possible.

If cut after a certain date, the hit goes on to the next years cap, 2007, not the 2006 cap.

[MoeRedskins]

If cut after a certain date, the hit goes on to the next years cap, 2007, not the 2006 cap.

If cut after june 1, the 06 bonuses are on the 06 cap and the rest of the hit fall to the 07 cap. June 1 is after Lavar is due his roster bonus and I think his signing bonus for the year is around 3 mill (i am not sure about this but its pretty big), so that is a 9 mill hit in 06, plus the remainder of the signing bonus of his 8 year deal signed 3 years ago goes on the 07 books. Anyway, it is not really feasible.

[CNYSkinFan]

If cut after a certain date, the hit goes on to the next years cap, 2007, not the 2006 cap.

only half the hit....half of it still goes on this year's cap.

[helimech24]

The only other option is to depend on a vet in his first year of the system, so there will be a fair amount of inexperiance ont he bench. It is definate that Joe woun't draft another QB high, maybe a low pick and practice squad him for a few years.

But I think, I would rather have a Bledsoe calibur vet on the bench, compared to Jason Campbell. I don't think the Skins will eat the 1.7 million on Ramsey salary or that Ramsey wants to backup again. So do we let Campbell backup or get a vet?

[CNYSkinFan]

But I think, I would rather have a Bledsoe calibur vet on the bench, compared to Jason Campbell. I don't think the Skins will eat the 1.7 million on Ramsey salary or that Ramsey wants to backup again. So do we let Campbell backup or get a vet?

We let Campbell backup. he needs the rep[s to mature that a backup gets. We gave up 3 draft picks for Campbell as well his contract. Many times that means starting by year 2, not backing up. Thank god for the emergence of Mark Brunell. Now Campbell can be brought along slowly but he should be the primary backup next year to look to be groomed to start in 2007 or 2008 depending on Brunell.

[PennSkinsFan]

We let Campbell backup. he needs the rep[s to mature that a backup gets. We gave up 3 draft picks for Campbell as well his contract. Many times that means starting by year 2, not backing up. Thank god for the emergence of Mark Brunell. Now Campbell can be brought along slowly but he should be the primary backup next year to look to be groomed to start in 2007 or 2008 depending on Brunell.

Yes! He has had a full season and a full training camp and will have another full training camp. There is a thing about bringing along slow, but snails pace can hurt just as much as rushing. Campbell should be the primary backup and if needed because of injury, with a full season and two training camps under him, JC should be ready to contribute.

[ConradCountry]

We have the abaility to cut some fat from the cap and with trades we can bring in some players that will cost us less then a high priced FA.

[ConradCountry]

We let Campbell backup. he needs the rep[s to mature that a backup gets. We gave up 3 draft picks for Campbell as well his contract. Many times that means starting by year 2, not backing up. Thank god for the emergence of Mark Brunell. Now Campbell can be brought along slowly but he should be the primary backup next year to look to be groomed to start in 2007 or 2008 depending on Brunell.

I agree that Campbell is not ready and I predict that we see him within the first 6 games of next year.

[helimech24]

We let Campbell backup. he needs the rep[s to mature that a backup gets. We gave up 3 draft picks for Campbell as well his contract. Many times that means starting by year 2, not backing up. Thank god for the emergence of Mark Brunell. Now Campbell can be brought along slowly but he should be the primary backup next year to look to be groomed to start in 2007 or 2008 depending on Brunell.

Ok, I can drink that koolaid, but who do we get as our third stringer? I would like to have a little bit of insurance if JC can't get the job done. Do we go after a vet, or just keep Ramsey and promote JC?

[CNYSkinFan]

Ok, I can drink that koolaid, but who do we get as our third stringer? I would like to have a little bit of insurance if JC can't get the job done. Do we go after a vet, or just keep Ramsey and promote JC?

A Hasselback/Ferrotte type. A journeyman that can start if needed but only in emergencies. Or we sign a UFA with a boat load of talent but is raw as hell.... When it comes down to it 3rd QB is not supposed to make 1 mil;lion a year. You need someone willing to play for vet minimum.

[helimech24]

A Hasselback/Ferrotte type. A journeyman that can start if needed but only in emergencies. Or we sign a UFA with a boat load of talent but is raw as hell.... When it comes down to it 3rd QB is not supposed to make 1 mil;lion a year. You need someone willing to play for vet minimum.

How funny would it be to see Ferrotte back in the BNG after all this time. Just need to remind him not to headbutt the stadium wall.

But I agree. We need a low cost vet to be in the mix somewhere just in case JC can't handle the duties.

[PennSkinsFan]

Moves we coud look at besides restructures:

1. Extend Renaldo Wynn. Upgrade over Daniels, but ya gotta keep Wynn on the field. His run stoipping is simply incredible. He is signed through 06 and will cost over $3 mil in 06. Extend him through 08 and spread it out a bit.

2. Release Brandon Noble. Saves 2.6 mil

3. Release, or extend John Hall. Halls cap is 1.82 mil, high for a Kicker

4. Release or extend Walt harris. Cap hit will be $2.75 mil, too high for a guy that wont start in 06. I'd actually like to see an extension here, because I like the way Harris plays in the nickel package.

5. Trade Ramsey

6. Release Matt Bowen, saving 2.4 mil

7. Release Cory Raymer, save 1.18 mil

[helimech24]

Moves we coud look at besides restructures:

1. Extend Renaldo Wynn. Upgrade over Daniels, but ya gotta keep Wynn on the field. His run stoipping is simply incredible. He is signed through 06 and will cost over $3 mil in 06. Extend him through 08 and spread it out a bit.

2. Release Brandon Noble. Saves 2.6 mil

3. Release, or extend John Hall. Halls cap is 1.82 mil, high for a Kicker

4. Release or extend Walt harris. Cap hit will be $2.75 mil, too high for a guy that wont start in 06. I'd actually like to see an extension here, because I like the way Harris plays in the nickel package.

5. Trade Ramsey

6. Release Matt Bowen, saving 2.4 mil

7. Release Cory Raymer, save 1.18 mil


If the FO does what you listed, they could save 15.54 mil by releasing everyone on the list. If they gave a salary of 1 mil to those you said to extend, it would be a savings of 12.54 mil.

Right around the price of Arrington.

[GWBlitzST]

Walt Harris may restructure.

[ConradCountry]

Thier is fat that can be trimmed from the roster which leaves me optimistic.

[colkurtz]

Ramsey is good trade bait - especially if he plays well this weekend. He will want more than the team can pay and he deserves a chance to start somewhere else. It's a win-win for him and the 'skins.

Arrington is going to be a big decision because he will cost a lot either by keeping him or letting him go. Gibbs and GW may be tiring of his media tirades and distractions and bite the bullet on his cap hit.

[helimech24]

Ramsey is good trade bait - especially if he plays well this weekend. He will want more than the team can pay and he deserves a chance to start somewhere else. It's a win-win for him and the 'skins.

Arrington is going to be a big decision because he will cost a lot either by keeping him or letting him go. Gibbs and GW may be tiring of his media tirades and distractions and bite the bullet on his cap hit.

Arrington shouldn't be that big of a decision because he will be owed 12 mil if he is kept this year. If they cut him before july 1, his cap hit is 6 mil. And then he will be off the books and give us relief in 2007

[CNYSkinFan]

Arrington shouldn't be that big of a decision because he will be owed 12 mil if he is kept this year. If they cut him before july 1, his cap hit is 6 mil. And then he will be off the books and give us relief in 2007

uh not quite.

If you release Arrington there will be a dead cap charge of about 8 million this year. and I think that will all be hit this year as Arrington's roster bonus is not in July from what I remember but in May. That's 8 million without a player. Keeping Lavar will not count 12 million. The roster bonus will be guaranteed and actually will cost about 7.5 million. Thus it will be cheaper in the short term to keep Lavar and cut him in 2007 if he does not produce.

[redwolf1218]

Arrington will cost more if he is gone than he will if he stays.

http://redskins.scout.com/3/cutsavings.html

[helimech24]

uh not quite.

If you release Arrington there will be a dead cap charge of about 8 million this year. and I think that will all be hit this year as Arrington's roster bonus is not in July from what I remember but in May. That's 8 million without a player. Keeping Lavar will not count 12 million. The roster bonus will be guaranteed and actually will cost about 7.5 million. Thus it will be cheaper in the short term to keep Lavar and cut him in 2007 if he does not produce.

Alright, I am so damn confused about the numbers getting thrown around here. Every other thread has diffenent numbers for how much he will make and at what time. I have a range from 6 million to 12.5. Where can I go to see the actual numbers on the contract?

[redwolf1218]

Alright, I am so damn confused about the numbers getting thrown around here. Every other thread has diffenent numbers for how much he will make and at what time. I have a range from 6 million to 12.5. Where can I go to see the actual numbers on the contract?
http://redskins.scout.com/3/cutsavings.html

[CNYSkinFan]

http://redskins.scout.com/3/cutsavings.html

great source but it does not take into account guaranteeing the roster bonus nor cutting him before the bonus is due.

[helimech24]

http://redskins.scout.com/3/cutsavings.html


Thank you

According to that, he will cost us 12.5 if cut or traded, and 12 and change if not cut or traded. So how much will it cost if he is cut before june 1?

[santanadasavior]

I think that it is imperative that we resign Clark. We also need to sign others on that list. The best way to do that would be to trade Ramsey, Raymer, Bowen, and Harris for high draft picks. We can clear up cap space and hopefully draft a guy like Mattius Kiwanuka from Boston College at DE to fill that gap.

[GoDannyBoy]

Free agent splurges eventually catch up and make tough decisions. ..... We don't need anymore superstars here. Were building toward success and sometimes superstars can derail that.

No more superstars. Just guys that want to play ball.

[helimech24]

No more superstars. Just guys that want to play ball.

We can grow our own superstars. Chris Cooley comes to mind.

[santanadasavior]

We can grow our own superstars. Chris Cooley comes to mind.

Ahh yes, and Lemar Marshall and Santana Moss.

[helimech24]

Ahh yes, and Lemar Marshall and Santana Moss.

Exactly. I think Gibbs has this mentality, and it is a good thing. We never got anywhere by getting the overrated players that couldn't play together. Now we are finally growing as a team and adding people when needed.

[akhhorus]

Arrington will cost more if he is gone than he will if he stays.

http://redskins.scout.com/3/cutsavings.html

Redwolf, you really need to re-read that webpage. The figure they give for Lavar if he is cut is for after June 1st. When the Skins would be on the hook for the 6.5 million roster bonus. If they cut/trade him before June 1st, you subtract 6.5 million from that figure.

uh not quite.

If you release Arrington there will be a dead cap charge of about 8 million this year. and I think that will all be hit this year as Arrington's roster bonus is not in July from what I remember but in May. That's 8 million without a player. Keeping Lavar will not count 12 million. The roster bonus will be guaranteed and actually will cost about 7.5 million. Thus it will be cheaper in the short term to keep Lavar and cut him in 2007 if he does not produce.

Wait a minute: If you cut/trade lavar, the Skins are on the hook for the remainer of his signing bonus, about 8 millionish. His cap charge-if they kept him past June 1st-would be 12.54 million. Cutting/trading Lavar saves money.


The Skins need to dump about 8-10 million in cap space. Cutting/trading Lavar, Ramsey, Harris(or restructure), Raymer, Bowen basically gets you to 10 million saved. And with Lavar's contract gone, that really helps the cap situation for 2007 and beyond.

[CNYSkinFan]

Redwolf, you really need to re-read that webpage. The figure they give for Lavar if he is cut is for after June 1st. When the Skins would be on the hook for the 6.5 million roster bonus. If they cut/trade him before June 1st, you subtract 6.5 million from that figure.



Wait a minute: If you cut/trade lavar, the Skins are on the hook for the remainer of his signing bonus, about 8 millionish. His cap charge-if they kept him past June 1st-would be 12.54 million. Cutting/trading Lavar saves money.


The Skins need to dump about 8-10 million in cap space. Cutting/trading Lavar, Ramsey, Harris(or restructure), Raymer, Bowen basically gets you to 10 million saved. And with Lavar's contract gone, that really helps the cap situation for 2007 and beyond.

Yes that is true...and I am not going to contribute to the Lavar thing anymore until after the playoffs ....HOWEVER

If you guarantee the roster bonus then the 2006 cap charge will only be 7.5 million as opposed to 8million to cut him. Cutting him will save the Redskins money overall and cap space in 2007. Guaranteeing the roster bonus and keeping him will keep a starter on the team while saving 1 million in cap space (as opposed to cutting/tradeing him) while costing us cap space down the road.

I don't mind pushing the cap space down the road. But Lavar has to have a good playoff season to show us that he is going to be worth it over the next 4 years.

[akhhorus]

Yes that is true...and I am not going to contribute to the Lavar thing anymore until after the playoffs ....HOWEVER

If you guarantee the roster bonus then the 2006 cap charge will only be 7.5 million as opposed to 8million to cut him. Cutting him will save the Redskins money overall and cap space in 2007. Guaranteeing the roster bonus and keeping him will keep a starter on the team while saving 1 million in cap space (as opposed to cutting/tradeing him) while costing us cap space down the road.

I don't mind pushing the cap space down the road. But Lavar has to have a good playoff season to show us that he is going to be worth it over the next 4 years.

But while saving a few million this coming season on L.O. might avert cap problems, you still have the big contract on the books. I would be more inclined to let him try and rebound if he didn't do things like: rip his team/coach while the team was preparing for the biggest game in franchise history this millenium or constantly whine. If he would do anything on the field, I would be happier to let L.O. have another shot, but he looks done.

[Paintedbird]

I like the idea of QB depth as much as the next guy, but Patrick has got to go. That money could be put to use elsewhere.

I totally disagree. Brunell's knee problem and fall off of production at the end of the season as he tires, as well as Campbell's lack of playing time this year, make Ramsey a necessity for the next season or two, unless we're willing to gamble with totally destroying our season in 06-07 and trying to rebuild in 08-09.

[akhhorus]

I totally disagree. Brunell's knee problem and fall off of production at the end of the season as he tires, as well as Campbell's lack of playing time this year, make Ramsey a necessity for the next season or two, unless we're willing to gamble with totally destroying our season in 06-07 and trying to rebuild in 08-09.

Ramsey's contract expires after 2006, he ain't staying unless the skins trade Campbell(which won't happen). And if you don't trade him this offseason, then the Skins can't trade him. And you can get plenty of other Qbs to back up Brunell and Campbell-ones who won't whine whenever they're benched. Ramsey did decently against the Giants, but don't go crazy with the praise. He threw 4 safe completions and the TD pass was typical Ramsey-high and nowhere near the WR. Moss made a great play and ran with it 50 yards.

[Redskinmayhem]

The only thing that worries me is the time frame. If we are fortunate enough to go deep into the playoffs, it really cuts short the time we have to get all those contracts re-worked by March 1.

I think that if we show well in th playoffs, signing guys won't be a problem. Notice how people are willing to take pay cuts in Pittburg and New England? Winning cures all.

[MONK_in_HOF]

I think that if we show well in th playoffs, signing guys won't be a problem. Notice how people are willing to take pay cuts in Pittburg and New England? Winning cures all.

Not to mention the desire to play for a HOF coach.

[The Skinsinator]

He threw 4 safe completions and the TD pass was typical Ramsey-high and nowhere near the WR. Moss made a great play and ran with it 50 yards.Ram did do everything asked of him in that game, but this is a point Ramseyites seem to forget. He threw very safe passes and let Mr. Everything run wild. In his defense, he did look poised for the most part and put the ball where it needed to be. At a minimum, that performance had to increase his stock mildly.

[stonebraker]

For the Salary Cap Geeks who want to know what our cap actually looks like next year, here is a great article from Scout.com

Cap Heck? (http://redskins.scout.com/2/482405.html)

It goes over how 2006 may be a tough cap year for the Skins but not unmanageable. The reason i am posting this is not because I am looking ahead...not yet anyways. But because as we go deeper in the playoffs 9fingers crossed) you will hear people say how we are in cap hell next year and it is win now or never and everyone will be released blah blah blah

This article backs up some of the things I have been saying about how we may not be in great shap e but nothing drastic needs to be done. A few guarantees of roster bonus' and a couple of cuts (Harris, Bowen) and/or trades (Ramsey) and we can be 15 million under the cap before the draft.

We can bukild on this year, keep almost everyone together and make a great run at 2006 as well.

Great post, I really appreciate it! tremedously valuable information

[HanburgerBum]

Sorry never saw the post there...good catch as well.

We will be fine cap wise...and keep Lavar, and keep everyone we want to.


I have soured on Lavar and don't want to keep him even for 2006, but that's discussion for another time.

What I want to say now is that while it would be great to make a run in 2006-7 as well, the Skins should not just be "happy" to get into the playoffs this year. They need to look at 2005 as a real opportunity to make some noise. The NFC playoffs is wide-open this year. There is not a single team in it that should scare the Redskins (assuming the cornerback injury situation is not too bad). The Skins have a realistic shot at representing the NFC in Detroit, let next year take care of next year. Who knows what will happen down the road? There could get serious injuries to stars like Santana and Clinton, or GW and/or other defensive coaches could leave. Strike while the iron is hot!

[Biggie]

I have soured on Lavar and don't want to keep him even for 2006, but that's discussion for another time.

What I want to say now is that while it would be great to make a run in 2006-7 as well, the Skins should not just be "happy" to get into the playoffs this year. They need to look at 2005 as a real opportunity to make some noise. The NFC playoffs is wide-open this year. There is not a single team in it that should scare the Redskins (assuming the cornerback injury situation is not too bad). The Skins have a realistic shot at representing the NFC in Detroit, let next year take care of next year. Who knows what will happen down the road? There could get serious injuries to stars like Santana and Clinton, or GW and/or other defensive coaches could leave. Strike while the iron is hot!

Are you trying to jinx us? :cry:

I agree. Let next year deal with itself. Let's go out there and win a playoff game.

[MONK_in_HOF]

Here is another article from Scout on how the Skins can save some cap space. Trimming the cap (http://redskins.scout.com/2/490049.html)

[santanadasavior]

Here is another article from Scout on how the Skins can save some cap space. Trimming the cap (http://redskins.scout.com/2/490049.html)

That would be great if we could do that, but will lavar marcus clinton shawn and cornelius allow the savings there?

[MONK_in_HOF]

That would be great if we could do that, but will lavar marcus clinton shawn and cornelius allow the savings there?

Well I think the article is pure speculation on some moves that could be done. Nothing there is a given.

[santanadasavior]

Well I think the article is pure speculation on some moves that could be done. Nothing there is a given.

If we could do that we would open up some huge free agent opportunities.

[MWballer]

Seems like a very bright idea!

[ChiefPowhatan17]

We need to get Bowen out of here and same with Walt Harris, bye...

[CNYSkinFan]

That would be great if we could do that, but will lavar marcus clinton shawn and cornelius allow the savings there?

Savings is kind of a weird term for it. Restructuring usually means guaranteeing a portion of salary and spreading it out, much like the roster bonus. MOST of the time the player still earns the same amount in real money the year he restructures. NFLPA disallows devaluing a contract so the money can only be moved from year to year.

[smoak]

Savings is kind of a weird term for it. Restructuring usually means guaranteeing a portion of salary and spreading it out, much like the roster bonus. MOST of the time the player still earns the same amount in real money the year he restructures. NFLPA disallows devaluing a contract so the money can only be moved from year to year.

Well then how are players (like Wynn last year) allowed to take steep pay cuts? Is it a technicality when a new contract replaces the old one?

[redskin_rich]

Well then how are players (like Wynn last year) allowed to take steep pay cuts? Is it a technicality when a new contract replaces the old one?
Wynn and Brunell both let the Skins backload a big portion of their salary for '05 to a later year, knowing in all likelihood that they will never see it.

[smoak]

Wynn and Brunell both let the Skins backload a big portion of their salary for '05 to a later year, knowing in all likelihood that they will never see it.

Oh so they just moved the ungauranteed annual salary to a later year? Huh, and I thought that was disallowed by the NFLPA. I assumed they got completely new deals.... You learn something new every day.

[CNYSkinFan]

Well then how are players (like Wynn last year) allowed to take steep pay cuts? Is it a technicality when a new contract replaces the old one?

Wynn moved some money to the final contract year, a year where he would probably be cut and had some money guaranteed so it was like a signing bonus and spread over the remaining four years of the contract. The cap ramifications were lessened but in many ways Wynn did not lose any real money.

[Shelley28]

This thread has been very educational. The salary cap tends to confuse me a bit. Thanks for the information.

[HAWGZHEAD]

This thread has been very educational. The salary cap tends to confuse me a bit. Thanks for the information.I try and avoid cap threads like the plague. The numbers give me migraines lol.

[MONK_in_HOF]

What if there is no cap for 2007, as it has been rumored? If this happens would the Redskins, and other teams, be able restructure contracts so the majority of what is owed is paid out during the 07 year? That would open a lot of options for teams with an owner willing to spend like ours.

[HAWGZHEAD]

No cap for 2007 and we would be the Washington Yankees.

[MONK_in_HOF]

This article from the Washington Times (Dave Elfin) makes our salary situation look very ominous. Link (http://www.washingtontimes.com/sports/20060117-115943-8513r.htm) Reading this really bumbed me out. I hope somehow he overlooked something.

[CNYSkinFan]

This article from the Washington Times (Dave Elfin) makes our salary situation look very ominous. Link (http://www.washingtontimes.com/sports/20060117-115943-8513r.htm) Reading this really bumbed me out. I hope somehow he overlooked something.

He overlooked all the roster bonus' would be guaranteed and that letting Lavar go before the roster bonus is due would not be a 12 million cap hit. It is pretty piss poor reporting. Check out the article in scout.com today

http://redskins.scout.com/2/490049.html

They trimmed 31 million putting us 13 million under the cap with no major cuts (even kept Lavar) and no outlandish restructuring.

[chrisbcbu]

He overlooked all the roster bonus' would be guaranteed and that letting Lavar go before the roster bonus is due would not be a 12 million cap hit. It is pretty piss poor reporting. Check out the article in scout.com today

http://redskins.scout.com/2/490049.html

They trimmed 31 million putting us 13 million under the cap with no major cuts (even kept Lavar) and no outlandish restructuring.

I was actually about to post this as well. They make all the moves that i want them to make. If we did this we should have plenty of room. They even left off restructuring Samuels contract. Since his cap hit is over 10mil by himself i look for him to restructure yet again.

[santanadasavior]

I was actually about to post this as well. They make all the moves that i want them to make. If we did this we should have plenty of room. They even left off restructuring Samuels contract. Since his cap hit is over 10mil by himself i look for him to restructure yet again.

Gibbs and his staff will assess the team, and probably make a lot of these moves. It will be all good.

[MONK_in_HOF]

He overlooked all the roster bonus' would be guaranteed and that letting Lavar go before the roster bonus is due would not be a 12 million cap hit. It is pretty piss poor reporting. Check out the article in scout.com today

http://redskins.scout.com/2/490049.html

They trimmed 31 million putting us 13 million under the cap with no major cuts (even kept Lavar) and no outlandish restructuring.

That was the original article I posted. There are just so many different articles floating around concerning our cap. I have always thought scout.com has done a good job and was hoping their article was more accurate than Elfin's. The cap has many intricacies, and is not fully understood by many, including myself, thus causing confussion with all the articles circulating with differing scenarios and figures. That makes me feel better that Elfin was way off.

[chrisbcbu]

Well this year it will probably be tougher than previous years concerning the cap if the CBA isnt renewed. Otherwise we have to make sure we get all of our restructures done by March 1st. Otherwise the rule of 30% goes into effect.