Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


Core group to be competitive-Worst case

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-01-2006, 10:31 AM   #16
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 80,427
Re: Core group to be competitive-Worst case

Tomorrow is going to be really ugly
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 03-01-2006, 10:38 AM   #17
I like big (_|_)s.
 
TheMalcolmConnection's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Lexington, Virginia
Age: 32
Posts: 17,463
Re: Core group to be competitive-Worst case

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattyk72
Tomorrow is going to be really ugly
Just stare at this and let your problems drift away...

__________________
Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted.
TheMalcolmConnection is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2006, 10:40 AM   #18
I like big (_|_)s.
 
TheMalcolmConnection's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Lexington, Virginia
Age: 32
Posts: 17,463
Re: Core group to be competitive-Worst case

This about sums up the CBA talks.

__________________
Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted.
TheMalcolmConnection is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2006, 10:42 AM   #19
Living Legend
 
That Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Springfield, VA
Age: 31
Posts: 16,245
Re: Core group to be competitive-Worst case

hey, here's a problem... there's 13 uncuttable players. releasing everyone (EVERYONE) saves about 29,823k. Signing 40 players to complete the roster at 235k each costs 9,400k.

29,823k - 9,400k = 20,423k total savings with 40 1st year rookies.

Not to alarm anyone, but here's our cap situation:
2006 total cap cost (dead money + 2006 salaries) - $116,793k
2006 cap - $95,000k

116,793k - 95,000k = 21,793k.

since we can save a maximum of 20.4mill and we need to cut 21.8mill, this is a fool's erand. with restructures it simply can't be done.

40 rookies and we'll still be 1.4mill in the hole... we're totally hosed.
__________________
Who says shameless self promotion is stupid? oh yeah, that was me... Click For Tunes!
That Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2006, 10:45 AM   #20
RG Glee
 
Schneed10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Newtown Square, PA
Age: 34
Posts: 8,277
Re: Core group to be competitive-Worst case

Quote:
Originally Posted by That Guy
hey, here's a problem... there's 13 uncuttable players. releasing everyone (EVERYONE) saves about 29,823k. Signing 40 players to complete the roster at 235k each costs 9,400k.

29,823k - 9,400k = 20,423k total savings with 40 1st year rookies.

Not to alarm anyone, but here's our cap situation:
2006 total cap cost (dead money + 2006 salaries) - $116,793k
2006 cap - $95,000k

116,793k - 95,000k = 21,793k.

since we can save a maximum of 20.4mill and we need to cut 21.8mill, this is a fool's erand. with restructures it simply can't be done.
Yep. We're going to lose at least a couple very valuable Redskins in the next few days. Prepare yourselves to shed some tears.
Schneed10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2006, 10:48 AM   #21
The Starter
 
RedskinPete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Camino,Ca
Posts: 1,174
Re: Core group to be competitive-Worst case

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paintrain
With the CBA mess going on and the rumors that we may have as many as 20 rookies on the roster to get under the cap (which seems absolutely ridiculous to me), who are the players that we HAVE to keep around in order to at least compete in '06? My list (without doing cap calculations, someone smarter than me can tell me if it works) is:
QB-Brunell, Campbell
RB-Portis, Nemo
FB/HB-Cooley, Sellers
TE-?
LT-Samuels
LG-Wilson
C-Rabach
RG-Thomas
RT-Jansen
WR-Moss, Patten
P-Frost
K-?
DE-Daniels
DT-Griffin
DT-Saleva'a
DE-Evans
LB-Clemons
LB-Marshall
LB-Washington
CB-Springs
FS-Taylor
SS-Stoutmire
CB-Rogers
PR/KR-Brown

That's 25 players and with a 45 man roster that assumes the rest would be rookies.. That leaves us with NO veteran depth.. Additions/subtractions/other options?
Is cutting Burnell a better thing for the cap and keeping Ramsey? If so it seems like a better idea so maybe we could keep others!
RedskinPete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2006, 10:48 AM   #22
Living Legend
 
That Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Springfield, VA
Age: 31
Posts: 16,245
Re: Core group to be competitive-Worst case

Quote:
Originally Posted by Schneed10
Yep. We're going to lose at least a couple very valuable Redskins in the next few days. Prepare yourselves to shed some tears.
some? we're going to lose all but 13, and even then there's not enough sasvings to be under the cap.
__________________
Who says shameless self promotion is stupid? oh yeah, that was me... Click For Tunes!
That Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2006, 10:49 AM   #23
RG Glee
 
Schneed10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Newtown Square, PA
Age: 34
Posts: 8,277
Re: Core group to be competitive-Worst case

Quote:
Originally Posted by That Guy
some? we're going to lose all but 13, and even then there's not enough sasvings to be under the cap.
That's assuming NOBODY restructures.
Schneed10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2006, 10:50 AM   #24
Living Legend
 
That Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Springfield, VA
Age: 31
Posts: 16,245
Re: Core group to be competitive-Worst case

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedskinPete
Is cutting Burnell a better thing for the cap and keeping Ramsey? If so it seems like a better idea so maybe we could keep others!
sixteenth time, no, cutting brunell costs 300k more than keeping him and keeping ramsey costs almost 1.7mill more than dumping him. if we got a new CBA then it'd be flipped. but right now we don't, so that's nto an option.
__________________
Who says shameless self promotion is stupid? oh yeah, that was me... Click For Tunes!
That Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2006, 10:50 AM   #25
RG Glee
 
Schneed10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Newtown Square, PA
Age: 34
Posts: 8,277
Re: Core group to be competitive-Worst case

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedskinPete
Is cutting Burnell a better thing for the cap and keeping Ramsey? If so it seems like a better idea so maybe we could keep others!
Can't cut Brunell. It would cost us more to cut him than to keep him. Have to let Ramsey go.
Schneed10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2006, 10:51 AM   #26
The Starter
 
RedskinPete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Camino,Ca
Posts: 1,174
Re: Core group to be competitive-Worst case

Quote:
Originally Posted by Huddle
It would probably be a mistake to try to be competitive.

I think you'd have to look at it as sacrificing the 2006 season and lop off top-salaried vets who are on the downside of their careers: Brunell, Samuels, Springs, Daniels...keep as much young talent as possible.
hate to say it but I think you are right! Keep the young talent and we will have to let go the older players! Worest case is here so deal with it!
RedskinPete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2006, 10:54 AM   #27
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 80,427
Re: Core group to be competitive-Worst case

Quote:
Originally Posted by That Guy
sixteenth time, no, cutting brunell costs 300k more than keeping him and keeping ramsey costs almost 1.7mill more than dumping him. if we got a new CBA then it'd be flipped. but right now we don't, so that's nto an option.
But we should cut Brunell right?

__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2006, 11:03 AM   #28
The Starter
 
RedskinPete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Camino,Ca
Posts: 1,174
Re: Core group to be competitive-Worst case

Quote:
Originally Posted by That Guy
sixteenth time, no, cutting brunell costs 300k more than keeping him and keeping ramsey costs almost 1.7mill more than dumping him. if we got a new CBA then it'd be flipped. but right now we don't, so that's nto an option.
Thanks so he[Burnell] is sitting pretty!!! Well lets say that this happens and all these players have to be cut. Wouldn't you say the best way to look at this is not what we can get out of the 06 season but what will be left to rebuild in 07. So keep young talent and pass on guys that will be too old! So looking at the bottom line is not the only thing to look at!
RedskinPete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2006, 11:06 AM   #29
Living Legend
 
That Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Springfield, VA
Age: 31
Posts: 16,245
Re: Core group to be competitive-Worst case

we won't have a choice, we'll have to let just about everyone go.

springs, griffin, lavar will be forced to stay due to their contracts.
__________________
Who says shameless self promotion is stupid? oh yeah, that was me... Click For Tunes!
That Guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2006, 11:07 AM   #30
Playmaker
 
Paintrain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Age: 43
Posts: 4,908
Re: Core group to be competitive-Worst case

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattyk72
But we should cut Brunell right?

I'm sure it was part of Lord Gibbs evil master plan to rid the Redskins of Ramsey by structuring the deal that way since he knew the CBA wouldn't be extended.. (insert maniacal laughter and a Monty Burns-esque 'Excellent' here)
__________________
FREE RG3!
Paintrain is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.30793 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25