Brunell's contract

Talk about the Washington Football Team here. Do you bleed burgundy and gold?
User avatar
SkinzCanes
Hog
Posts: 1510
youtube meble na wymiar Warszawa
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 12:31 am

Brunell's contract

Post by SkinzCanes »

Brunell Reluctant to Redo Salary Again

By Jason La Canfora
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, March 1, 2006; Page E02

The Washington Redskins met with representatives for quarterback Mark Brunell over the weekend in an attempt to restructure his salary and create additional space under the salary cap by the NFL deadline on Friday.

Brunell's agent, Leigh Steinberg, rejected the team's proposal, sources said, and although the sides have not negotiated since, the Redskins could make another attempt to rework the contract before Friday.

The Redskins have $115.4 million devoted to their 2006 salary cap, and must get under what is projected to be about a $96 million cap by 12:01 a.m. Friday if there is not an extension of the collective bargaining agreement between the league and the NFL Players Association. Without an extension, the Redskins face as tough a challenge as any team in the league in meeting the cap. With an extension, the cap figure could approach $108 million.

Brunell, who signed a seven-year, $43 million contract, including a guaranteed $8.6 million signing bonus, in 2004, has a $4 million base salary for 2006, second highest on the team. The Redskins had hoped to convert his base salary into bonuses and diminish his cap figure by several million dollars, but Steinberg declined, according to two sources with knowledge of the situation.

Steinberg, who agreed to rework Brunell's contract last year after a poor 2004 season, declined to comment, but sources said he met with Eric Schaffer, Washington's director of football administration, Friday night at the Indianapolis hotel where team executives and agents converged for the NFL combine.

Coach Joe Gibbs would not comment directly on Brunell's situation, or whether the team would approach him again, but said in general the Redskins are considering all means of managing the cap, given the uncertainty of labor negotiations.

"At this time, a lot of teams have a number of scenarios going on and they're talking to a number of their players to find ways to fulfill their obligations with the salary cap," Gibbs said. "But so much is up in the air right now, and we've got all kinds of scenarios going depending on how this thing turns out" with the CBA.

Brunell, who turns 36 in September, and offensive linemen Jon Jansen and Randy Thomas are three of the most obvious candidates for restructuring for cap purposes, but agents for those players said they have made no movement toward altering those contracts as of the start of this week. Thomas is coming off the best season of his career and Jansen played much of the season with broken thumbs.

Gibbs has been Brunell's biggest supporter throughout his roller-coaster tenure here, prizing his leadership and smarts, and has favored experienced passers throughout his Hall of Fame coaching career. Brunell has significant leverage because he would count more against the salary cap if traded or cut than he presently does ($5.43 million), and Washington's quarterback situation certainly also plays in Brunell's favor.

Patrick Ramsey, the only other quarterback on the roster with NFL experience, has been granted permission to seek a trade and is being shopped aggressively after sitting on the bench virtually all of 2005. Gibbs said that, as of yesterday afternoon, there had been no real progress toward a deal, but Miami and the New York Jets are interested, and there is sentiment in the league that a third- or fourth-round pick would satisfy the Redskins.

Jason Campbell, a first-round pick last year, was the third quarterback last season and Gibbs has said he is ready to fill a bigger role this season.

Gibbs said that if the Redskins cannot receive "value" for Ramsey he could still return, but the team agreed it would move the former first-round pick after benching him, sources said, and could use the $1.7 million in cap savings that trading him would provide, particularly if Campbell is ready to at least be the backup.

The Redskins would like to clear sufficient cap space to acquire a wide receiver and a pass-rushing defensive end in free agency, which begins Friday.

A new CBA would make it even more likely Washington could retain free agent safety Ryan Clark, tight end Robert Royal and defensive end Demetric Evans.


Considering how much Gibbs has supported Brunell since he was acquired you would think he would be willing to help out the team and redo his contract, especially considering the possibility of no CBA extension.
Chris Luva Luva
---
---
Posts: 18887
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 1:55 pm
Location: AJT
Contact:

Post by Chris Luva Luva »

Its not Brunells problem...

Yea, Id love for Brunell to redo his contract, it'd help out a lot but this is just another case of us overpaying people. Brunell did a heck of a job but his services are definately not fitting of his paycheck. I'd add Chris Samuels and a few other people to my list also. None of these guys are bad players, they're simply OVERPAYED.
The road to the number 1 pick gaining speed!
dabear
piglet
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:02 pm
Location: chicago

Post by dabear »

what would you guys do if your boss asked you to take a pay cut at work today to help out others in your office? would you do it? i don't think so.
gay4pacman
Pacman Rules
Pacman Rules
Posts: 1842
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2005 8:56 pm
Location: Lawn Monster

Post by gay4pacman »

If i was making 5 million dollars??? cmon rich is rich

these guys need to e team players
I know this guy named Jimmy, he has a pet....POSTERNUTBAG! Thats his cats name, POSTERNUTBAG!!!
Chris Luva Luva
---
---
Posts: 18887
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 1:55 pm
Location: AJT
Contact:

Post by Chris Luva Luva »

gay4pacman wrote:If i was making 5 million dollars??? cmon rich is rich

these guys need to e team players


We have a lot of team players but its asking a lot to ask EVERYONE to do it. Both Clark and Royal have said they'd come back for a reasonable amount.

Im not mad at Brunell as much as our front office. As much as it has improved it still has a long way to go.
The road to the number 1 pick gaining speed!
User avatar
SkinzCanes
Hog
Posts: 1510
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 12:31 am

Post by SkinzCanes »

I'd add Chris Samuels and a few other people to my list also. None of these guys are bad players, they're simply OVERPAYED.


Hasn't Samuels reworked his contract atleast twice to help the team get under the cap in previous years?
User avatar
riggofan
HereComesTheDiesel
HereComesTheDiesel
Posts: 9460
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2004 5:29 pm
Location: Montclair, Virginia

Post by riggofan »

If you have to take a pay cut to keep your company in business, you do it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"You can't do epic **** with basic people." - DJax
"We're on the rise, man, whether you're on the train or not." - Josh Norman
User avatar
Jake
Junior Hog
Junior Hog
Posts: 11253
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2003 4:18 am
Location: Mayo, Maryland
Contact:

Post by Jake »

SkinzCanes wrote:
I'd add Chris Samuels and a few other people to my list also. None of these guys are bad players, they're simply OVERPAYED.


Hasn't Samuels reworked his contract atleast twice to help the team get under the cap in previous years?


Yes but that was before he received his new contract last year.
RIP Sean Taylor 1983-2007
RIP Kevin Mitchell 1971-2007
RIP Justin Skaggs 1979-2007
RIP Sammy Baugh 1914-2008

RIP JPFair
RIP VetSkinsFan

#60 Chris Samuels: 6-time 6-time 6-time 6-time 6-time 6-time Pro Bowl left tackle!
Chris Luva Luva
---
---
Posts: 18887
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 1:55 pm
Location: AJT
Contact:

Post by Chris Luva Luva »

Jake wrote:
SkinzCanes wrote:
I'd add Chris Samuels and a few other people to my list also. None of these guys are bad players, they're simply OVERPAYED.


Hasn't Samuels reworked his contract atleast twice to help the team get under the cap in previous years?


Yes but that was before he received his new contract last year.


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: I baited you good!!!! I KNEW when I typed something about Mr. Sammels it'd lure you out. :twisted:
The road to the number 1 pick gaining speed!
Justice Hog
Pursuer of Justice
Pursuer of Justice
Posts: 5809
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2003 8:38 pm
Location: Newark, Delaware

Post by Justice Hog »

dabear wrote:what would you guys do if your boss asked you to take a pay cut at work today to help out others in your office? would you do it? i don't think so.


If I was making $5 million/year and my boss asked me to reduce it to $4 million to help the company, if I were a devoted company man, I'd consider it because I was already making a ton of money.

The key issue, for me, is whether I was "devoted to the company."

I wouldn't be surprised if a few "core Redskins" restructured their contacts to help the team get passed this problem.
Fran Farren
"Justice Hog"

Newark, DE

“God didn't give us a spirit that is timid but one that is powerful, loving and controlled.” 2 Timothy 1:7
User avatar
SkinzCanes
Hog
Posts: 1510
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 12:31 am

Post by SkinzCanes »

I can understand under normal conditions that he would have reservations about renegotiating his contract. However, with the possibility of no extension to the CBA looming I would think that a supposed "team player" like Brunell would be willing to renogiate his contract in what will likely be his last year as a significant contributor on an NFL team. I think it says a lot about a a guy's character when he is in the twilight of his career and would rather keep an extra million dollars and see his team's roster be gutted than take the hit and possibly win a Super Bowl.
skinsfan#33
#33
#33
Posts: 4084
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 9:44 am

Post by skinsfan#33 »

riggofan wrote:If you have to take a pay cut to keep your company in business, you do it.


You don't think these guys actually give up any money when they re-do their contracts do you? 95% of the time they end up with the same amount or more; it is just in a more cap friendly format.

If someone gives you 10 $100 bills or a bank draft for $1000 or 100,000 pennys it is all still $1000. This is all just a shell game!
"Dovie'andi se tovya sagain"
(It is time to roll the dice) Tai'shar Manetheren

"Duty is heavier than a Mountain, Death is lighter than a feather" Tai'shar Malkier

RIP James Oliver Rigney, Jr. 1948-2007
crazyhorse1
ch1
ch1
Posts: 3634
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 9:01 pm
Location: virginia beach

Post by crazyhorse1 »

Cut the guy. He won't make it to the playoffs anyway. We'll do just fine with Ramsey and Campbell. We'll take just a 3 million dollar hit and be better off for it. Of the top players we may have to lose because of the new cap problem, he's the obvious one to go. I sure as hell don't want to lose Portis or Cooley or Washington or Moss or Taylor. We should count ourselves lucky if we just lose Brunell from our first string offense. We're sure to lose almost all of our receivers except, hopefully (Moss).
dabear
piglet
Posts: 28
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:02 pm
Location: chicago

Post by dabear »

it's not about the dollar amount to these guys. if the team expects them to be loyal and do whats best for the team, then they, in return, should do what is best for the player. don't give me this garbage about mark not being a team guy because he won't re-do his contract. the guy signed a contract, they should honor it. end of story.
GoSkins
goskins
goskins
Posts: 679
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 4:55 pm
Location: Hampden-Sydney, VA

Post by GoSkins »

crazyhorse1 wrote:Cut the guy. He won't make it to the playoffs anyway. We'll do just fine with Ramsey and Campbell. We'll take just a 3 million dollar hit and be better off for it. Of the top players we may have to lose because of the new cap problem, he's the obvious one to go. I sure as hell don't want to lose Portis or Cooley or Washington or Moss or Taylor. We should count ourselves lucky if we just lose Brunell from our first string offense. We're sure to lose almost all of our receivers except, hopefully (Moss).


So should I agree with you or Joe Gibbs who states "When you go back and look at his stats, last season was one of the best years he's ever had. He played extremely well for us. Obviously, Mark is at a point where you have to ask: How many more years is he going to be able to do that? We think he has a couple more years for sure, and he would probably say more than that."?

Again, everyone has the right to an opinion and to express that opinion. But, for the life of me, I can't fathom why you think you know more about the QBs than Joe Gibbs.
SkinsFreak
Fire in the Sky
Fire in the Sky
Posts: 4730
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2005 8:31 am
Location: Surfside
Contact:

Post by SkinsFreak »

skinsfan#33 wrote:
riggofan wrote:If you have to take a pay cut to keep your company in business, you do it.


You don't think these guys actually give up any money when they re-do their contracts do you? 95% of the time they end up with the same amount or more; it is just in a more cap friendly format.

If someone gives you 10 $100 bills or a bank draft for $1000 or 100,000 pennys it is all still $1000. This is all just a shell game!


Really - You guys keep talking about Brunell taking a pay cut. I must have missed that. I read that they wanted to "restructure" the contract.

***Brunell, who signed a seven-year, $43 million contract, including a guaranteed $8.6 million signing bonus, in 2004, has a $4 million base salary for 2006, second highest on the team. The Redskins had hoped to convert his base salary into bonuses and diminish his cap figure by several million dollars, but Steinberg declined, according to two sources with knowledge of the situation.***

I agree with others here, that after what Gibbs did for Mark, he should return the favor. Is it really costing Mark anything to do so?
User avatar
die cowboys die
Hog
Posts: 2115
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2004 9:37 pm
Location: Boston, MA

Post by die cowboys die »

GoSkins wrote:
crazyhorse1 wrote:Cut the guy. He won't make it to the playoffs anyway. We'll do just fine with Ramsey and Campbell. We'll take just a 3 million dollar hit and be better off for it. Of the top players we may have to lose because of the new cap problem, he's the obvious one to go. I sure as hell don't want to lose Portis or Cooley or Washington or Moss or Taylor. We should count ourselves lucky if we just lose Brunell from our first string offense. We're sure to lose almost all of our receivers except, hopefully (Moss).


So should I agree with you or Joe Gibbs who states "When you go back and look at his stats, last season was one of the best years he's ever had. He played extremely well for us. Obviously, Mark is at a point where you have to ask: How many more years is he going to be able to do that? We think he has a couple more years for sure, and he would probably say more than that."?

Again, everyone has the right to an opinion and to express that opinion. But, for the life of me, I can't fathom why you think you know more about the QBs than Joe Gibbs.



but doesn't that just prove the point right there? if that was one of the best season's brunell has ever had, then what hope do we have of being a championship team with him at the helm???

unfortunately we are still dealing with the aftermath of the only serious blunder gibbs has made since returning to the redskins. brunell NEVER should have been given such a lucrative contract. there was simply no reason to do so. it is really biting us in the butt now.
GoSkins
goskins
goskins
Posts: 679
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 4:55 pm
Location: Hampden-Sydney, VA

Post by GoSkins »

Let's see...Brunell got us to the 2nd round of the playoffs. Not too shabby. And what have our other QBs done for us? Nada.

Is he overpaid? Yes he is. Should he restrucutre his contract to help the team? Yes. But then so should every player on the team that has a large contract. Don't just pick on Brunell.
User avatar
ATV
Hog
Posts: 975
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 12:32 pm
Location: Algonquin, IL

Post by ATV »

They just restructured his contract.....

http://www.redskins.com/news/newsDetail.jsp?id=6270

I guess he's a Redskin again.
User avatar
SkinsFanInHawai'i
Hog
Posts: 1623
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 7:16 pm
Location: Ft. Lewis, WA

Post by SkinsFanInHawai'i »

ATV beat me to it :lol:
EA7649
||||||
||||||
Posts: 2285
Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 3:55 pm
Location: Below the Appalachian Trail
Contact:

Post by EA7649 »

I think he should b/c it said we would gave the same amount of money only in bonus's
crazyhorse1
ch1
ch1
Posts: 3634
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 9:01 pm
Location: virginia beach

Post by crazyhorse1 »

ATV wrote:They just restructured his contract.....

http://www.redskins.com/news/newsDetail.jsp?id=6270

I guess he's a Redskin again.


Pass my dish of crow. I am a complete ASS for doubting Mr. Brunell's honor for a single moment. It will not happen again.
Irn-Bru
FanFromAnnapolis
FanFromAnnapolis
Posts: 12025
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 7:01 pm
Location: on the bandwagon
Contact:

Post by Irn-Bru »

Brunell reacted strongly to a report in The Washington Post that suggested he was reluctant to restructure his contract.

"I have, and always will, try to do what is in the best interest of my team," said Brunell, who agreed on Tuesday to restructuring the terms of his deal. "If I am seen in a negative light for something I have done wrong, so be it. During the course of my career, I have always maintained the team above myself; however I do not like when I am written about in the paper and it is incorrect."



Thanks, Washington Post!
GoSkins
goskins
goskins
Posts: 679
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 4:55 pm
Location: Hampden-Sydney, VA

Post by GoSkins »

Beside dumping SI all Redskins fans should dump the Washington Post.
The Hogster
#######
#######
Posts: 7225
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 10:13 pm
Location: Washington D.C.

Post by The Hogster »

I wonder how much cap savings this will give us.
SPIT HAPPENS!!
___________________________
Post Reply