Brunell Reworks Deal (FKA "Brunell Reluctant to Renegotiate Deal")

BigSKINBauer · 03-01-2006, 01:26 AM

OK, so if he doesn't restructure if we need him to after the negotiations are done I will lose respect for him.

Dana87 · 03-01-2006, 02:03 AM

We don't have enough facts to make any kind of judgment of Brunell at this point. For all we know he was offered the league minimum. I believe Mark will restructure to help the team but it should be equitable for both parties. Until we know what he is turning down we are jumping the gun.

That Guy · 03-01-2006, 04:17 AM

depending on players to restructure every year is a stupid idea. no one wants to restructure, it makes getting cut next year much more likely, and if you're cut, you're losing money.

If you didn't think there'd be problems playing with people's contracts, you're fooling yourself.

offiss · 03-01-2006, 04:40 AM

AHHHH my kind of thread, I would laugh my A** off if this guy doesn't restructure, Gibbs has kept him off the scrap heap the last 2 years, and basically treated Brunell like the son he never had, if he turns around and thumbs his nose at him and refuses to restructure, that would be classic. I seriously doubt that would happen, he's already made far more money with us than he would have with any other team, he owes Gibbs big time.

He may be hearing grumblings that he's no longer the teachers pet, as Gibbs is going to push hard for Campbell this season, and he's not going to take a pay cut to sit the bench, perhaps he overheard Saunders evaluation of him and it ain't good. Welcome to Ramseys world Mark.

Perhaps the Jets or Dolphins would give up a high pick for Brunell? You know because he's so good. Don't make me laugh.

onlydarksets · 03-01-2006, 08:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by offiss

Gibbs has kept him off the scrap heap the last 2 years, and basically treated Brunell like the son he never had

First, Gibbs has a son.

Second, yes, it's crazy to rely on players to restructure their deals, but I think it's understood that you are going to have to restructure if you want to stick around for long. If Brunell restructures, maybe he lasts 2 years. If he doesn't restructure, he's gone after next year. Yes, it would be a paycut (looking at yearly average salary), but I think it was understood from the outset that his contract was not meant to run its course.

Hog1 · 03-01-2006, 05:37 AM

It might be a bit early to lead him down the Green Mile. As Tafkas pointed out, all is not known at this point. I'm sure he will do the right thing. If not, don't let the door hit you in.........................

dmek25 · 03-01-2006, 06:47 AM

its all strictly business.by the way,what kind of cap hit if we cut brunell loose?

jdlea · 03-01-2006, 06:59 AM

If Mark Brunell doesn't restructure we should cut him. Go into the season with Campbell and Ramsey. I don't know what the cap savings is, but if it's considerable, then he should go. This isn't emotional, it's just business, remember. Everyone who said that about LaVar should apply it to MB, right now. It's the same situation.

That Guy · 03-01-2006, 07:24 AM

for the fifthteenth time, brunell costs 300k more to cut then to keep. ramsey costs 1.7mill more to keep then to cut. If a new cba gets done then the situation flips. right now MB has the leverage though.

and without a new cba we literally can't afford even a 300k (+230-310k replacement cost) hit just to be spiteful.

jdlea · 03-01-2006, 07:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by That Guy

for the fifthteenth time, brunell costs 300k more to cut then to keep. ramsey costs 1.7mill more to keep then to cut. If a new cba gets done then the situation flips. right now MR has the leverage though.

and without a new cba we literally can't afford even a 300k (+230-310k replacement cost) hit just to be spiteful.

wow, thanks and sorry for making you repeat it so many times. So, Mark holds all the cards on this one I guess. He doesn't have to restructure cause the Skins don't gain much by cutting him. That makes him even more of an ass if he doesn't restructure.

firstdown · 03-02-2006, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdlea

wow, thanks and sorry for making you repeat it so many times. So, Mark holds all the cards on this one I guess. He doesn't have to restructure cause the Skins don't gain much by cutting him. That makes him even more of an ass if he doesn't restructure.

If we don't know what the skins have offered him how can we condone him. How do we know that what they are offering him might be a big risk of him loosing alot of money. He is getting close to the end of his career and what he makes could be his last chance to make money as a football player. He has helped in the past and I feel he will do what is right for the team and himself. He also knows that next season could be his last to make a push for the SB and I think that will play a part in his decision making.

Sorry if I'm not up to date I see that Brunell did redue his contract.

TheMalcolmConnection · 03-01-2006, 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by That Guy

for the fifthteenth time, brunell costs 300k more to cut then to keep. ramsey costs 1.7mill more to keep then to cut. If a new cba gets done then the situation flips. right now MR has the leverage though.

and without a new cba we literally can't afford even a 300k (+230-310k replacement cost) hit just to be spiteful.

MR? Is that Pat and Mark's love child?

That Guy · 03-01-2006, 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

MR? Is that Pat and Mark's love child?

you have angered the tiki gods.

if MB gave up 500k this year, he'd also have to give up 650k next year to have his contract be legal within the confines of the 30% rule, as someone pointed out a few posts up. therefore its real money.

that means to cut his base saslary this year by 500k requires turning 1.15mill of base salary (500k in 2006 and 650k in 2007 due to the 30% rule) into a bonus that only prorates out 4 years (to 2009)... that's nearly 300k that still counts against the cap this year.

So a 500k cut this year and 650k cut next year combined only saves the skins 200k on the cap in 2006... talk about diminishing returns. If he nuked his entire base salary to vet min, thats till only about 600k savings this year and it virtually gaurantees he won't be on the roster in 2007.

of course, he could actually give up a lot of money in both 2006 AND 2007, but not many people are going to agree to a massive paycut, regardless of the situation.

Twilbert07 · 03-01-2006, 09:05 AM

This all goes back to the decision to waaaaay overpay Brunell when we signed him. It's coming back to bite us in the ass.

Luxorreb · 03-01-2006, 07:39 AM

I think we're all reading more into this than we should at this point. With the cba thing still unresolved noone is jumping the gun in any direction. Problem for Brunnell he might find himself not in a Redskins uniform next season if cba doesn't pass...

03-01-2006, 01:26 AM	#1
BigSKINBauer Pro Bowl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Washington, DC Age: 37 Posts: 5,688	Re: Brunell Reluctant to Renegotiate Deal OK, so if he doesn't restructure if we need him to after the negotiations are done I will lose respect for him.

03-01-2006, 02:03 AM	#2
Dana87 Special Teams Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Saint Augustine, Florida Age: 64 Posts: 130	Re: Brunell Reluctant to Renegotiate Deal We don't have enough facts to make any kind of judgment of Brunell at this point. For all we know he was offered the league minimum. I believe Mark will restructure to help the team but it should be equitable for both parties. Until we know what he is turning down we are jumping the gun. __________________ "Home Field Advantage Throughout the '06 Playoffs"

03-01-2006, 04:17 AM	#3
That Guy Living Legend Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: VA Age: 42 Posts: 17,620	Re: Brunell Reluctant to Renegotiate Deal depending on players to restructure every year is a stupid idea. no one wants to restructure, it makes getting cut next year much more likely, and if you're cut, you're losing money. If you didn't think there'd be problems playing with people's contracts, you're fooling yourself.

03-01-2006, 04:40 AM	#4
offiss Registered User Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: sparta, new jersey [ northern jersey ] Age: 61 Posts: 3,097	Re: Brunell Reluctant to Renegotiate Deal AHHHH my kind of thread, I would laugh my A** off if this guy doesn't restructure, Gibbs has kept him off the scrap heap the last 2 years, and basically treated Brunell like the son he never had, if he turns around and thumbs his nose at him and refuses to restructure, that would be classic. I seriously doubt that would happen, he's already made far more money with us than he would have with any other team, he owes Gibbs big time. He may be hearing grumblings that he's no longer the teachers pet, as Gibbs is going to push hard for Campbell this season, and he's not going to take a pay cut to sit the bench, perhaps he overheard Saunders evaluation of him and it ain't good. Welcome to Ramseys world Mark. Perhaps the Jets or Dolphins would give up a high pick for Brunell? You know because he's so good. Don't make me laugh.

03-01-2006, 05:37 AM	#6
Hog1 Quietly Dominating the East Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Naples, Florida Posts: 10,675	Re: Brunell Reluctant to Renegotiate Deal It might be a bit early to lead him down the Green Mile. As Tafkas pointed out, all is not known at this point. I'm sure he will do the right thing. If not, don't let the door hit you in......................... __________________ Goodbye Sean..........Vaya Con Dios thankyou Joe....... *“God made certain people to play football. He was one of them.” – Joe Gibbs*

03-01-2006, 06:47 AM	#7
dmek25 MVP Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: lancaster,pa Age: 63 Posts: 10,672	Re: Brunell Reluctant to Renegotiate Deal its all strictly business.by the way,what kind of cap hit if we cut brunell loose? __________________ "It's better to be quiet and thought a fool than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt." courtesy of 53fan

03-01-2006, 06:59 AM	#8
jdlea Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Arlington, VA Age: 41 Posts: 3,109	Re: Brunell Reluctant to Renegotiate Deal If Mark Brunell doesn't restructure we should cut him. Go into the season with Campbell and Ramsey. I don't know what the cap savings is, but if it's considerable, then he should go. This isn't emotional, it's just business, remember. Everyone who said that about LaVar should apply it to MB, right now. It's the same situation.

03-01-2006, 07:24 AM	#9
That Guy Living Legend Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: VA Age: 42 Posts: 17,620	Re: Brunell Reluctant to Renegotiate Deal for the fifthteenth time, brunell costs 300k more to cut then to keep. ramsey costs 1.7mill more to keep then to cut. If a new cba gets done then the situation flips. right now MB has the leverage though. and without a new cba we literally can't afford even a 300k (+230-310k replacement cost) hit just to be spiteful.

03-01-2006, 09:05 AM	#14
Twilbert07 Impact Rookie Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Atlanta, GA Age: 60 Posts: 594	Re: Brunell Reluctant to Renegotiate Deal This all goes back to the decision to waaaaay overpay Brunell when we signed him. It's coming back to bite us in the ass. __________________ a Skins fan every day, every way.

03-01-2006, 07:39 AM	#15
Luxorreb ^21^ Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Richmond, Virginia Age: 53 Posts: 1,630	Re: Brunell Reluctant to Renegotiate Deal I think we're all reading more into this than we should at this point. With the cba thing still unresolved noone is jumping the gun in any direction. Problem for Brunnell he might find himself not in a Redskins uniform next season if cba doesn't pass... __________________ ^21^

Brunell Reworks Deal (FKA "Brunell Reluctant to Renegotiate Deal")

Locker Room Main Forum