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

This is from the Extreme Skins site...

Chris Samuels
SB: $10M
2004: $5.132M
2005: $6.025M
2006: $7.702M

Jon Jansen
SB: $8M ('02)
2004: $1.4M
2005: $2M
2006: $4M
2007: $4.25M
2008: $4.75M

I think this is a pretty clear indication of why the team is looking to renegotiate. Jansen has a pretty healthy contract, but it is no where near the level of Samuels (which is by far the most expensive on the team). If the team cuts/trades Chris, it will cost us a little this season, but will save us from having to spend almost $14M in salary over the next two seasons.

I might be wrong, but I believe "renegotiating" is just asking a player to turn his yearly salary into signing bonus, or give him another large bonus and extend his contract a few years.

With all due respect to Jake, does anyone know why Chris won't do this for us? Are they asking him to take a paycut too? I know he's renegotiated before but when you are a high-paid player you have to expect to keep renegotiating or get cut.

Someone needs to make sense of all this. There's some crazy rumors flying around now.

Chris agent has said he wasn't going to talk about a new deal if drafted Mark Brunell back in Feb so The Dan and Vinny may have been looking at this for a while now

cjpck44 wrote:I might be wrong, but I believe "renegotiating" is just asking a player to turn his yearly salary into signing bonus, or give him another large bonus and extend his contract a few years.

With all due respect to Jake, does anyone know why Chris won't do this for us? Are they asking him to take a paycut too? I know he's renegotiated before but when you are a high-paid player you have to expect to keep renegotiating or get cut.

Someone needs to make sense of all this. There's some crazy rumors flying around now.

This is correct. The player simply agrees to reduce his annual salary and receives a signing bonus that the team can accrue equally over the remaining years of the contract for accounting purposes.

We would free up cap space down the road that will be greatly needed by moving Samuels. But what is the total hit this year??

Of course Chris Samuels makes more than jon Jansen... he's a left tackle and Jon's a right tackle... that's the league norm. The guy who protects the blind side gets the green... the only time a RT makes more than a LT is when the QB is left-handed... so if Brunell wins the job and keeps it for a while... JJ will probably actually be looking for a raise.

it will cost us a little this year

Cost us a little? 9M in dead cap for one guy is most definitely anything but little.

Throw in the fact that you can't draft a position of need anymore because you spent it on Gallery, throw in that o-line is not a position of need despite the media's impressions from last year, throw in that you add $9M in dead cap space, throw in that Buges went on record as saying that Samuels was gold... and I think you have to be left with the conclusion that this particular rumor holds very little merit. At least that's the impression that I come away with.

... not worth much more than the keyboard it's typed from.

Like I Said I like this updated rumor more than just trading Samuels for the #2 pick the update says Samuels goes to the Browns for their #7 (I don't know why they would do that) and we swap our #5 and Gardner for the raiders #2...


I'D swap #5 and Gardner for the Raiders #2 then trade the #2 to the browns for their #7 and a few later picks

wait a minute why do the Raiders and Browns need us to due this????

I hope you're right, Boss. But I didn't think they'd get rid of Trotter for that same reason and he's gone.

there may have been other reasons portis...

2 that I can think of right off the top

1. that he was the one being a mercenary and haring off to parts unknown, busting assignments - which IS his biggest knock, and was before we got him from the Eagles.

2. He was poison behind closed doors - you don't know - he could have been one of the mouths that we hear about - one of the attitude children.

Or both.

I am not saying it is true, but there had to be SOMETHING to get the Skins to take a cap hit to get rid of him. They wouldn't take the hit for NO REASON. Gibbs and Williams do not work that way - their track record is all I have to point to in order to prove that point.

Exactly SfiR... saved me some typing thx.

It IS economically retarded to cut Trotter... but the Skins know that and they're still gonna do it, so draw from that what you will.

Samuels is definitely not poison... not playing as well as he could be but as already discussed ad nauseum... Buges will have something to say about changing that.

And doing it once for 6 mil is one thing (cutting a guy despite the cap ramifications), but doing it twice and giving you $15M in dead cap space is what also makes this different in my opinion.

Nobody is going to take Trotter so he'll be cut june 1 and the cap charge will get split between 2004 and 2005... this trade thing is just to let Trotter know he ain't coming back in the 'gentlemanly' fashion that Gibbs works.

... but nobody will want the 'backend loaded' portion of JT's contract.

You can't split Samuels cap hit if you trade him, so it'd just be all 9M at once... but as also discussed ad nauseum... next year Chris' bonus will be down to a number that WILL make him cuttable if he doesn't renegotiate.

How much cheaper will Samuels cap hit be next year?

BossHog wrote:throw in that Buges went on record as saying that Samuels was gold...

If you were going to trade him would you tear him down?

jklote wrote:

BossHog wrote:throw in that Buges went on record as saying that Samuels was gold...

If you were going to trade him would you tear him down?

It was the day after Buges came here... there wan't even an issue with Samuels' re-negotiating his contract yet. They just asked Buges what he thought of the line he was inheriting and he went out of his way to say what a good player he thought Samuels was both physically and technically.

The whole Brunell-Ramsey-Sexton-Samuels thing didn't even exist at that time. There was never an issue about re-doing the contract until Brunell was schmoozed.

That is why this trade has defined the word "horsecrud" to me. Not only can I not see Coach Bugel letting Danny do this. I can't see Danny letting this team take a serious cap hit this year for a player that is not even playing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If this cap hit is MUCH LOWER then I might see something like this happening.

On second thought Samuels even said he wanted to be a "core player" I don't believe Samuels is leaving us after he said that.

Samuels definetly needs to restructure that contract. I think his agent wants some payback at the Redskins for bringing in Brunell. But I can see Samuels stepping in and signing a extension or a restructured deal.

I would love to see Samuels restructure! I think this year he will defintely play up to his capabilities like he had and be a Pro Bowler!

I hate that the agent's bitterness towards the Redskins is impacting Samuels' willingness to restructure (if the public perception is accurate). Shouldn't the agent keep the interests of all of his clients in mind instead of saying the team screwed one of my clients so I am going to give them a hard time with all of my clients? When is restructuring a contract ever a bad thing from a player's perspective? In essence, the team is taking a non-guaranteed amount of money that is supposed to be paid as salary over a period of time and making a one time payment instead which is guaranteed. Chris Samuels is one of my favorite Redskins and I don't want to see him go, but if he is being incooperative, they should let him go and put his agent on the blacklist with the Postons. Does anyone know if the agent represents anyone else on the team (besides Ramsey and Samuels)?

BossHog wrote: At least that's the impression that I come away with.
... not worth much more than the keyboard it's typed from.

Now, THAT'S rich.
The keyboard that that came from is the one that gave birth to this site, correct ? That makes it a Golden Keyboard, and worth ten times its weight, in gold.
This is no time to try "humility" as a closing statement, Boss. You're in the "Who's Who ?" of cap guys around here.

Trotter sucks Im glad we cut him. Lets just hope that the league cap makes some significant increases over the next couple of years, (then it wouldnt be so bad after all). You make the point that cutting Trotter is economically retarded, well obviously hes a player that Gibs/ coaching staff want nothing to do with, granted were getting screwed on his signing bonus but its still cheaper than paying both that and his annual salary. Now the trick is finding a young cheap talented middle linebacker, too bad we have a tendency to keep trading away our picks.

tcwest10 wrote: This is no time to try "humility" as a closing statement, Boss. You're in the "Who's Who ?" of cap guys around here.

Bahhh... I appreciate the compliment but as there are people here that bear me ill will for 'swaying' judgement, I feel compelled to constantly state that my opinions are just that. Nothing more, nothing less.


And just to clear things up... we haven't cut Trotter yet, but it does seem a foregone conclusion come June 1st.

BigCarter... that's why I stated it exactly the way I did... that we were still going to cut him despite the ramifications. I said to draw from it what you will because we haven't had any Redskin TELL us directly that JT was poison... but I think the actions of the FO and coaching staff speak for themselves.

Dead cap space is going to be a huge problem with any attempt to move samuals. This year alone we have 6.25 million in dead cap space for old man Bruce and big statue Wilkerson. We will have another 4.5 million for Trotter either this year or next. If you add 9 million for Samuals next year also that spells hell for any free agents that the Daniel wants and can't resist.

Samuels cannot be traded before the draft unless other players restructure or are cut. If I understand the current 'skins cap situation correctly, eating the remainder of Samuels bonus would not allow the 'skins to make all of their current draft picks. Wouldn't be enough tender room.