Quote:
Originally Posted by Schneed10
I explained in this post here (you're forgiven for not tracing back, it's a huge thread):
http://www.thewarpath.net/salary-cap...tml#post529995
Since writing that post, I've realized how they've done it. By installing option bonuses in the second year of the contract, the Redskins were able to cleverly circumvent the 30% Rule. The option bonus doesn't count as salary, so they don't exceed the 30% inflation limit on base salaries.
So, to that guy's point, why would a player go for that? Trust. Dan Snyder sold them on the idea that while the bonus was technically an option bonus (for cap purposes), he had every intention of paying the player that money.
That's why Haynesworth contract says he'll get $32 million in the first 13 months. Notice they didn't say in the first year. He has a huge option bonus put in for 2010. I'm sure Danny has every intention of picking it up; it is clear the Redskins don't expect a salary cap in 2010. |
Suppose that the labor situation gets resolved and there is a cap in 2010? Does the structure of this deal cast us directly to "Cap Hell", assuming we want to retain Haynesworth???