ESPN: Teams that are helped/hurt by the new salary cap proposal

SmootSmack · 06-27-2011, 04:49 PM

I have no idea. I think Barnes and Buch would get more playing time. Not sure either would start.

JoeRedskin · 06-27-2011, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skinster

I thought that we gave haynesworth most of his guaranteed money already?

We did. If he is cut or traded, then, instead of being pro-rated over the contract, the remainder of the bonus (that which has not been used on a pro-rated basis, not the unpaid portion) is escalated into this year's cap.

Schneed10 · 06-27-2011, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

We did. He has no more guaranteed money left from what I gather. Some of his guaranteed money was forfeited once he decided to skip OTAs and mandatory camp.

None left to be paid, but lots left to be allocated on the salary cap books.

GTripp0012 · 06-27-2011, 05:17 PM

Clayton's salary cap estimate seems low. I wish he had shown his work. $120 million would be really tight, both compared to recent history, and compared to what reported estimates of the revenue pie suggest.

I worked off the reported $9 billion total revenue figure and got a salary cap of $135 million. It's possible the $9 billion figure is just made up, but Clayton appears to be using an $8 billion revenue figure. Which could be accurate, but I don't think that information is publicly available.

GTripp0012 · 06-27-2011, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

As I heard it this weekend FA Target #1 is Aubrayo Franklin. So that should be interesting

Not at all surprised if that was the case. Franklin would be a very Redskins signing. They need a nose tackle, and so they'll go get a player for $25 million in first three years money, even though the player is kind of useless if the other team is passing, and is turning 31 next month.

Good player, but you could say that about most Redskin FA signings right down through Archuleta. Basically nothing has changed in the last four to twelve years.

GTripp0012 · 06-27-2011, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monkeydad

Yeah, that will solve our issues.

We need a starting CB, some offensive linemen, a NT, maybe some more LB depth, and you want to sign UDFAs to fill all of these key needs?

Trying to get Andrew Luck?

I agree. It's 7-9 or bust this year!

NLC1054 · 06-27-2011, 05:34 PM

If Aubrayo's going to be that expensive, he'll walk.

I really think it's that simple. They'll attempt to sign him to a deal that's fair to both parties, but if he balks and one money, the Redskins will let him walk and move into the secondary market. I think the signing of O.J Atogwe proved that we're going to be taking a different approach and not setting the market for players.

Then again it seems like it's just a stupid rumor because everyone knows we need a nose tackle. Mike plays his cards so close to his chest I don't think anyone actually has any clue who he's targeting in free agency.

I mean people have said they "heard" we were looking at signing Jamarcus Russell after that one off "favor for a friend" workout last year. We'll look at Franklin, but we're not going to set the market for him until the front office sees what everyone else is offering for him.

NYCskinfan82 · 06-27-2011, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

This team isn't going ANYWHERE next year. Our QB's are REX GROSSMAN AND JOHN BECK w/ rumors of VINCE YOUNG coming in to compete. EEEEWWWW!!!!!!

I want every guy that's in year 1, 2 and 3 to play and play as much as possibe. Let's see if this rookie NT from WV can play. Let's see if Barnes can play CB and start or be a 3rd corner. What about Capers and Cook? We know Rocky can't play inside in a 3-4 so get Riley in there. Kerrigan should walk in and start day one cause Alexander can't rush the passer. Hankerson starts day one. You get my point? Right now this team doesn't need any 29 or 30 year old free agents. It needs to get younger and let some of these guys learn and grow together.

I like your idea, but please remember the only way some of these rookies are going to learn is they need to watch the vets at least under 30 vets. Coach's can coach you but there's nothing like seeing it first hand.

NYCskinfan82 · 06-27-2011, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk

I'd take Rex over Dilfer. There's probably been a few others worse than Rex to make a SB.

Regardless of how or why, he started for a SB team. Not a ton of guys can say that.

Agree 110%.

GTripp0012 · 06-27-2011, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NLC1054

If Aubrayo's going to be that expensive, he'll walk.

I really think it's that simple. They'll attempt to sign him to a deal that's fair to both parties, but if he balks and one money, the Redskins will let him walk and move into the secondary market. I think the signing of O.J Atogwe proved that we're going to be taking a different approach and not setting the market for players.

Then again it seems like it's just a stupid rumor because everyone knows we need a nose tackle. Mike plays his cards so close to his chest I don't think anyone actually has any clue who he's targeting in free agency.

I mean people have said they "heard" we were looking at signing Jamarcus Russell after that one off "favor for a friend" workout last year. We'll look at Franklin, but we're not going to set the market for him until the front office sees what everyone else is offering for him.

He's going to have plenty of offers though. I dunno, if things are really different this time around, you might see us make a fair offer to the one starting-caliber nose on the FA market, but lose out to another team who overpays. I haven't ruled out the possibility of that happening. But the historical M.O. of the Redskins is that they'll actually get Franklin and be worse off for it.

And I think if they do get Franklin, they'll be worse off. It doesn't HAVE to be like that. There may be no market for his services. But that's not what I'm expecting.

NYCskinfan82 · 06-27-2011, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Clayton's salary cap estimate seems low. I wish he had shown his work. $120 million would be really tight, both compared to recent history, and compared to what reported estimates of the revenue pie suggest.

I worked off the reported $9 billion total revenue figure and got a salary cap of $135 million. It's possible the $9 billion figure is just made up, but Clayton appears to be using an $8 billion revenue figure. Which could be accurate, but I don't think that information is publicly available.

I read the same new cap possibly $135 mil.

Dirtbag59 · 06-27-2011, 06:27 PM

Why the hate for Franklin? Does he have a reputation as being a lazy player?

Schneed10 · 06-27-2011, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Clayton's salary cap estimate seems low. I wish he had shown his work. $120 million would be really tight, both compared to recent history, and compared to what reported estimates of the revenue pie suggest.

I worked off the reported $9 billion total revenue figure and got a salary cap of $135 million. It's possible the $9 billion figure is just made up, but Clayton appears to be using an $8 billion revenue figure. Which could be accurate, but I don't think that information is publicly available.

I agree, $120M is probably on the low side.

But the $135 assumes a couple things:

- The NFL's revenue pie is $9 billion on the nose. In reality they may be rounding it up from $8.6 billion, or something like that.

- That the players will end up with 48% of the pie. A little more or a little less on either side would really affect the cap calculation.

It's probably somewhere in between Clayton's $120 and your $135.

Dirtbag59 · 06-27-2011, 06:42 PM

Scouts Inc has him ranked as the 10th best DT in the league tied with Casey Hampton. If thats the case I would love to have him.

Quote:

Grade: 83 | Key

Comment: Franklin spent his first four years with the Baltimore Ravens as a backup who saw limited action but then found success after signing with the 49ers prior to the 2007 season. He has become a very effective run stopper in the middle as he plugs up the middle. He plays with excellent leverage and does a good job of using his hands to control and shed blockers. He lacks great lateral range and makes most of his lays in the box. He lacks the upfield speed and acceleration to pressure the pocket as a pass-rusher but can cave in the pocket with an effective bull rush at times.

GTripp0012 · 06-27-2011, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I agree, $120M is probably on the low side.

But the $135 assumes a couple things:

- The NFL's revenue pie is $9 billion on the nose. In reality they may be rounding it up from $8.6 billion, or something like that.

- That the players will end up with 48% of the pie. A little more or a little less on either side would really affect the cap calculation.

It's probably somewhere in between Clayton's $120 and your $135.

Agreed.

06-27-2011, 04:49 PM	#46
SmootSmack The Bluths Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 43,225	Re: ESPN: Teams that are helped/hurt by the new salary cap proposal I have no idea. I think Barnes and Buch would get more playing time. Not sure either would start. __________________ You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You

06-27-2011, 05:17 PM	#49
GTripp0012 Living Legend Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Grand Rapids, MI Age: 25 Posts: 15,152	Re: ESPN: Teams that are helped/hurt by the new salary cap proposal Clayton's salary cap estimate seems low. I wish he had shown his work. $120 million would be really tight, both compared to recent history, and compared to what reported estimates of the revenue pie suggest. I worked off the reported $9 billion total revenue figure and got a salary cap of $135 million. It's possible the $9 billion figure is just made up, but Clayton appears to be using an $8 billion revenue figure. Which could be accurate, but I don't think that information is publicly available. __________________ Shanahan: “The bad thing is he's [Sav Rocca] probably our best offensive weapon and that’s not good.”

06-27-2011, 05:34 PM	#52
NLC1054 Special Teams Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 278	Re: ESPN: Teams that are helped/hurt by the new salary cap proposal If Aubrayo's going to be that expensive, he'll walk. I really think it's that simple. They'll attempt to sign him to a deal that's fair to both parties, but if he balks and one money, the Redskins will let him walk and move into the secondary market. I think the signing of O.J Atogwe proved that we're going to be taking a different approach and not setting the market for players. Then again it seems like it's just a stupid rumor because everyone knows we need a nose tackle. Mike plays his cards so close to his chest I don't think anyone actually has any clue who he's targeting in free agency. I mean people have said they "heard" we were looking at signing Jamarcus Russell after that one off "favor for a friend" workout last year. We'll look at Franklin, but we're not going to set the market for him until the front office sees what everyone else is offering for him.

06-27-2011, 06:27 PM	#57
Dirtbag59 Naega jeil jal naga Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Atlanta, Georgia From: Silver Spring, Maryland Age: 27 Posts: 13,978	Re: ESPN: Teams that are helped/hurt by the new salary cap proposal Why the hate for Franklin? Does he have a reputation as being a lazy player? __________________ Flacco is 1337 Fanclub President

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

ESPN: Teams that are helped/hurt by the new salary cap proposal

Redskins Locker Room