New contracts for Andre Carter and Randle El

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by celts32

Honestly even though Moss is our best WR...he doesn't exactly fill that go to role either. We don't have that player. Moss dissapears for weeks at a time. Moss is a good player but not good enough or consistent enough to be an effective #1 WR. I would move him if a reasonable trade offer was there. That would force one of these young WR's to sink or swim as the #1 WR and see what happens. With Moss & El back on this team next year those young guys are going to get minimal opportunities and probably not progress that much.

I wouldn't assume so much... if the young guys have learned their routes and can be effective on offense I firmly believe they'll split time w/ Moss/ARL... the much bigger concern is not Zorn's willingness to include them but Hixon's seeming inability to develop WRs at the professional level. I hope very much he proves me wrong...

[BigHairedAristocrat]

several people are griping about how these moves are stupid because it will likely increase ARE and carters cap numbers in future years, making it difficult to cut them when they stop producing (like with jansen). what we must remember is that there will ne no salary cap in 2010, which means well be able to cut whomever we want without worrying about the dead cap space such a move would create. so don't worry, next year at this time we could easily cut both of these guys, along with a ton of other non-producing players. this was a very good move by vinny. it buys us time to make other moves and gives us more room to sign players and improve our team in 2009. the only down side to this is snyder's wallet will likely take a much bigger hit when we finally cut ties with these two

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

several people are griping about how these moves are stupid because it will likely increase ARE and carters cap numbers in future years, making it difficult to cut them when they stop producing (like with jansen). what we must remember is that there will ne no salary cap in 2010, which means well be able to cut whomever we want without worrying about the dead cap space such a move would create. so don't worry, next year at this time we could easily cut both of these guys, along with a ton of other non-producing players. this was a very good move by vinny. it buys us time to make other moves and gives us more room to sign players and improve our team in 2009. the only down side to this is snyder's wallet will likely take a much bigger hit when we finally cut ties with these two

Thank you. Someone else said it so I didn't have to.

There's not likely to be a cap in 2010 and beyond. Extending Randle-El and Carter will not be a financial problem come this time next year.

This clears more space than I had anticipated would be possible from Carter and Randle-El, because they're extending (to remain compliant with 30% rule) as opposed to restructuring.

I'll withhold further comment until I see more contract details, but this points to an attempt to keep the old heads on the team around for a longer period of time.

[#56fanatic]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Thank you. Someone else said it so I didn't have to.

There's not likely to be a cap in 2010 and beyond. Extending Randle-El and Carter will not be a financial problem come this time next year.

This clears more space than I had anticipated would be possible from Carter and Randle-El, because they're extending (to remain compliant with 30% rule) as opposed to restructuring.

I'll withhold further comment until I see more contract details, but this points to an attempt to keep the old heads on the team around for a longer period of time.

You can not bank on NOT have a salary cap. I would imagine the sides will come together and work something out. the NFL and its owners do not want to have a NON CAPPED NFL. It would be disastrous for the smaller market teams, especially in the financial situation the country is in.

[Trample the Elderly]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

several people are griping about how these moves are stupid because it will likely increase ARE and carters cap numbers in future years, making it difficult to cut them when they stop producing (like with jansen). what we must remember is that there will ne no salary cap in 2010, which means well be able to cut whomever we want without worrying about the dead cap space such a move would create. so don't worry, next year at this time we could easily cut both of these guys, along with a ton of other non-producing players. this was a very good move by vinny. it buys us time to make other moves and gives us more room to sign players and improve our team in 2009. the only down side to this is snyder's wallet will likely take a much bigger hit when we finally cut ties with these two

Thanks

[Skins_4_Lyfe]

Plackemeier should have been a keeper, best punter we've had in quite some time

[SOUL-SKINS]

Originally Posted by Skins_4_Lyfe

Plackemeier should have been a keeper, best punter we've had in quite some time

Ummm.What ?

[Dirtbag59]

Anyone know if his name was meant to be pronounced as Guido Matt because I think that would make a lot of sense.

Anyway back on topic. I really don't like the idea of rewarding non-productive players with more bonus money making it harder to cut them down the line. And of course by non productive I mean based on their production last season. It's honestly just a lot more of the same and I guess I've made my current feelings on the front office clear so I'll stay away from that for now. However with this current topic I'll go on record as saying I don't like the move. If anything I would rather cut the older guys and get some breathing room instead of using the same tactics that got us to where we are with Jansen, not saying that it will happen exactly the same way with Carter and Randle El but it's not promising.

So there now you guys know why

[BigHairedAristocrat]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag359

I really don't like the idea of rewarding non-productive players with more bonus money making it harder to cut them down the line. And of course by non productive I mean based on their production last season. It's honestly just a lot more of the same and I guess I've made my current feelings on the front office clear so I'll stay away from that for now. However with this current topic I'll go on record as saying I don't like the move. If anything I would rather cut the older guys and get some breathing room instead of using the same tactics that got us to where we are with Jansen, not saying that it will happen exactly the same way with Carter and Randle El but it's not promising.

So there now you guys know why

If youre a redskins fan and you dont like these contracts then you just dont understand it. Here are the full details of the contracts:

The Full Carter And Randle El Contracts - Redskins Insider

Now, of course, JLC would never say anything positive about the skins. He just referred to these moves as standard "salary cap gymnastics." Really, this is great for the skins and does the exact opposite of what you alleged in your post.

Prior to these new contracts, to release Carter after the 2009 season would have cost 6.8M against the cap. So now, not only do we save 2.4M against the cap in 2009, it will only cost 5.1M against the cap to cut him after the season.

Prior to AREs new contract, it would also have cost 6.8M to cut him after the season. Now, not only do we save 2M against the cap in 2009, but his release fee after the season is now only 4.4M.

To summarize, these extensions lower their cap hit significantly in 2009, while also HELPING us and making it EASIER to cut them prior to the 2010 season. Cutting them in 2010 wouldnt matter if there is no salary cap, but if there is a new CBA, these new contracts will save us 4.1M in cap space 2010, as well.
There is also another bonus for us - ARE and Carter likely realize this is their last year for the redskins, so in 2009, they are essentially auditioning for a new contract with another team in 2010 - we might actually get some production out of them this year.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by BigHairedAristocrat

Now, of course, JLC would never say anything positive about the skins. He just referred to these moves as standard "salary cap gymnastics."

From the article:

In both cases, the players will pocket in raw cash terms exactly what they would have in 2009 under their previous deals ($4.5 million for Carter - including his old roster bonus - and $4 million for Randle El).

Neither has been very productive since signing lucrative free agent deals here in March of 2006, and both play positions that have been woefully unproductive here on the whole. From the player standpoint, there's every incentive to do these deals, they end up getting more money up front now and the chance to earn much more.

Even as JLC tries to put down the FO, he contradicts himself.
To me these contracts seem to be a good balancing act whether or not a CBA is signed.

[SmootSmack]

It's probably Antwaan's fault he sucks as a punt returner. But I don't think he's to blame for the contract he initially got here and it's not his fault no one has been able to supplant him yet as the #2 receiver. He hasn't done an awful job.

[MTK]

Here's my hope for our WRs and ARE. Take him off punts so he can be fresher for playing WR. Less bumps and bruises, less mileage. Then I hope that either Thomas or Kelly can take a starting job and bump ARE into the slot as the #3 where he should be and can be most effective. Then use him more on gadget plays (wildcat, options, etc) where he excels.

[53Fan]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Here's my hope for our WRs and ARE. Take him off punts so he can be fresher for playing WR. Less bumps and bruises, less mileage. Then I hope that either Thomas or Kelly can take a starting job and bump ARE into the slot as the #3 where he should be and can be most effective. Then use him more on gadget plays (wildcat, options, etc) where he excels.

I think that's why we got him to begin with. I think he'd be good in the slot. We've had to use him at #2 because no one else could take that spot so he's had to play out of position. If Kelly can perform this year the way we hoped he would when we drafted him, it sure would cure a lot of ills.

[REDSKIN1]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Here's my hope for our WRs and ARE. Take him off punts so he can be fresher for playing WR. Less bumps and bruises, less mileage. Then I hope that either Thomas or Kelly can take a starting job and bump ARE into the slot as the #3 where he should be and can be most effective. Then use him more on gadget plays (wildcat, options, etc) where he excels.

I second this motion.... All in favor say I...

[BigHairedAristocrat]

I think the expectation when we drafted him was that Devin Thomas should be our #1 receiver, moving Moss to #2 and ARE to #3. If Moss is traded at some point, Kelly would be our #2. One way or another, i dont think ARE starts this year as our #2 receiver.