Washington football community discussions spanning the Redskins to Commanders era. 20+ years of game analysis, player discussions, and fan perspectives.
https://the-hogs.net/messageboard/
Irn-Bru wrote:He's a $4 million dollar slot/4th receiver in 2009, if that's what we re-signed him to be.
CanesSkins26 wrote:Irn-Bru wrote:He's a $4 million dollar slot/4th receiver in 2009, if that's what we re-signed him to be.
It's a stupid decision on the part of the Skins. At that kind of money ARE will either be starting or be the third receiver. No way that he will be paid $4 million to be the 4th receiver. So essentially this means less playing time for either Kelly or Thomas next season.
VetSkinsFan wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:Irn-Bru wrote:He's a $4 million dollar slot/4th receiver in 2009, if that's what we re-signed him to be.
It's a stupid decision on the part of the Skins. At that kind of money ARE will either be starting or be the third receiver. No way that he will be paid $4 million to be the 4th receiver. So essentially this means less playing time for either Kelly or Thomas next season.
Isn't the slot the 3rd receiver?
Irn-Bru wrote:He's a $4 million dollar slot/4th receiver in 2009, if that's what we re-signed him to be.
Carter's new deal saves the team about $2.4 million in 2009, and lowers his case salary from $2 million to $1.5 million. Randle El's new deal saves $2 million in cap space for next season, and lowers his base salary from $4 million to $1.5 million according to sources.
SkinsFreak wrote:Irn-Bru wrote:He's a $4 million dollar slot/4th receiver in 2009, if that's what we re-signed him to be.
Actually, he WAS the $4 million dollar receiver. He's now the $1.5 million dollar receiver.Carter's new deal saves the team about $2.4 million in 2009, and lowers his case salary from $2 million to $1.5 million. Randle El's new deal saves $2 million in cap space for next season, and lowers his base salary from $4 million to $1.5 million according to sources.
both cases, the players will pocket in raw cash terms exactly what they would have in 2009 under their previous deals ($4.5 million for Carter - including his old roster bonus - and $4 million for Randle El). Only now most of it comes in the form of upfront, guaranteed money, via new signing bonuses.
<snip>
The Randle El contract is virtually identical in theory.
As part of his new deal he got a $2.5 million signing bonus,
SkinsFreak wrote:VetSkinsFan wrote:CanesSkins26 wrote:Irn-Bru wrote:He's a $4 million dollar slot/4th receiver in 2009, if that's what we re-signed him to be.
It's a stupid decision on the part of the Skins. At that kind of money ARE will either be starting or be the third receiver. No way that he will be paid $4 million to be the 4th receiver. So essentially this means less playing time for either Kelly or Thomas next season.
Isn't the slot the 3rd receiver?
In a WCO, they rotate WR's in and out quite frequently and also move them around the formation all the time. At the moment, we have four WR's, not including Thrash. So whether they dub him the 2nd, 3rd, 4th or slot receiver is almost irrelevant, he'll be moved around as they did last year. If many here are concerned about the development of Thomas and Kelly, having Moss as the only other WR with any experience might be leaving the team a little thin.
Irn-Bru wrote:He's a $4 million dollar slot/4th receiver in 2009, if that's what we re-signed him to be.
PulpExposure wrote:SkinsFreak wrote:Irn-Bru wrote:He's a $4 million dollar slot/4th receiver in 2009, if that's what we re-signed him to be.
Actually, he WAS the $4 million dollar receiver. He's now the $1.5 million dollar receiver.Carter's new deal saves the team about $2.4 million in 2009, and lowers his case salary from $2 million to $1.5 million. Randle El's new deal saves $2 million in cap space for next season, and lowers his base salary from $4 million to $1.5 million according to sources.
Not quite.both cases, the players will pocket in raw cash terms exactly what they would have in 2009 under their previous deals ($4.5 million for Carter - including his old roster bonus - and $4 million for Randle El). Only now most of it comes in the form of upfront, guaranteed money, via new signing bonuses.
<snip>
The Randle El contract is virtually identical in theory.
As part of his new deal he got a $2.5 million signing bonus,
1.5 salary +2.5 signing bonus = one 4 million dollar slot receiver
Deadskins wrote:PulpExposure wrote:SkinsFreak wrote:Irn-Bru wrote:He's a $4 million dollar slot/4th receiver in 2009, if that's what we re-signed him to be.
Actually, he WAS the $4 million dollar receiver. He's now the $1.5 million dollar receiver.Carter's new deal saves the team about $2.4 million in 2009, and lowers his case salary from $2 million to $1.5 million. Randle El's new deal saves $2 million in cap space for next season, and lowers his base salary from $4 million to $1.5 million according to sources.
Not quite.both cases, the players will pocket in raw cash terms exactly what they would have in 2009 under their previous deals ($4.5 million for Carter - including his old roster bonus - and $4 million for Randle El). Only now most of it comes in the form of upfront, guaranteed money, via new signing bonuses.
<snip>
The Randle El contract is virtually identical in theory.
As part of his new deal he got a $2.5 million signing bonus,
1.5 salary +2.5 signing bonus = one 4 million dollar slot receiver
No, the bonus is prorated over the life of the contract, so it's more like $1.9 mil this season.
He's a $4 million dollar slot/4th receiver in 2009
DarthMonk wrote:Below is the post that laid out cap implications. It's great info. Let's assume they are good data. 2 things:
1) All the cap hits just last one year. Massive cap room results in 1 year.
2) We have yet to discuss compensatory picks.
"Under the NFL's collective bargaining agreement, teams that lose more or better "compensatory" free agents than they acquire in a year are eligible to receive compensatory draft choices. No team can receive more than four."
Now although it looks painful (and may be) if we let go of say Jansen, Portis, Taylor, and Washington we save a net of 3 million immediately and are well on our way to 4 compensatory picks as well as a quick extra 23 million in cap space a year down the road. Three of those players (Jansen, Taylor, Washington) figure to not really help us next year (based on age and the last couple of years) and Portis (already locker room poison?) can be replaced. He's not Jim Brown and even Brown was probably replaceable to a certain extent by Bobby Mitchell (ask Welch).
I say get rid of these guys and a few more (Springs and Daniels?) and get
1) 13 million of immediate relief
2) 30 million in space in 1 year
3) 4 more draft picks
4) younger
We might even get better immediately and certainly will long term - especially if we finish the blow up in one more year.ey is an example of what we want to do. Draft wisely and pay a homegrown star. He's a keeper.
We should mostly let the remaining linemen play out their contracts and draft replacements. My personal favorite for the #13 is Alex Mack, a center. Most mock drafts put him around #20 so a trade down while getting an extra pick along with Mack could be a possibility. He is generally thought of as a potential all-pro and many say "the best lineman in the draft, period." Check this out:
http://www.nfldraftdog.com/2009_NFL_Draft/Alex_Mack.htm
DarthMonkdad23hogjrs wrote:Blow it up?
Sure, here are some guys that would be a part of the "destruction"
ARE - moving him would increase our # against the cap 600k, we are already 3-4 M over, depending on where you get your info
Jansen - I've seen people coming for his head...great, that will cost you 2.78 million against the cap
Portis - YEAH, LETS GET CRAZY...crazy will cost you 7.7 M against the cap
Some other guys that not everyone is pointing pitch forks at, but would fit into blowing it up...
R. Thomas - costs you 4.5 M to move him; Moss - 464k against the cap to move; everyone on the "Trade Rogers" bandwagon - check this out - 1.43 M against the cap to pull that trigger
and my personal favorite:
"Trade cooley for a #2 OR 3" - that will cost you 8.1 M against the cap
We found a gem....so now you want to trade him so we can maybe do it again...but most likely not...makes sense.
You can't "Blow it Up" completely
why? because we laced the place with plutonium...
guys you can get rid of - more of a wittling
Springs - Saves 6M
Taylor - Saves 8.5M
M. Washington - Saves 4.5M
Griffin - Saves 3.62M
Rabach - Saves 2.35M
Daniels - Saves 2.3M
Sorry to say, everyone else costs you against the cap, or is worth more than what they save you against the cap.
DarthMonk wrote:Sorry! Meant for GM forum!
Can staff move?
DarthMonk
Deadskins wrote:I think the point is, had we blown it up as he suggested, we would now be past the rough years (which were rough anyway) and be a younger, leaner, meaner team with a lot more draft picks. Actually, this being a capless year was the perfect time to blow it up.
Deadskins wrote:I think the point is, had we blown it up as he suggested, we would now be past the rough years (which were rough anyway) and be a younger, leaner, meaner team with a lot more draft picks. Actually, this being a capless year was the perfect time to blow it up.
ey
1niksder wrote:They kind of - sort of are doing what I had in mind back then
Deadskins wrote:1niksder wrote:They kind of - sort of are doing what I had in mind back then
Darth beat you to it by three days.
1niksder wrote:They kind of - sort of are doing what I had in mind back then
1niksder wrote:Deadskins wrote:1niksder wrote:They kind of - sort of are doing what I had in mind back then
Darth beat you to it by three days.
Darth started the thread and everyone wanted to talk about it, the discussion was the reason I started looking at the options....
Darth's idea led to the article....
DarthMonk wrote:Marty came here. Payroll was a then-record 100 MILLION dollars. Marty kept 22 guys. He replaced 31. 13 of the new guys were ROOKIES. He FIRED VINNY. He reduced payroll to 53 MILLION by letting go of almost all the high priced talent (can you say Deion?).
We went 0-5 and then 8-3 the rest of the way with TONY BANKS at QB.
We need to do this again. Let go of (release, trade, whatever makes sense) virtually every high priced guy. Accumulate compensatory picks. Pick LINEMEN. Find a runner. They are everywhere. If the hole is there Rock or Betts or some other guy (did we cut a guy named Mason?) we never heard of who costs less than 1 million can run through it and if it's not there he can slam it up in there for a yard or two. We should NEVER spend big bucks or 1st round picks on a runner.
Many teams have shown us we could be better than we are now in TWO years while getting YOUNGER and CHEAPER.
DarthMonk
SkinsJock wrote:I'm still a big fan of this FO and what they've done ..
as far as Mike's job as HC - I'm waiting to hear about RG3's knee ....
skinsfan#33 wrote:SkinsJock wrote:I'm still a big fan of this FO and what they've done ..
as far as Mike's job as HC - I'm waiting to hear about RG3's knee ....
What's RG3 knee got to do with Shanny's job as a HC?
I would say most NFL HCs would have done the exact same thing! I have know problem with a HC letting a player that says he is OK and the Drs clear him play in a game.
Chris Clemons didn't have a prior injury and still toe his ACL (w/o contact). Who knows, but RG3 could have injured his lee in that game even w/o it being injured prior.
You can disagree with him leaving RG3 in the game when out was clear he was ineffective and I would understand that, but judging his coaching job based on the outcome of his knee exam is very short sighted in my mind. To me one had nothing to do with the other!
emoses14 wrote:
skinsfan#33 wrote:SkinsJock wrote:I'm still a big fan of this FO and what they've done ..
as far as Mike's job as HC - I'm waiting to hear about RG3's knee ....
What's RG3 knee got to do with Shanny's job as a HC?
I would say most NFL HCs would have done the exact same thing! I have know problem with a HC letting a player that says he is OK and the Drs clear him play in a game.
Chris Clemons didn't have a prior injury and still toe his ACL (w/o contact). Who knows, but RG3 could have injured his lee in that game even w/o it being injured prior.
You can disagree with him leaving RG3 in the game when it was clear he was ineffective and I would understand that, but judging his coaching job based on the outcome of his knee exam is very short sighted in my mind. To me one had nothing to do with the other!
