Should We Go After Another QB in Offseason

redsk1 · 11-15-2004, 05:00 PM

Unless your Peyton Manning or Ben R., it takes some time to play QB (as in several-seven yrs). Lets give P. Ramsey some time under this system. Make a decision after the season. If Ramsey shows some good signs lets not go out and spend more $. Keep Hasselbeck as the 2nd!! Brunell 3rd.

sportscurmudgeon · 11-15-2004, 07:31 PM

Two points here:

POINT # !: Someone said that Brunell was being paid like Manning. You must be referring to Archie Manning and his pension from the NFL.

I'll defer to Crazy Canuck here for the exact numbers but I believe that Peyton Manning got a $34M signing bonus in his last deal. The total value of the deal is somewhere north of $100M. Brunell's bonus was about $8M and the total package was probably not worth $34M. Danny Boy has been known to overpay for players, but even he did not bid that high for Mark Brunell.

Eli Manning got a $20M signing bonus with the Giants and something on the order of a $40M total package. Once again, that is more than Brunell got.

So he isn't getting "paid like Manning" and it would have been folly for anyone to believe that he would perform like Peyton Manning this year.

POINT #2: Brees stunk last year and now is having a great year in his "contract year". That is exactly the pattern followed by Brian Griese in Denver and that did not work out very well once he signed and got his big contract. Brees is probably better than Griese but I do not think he is the reincarnation of Johnny Unitas. Someone will overpay for him in the off-season and don't bet against Danny Boy being the one with the drooling wallet.

CrazyCanuck · 11-15-2004, 10:09 PM

You guys made a lot of good points in this thread. Here's my take.

Brunell - He's a $3.4M cap hit in 2005, so to eat $7.1M in dead cap to cut him doesn't make much sense. 2006 is our trouble year so pushing the bulk of the dead money there doesn't help either. I agree with Ramseyfan that the only logical solution would be to keep Brunell on as a backup in 2005, then cut him after June 1st 2006. We'd eat $1.4M in dead cap in 2006 and $4.3M in 2007.

Ramsey - We have Ramsey signed through 2006. But I think Gibbs will know sooner than that if Ramsey has a future with the Skins. Hopefully PR steps up and shows Gibbs he's the QB of the future. If he plays well enough they sign him to an extension in the offseason or midway through next year and everyone's happy.

If not, the Skins will have to make some decisions. I can't see Gibbs going back to the draft for a QB and starting all over. I figure they give Ramsey until midway next year to show what he's got, and if he's not the man they trade him and bring in another vet QB for 2006.

If Gibbs really sees nothing in Ramsey the rest of this year it is conceivable they could go after a QB in the offseason. Believe it or not, they could probably afford it since the cap hits are usually smallest in the first couple years of the contract.

MTK · 11-15-2004, 10:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrazyCanuck

You guys made a lot of good points in this thread. Here's my take.

Brunell - He's a $3.4M cap hit in 2005, so to eat $7.1M in dead cap to cut him doesn't make much sense. 2006 is our trouble year so pushing the bulk of the dead money there doesn't help either. I agree with Ramseyfan that the only logical solution would be to keep Brunell on as a backup in 2005, then cut him after June 1st 2006. We'd eat $1.4M in dead cap in 2006 and $4.3M in 2007.

Ramsey - We have Ramsey signed through 2006. But I think Gibbs will know sooner than that if Ramsey has a future with the Skins. Hopefully PR steps up and shows Gibbs he's the QB of the future. If he plays well enough they sign him to an extension in the offseason or midway through next year and everyone's happy.

If not, the Skins will have to make some decisions. I can't see Gibbs going back to the draft for a QB and starting all over. I figure they give Ramsey until midway next year to show what he's got, and if he's not the man they trade him and bring in another vet QB for 2006.

If Gibbs really sees nothing in Ramsey the rest of this year it is conceivable they could go after a QB in the offseason. Believe it or not, they could probably afford it since the cap hits are usually smallest in the first couple years of the contract.

Nice info CC, thanks

What happens if Brunell retires? Do we still take a cap hit?

CrazyCanuck · 11-15-2004, 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

What happens if Brunell retires? Do we still take a cap hit?

Good question. I heard that there might be a "Barry Sanders" rule where you could get cap relief if a player retires, but I'm not sure.

And by the way SC is right, Peyton's deal is nowhere near Brunell's.

SUNRA · 11-15-2004, 10:47 PM

The Redskins will definitely go after an experienced QB. Could be Kitna, Brees or someone else. Hasselbeck deserves a chance as well as Ramsey for 1# spot because up until now there has been no efficient passer for this team since Brad Johnson. If you compare the successful QB's in the past, we are not even close with the QB's we have now.

SmootSmack · 11-15-2004, 10:54 PM

I saw this on Ask the Commish:

What happens if a player is traded or retires?

Answer: In most cases, if a player retires, the remaining signing bonus that has not been included in salary “accelerates” and is included in that year’s team salary. Thus, the team will take an immediate salary cap hit of the remaining signing bonus.

MTK · 11-16-2004, 12:18 AM

Here's the Brunell situation as reported by the Post, does this sound about right CC? From this it sounds like cutting him after June 1 might not be all that bad, especially when the cap goes up from the TV money.

Quote:

Brunell is due to receive a $500,000 roster bonus on April 1, league sources said, and the Redskins would face a steep $7.165 million salary cap hit in 2005 if he retires or the team releases him before then; if Brunell is cut or retires after June 1, Washington would be penalized $1.93 million against the 2005 cap and another $5.7 million against the 2006 cap. Before this season began, many NFL executives believed the Redskins already were headed to a salary cap crisis by 2006.

redwagonskins · 11-16-2004, 01:28 AM

Either way, the cap hit is going to be painful. We wouldn't be able to afford a free-agent QB even if we wanted one.

CrazyCanuck · 11-16-2004, 01:42 AM

Quote:

Brunell is due to receive a $500,000 roster bonus on April 1, league sources said, and the Redskins would face a steep $7.165 million salary cap hit in 2005 if he retires or the team releases him before then; if Brunell is cut or retires after June 1, Washington would be penalized $1.93 million against the 2005 cap and another $5.7 million against the 2006 cap. Before this season began, many NFL executives believed the Redskins already were headed to a salary cap crisis by 2006.

This is exactly right Matty.

Like I wrote above I still think it makes more sense to cut Brunell after June 1 2006. It all comes down to when the Skins want to eat the bulk of the money, and 2006 would seem to be the worst time to do it, cuz our cap number takes a big spike that year. It would make more sense to eat the bulk of the money in 2007. Of course a lot will depend on the new salary cap figures.

That Guy · 11-16-2004, 02:30 PM

Quote:

Someone said that Brunell was being paid like Manning.

I said he was being paid half as much but wasn't playing half as well... there's 1mill/year QBs doing much better than brunell, that's the only point i was trying to make... in price/performance, we got absolutely screwed... (canuck's salary info on the site has brunell at 53$mill, but i thought it was 42$mill)

CrazyCanuck · 11-16-2004, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by That Guy

canuck's salary info on the site has brunell at 53$mill, but i thought it was 42$mill

Not sure where the $53M is listed.

Brunell's deal includes about $34M in salary and another $9M in signing bonus and roster bonus, for a total of $43M.

That Guy · 11-16-2004, 04:56 PM

in the excel salary info from this very site (http://www.thewarpath.net/WarpathRedskinsCap.htm):

Mark Brunell QB 7 years $9,100 $2,193 $3,433 $5,433 $6,633 $7,833 $9,033 $8,800

figures in thousands, my math adds that up to $52,458,000... again, i thought it should be 43mill, but that info on this site is wrong then... (first number is signing/roster bonuses i believe), so that's where it's listed.

CrazyCanuck · 11-16-2004, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by That Guy

in the excel salary info from this very site (http://www.thewarpath.net/WarpathRedskinsCap.htm):

Mark Brunell QB 7 years $9,100 $2,193 $3,433 $5,433 $6,633 $7,833 $9,033 $8,800

Actually the $9,100 is the total of his bonuses and is being double-counted in your calculation. I know this column was confusing so I've changed it to a true total of all his cap hits. In the new version this total equals $43M which is the correct amount of his deal. This will be reflected the next time Matty updates the cap sheets on the site.

Anyways thanks for pointing this out and I'll continue to make the cap sheets as "user-friendly" as possible. If anyone else has any issues or suggestions please don't hesitate to mention them. Thanks.

That Guy · 11-16-2004, 05:23 PM

ahh, sorry for being an idiot then

i knew it was 43$mill, so after seeing that i was a bit confused...

11-15-2004, 07:31 PM	#32
sportscurmudgeon Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 3,159	Two points here: POINT # !: Someone said that Brunell was being paid like Manning. You must be referring to Archie Manning and his pension from the NFL. I'll defer to Crazy Canuck here for the exact numbers but I believe that Peyton Manning got a $34M signing bonus in his last deal. The total value of the deal is somewhere north of $100M. Brunell's bonus was about $8M and the total package was probably not worth $34M. Danny Boy has been known to overpay for players, but even he did not bid that high for Mark Brunell. Eli Manning got a $20M signing bonus with the Giants and something on the order of a $40M total package. Once again, that is more than Brunell got. So he isn't getting "paid like Manning" and it would have been folly for anyone to believe that he would perform like Peyton Manning this year. POINT #2: Brees stunk last year and now is having a great year in his "contract year". That is exactly the pattern followed by Brian Griese in Denver and that did not work out very well once he signed and got his big contract. Brees is probably better than Griese but I do not think he is the reincarnation of Johnny Unitas. Someone will overpay for him in the off-season and don't bet against Danny Boy being the one with the drooling wallet. __________________ The Sports Curmudgeon www.sportscurmudgeon.com But don't get me wrong, I love sports...

11-15-2004, 10:47 PM	#36
SUNRA The Starter Join Date: Mar 2004 Posts: 1,680	The Redskins will definitely go after an experienced QB. Could be Kitna, Brees or someone else. Hasselbeck deserves a chance as well as Ramsey for 1# spot because up until now there has been no efficient passer for this team since Brad Johnson. If you compare the successful QB's in the past, we are not even close with the QB's we have now. __________________ Redskins Member since 1970

11-15-2004, 10:54 PM	#37
SmootSmack Uncle Phil Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 45,256	If Brunell Retires I saw this on Ask the Commish: What happens if a player is traded or retires? Answer: In most cases, if a player retires, the remaining signing bonus that has not been included in salary “accelerates” and is included in that year’s team salary. Thus, the team will take an immediate salary cap hit of the remaining signing bonus. __________________ You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You

11-15-2004, 05:00 PM	#31
redsk1 The Starter Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 2,351	Unless your Peyton Manning or Ben R., it takes some time to play QB (as in several-seven yrs). Lets give P. Ramsey some time under this system. Make a decision after the season. If Ramsey shows some good signs lets not go out and spend more $. Keep Hasselbeck as the 2nd!! Brunell 3rd.

11-15-2004, 10:09 PM	#33
CrazyCanuck Serenity Now Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 2,008	You guys made a lot of good points in this thread. Here's my take. Brunell - He's a $3.4M cap hit in 2005, so to eat $7.1M in dead cap to cut him doesn't make much sense. 2006 is our trouble year so pushing the bulk of the dead money there doesn't help either. I agree with Ramseyfan that the only logical solution would be to keep Brunell on as a backup in 2005, then cut him after June 1st 2006. We'd eat $1.4M in dead cap in 2006 and $4.3M in 2007. Ramsey - We have Ramsey signed through 2006. But I think Gibbs will know sooner than that if Ramsey has a future with the Skins. Hopefully PR steps up and shows Gibbs he's the QB of the future. If he plays well enough they sign him to an extension in the offseason or midway through next year and everyone's happy. If not, the Skins will have to make some decisions. I can't see Gibbs going back to the draft for a QB and starting all over. I figure they give Ramsey until midway next year to show what he's got, and if he's not the man they trade him and bring in another vet QB for 2006. If Gibbs really sees nothing in Ramsey the rest of this year it is conceivable they could go after a QB in the offseason. Believe it or not, they could probably afford it since the cap hits are usually smallest in the first couple years of the contract.

11-16-2004, 01:28 AM	#39
redwagonskins Impact Rookie Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: San Diego Posts: 685	Either way, the cap hit is going to be painful. We wouldn't be able to afford a free-agent QB even if we wanted one.

11-16-2004, 04:56 PM	#43
That Guy Living Legend Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: VA Age: 42 Posts: 17,620	in the excel salary info from this very site (http://www.thewarpath.net/WarpathRedskinsCap.htm): Mark Brunell QB 7 years $9,100 $2,193 $3,433 $5,433 $6,633 $7,833 $9,033 $8,800 figures in thousands, my math adds that up to $52,458,000... again, i thought it should be 43mill, but that info on this site is wrong then... (first number is signing/roster bonuses i believe), so that's where it's listed.

11-16-2004, 05:23 PM	#45
That Guy Living Legend Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: VA Age: 42 Posts: 17,620	ahh, sorry for being an idiot then i knew it was 43$mill, so after seeing that i was a bit confused...

Should We Go After Another QB in Offseason

Locker Room Main Forum