Is it time to start worrying about our cap?

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Outsiders tend to look at the Redskins and say they are headed for salary cap hell within a season or two. Conversely, Redskins' officials and fans typically argue that such claims are overhyped or simply unfounded.

As some of you may know, I tend to agree with the "sky is falling" crowd. While I don't expect the team to implode, I think that we are headed for some serious cap problems and we have begun to feel the effects of free agency spending sprees, constant contract restructuring, and failure to build the team through the draft.

It's likely that the 'Skins will be unable to afford to re-sign Smoot, unable to franchise Smoot and trade him because of the cap ramifications, lose Samuels because the front office has restructured his contract twice (leading to his bloated cap figure in 2004 and 2005), not be able to sign adequate replacements for Gardner and Coles, unable to trade Coles (because of its cap ramifications), unable to revamp our defensive line by signing a guy like Darren Howard.

In sum, the Redskins will probably lose two second round picks because of a lack of cap room (as they are unable to trade Coles and unable to tag and trade Smoot) and have inadequate depth on the defensive line and in the wide receiving corps.

Moreover, the 'Skins' cap woes weren't supposed to begin until next year. I'm afraid to even think about what that "cap hell" will mean for the Redskins.

[Daseal]

I think that until we see proof that the sky is falling, it's not. Daniel Snyder has done an amazing job at manipulating the cap thus far, and I think he still will.

The Coles situation is really a bit.. well.. Odd. That's not really something they planned on and his figure gets more and more cap friendly as the contract goes on (as far as dumping him is concened.) We may have to lose players, but that happens on every team, they say every team has what, a 30% turnover rate every year or something outragious like that? We're no different than a lot of other teams in that sense.

Smoot, Pierce, Samuels, and even Coles are still in negotiaions too. Negotiations are exactly that, I feel Smoot truly wants to stay, he's the only player in this era that says "I hate the Dallas Cowboys." That's true Redskin talk right there, he's the ONLY player on our team I'd label a true Redskin. Well, add Jon Jansen. He also fits the mold. Those two are the only two Redskins on this team, I'd prefer not to lose half of them. Pierce/Smoot are trying to do the best thing for them financially. We wouldn't pay Smoot what he's asking even if we had the money I'm willing to bet.

Restructuring is part of the new era of football. It's the only reason teams can play payers what they want and still keep them. We may have to cut Samuels go, but that's to save the cap, we may have to do the same thing with LaVar in a few years. It's how the Redskins manage the cap, and thus far has been very productive. I think we're fine. We may have to cut a few players here and there, but I don't think we're up the creek without a paddle. We have Dan Snyders diamond encrusted paddle!

[MTK]

2006 sure is looking a lot better with Coles headed out the door.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

We're going to spend $50 million of a projected $90 million cap figure on the following 8 players.

Arrington 12.141
Griffin 4.883
Coles 6.857
Jansen 5.238
Portis 5.476
Springs 5.558
Thomas 4.500
Washington 5.167

[Daseal]

Besides Arrington most of those aren't TOO bad. A lot of teams have 6-10 really good players who are well paid that they try to put solid, affordable talent around. We're no different.

[Gmanc711]

Agreed Daseal. I think we obviously have to wait and see what goes on with the mess that is this offseason thusfar. However, I dont think we are nearly in the "Hell" that people are putting us in. Are we going to have to let go of a few guys....no doubt. But when you look at CC's updated cap sheets (Thanks CC); you'll see that in 2007 we are in fairly decent shape right now. I mean we'll have to resign a ton of guys by then and things like that, but we will have the room to let go of a couple big contracts next season (BRUNELL, I'm looking at you). So overall I'm not terribly worried. We may have to see a guy or two walk that we dont want to see walk, but its not going to be anything like the Titans of this season.

[MTK]

Looks like LaVar will be up for a restructure. Hopefully Coles will be off the books by then.

[CRT3]

Expect the Cap to rise and the last year of the Collective Bargainning agreement there is no cap, so maybe that is what they are playing towards.

[CRT3]

http://www.nflpa.org/Media/main.asp?...nsion+Features

There is no Cap in 2007 which is what I figured. So they are playing the $ for that year of no cap. They actually are in pretty good shape and no terrible need to worry untill 2008.

[MTK]

So in 2007 there will be no cap at all?

[SmootSmack]

As I understand it, if a new collective bargaining agreement isn't agreed to by the fall of 2006 then no salary cap will be in place for the 2007 offseason-the catch is that there will be fewer free agents that year because, while players are usually UFAs after their 4th year now, it would go up to 6 years now.

I think one of the sticking points actually is that the NFLPA wants teams like the Redskins and Cowboys to contribute a larger portion of their local revenues or something like that.

[MTK]

Ok, so this no cap thing isn't set in stone.

[CRT3]

Its set in stone untill that possible carve out a new deal. Don't expect a new deal without some major changes to the system as it stands. The Redskins are actually in a great position here with there local revenue being the highest in the league, the possiblity of maxing out the cap and going beyond it for 2007, and a HOF players coach in place. Also Dan has done his part in actively pursuing the agents not the players over the years. So the players have been steered to DC first since it is a players place and the money ain't bad.

Way to go Dan!!!

[CrazyCanuck]

I did some quick analysis on 2006 the other day. We do have some issues but we're not dead yet. I listed about $35M in potential savings I see on the 2006 cap, so I think we have room to maneuver.

Actually this offseason will give us a much clearer picture of where we'll be in 2006.

Right now there are still too many questions:
- Smoot gone?
- Samuels restructure or gone?
- Coles gone?
- new free agents?

Put it this way, if you take away Samuels and Coles from 2006, we're at like $90M, so let's wait and see.

[CrazyCanuck]

Originally Posted by smootsmack

As I understand it, if a new collective bargaining agreement isn't agreed to by the fall of 2006 then no salary cap will be in place for the 2007 offseason-the catch is that there will be fewer free agents that year because, while players are usually UFAs after their 4th year now, it would go up to 6 years now.

I think one of the sticking points actually is that the NFLPA wants teams like the Redskins and Cowboys to contribute a larger portion of their local revenues or something like that.

This is my understanding as well. They are arguing over the local revenue stuff. Right now there are certain revenue streams that do not get shared like luxury boxes, etc. Supposedly these revenue inequalities result in about a $100M difference between the bottom teams (Ariz) and the top teams (Skins).