WR Andre Roberts has agreed to deal with Redskins

[That Guy]

and anyone that thinks garcon is getting cut next year is some kind of crazy. unless you're planning on lead-piping his knee or some such.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by That Guy

and anyone that thinks garcon is getting cut next year is some kind of crazy. unless you're planning on lead-piping his knee or some such.

Or understand how backloaded deals affect the cap.

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Or understand how backloaded deals affect the cap.

yeah, its more cap related than performance related. Gruden is a fan, if Garcon plays well, you can always iron out a backloaded deal.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

yeah, its more cap related than performance related. Gruden is a fan, if Garcon plays well, you can always iron out a backloaded deal.

If Gruden is a fan. Gruden came from Cincinnati, where he had AJ Green, Marvin Jones, Mohammad Sanu, and Andrew Hawkins. He's going to try to put something similar together here, and that gets a lot easier when Garcon isn't hogging $9 million on the cap.

He's a necessary part of this year's roster, so I'm not suggesting that Gruden can't wait to get Garcon out of town. I just think the offense is going to be Jordan Reed-centric because...well, obviously.

[mooby]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

If Gruden is a fan. Gruden came from Cincinnati, where he had AJ Green, Marvin Jones, Mohammad Sanu, and Andrew Hawkins. He's going to try to put something similar together here, and that gets a lot easier when Garcon isn't hogging $9 million on the cap.

He's a necessary part of this year's roster, so I'm not suggesting that Gruden can't wait to get Garcon out of town. I just think the offense is going to be Jordan Reed-centric because...well, obviously.

So I guess when AJ Green's contract extension comes up, which should be sometime in the next couple years, do you think the Bengals won't be willing to give him a huge deal with a large cap hit? Because if they want to keep their nice core of receivers together, it's going to be hard to justify when one of them has a huge salary.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by mooby

So I guess when AJ Green's contract extension comes up, which should be sometime in the next couple years, do you think the Bengals won't be willing to give him a huge deal with a large cap hit? Because if they want to keep their nice core of receivers together, it's going to be hard to justify when one of them has a huge salary.

No because A.J. Green is treated as one of the 10 best offensive players in football by both offenses and defenses. So if you have to, you just allocate more resources to the receiver position.

I know people find this objectionable, but Garcon is just a guy. He's not a bad player. He's just an unremarkable one, one with strengths (he blocks well and he's great after the catch), and weaknesses (he needs the scheme to get him open, inconsistent catcher). I like him more than Julian Edelman, but they're both proof that 100 catches can be done by any player of quality in the NFL, not just the special guys. He's the same guy he was in Indy when he split reps with Austin Collie.

Sometimes, you'll see a team follow him with a better cover guy, but that's more an indictment of the rest of the offense than a complement of Garcon. Safety alignment never changes based on where he lines up.

[Mechanix544]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

No because A.J. Green is treated as one of the 10 best offensive players in football by both offenses and defenses. So if you have to, you just allocate more resources to the receiver position.

I know people find this objectionable, but Garcon is just a guy. He's not a bad player. He's just an unremarkable one, one with strengths (he blocks well and he's great after the catch), and weaknesses (he needs the scheme to get him open, inconsistent catcher). I like him more than Julian Edelman, but they're both proof that 100 catches can be done by any player of quality in the NFL, not just the special guys. He's the same guy he was in Indy when he split reps with Austin Collie.

Sometimes, you'll see a team follow him with a better cover guy, but that's more an indictment of the rest of the offense than a complement of Garcon. Safety alignment never changes based on where he lines up.

Garcon is just a guy? Ok, Ive heard enough of this lunacy.......

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Or understand how backloaded deals affect the cap.

His deal isn't a cap killer, nor is it a backloaded deal in the sense of skyrocketing cap charges. His base salary, dead cap and cap savings per year of his deal is :
Year
2012 $2,100,000 $13,100,000 ($8,400,000)
2013 $5,600,000 $8,800,000 ($615,625)
2014 $7,100,000 $6,600,000 $3,100,000
2015 $7,100,000 $4,400,000 $5,300,000
2016 $7,600,000 $2,200,000 $8,000,000

That's a consistent base salary, which indicates a team is looking to count on him, and not be forced into a decision based on outrageous base or cap numbers.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

His deal isn't a cap killer, nor is it a backloaded deal in the sense of skyrocketing cap charges. His base salary, dead cap and cap savings per year of his deal is :
Year
2012 $2,100,000 $13,100,000 ($8,400,000)
2013 $5,600,000 $8,800,000 ($615,625)
2014 $7,100,000 $6,600,000 $3,100,000
2015 $7,100,000 $4,400,000 $5,300,000
2016 $7,600,000 $2,200,000 $8,000,000

That's a consistent base salary, which indicates a team is looking to count on him, and not be forced into a decision based on outrageous base or cap numbers.

Can save $5.3 million to release or $7.5 million with a post June 1 designation.

$5 MM AAV can get you a better receiver than Garcon on the open market in most years. Plus: they're going to draft someone from a loaded WR class who is going to need someone to get released from the rotation in order to get increased reps.

It's a no brainer.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Can save $5.3 million to release or $7.5 million with a post June 1 designation.

$5 MM AAV can get you a better receiver than Garcon on the open market in most years. Plus: they're going to draft someone from a loaded WR class who is going to need someone to get released from the rotation in order to get increased reps.

It's a no brainer.

You are always so self-assured in your opinions yet they are so often completely detached from reality.

Garcon led the NFL in receptions this year, GTripp. Go spout your know-it-all bullshit somewhere else.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

You are always so self-assured in your opinions yet they are so often completely detached from reality.

Garcon led the NFL in receptions this year, GTripp. Go spout your know-it-all bullshit somewhere else.

Edelman was second, no?

Are you giving him 10 million a season?

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Edelman was second, no?

Are you giving him 10 million a season?

The slot WR in Brady's offense is a terrible comparison and you know it.

Secondly, I don't mind people being wrong, but when you're a know-it-all blowhard AND you're wrong, then I hate it. You need to just shut the fuck up and here's why.

Last year Garcon's cap number was $8.2M in a season when the cap was $123M. In other words he occupied 6.7% of the team's cap space.

This year with the cap at $133M and his cap number at $9.7M, he will occupy 7.3% of the team's cap space.

Next year and the year after, when you're proposing the team cut him, he will occupy less % of space than he will this year. Next year his cap number will be $9.7M or 6.9% of an estimated $140M cap. And in 2016 he will have a cap number of $10.2M, or 6.8% of an estimated $150M cap. And the cap may actually go up faster than that, making those %s even lower.

Again, currently 7.3% of the cap. Next year, 6.9% of the cap. 2016, 6.8% of the cap. And that's if they decide not to restructure any of that base salary and extend him.

Just shut the fuck up. He's an integral part of the team, one of the best players we have, Griffin's favorite target by far. He's not going anywhere. Now please just go away.