View Single Post
Old 06-30-2011, 06:27 PM   #78
GTripp0012
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 38
Posts: 15,994
Re: ESPN: Teams that are helped/hurt by the new salary cap proposal

Quote:
Originally Posted by Defensewins View Post
Can someone explain this quote form the article:
"Snyder and Mike Shanahan will have to be creative in how they structure contracts, because the $120 million cap would give them only around $10 million of cap room. On the positive side, the Redskins' current payroll is $75.7 million, meaning Snyder would have to spend close to $45 million in cash to meet the potential minimum floor requirements. Imagine a system that forces Snyder to spend."

Do we have $10M to spend or $45M?
Sorry I did not go back and read 5 full pages of this thread to see if this was already discussed.
Brilliant on the part of Allen to free up space during an uncapped year (2010) so we can have extra spending money in 2011. This was the kind of planning we did not have under the rudderless Snyderatto FO....and yes I add Snyder to the equation in our former Cerratto/Snyder FO failure.
I think that Clayton is suggesting that there may be a cash requirement re: the salary floor that won't be satisfied by the $35 million of deadcap the Redskins will have. After accounting for 53 players on the roster and all of that deadcap, the Redskins probably have 10ish million to spend on a $120 million cap.

But to put it in perspective, the Redskins entire 2006 shopping spree: Adam Archuleta, Brandon Lloyd, Antwaan Randle El, Andre Carter, Christian Fauria, and Todd Collins took up about $10 million of cap room in 2006. But the Redskins SPENT a lot more than $10 million on those players in the fiscal year 2006. They spent at least $40 million on those six players.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
 
Page generated in 0.09950 seconds with 10 queries