The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Surfer, first of all, I agree that he's slightly overpaid a bit based on his mediocre performances the last two seasons but you're making it seem like that the 8 mil this season is going to Shane Matthews or Bruce Smith. Everyone on the line improved as the season went on, including Chris. It's not like Chris is a bum. He's a solidified and great "book-end tackle" (as my brother-in-law wouldn't stop saying when his Bears got John Tait )

Secondly, he hasn't refused to re-negotiate. I don't think Chris has even been approached about his contract yet. I know that I've read the Post mentioning his contract as one that should be targeted to restructure. I'm postive that contract talks will start in the future.

Although the sight of Samuels leaving would be very sad for me we could pick up Gallery with one of those two picks to fill the void, and then maybe use the other to trade down and get even more picks, just a thought...

~one~

skinsfaninroanoke wrote:Guys - there won't be a boatload of cap room this year - and that is a definite.

WE WILL BE PAYING MORE for letting him go this year - no savings - we will pay MORE.

He will actually cost like 500k-750k more if we release or trade him...

The signing bonus he is entitled to will not be prorated any longer... ALL of it will come due this year - over 9 million dollars worth. Since his salary cap hit is like 8.6 mil, we will lose money on this deal if we release or trade him.

Just to clarify for everyone thinking we will save money by not paying him his salary - we will still owe the whole signing bonus that is left on his contract time.

Yeah but over the long run we will be ahead. Otherwise we get that hit every year, and it only gets WORSE!!!!

Would you like to specify on what you mean by worse?

What ive haerd is that we are also talking with Oakland about possibly Trading gardner and the #5 for the number 2. At the #2 taking Gallery (remember not only is he a great Lt but he also played TE comming into college.) Then apperently turning around and trading sanuals to the Browns for the #7 pick overall and take whoever is left that we want on our board.

Apperently this has spred pretty wide, who knows if theres fire where theres smoke

Next year Samuel's cap hit will be 9.6 million and the year after 11.3 million. I'm thinking that's what jklote defines as worse. Plus, I think Winey did an excellent job taking over last year and if Brunell wins the starting job, then Jansen will be protecting his blind side NOT Samuels.

It would be awesome if we got gallery for the tightend spot.

Think about it. Samuels and Gallery side by side. Or Jansen and Gallery side by side on the line.

The HOGS would be back!!!!!!

even if we decide to make the trade and get Gallery we will have a huge signing bonus to dole out as opposed to the hefty cap figure Samuals has coming up???? 6 in one half a dozen I say. The only thing that makes sense is trading the Oakland pick for a package of draft picks. A 2 and a 5 bonus money will come to about 30 million. CAP, CAP, CAP

guys - we will be taking the hit from Samuels AND have to sign huge contracts with WHOEVER we sign at #2 and #5 - that is why I am guessing we might move back down the charts some...

read my lips - we won't be saving ANYTHING this year from trading Samuels - the prorated signing bonus will hit us for over 9 million dollars plus the contracts of the two people in the top 5 of the draft we have to sign.

Since C-Sam has reworked his salary before there is a lot of money pushed into this contract. This is when we start seeing some issues with the backloaded contracts.

Guys - think of it this way... we trade Samuels, get Gallery and Taylor ( ::shudder:: ) - how much do you think we pay the # 2 and 5 pick in the draft? Remember Arrington and Samuels?

Gallery - 5 years - 15 mil s.b. - 25 mil contract? (light I would think but I gotta make the point)

His overall salary hit would be light - like 2 mil a year, but the s.b. would hit us at 3 mil a year - making his hit 5 mil a year.

Taylor would be similar, though a bit less... call him 4 mil a year.

That would be Samuels prorated s.b. - 9 mil + 5 mil (Gallery) + 4 mil (Taylor)

The last I heard - we had 3.3 million in cap space.

We don't save a single centavo on Samuels this year. We lose money if we cut him or trade him. There is not option on that. We can't just start cutting everyone to do this. Even if I am high on the two draft picks costs - say half - it is still 9 mil + 4.5 mil = 13.5 mil - 10 million more than we have in place.

I just don't see it happening at all. Sure fire way to have to maybe cut people we don't want to.

Nope. We're stuck with him. For better or for worse, we're married to C-Sam. I'm sure Bugel can get some better production out of the man this season. I hope so. That would be an exceedingly expensive bust.
You know where I stand on "potential". This had best be C-Sams breakout year.

Why would Oakland do this if they want a OT. They can just get Gallery.

agreed - this doesn't make any sense on any level - which adds up to one thing:

Al Davis

It might not be a romur ... check out the post I almost pasted the whole artical

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ar ... 4Apr9.html

Here's anther one

http://www.washingtontimes.com/sports/2 ... -8726r.htm

Maybe Snyder is just pissed cause Samuel wont restructure and figures he would rather pay him and replace him with Gallery. Either way he will have to pay him next year but he will be saving hisself a headache for the up coming year...As far as the dilema of having to pay a 2nd and 5th overall pick...maybe we dont plan on getting Taylor like everyone thinks. Maybe we will trade down with the 5th pick.....Same thing the Bucks did with Keyshawn...paid him while he sat at home.....

maybe we dont get gallary and trade down?

johnjack wrote:My apologies, I see more value in the deal. I had forgotten that we would still have the #5 overall pick. That would make the rumor more feasible, but I still stand by my position that Bugel likes those two tackles too much to move one without getting "known" value out of the deal.

yeah, i just realized this too. however, with all the restructuring we're always asking people to do, is it really smart to pay $9 for Samuels to leave and then assume the signing bonuses of the #2 and #5 pick?

The way I heard it this morning went like this .... Rod Gardner and our #5 to Oakland for their #2 & Chris Samuels to Clevland for thier #7...... I heard it twice and it still dont add up. Why would trade Chris and why would the browns give up a 7 for him? They would want more. But with the WRs we have I'd jump all over Gardner & our #5 for the #2 pick Then again you have to deal with Al Davis AND Norv Turner

I wouldn't give up #5 for a #2... if we really want Taylor he is likely to fall to #5 with the team needs that are drafting ahead of us.

I still believe the option is feasible to trade back and really aid the defense.

I agree we shoundn't be looking to trade up for a OL when we have a line that hasn't had to run block for two years (they'll be ready to get after some people Trading down makes a lot sence if we get who we want(s. taylor) and another pick.