Somethings wrong. Give up a receiver for a cripple.
Unless Coles know something we dont
WFAN RADIO IN NEW YORK REPORTING ITS ALL BUT DONE
-
redskincity
- Hog
- Posts: 3779
- youtube meble na wymiar Warszawa
- Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 9:52 pm
- Location: The Heart
The Jets are tooooooo fast to just Trade up.
Somethings wrong. Give up a receiver for a cripple.
Unless Coles know something we dont
Somethings wrong. Give up a receiver for a cripple.
Unless Coles know something we dont
• NFL Championships
1937, 1942, 1983, 1987, 1991
• Conference Championships
1936, 1937, 1940, 1942, 1943, 1945, 1972, 1982, 1983, 1987, 1991
• Division Championships
1972, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1987, 1991, 1999,
• All-Time Record:
515-465-27
1937, 1942, 1983, 1987, 1991
• Conference Championships
1936, 1937, 1940, 1942, 1943, 1945, 1972, 1982, 1983, 1987, 1991
• Division Championships
1972, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1987, 1991, 1999,
• All-Time Record:
515-465-27
-
lamont_jordan_rules
- newbie
- Posts: 18
- Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 3:13 pm
FYI - guys
...post from another member, flowtrain from our website, flow is our resident genius & definitely listen to what he says:
Track this topic | Email this topic | Print this topic
Flowtrain Posted: Feb 25 2005, 05:52 PM
There are a few interesting salary cap issues that could prove to kill this trade before it's ever consummated. Media outlets have done a poor job covering this angle, but here's a summary because it's so critical.
The key issue is this. Coles is set to receive a $5M bonus installment from the Skins. This money is part of his original $13M signing bonus and is guaranteed. As a result, it's been prorated against the cap over the past 2 years and the Skins are responsible for it, even though the actual funds haven't yet hit Coles' bank account.
In addition, if Coles is cut or traded, a $9M cap hit would accelerate due to the unamortized portion of his $13M bonus. But, in Coles' recent pact with the Skins, he said he'd forego the $5M installment in return for getting released (figuring he could recoup this money in a signing bonus from another team). The result would be a $9M cap hit to the Skins, followed by a $5M credit for bonus money returned, or a net hit of $4M in dead money (not including salary taken off the books). However, Coles did NOT agree to return the $5M if he were traded (rather than released), because then, he couldn't assure himself of recouping that $5M in a new signing bonus with a new team.
Enter Jets.
The Skins will ask Coles to forego his $5M bonus installment and ask the Jets to pay him this $5M as part of the deal. Coles may agree in this case, assuming the Jets are a team he wants, but he might also require the Jets further sweeten the pot with a restructure. The result for Coles would be the same (or potentially better) monetarily as if he'd stayed, and he gets a new team that he's happy with. The Skins get a $4M hit rather than $9M, and the Jets would prorate out the $5M as part of a new deal, still getting Coles still relatively cheap.
The PROBLEM. In my view, the NFLMC could reject this trade proposal because it smells like blatant cap circumvention. It's bad policy to allow teams to transfer cap space along with a player. There's no recent precedent on this issue, but the deal could be held up while the NFL debates the issue. Another small wrinkle is that the $5M refund only hits the 05 cap if the Skins act immediately, otherwise it hits the cap in the "next league year." That could also complicate the timeline.
The ALTERNATIVE. Undoubtedly the Jets have insisted from the start is that the Skins trade Coles outright and that the Skins pay his bonus and take a $9M hit. Unfortunately, media reports have conflicted as to who will assume the $5M, leading me to conclude that this is still unresolved. This second scenario actually isn't completely out of the question, assuming the Samuels restructure currently in progress goes through. But it would put the Skins in a real bind cap wise. Would this be a better option than cutting Coles with a $4M hit and getting nothing at all in return? Quite possibly, especially since it appears they're also losing Gardner. So the Skins might ultimately proceed on this path if push comes to shove.
If the Skins did eat Coles' bonus, it's phenomenal for the Jets. Coles becomes a relatively cheap player who can also be cut or traded with NO negative cap effects. Alternatively, if the Jets eat the $5M and treat it as a new bonus, Coles still comes relatively cheap. But, of course, new issues arise if it's necessary to restructure Coles new deal with the Jets and, as mentioned, it's possible he'd be seeking additional guaranteed money from the Jets.
As you see, there are a number of important layers and details that will need ironing out. And if the parties don't see eye to eye on them, or if the NFLMC rejects the agreement on the basis of cap circumvention, the deal could unravel in a hurry.
In other words, stay tuned. We ain't there yet.
...post from another member, flowtrain from our website, flow is our resident genius & definitely listen to what he says:
Track this topic | Email this topic | Print this topic
Flowtrain Posted: Feb 25 2005, 05:52 PM
There are a few interesting salary cap issues that could prove to kill this trade before it's ever consummated. Media outlets have done a poor job covering this angle, but here's a summary because it's so critical.
The key issue is this. Coles is set to receive a $5M bonus installment from the Skins. This money is part of his original $13M signing bonus and is guaranteed. As a result, it's been prorated against the cap over the past 2 years and the Skins are responsible for it, even though the actual funds haven't yet hit Coles' bank account.
In addition, if Coles is cut or traded, a $9M cap hit would accelerate due to the unamortized portion of his $13M bonus. But, in Coles' recent pact with the Skins, he said he'd forego the $5M installment in return for getting released (figuring he could recoup this money in a signing bonus from another team). The result would be a $9M cap hit to the Skins, followed by a $5M credit for bonus money returned, or a net hit of $4M in dead money (not including salary taken off the books). However, Coles did NOT agree to return the $5M if he were traded (rather than released), because then, he couldn't assure himself of recouping that $5M in a new signing bonus with a new team.
Enter Jets.
The Skins will ask Coles to forego his $5M bonus installment and ask the Jets to pay him this $5M as part of the deal. Coles may agree in this case, assuming the Jets are a team he wants, but he might also require the Jets further sweeten the pot with a restructure. The result for Coles would be the same (or potentially better) monetarily as if he'd stayed, and he gets a new team that he's happy with. The Skins get a $4M hit rather than $9M, and the Jets would prorate out the $5M as part of a new deal, still getting Coles still relatively cheap.
The PROBLEM. In my view, the NFLMC could reject this trade proposal because it smells like blatant cap circumvention. It's bad policy to allow teams to transfer cap space along with a player. There's no recent precedent on this issue, but the deal could be held up while the NFL debates the issue. Another small wrinkle is that the $5M refund only hits the 05 cap if the Skins act immediately, otherwise it hits the cap in the "next league year." That could also complicate the timeline.
The ALTERNATIVE. Undoubtedly the Jets have insisted from the start is that the Skins trade Coles outright and that the Skins pay his bonus and take a $9M hit. Unfortunately, media reports have conflicted as to who will assume the $5M, leading me to conclude that this is still unresolved. This second scenario actually isn't completely out of the question, assuming the Samuels restructure currently in progress goes through. But it would put the Skins in a real bind cap wise. Would this be a better option than cutting Coles with a $4M hit and getting nothing at all in return? Quite possibly, especially since it appears they're also losing Gardner. So the Skins might ultimately proceed on this path if push comes to shove.
If the Skins did eat Coles' bonus, it's phenomenal for the Jets. Coles becomes a relatively cheap player who can also be cut or traded with NO negative cap effects. Alternatively, if the Jets eat the $5M and treat it as a new bonus, Coles still comes relatively cheap. But, of course, new issues arise if it's necessary to restructure Coles new deal with the Jets and, as mentioned, it's possible he'd be seeking additional guaranteed money from the Jets.
As you see, there are a number of important layers and details that will need ironing out. And if the parties don't see eye to eye on them, or if the NFLMC rejects the agreement on the basis of cap circumvention, the deal could unravel in a hurry.
In other words, stay tuned. We ain't there yet.
J-E-T-S, JETS, JETS, JETS!!!
I'm a jet fan and i'm glad we are getting back coles. Moss is such a "Over Rated" reciever. He is speedy but he is a P*ssy he dose'nt like going over the middle like coles does. Coles is willing to ruf it out in the middle. And that was a crap shot against penington to. He has the arm and the accuracy. Who the hell is ur QB? Pat ramsey. He sux.
If your gonna spout off crap like this, you need to take it to smack. Read the rules...it's called FLAMING, and it doesn't belong within the confines of this forum.
<~~~~~Runs with scissors X
(_E=mc2_)
“This is where I'm most comfortable, ... This is my life, where I work. I'm definitely glad to be back.” #21
(_E=mc2_)
“This is where I'm most comfortable, ... This is my life, where I work. I'm definitely glad to be back.” #21
you can't just break the rules because you are speaking about your own team.NYJ 1968 wrote:Whats the matter? I can't say what i want to say in this forum. I am speaking what i feel. I did'nt curse at anyone exept moss. What did i do so wrong?
Rules are rules,you follow them on JI,follow them here.
Welcome Home Coles
-
njskinsfan
- Hog
- Posts: 485
- Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2004 11:32 pm
- Location: Jersey shore
I hope there is plenty of room on the pine for Moss because that is where he ends up for half of the season and the other half on injured reserve.
If we wanted him so bad we shouldn't have taken Gardner over him when the two were available in the draft. "The Daniel" wanted Moss and Shottie wanted Gardner and guess who won that round?
Guess who will win in the end?
If we wanted him so bad we shouldn't have taken Gardner over him when the two were available in the draft. "The Daniel" wanted Moss and Shottie wanted Gardner and guess who won that round?
Guess who will win in the end?
Over! Nothing is over until we say its over. Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor! Hell no! -- Future Sen. Blutarski.