King predicts Haynesworth to Redskins

The 30% Rule.

http://www.thewarpath.net/salary-cap-central/27689-the-30-rule.html#post518062

Nice prediction on Marcus being the first to go!

The Redskins are NOT interested in Haynesworth. Snyder is doing the agent (who is a friend of his) a favor. Just by meeting with him, the possibility the free-spending skins are interested in Haynesworth, will raise his agent's bargaining position exponentially. Business, not excluding the NFL, is a world of favors and who knows this better than Dan Snyder. Sometime down the road, Wichard might guide one of his clients we are pursuing here over another team. Or maybe if Malcolm Kelly works out, he will be more helpful in getting a reasonable contract extension done with the Redskins.

Snyder took this dinner knowing we cannot realistically afford Haynesworth's asking price. However, another benefit of the meeting is that if we can't get him, why not try and raise his price to ridiculous amount to screw any NFC East team (or any of our NFL competition) who does go after him?

Although I used to be a Snyder basher, I have come to realize we are lucky to have one of the smartest owners in the NFL, and this will show to be true in time. We as skins fans are through the worst years of his ownership. He has learned from his mistakes, and the good years should start to come sooner rather than later.

HAILLLLLL SKINS

I hate quote wars, it's a waste of time, but obviously we're talking past each other. Hopefully this helps articulate what didn't get through the first time.

The last point is the important one.


I never suggested that the skins should address only one of their issues, and I never called anyone an idiot.

Jesus Christ, I am tired of casual football fans that only want to acquire college kids who have never played a down in the NFL. I don't care if you have the 1st overall pick....he's not guaranteed to do Sh*t. Skins fans are largely paranoid and myopic because of some bad deals that happened a decade ago.
so am i paranoid, myopic, or just a casual fan? and this doesn't serve to devalue opinions that don't match your own? cause that's the way it reads.


My initial response was obviously that of a frustrated one. I am tired of pseudo-fans regurgitating and repeating what the talking heads say. This is why it's a copy-cat league, most people can't think for themselves. The "popular" thing to say about Randy Moss prior to going to the Pats was that he had character issues. No he didn't and neither does Haynesworth.I didn't... I'm trying to look up the post now, but I believe I said it was the steal of the draft or of the year and that he absolutely DID NOT have character issues. It's just that football is just a job to him, and if he could he'd spend his time smoking weed and fishing on his boat. I mean, he lives in a retirement community and his neighbors have never had a complaint. and the pats got a crazy deal on his salary too. so I'm not sure where that was "popular" to say, but i really don't remember that here.

You probably should have read my post in it's entirety. If we hit on 6 or 7 draft picks? you should probably pay more attention when reading mine, i said draft picks AND cheap FAs to replace lost talent... cheap FAs don't always work out so well either.

I assure you I know how many draft picks we have, and I'm also well aware that we don't draft all that well.

At what point did I say offense is irrelevant? I only made a completely logical argument as to why elite defensive linemen are important and showed exactly why with the last two superbowl winners.If there is no cap next year, then why worry about a players salary? Also, I noted in my post that an elite, blue chip DT can improve an entire Defense, never did I propose that this player alone would solve all of our woes.well, if we're barely under the cap, and we have to cut players to get him in here (30% rule if we're going to assume no new CBA, which i think is a HUGE assumption until it's actually announced as such, despite local objections). that would completely rule out helping the offense and cutting players without getting adequate replacements.

30mill sb, 96mill/6year deal (5 year proration of SB and 30% rule in effect)

Year 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
SB 6 6 6 6 6 0
Salary 5.2 6.8 8.8 11.4 14.8 19.3
that means 11mill to get him in the door at asking price. If that's the plan, where does Hall's contract come in to play? why would we be talking with chris canty? we probably would have to ditch any notion of doing much to improve the OL too. With daniels, griffin, springs, taylor, and rabach gone you have ~22mill to work with (and marcus's money for the rookie pool) including emergencies, replacements, our current RFA/UFAs, outside FAs, etc.

so, let's keep rabach, since there's no cheap alternative and assume haynesworth is signed. ~22 - 2.4 - 11.2 = 8.4. if you want to sign hall too with the 30% rule, and he wants 15mill sb/5years, that's another 6mill gone, and your offseason is already done. you'll probably lose evans or daniels, canty is out, and you've still got a crap OL, no added depth, a huge hole at OLB, and no money to sign offensive help like a bobby engram, a kicker, or a punter.

Not to mention you probably can't get kendall, fabini, montgomery and golston all back at vet min either... AND you need to count 460k for each or those cuts above for their vet min replacements, bringing that 2.4mill down to under 1mill. So, despite local objections, I like Haynesworth a lot, BUT NOT at that price.

That's why I asked if he was the missing piece, because, with our structure as is, that'd be our offseason. If you're talking about getting him, watching a CBA get nuked and having him for the uncapped years, that's a HUGE gamble, but at least you're cutting players that weren't staying here long anyways. It'd be a rough year with less than 0 depth though in 2009.


if I screwed something up, let me know, but I'm pretty sure the uncapped money structure is even worse than the capped version (for 2009) where you just assume he'll get lazy or hurt.

So does that mean you'll be out of a job here? LOL. :silly:

On a similar note, pardon my ignorance, but with the possibility of having the end of the cap, what's stopping teams like the Redskins to just coast this next season, and then go nuts during the offseason before the cap-less year begins?

The available free agent pool next year will not be as deep. In the event the salary cap era comes to an end and a CBA is not reached, all drafted players would have to put in 6 years of time with the team that drafted them before they could become an unrestricted free agent.

That's why you don't see the team pushing hard to extend Jason Campbell. It isn't necessarily that they don't believe in him for the long term. It's that they know that if the CBA expires he will NOT be a free agent next season, he will be the exclusive rights property of the 'Skins and they'll have all the leverage to set the price where they want it. Same with Carlos Rogers.

All the players around the league drafted the same year as Campbell and Rogers would experience the same thing. They won't be eligible for free agency. So the player pool will be very slim next season. The Redskins could try to pounce next year if they wished, but they'll find the pickings slim.

The available free agent pool next year will not be as deep. In the event the salary cap era comes to an end and a CBA is not reached, all drafted players would have to put in 6 years of time with the team that drafted them before they could become an unrestricted free agent.

That's why you don't see the team pushing hard to extend Jason Campbell. It isn't necessarily that they don't believe in him for the long term. It's that they know that if the CBA expires he will NOT be a free agent next season, he will be the exclusive rights property of the 'Skins and they'll have all the leverage to set the price where they want it. Same with Carlos Rogers.

All the players around the league drafted the same year as Campbell and Rogers would experience the same thing. They won't be eligible for free agency. So the player pool will be very slim next season. The Redskins could try to pounce next year if they wished, but they'll find the pickings slim.

Thanks Schneed :)

Don't do anything rash LOL... i think it's hard for folks to believe there won't be a cap again. That's all.

i assure you, 2010 will be the only year without a cap. it will be back in 2011, which is why we would be wise to refrain from making any huge signings now.

Not sure where you're getting your info BHA but once the cap is gone it's not coming back. I think that's pretty much a guarantee.

That Guy, thanks for the laugh. Your psychoanalysis of the cap and who we should/should not keep gave me a good chuckle. I liked how your started your post by saying I hate quote wars and it's a waste of time. Clearly youre someone that has a lot of free time on his hands.

I'm not going to get into the financial logistics of what it would take to get this player. My retort was that a single player like this could elevate the play of an entire defense and therefor you don't need pro bowlers at every position. My remarks were made due to the people that said "no way", "he has character issues", and "he will get lazy and not play after he gets paid" as if they had a crystal ball and some rare insight as to how someone would perform in the future. I do not agree with this or certain people being so presumptuous. Your taking all this to personally and I never singled you out, but may have made some generalizations about fellow fans, which in hindsight was probably not the best idea. For that I apologize.

For what it's worth, Haynesworth is not only one of the most dominant defensive players in the league, but he is also very versatile for a 300+ pound guy. He can play defensive end, which Tenn. did and had great success with last year.

Not sure where you're getting your info BHA but once the cap is gone it's not coming back. I think that's pretty much a guarantee.

Agreed. BHA's logic regarding the return of a cap is unsound. He assumes that:

1) A salary floor for NFL franchises could not be set through other means and
2) The players would have a financial incentive to agree to a cap. They most certainly do not.

question:

is snyder allowed to enter discussions/negotiations with haynesworth's agent while AH is still under contract until friday with the titans?

im guessin it must be perfectly legit since the article doesnt say anything. also AH's agent does rep other players (FA and draft declared) which snyder would be able to inquire about. just curious if this is perfectly ok, an unwritten rule where snyder and AH's agent could met and talk about other things just not about acquiring AH, or some third option.

go skins!

since noone answered my question i searched for the answer. it seems that danny (from the slant in the King article) was tampering if he was talking with AH agent before FA begins. Like i thought, its just too hard of a rule to enforce so it becomes a gentlemen's code of conduct to which . . . . danny knows no ethics. i think this is the kinda thing that might get the other owners not to happy with danny. bad rep gets worse.

TAMPERING CONTINUES TO BE A COMBINE REALITY (http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/02/23/tampering-continues-to-be-a-combine-reality/)

Posted by Mike Florio on February 23, 2009, 7:45 a.m. EST
As you might have figured out by now, we’re fascinated by the concept of tampering, especially when it comes to the discussions that occur between agents for pending free agents and other teams at the Scouting Combine in Indianapolis.
Eagles president Joe Banner acknowledges the situation in an interview with Les Bowen of the Philadelphia Daily News.
Specifically, Banner explains that, if one of his team’s free agents isn’t re-signed by the commencement of the free-agent signing period, it’s because the player “knows he wants to leave, or there’s a better deal somewhere (http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/20090223_Eagles_-_Expect_some_free-agent_decision_from_Eagles_this_week.html).”
And a player will know there’s a better deal somewhere only if other teams have engaged in prohibited communications with the player’s agent regarding the deals that are available.
It’s a fact of life, as Colts president and G.M. Bill Polian acknowledged on Sunday. But Polian realizes there’s nothing that can be done about it.
“I don’t know if there is a remedy for it that’s enforceable, it just may be human nature (http://myespn.go.com/blogs/afcsouth/0-7-579/Quick-hits-from-Colts-president.html),” Polian said, according to Paul Kuharsky of ESPN.com. “I wish it were otherwise but I don’t know of any way to make it change.”
The league’s Anti-Tampering Policy clearly prohibits any private meetings or conversations between a player or his agent and a team at a time when another team holds the player’s rights. And the policy acknowledges that some players or their agents might try to spark such talks — especially since as Drew Rosenhaus recently pointed out no rules of the NFLhttp://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/mag-glass_10x10.gif (http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/02/23/tampering-continues-to-be-a-combine-reality/#) Players Association prevent agents from trying to incite tampering.
Under such circumstances, however, the policy states that a team contacted by the agent for a player who is under contract with another franchise “must immediately report” the incident to the team that holds the player’s rights.
We’d be willing to bet that such a report has never been made.
The reality is that nearly everyone tampers at this time of the year, and that nearly no one makes a big deal about it. So a serious disconnect exists, and as we’ve pointed out in the past the league should alter the rules to reflect the manner in which things really happen.
The fix is easy. Upon the conclusion of the Super Bowl, players scheduled to become free agents in less than a month should be permitted to negotiate with any other team, but prohibited from signing until the official opening of free agency. Such an approach would address one of the most awkward aspects of the business habits of the 32 NFL teams, with all or nearly all of them routinely violating the terms of a rule that the league office rarely attempts to enforce.

END ARTICLE

Am i the only one who is concerned about this? will we be stripped some draft picks like the 49ers? do i need to bring up other non-nfl related business moves danny has done that show he has no heart and will bend or break rules for his benefit? as an nfl owner or GM how would you feel reading this King article about danny meeting AH's agent? i like danny as an nfl owner, but his tactics leave a trail of slime wherever he goes.

rant over, sorry.

go skins!!