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

Are we going to be able to get out of Brunell's contract without hurting us because i know the deal was big but how much was guarenteed?

no, we can't get out of it. He's on the team at least one more season. After that the cap hit would be reasonable. Right now it would be a 7.4 hit or a 1.2 hit now and a 6.2 next year. If we wait until after next year to cut him it's a 6 mil hit in 2006 or 1.2 and then 5 mil in 2007. We are way over the cap in 2006 right now, and pretty light for 2007, so he's definitely playing for the redskins next season, and gone after that.

Of note, is the fact that the cap only runs thru 2007 unless it is reinstated, which it will be, but probably will be tweaked.

I think Gibbs gave Ramsey the nod next year hoping Brunell would retire and then the cap hit would not strap the team. Ramsey is the player to build around, he will be much improved next year.

Even if he retires we still take a cap hit. I think it is signing bonus only but it is still a substantial amount.

I think he could get the axe after June 1st. He should volunteer to have his cap number reduced. Too bad we can't shift him to the coaching staff - that's where he belongs. The fact is, he's the third best QB on the team.

According to our cap table, his hit is 3.5M in '05, 5.5M in '06 and 6.6 in '07. Can someone please tell me how we can avoid this? Is it possible?

Texas Hog wrote:According to our cap table, his hit is 3.5M in '05, 5.5M in '06 and 6.6 in '07. Can someone please tell me how we can avoid this? Is it possible?

only if snyder hires some Enron accountants...

Texas Hog wrote:According to our cap table, his hit is 3.5M in '05, 5.5M in '06 and 6.6 in '07. Can someone please tell me how we can avoid this? Is it possible?

Some of it has already been paid the cap hit includes the prorated bonus, his Salary is 1.5M '05, 4M '06, 5.2M '07

If Brunell retired the salary would come off the cap but the prorated bonus is due (right now 7.37M) now. If he agreed to give part of his signing bonus back we would still take the full 7.37M hit this year but whatever portion he gave up would be a credit in '06 (a year we could use a credit)

If Brunell hangs it up or is cut at the end of 2005 the cap hit in '06 would be 5.94M however his current hit for '06 is 5.4M so I wouldn't worry about his cap numbers after '05

If we had the Cap space retirement wouldn't be a bad idea to help out the cap in '06....

If Mark doesn't want to give back any of the SB money "the Danny" can always take him to court

Thanks 1niksder

I don't see any real savings in him being cut or retiring. At this point he seems more valuable as a teacher and serviceable backup.

Texas Hog wrote:According to our cap table, his hit is 3.5M in '05, 5.5M in '06 and 6.6 in '07. Can someone please tell me how we can avoid this? Is it possible?

Yes, it is possible. We will make him an offer he can't refuse

REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:Cut Brunell???!!!! I guess you're ALSO gonna suggest trading Lavar. I can't stand all the hateration around these here parts nowadays!!!

We might as well get rid of Joe in the process.

Hey, I'm really bad at jokes, but you are joking right? You don't think Brunell deserves to be cut after what he did to us?

Ask him to be a man and restructure his contract to reflect what a back QB gets paid in the NFL.

1fan4ramsey wrote:Ask him to be a man and restructure his contract to reflect what a back QB gets paid in the NFL.

Possible words that you meant to say.

Black?
Backup?
Bad?

I'm going to run and say that you meant black!! YOU THINK BLACK QB'S SHOULD MAKE LESS?!?!?!?!? lol

Joking.

I think you meant backup.

1fan4ramsey wrote:Ask him to be a man and restructure his contract to reflect what a back QB gets paid in the NFL.

Sorry, I meant BACKUP.

Your salary in future years are not guaranteed, therefore, if your not on the team, your salary doesn't count towards the cap because it is money you never got. Salary is not counted towards the cap until the player reports to training camp. It may be mini camps, but I'm pretty sure it's the normal training camp.

Your signing bonus always counts against the cap because it's money you recieved. If you get traded, get cut OR retire, your bonus accelerates and the whole thing counts against that years cap. The only way to circumvent it, is to cut them after June 1st. If you do that, the regular portion of the cap hit (bonus divided by the # of years of the contract) is counted for that year. Then the rest of the bonus is counted towards next years cap.

Not sure if you guys are serious, but the NFLPA would not let Brunell give back his bonus money even if he wanted to. That would set a bad precedent for the players. And I also don't think the NFL would relieve the # from the Skins cap just because the money was given back. I think they only do that in a case like Barry Sanders or Ricky Williams where the player was legally made to pay back the bonus because of sketchy reasons for retirement.

REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:Cut Brunell???!!!! I guess you're ALSO gonna suggest trading Lavar. I can't stand all the hateration around these here parts nowadays!!!

We might as well get rid of Joe in the process.

you must be joking redeemed. Obviously we need to be out from under Brunells contract. Brunell does not have the ability to play in the NFL any longer. Sad but true. It was a signing that didn't work out, and Joe made a mistake and overpaid him. IF it was possible to dump him, we would. Unfortunately it isn't an option right now.

Comparing the talk of people wanting out of Brunells contract to Lavar and Gibbs is just stupid. Everyone wants Brunell gone, and only a small few want either Lavar or Gibbs gone.

You seem to be trying to rile people up lately. What's the problem? Since you've changed your tag, you seem different somehow...

Scottskin,
You seem well informed on the salary cap system, not too many "fans" are. I think that you are right about the NFPLA, but I am pretty sure if a player chose to give back some of his signing bonus then it would be creditted back to the team's cap. The Sanders and Williams arbitrations were simply a legal way for the team to force the player to return the money.
By the way, WHY THE HORSESHOE? I was a Colts fan until the Mayflower incident, but that is in the past and the Colts no longer exist. There is now a team call the Indianapolis Colts but Jonny U NEVER played for that team !

Scottskins wrote:Not sure if you guys are serious, but the NFLPA would not let Brunell give back his bonus money even if he wanted to. That would set a bad precedent for the players. And I also don't think the NFL would relieve the # from the Skins cap just because the money was given back. I think they only do that in a case like Barry Sanders or Ricky Williams where the player was legally made to pay back the bonus because of sketchy reasons for retirement.

Barry Sanders Rule
Due to the Salary Cap, owners are now investing a greater amount of money up front for players in the form of guaranteed signing bonuses. Thus, the owners must try to protect their investments by including language in the contract that calls for a player to return a portion of the signing bonus to the team if the player “fails or refuses” to practice or play with the team. In certain situations, a team will be repaid some of the signing bonus it paid to a player (i.e., a refund), or a team will fail to pay part of a signing bonus that was already allocated toward team salary. If this happens, the amount previously included in team salary will be added to the team’s Salary Cap in the next year.

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

I don't know if there was language in Brunell's contract to cover him not playing out the contract but we are talking about "The Danny"

skinsfan#33 wrote:Scottskin,
You seem well informed on the salary cap system, not too many "fans" are. I think that you are right about the NFPLA, but I am pretty sure if a player chose to give back some of his signing bonus then it would be creditted back to the team's cap. The Sanders and Williams arbitrations were simply a legal way for the team to force the player to return the money.
By the way, WHY THE HORSESHOE? I was a Colts fan until the Mayflower incident, but that is in the past and the Colts no longer exist. There is now a team call the Indianapolis Colts but Jonny U NEVER played for that team !

I'm not too sure about the effects of returning signing bonuses on the cap. With what 1niksider showed, I think it's sort of a grey line right now. It is probably a case by case deal right now, and will likely be addressed better by the next agreement.

As far as the Colts logo, I'm using it so I can recognize my posts easily. I was using LA's 56 logo, but their are too many people using it now. Plus I was rooting for the Colts in the playoffs....

Scottskins wrote:[I'm not too sure about the effects of returning signing bonuses on the cap. With what 1niksider showed, I think it's sort of a grey line right now. It is probably a case by case deal right now, and will likely be addressed better by the next agreement.

From what I've read the only way the team recoups any bonus money is when they have "the Barry Sander's clause in the player's contract.

I hope "the Danny" included one

gotcha. I would think he would. If not, you can bet there will be one in every contract he does from now on lol...

I have never had a bad word to say about Joe, but getting Brunell was his worst move EVER

Nobody could have predicted how much brunell fell off. You can't blame Gibbs, all he saw was old film when brunnel was a good QB. But he is not a bad back up at all.

4bz wrote:Nobody could have predicted how much brunell fell off. You can't blame Gibbs, all he saw was old film when brunnel was a good QB. But he is not a bad back up at all.

"old film" is exactly right. Why do you think the Jags were so willing to let Leftwich lead their team?

As far as him being a backup, I would agree, but not for the money Snyder's paying him. For all I know, that may be all Ramsey's good for, but I like Snyder's financical situation with him much better. (I'm not bashing Ramsey, I love the kid and wish him well. I think he's going to be very good).

So yes, I think we can blame Gibbs. Brunell was a HORRIBLE pickup. Just think what we could do with all of that $$.