How about Coles for Moss?

Redskins4Life · Post by **Redskins4Life** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 2:05 pm

Although new Vikings owner says he has no intention of trading Moss, it's inevitable the team will take any good offer. Why not Coles and a 3rd round pick for Moss? The Vikings probably wouldn't get more than two first round picks for Moss, and thats the best case scenario. Not only would Coles provide them a good young wideout, he has pro bowl capability. Why would we want Moss? He's the best reciever in the game, 'nuff said. I think this could really work out for both teams. Two wideouts who don't want to be on their current teams make a swap and we add a draft pick to sweeten the deal up. What do yall think?

BossHog · Post by **BossHog** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 2:08 pm

I think you fail to take into account a very monumental factor... the salary cap.

So after finding 9 million to eat what's left on Coles' deal, we're going to find enough to sign Randy to a deal too?

Wow.

That would take some real creative accounting.

I guess we could just field a team of 38 and still meet cap standards. :oops:

:-"

redskincity · Post by **redskincity** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 2:09 pm

Could all of Coles numbers be given to another team to deal with, without affecting our cap??

oafusp · Post by **oafusp** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 2:09 pm

Won't happen.

I would support a Derrick Mason AND Jerry Porter signing....with a "trade down" in the first round of the draft to aquire offensive and defensive line help.

BringThePain! · Post by **BringThePain!** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 2:09 pm

Guess who's back?

Back again...

Moss Threads Back..

Let's begin!

Guess who's back?
Guess who's back?
Guess who's back?
Guess who's back?

... i'm an aspiring rapper...

And to comment on your post.... No, thanks... I'd rather shoot Laveranues in his other foot and have him play for us...

Smithian · Post by **Smithian** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 2:10 pm

redskincity wrote:Could all of Coles numbers be given to another team to deal with, without affecting our cap??

Only in Madden. I just trade my big salaries for like 7th round picks.

BossHog · Post by **BossHog** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 2:11 pm

redskincity wrote:Could all of Coles numbers be given to another team to deal with, without affecting our cap??

Absolutely not. It's our signing bonus, it's ours to deal with unless we reach a settlement.

There are NO scenarios that will eliminate the 9 million dollar cap hit EXCEPT reaching a settlement.

avbanig · Post by **avbanig** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 2:12 pm

I don't want Randy Moss, we can't afford his contract, even if we did trade Coles. Moss will create so many problems here, at least Coles kept his mouth shut last year, he could have caused problems and said how unhappy he was.

Its clear the reskins will build around the running of Portis and Betts and a short and intermediate passing game of Cool

ey and Royal, or another TE if they pick up someone else.

The best thing we can hope for is to trade coles for a first or at worst a second round pick.

I don't know why they aren't trying to trade him, just releasing him seems like just a stupid idea, for all they gave up just to give him.

One good thing is that now McCants and Jaccobs should get a chance to be a starter, even if the redskins sign a FA WR or draft a WR in the draft.

redskincity · Post by **redskincity** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 2:14 pm

Dan Snyders high risk, high reward system in affect.

Man this sucks. All of our dealings are setup with big bonuses.

We need to clog this leak.

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 2:16 pm

Releasing Coles is going to hurt because of the cap. I know he is giving back a portion of his SB but unless he is giving back more than half. the releases will wipe out the available cap space we have. That means we don't have the maney to resign ANY of our unsigned players and no money to pick up ANYBODY in free agency..
Or we need to restructure some more contracts or say goodbye to somemore players

ii7-V7 · Post by **ii7-V7** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 2:20 pm

Moss aint gonna happen!
Moss aint gonna happen!
Moss aint gonna happen!
Moss aint gonna happen!
Moss aint gonna happen!
Moss aint gonna happen!
Moss aint gonna happen!
Moss aint gonna happen!
Moss aint gonna happen!
Moss aint gonna happen!
Moss aint gonna happen!
Moss aint gonna happen!
Moss aint gonna happen!
Moss aint gonna happen!
Moss aint gonna happen!
Moss aint gonna happen!
Moss aint gonna happen!
Moss aint gonna happen!
Moss aint gonna happen!

Get it through your thick skull!

redskincity · Post by **redskincity** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 2:20 pm

Well in that case, I would make him sit his butt on the bench until he gets that burning desire to play again!!!!

BossHog · Post by **BossHog** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 2:24 pm

1niksder wrote:Releasing Coles is going to hurt because of the cap. I know he is giving back a portion of his SB but unless he is giving back more than half. the releases will wipe out the available cap space we have. That means we don't have the maney to resign ANY of our unsigned players and no money to pick up ANYBODY in free agency..
Or we need to restructure some more contracts or say goodbye to somemore players

How do you figure?

If they reach a settlement, I don't see why the Redskins would agree to give up much more than an extra year of bonus money (1.8M)... but that is impossible to predict.

Regardless... if the Redskins WERE put in a position where they were going to eat the cap... they wouldn't likely just release him, and if they did it would be after June 1st... because as of now... they're in cap compliance.

If they were going to eat the cap, then they'd be much more inclined to get something for him and try to complete a trade of some sort.

I don't see them out and out releasing him before March 2nd in any scenario under his existing contract.

avbanig · Post by **avbanig** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 2:25 pm

Great so if that's true and releasing him means we will take a huge salary cap hit, and we wouldn't be able to sign players...than you know what i'd do with him... I'd keep him.

I'm tired of the skins over paying for players, even though in my opinion they didn't with Coles.

But if the guy is just going to hurt the franchise by being cut, than keep him. He'll still play, because he needs to get paid, maybe he'll hold out during training camp of something stupid like that, but just keep him.

We'll open up our offense more next year, and with Coles and someone like M williams, or B Edwards in the draft our team should be knocking on the playoff door, and will probably make it.

I wouldn't let a player ruin the franchise.

BossHog · Post by **BossHog** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 2:26 pm

Watch the language guys. Abbreviated cursewords are no more welcome than the cursewords themselves outside the Smack forum.

I would like to try and post instead of moderate if it's all the same to y'all. :wink:

BringThePain! · Post by **BringThePain!** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 2:30 pm

avbanig wrote:I wouldn't let a player ruin the franchise.

First, Welcome to the board.... keep up the good posts...

I don't believe you have to worry about the Skins just out right releasing the guy... it wouldn't make since and Danny Boy ain't the kinda person to let that happen...

Primetime42 · Post by **Primetime42** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 2:34 pm

Even if this trade happened, it could only serve to hurt the cap situation, given the signing bonus you have to eat ANYWAY, plus what you might have to pay for a Randy Moss...and don't forget that a trade like that usually consumates in one or BOTH guys getting new contracts. :shock:

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 3:22 pm

BossHog wrote:How do you figure?

If they reach a settlement, I don't see why the Redskins would agree to give up much more than an extra year of bonus money (1.8M)... but that is impossible to predict.

If the Skins are only looking at $1.8M in dead money that would be graat but I don't see Coles giving back $7M. That was my point unless he gives back atleast half of the $13M he got as a bonus the Skins will have to move some money around or release some players to be under the cap

BossHog wrote:Regardless... if the Redskins WERE put in a position where they were going to eat the cap... they wouldn't likely just release him, and if they did it would be after June 1st... because as of now... they're in cap compliance.

If they were going to eat the cap, then they'd be much more inclined to get something for him and try to complete a trade of some sort.

I don't see them out and out releasing him before March 2nd in any scenario under his existing contract.

I agree if they are going to take the full hit then Coles would not be cut, maybe traded.

With Coles cap number doubling next year this day was coming anyway.

BossHog · Post by **BossHog** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 3:37 pm

If the Skins are only looking at $1.8M in dead money that would be graat but I don't see Coles giving back $7M. That was my point unless he gives back atleast half of the $13M he got as a bonus the Skins will have to move some money around or release some players to be under the cap

I would agree more were the Redskins in a situation where they HAD to do something. But they really don't do they? it's Coles' attitude that wants out... if you tell him, 'no thanks, we'd rather keep you', he's going to agree to a lot less than you might think. The agent will of course make the argument that the contract was backloaded and that he deserves more... but they're the ones that want to make a deal that gets them out of it.

Maybe that won't come into it, but it should. If I was doing the negotiating, I'd be telling Coles that his butt was going to be scout squad all year and maybe some good old-fashioned return duty with a bunch of players in front of him blocking that know he doesn'tt wanna be there. :-"

BringThePain! · Post by **BringThePain!** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 3:40 pm

BossHog wrote:I'd be telling Coles that his butt was going to be scout squad all year and maybe some good old-fashioned return duty with a bunch of players in front of him blocking that know he doesn'tt wanna be there. :-"

.... you're evil....

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 3:43 pm

BossHog wrote:
If the Skins are only looking at $1.8M in dead money that would be graat but I don't see Coles giving back $7M. That was my point unless he gives back atleast half of the $13M he got as a bonus the Skins will have to move some money around or release some players to be under the cap

I would agree more were the Redskins in a situation where they HAD to do something. But they really don't do they? it's Coles' attitude that wants out... if you tell him, 'no thanks, we'd rather keep you', he's going to agree to a lot less than you might think. The agent will of course make the argument that the contract was backloaded and that he deserves more... but they're the ones that want to make a deal that gets them out of it.

Maybe that won't come into it, but it should. If I was doing the negotiating, I'd be telling Coles that his butt was going to be scout squad all year and maybe some good old-fashioned return duty with a bunch of players in front of him blocking that know he doesn'tt wanna be there. :-"

Looks like the FO is in the drivers seat on this one I hope we get some relief out of this.

Rumor has has it he wants to play here or in Baltimore so maybe he'll do whatever the Skins want to get on the open market.
The Jags and the Ravens are hurting for a WR so they'll throw money at him and he knows it .....if he hits the market in time

SkinsChic · Post by **SkinsChic** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 3:47 pm

He would fit perfectly with the scum in Baltimore...Moss that is.

Primetime42 · Post by **Primetime42** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 3:49 pm

I just heard a rumor that made my stomach churn...

our #11 and Coakley for Moss.

Talent-wise, smart.

But I can't stand Moss' attitude. Wanna do a three-way?

JansenFan · Post by **JansenFan** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 3:57 pm

No thanks. Not into that stuff, you pervert!

Primetime42 · Post by **Primetime42** » Mon Feb 21, 2005 4:07 pm

JansenFan wrote::shock: No thanks. Not into that stuff, you pervert!

Rats.