Gibbs the GM

[MTK]

I don't recall Brunell only asking for $5M... either way I think the hype over his contract is really overblown anyway.

On the surface it was a 7 year deal for $43M with a bonus of $8.6M.

The deal will essentially be a 3 year deal for approx. $10M and we'll end up eating about $4.9M of his bonus.

[#56fanatic]

thats just it, we eat so much money on these contracts. Coles we ate about 9mil, and with all the LaVar stuff it sounds like we are going to eat aprox. 12mil. what about Brunell, which will be around 4 or 5 mil. This is why I think we need to have a GM or someone more familiar with the cap than Joe. Trotter we ate a bit of that contract too. Not saying Joe can not do this, but somebody that has been in the league the last 5 to 10 years may have a better grasp of the Cap and how it works. And how to spend money WISELY. We all know Dan and Vinny live in a fantasy football world and it is going to catch up with us eventually, like in two years.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by #56fanatic

thats just it, we eat so much money on these contracts. Coles we ate about 9mil, and with all the LaVar stuff it sounds like we are going to eat aprox. 12mil. what about Brunell, which will be around 4 or 5 mil. This is why I think we need to have a GM or someone more familiar with the cap than Joe. Trotter we ate a bit of that contract too. Not saying Joe can not do this, but somebody that has been in the league the last 5 to 10 years may have a better grasp of the Cap and how it works. And how to spend money WISELY. We all know Dan and Vinny live in a fantasy football world and it is going to catch up with us eventually, like in two years.

Gibbs doesn't handle the cap stuff, that's Snyder's department.

People have been saying for years now that the cap will "catch up" with us, well Snyder has been running the team and managing the cap pretty well since 1999. Where is this salary cap hell?? The answer is it's not going to happen because Snyder actually has a clue when it comes to managing the cap and he always has a 3 year plan in place. They know when they sign someone how it's going to effect the cap down the road and they structure the contracts accordingly.

[#56fanatic]

When we keep reworking these deals, like brunell, jansen, and these guys it just keeps putting off the cap hits. The first couple of years on these contracts are so minimal that the salaries dont hurt us that much. Its the 4 and 5th years of these contracts that kills the cap. in the case of some of these players, they never get to the 4th and 5th years because we rework them. LaVar has done it in the past. Twice counting the last contract. Brunell did it this year, and he has only been here 2 years. Dont you remember how long it took the 49ers to straighten out there mess. What I am saying is Gibbs wants somebody and Danny doesn't say no, vinny doesn't say no, they just go get them, then get someone to rework their current deal. We can not keep reworking contracts every year and avoiding those 4th and 5th years. Portis' contract is like that, Moss is like that. All these guys getting these huge contracts have backloaded deals where they are like 1 to 3 million in the first couple then balloon to 6 to 9 million. Like Coles last year, we had to eat what was left on the signing bonus, and that 9 million. We can't keep doing that to try and make a run, I like Dan and wouldn't want a different owner but you can't help but admire teams like the Pats, Eagles, Bengles, that build through the draft, then pick maybe one or two free agents that put them over the top. Dallas just got out of all that cap problem stuff last year.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by #56fanatic

When we keep reworking these deals, like brunell, jansen, and these guys it just keeps putting off the cap hits. The first couple of years on these contracts are so minimal that the salaries dont hurt us that much. Its the 4 and 5th years of these contracts that kills the cap. in the case of some of these players, they never get to the 4th and 5th years because we rework them. LaVar has done it in the past. Twice counting the last contract. Brunell did it this year, and he has only been here 2 years. Dont you remember how long it took the 49ers to straighten out there mess. What I am saying is Gibbs wants somebody and Danny doesn't say no, vinny doesn't say no, they just go get them, then get someone to rework their current deal. We can not keep reworking contracts every year and avoiding those 4th and 5th years. Portis' contract is like that, Moss is like that. All these guys getting these huge contracts have backloaded deals where they are like 1 to 3 million in the first couple then balloon to 6 to 9 million. Like Coles last year, we had to eat what was left on the signing bonus, and that 9 million. We can't keep doing that to try and make a run, I like Dan and wouldn't want a different owner but you can't help but admire teams like the Pats, Eagles, Bengles, that build through the draft, then pick maybe one or two free agents that put them over the top. Dallas just got out of all that cap problem stuff last year.

Sorry fanatic, you're just flat out wrong. We can keep reworking the deals. As you rework the deal, it's not like you're kicking 100% of the cap hit down the road. You're kicking a manageable portion of it down the road, because some of the allocated bonus already came off the books in the years between the initial signing and the renegotiation.

Crazy Canuck, a little love here?

[#56fanatic]

You will see. I am not going to argue over these points. I know what I am talking about. I have a friend that played for the Raiders for 10 years and just recently retired last year. He has explained all this stuff to me. The end of the contracts is where all the money is, thats why players are cut after the first 3 or so years, so they dont see that money, and teams just have to pay the remaining parts of the signing bonuses either in one year or spread it out to the next year. "dead money", we lead the NFL in dead money every year. When you rework these deals, it sets the 1st couple years at very low salaries then the contract money excelerates towards the end of the deal, like the last two years. If the player is not willing the renegotiate, then they get cut, or if they are two old or past their prime they get cut because its not financially in the best interest to extend a contract for a player in their mid 30's. Wait and see, Portis and Moss will have to rework their deals to free up cap space or they will get cut in two to three years. Noway can we keep those huge contracts past that length.

[skins052bgr8]

I tend to agree with Matty, Salary cap hell was supposed to be here in 04, 05, 06, 07, Where is it? It is always a year or two away. Some people on here forget these people do this for a living and do have a plan down the road. We may lose one to two people a year Smoot and Pierce (very good salary cap move this year) that we believe are critical due to the salary cap. How many of us would have thought losing Arrington two years ago as a salary cap casualty would have been devastating to this team, I for one would have thought I would just die not the case. These players can be replaced. The raiders are not the best team to talk about salary cap management they could be in worst shape then us and their moves have not panned out anywhere near like ours are starting to. Previous years we spent and spent, but we may have to suffer through a year or two here and there where we are not as flashy and kill the free agent market due to limited cap like this year we took some hits even with Coles, but it seems to be working out. Keep the bulk of the team intact with little turnover and filling with role players will be our key to success, good managing

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

Sorry fanatic, you're just flat out wrong. We can keep reworking the deals. As you rework the deal, it's not like you're kicking 100% of the cap hit down the road. You're kicking a manageable portion of it down the road, because some of the allocated bonus already came off the books in the years between the initial signing and the renegotiation.

every time you re-negotiate you HAVE to add more money, or else the players won't agree to it. so you're replacing one baloon with a slightly bigger one over and over again across multiple players. In the end it DOES mean more wasted money and more dead cap.

2) I don't think we're "mortgaging the future." We've given away a lot of draft picks, I'll grant you that. And our ability to hit on late round picks has been iffy. But I'd assert that our ability to uncover undrafted free agents and sign low-level free agents and turn them into starters has made up for it. Cedric Killings, Ryan Boschetti, Joe Salavea'a, Ryan Clark, Demetric Evans, guys like that. If you're talking about mortgaging the future as it relates to the salary cap, we're in good enough shape next year to keep the team intact, and we're in tremendous shape for 2007.

the problem is, who's better? taylor, or some guy you've never heard of that may play 30% of the snaps. The best players on our defense were all drafted at one point, the UDFAs are high quality ones, but they're not springs, griffin, washington etc. They may be solid starters, but none have been impact players in the way rod smith has been etc. So I REALLY wouldn't bank on UDFAs as an equivalent to having solid drafts where you can get actual studs for cheap.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by That Guy

every time you re-negotiate you HAVE to add more money, or else the players won't agree to it. so you're replacing one baloon with a slightly bigger one over and over again across multiple players. In the end it DOES mean more wasted money and more dead cap.

OK, yet another ridiculous innaccuracy in this thread regarding cap management. I think Canuck needs to teach a class (Canuck I had a feeling you were a fellow finance guy, now I'm sure of it after that cost of capital post).

When you RENEGOTIATE a contract you are RARELY adding more money. You're taking the roster bonus or base salary from the old contract and turning it into a signing bonus. The player doesn't care what you call the payment, they just care that they're getting it. They sign a deal for the same amount of money they were previously contracted for, and the cap hit is spread evenly over multiple seasons rather than hitting all that year. Every one of the Skins' big contracts are structured this way on purpose, so that when the big roster bonuses are due they can then be renegotiated into signing bonuses. Brunell and Jansen just restructured in this very manner. Moss, Springs, Portis, and several others will all do the same thing in the next few years.

Originally Posted by That Guy

the problem is, who's better? taylor, or some guy you've never heard of that may play 30% of the snaps. The best players on our defense were all drafted at one point, the UDFAs are high quality ones, but they're not springs, griffin, washington etc. They may be solid starters, but none have been impact players in the way rod smith has been etc. So I REALLY wouldn't bank on UDFAs as an equivalent to having solid drafts where you can get actual studs for cheap.

And this I find to be absurd. Football in the NFL is a team game, you need depth more than you need stars. Yes, Sean Taylor does great things for our team, and he's probably the MVP of the defense. But that's not to say guys like Joe Salavea'a and Lemar Marshall aren't incredibly important.

And if I can add one thing, just for a friggin reality check... don't you see a difference between the team this year and the team before Gibbs got here?