Salary Cap Analysis

[CrazyCanuck]

As for the article, it's pretty much your run-of-the-mill Snyder bashing piece. But it does make some valid points. Without a new CBA we will be in trouble, but we won't be the only ones. If there is a new CBA we should be able to clean up our cap and be ok for 2006 and the future, but the writer doesn't spend much time discussing this.

I guess you can chalk this one up as more anti-Skins rhetoric, with a hint of credibility.

[CrazyCanuck]

And if Mr. Schaffer needs some help with his cap sheets, please don't hesitate to ask. Schneed and I can be there by 9am.

[70Chip]

When I first read the article, it concerned me. Then I realized that these outside people don't realize that we have been doing this cap dance every off-season for five years. There are some NFL fans who never have to give this a thought because their owners will never put them over the cap. How boring. And yes, I still think the Redskins will be contenders next year.

Canuck: If I were Snyder, Redskin 1 would be headed for the Great White North post haste.

[Pocono]

Originally Posted by 70Chip

When I first read the article, it concerned me. Then I realized that these outside people don't realize that we have been doing this cap dance every off-season for five years. There are some NFL fans who never have to give this a thought because their owners will never put them over the cap. How boring. And yes, I still think the Redskins will be contenders next year.

Canuck: If I were Snyder, Redskin 1 would be headed for the Great White North post haste.

This is the final capped year at present and the CBA says that most of the steps in that cap dance teams do every year can't be used. Just about every Skin's contract is written right up against the 30% rule so to change 06's cap hit will require changing every other year of the contract downward and agents and players aren't going to let that happen. My guess is if 3/1 comes without an extension the Skins will cut down to the minimum of 43 players and hope an extension is done after 3/1. Most of the logical cut targets had their cut savings reduced last year when Snyder did a wave of restructures so he could do the Coles/Moss deal so the largest amount the team can save by cutting one player is 2M by axing Bowen or Harris and those amounts are small bites of a 21-23M apple.

[70Chip]

Originally Posted by Pocono

This is the final capped year at present and the CBA says that most of the steps in that cap dance teams do every year can't be used. Just about every Skin's contract is written right up against the 30% rule so to change 06's cap hit will require changing every other year of the contract downward and agents and players aren't going to let that happen. My guess is if 3/1 comes without an extension the Skins will cut down to the minimum of 43 players and hope an extension is done after 3/1. Most of the logical cut targets had their cut savings reduced last year when Snyder did a wave of restructures so he could do the Coles/Moss deal so the largest amount the team can save by cutting one player is 2M by axing Bowen or Harris and those amounts are small bites of a 21-23M apple.

Yes. No deal means drastic measures, beyond the "logical" cuts. I think the owners may want to avoid putting Snyder in this position, though, because they want concessions from him on revenue sharing. This is his hole card.

[Pocono]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/column...ohn&id=2332991

Another article about why getting under the cap in 06 is different from any other year.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by Pocono

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/column...ohn&id=2332991

Another article about why getting under the cap in 06 is different from any other year.

Nice link.

The cap rules for '06 are dependent upon whether the CBA gets extended or not. If we go with the assumption that the CBA will not get extended, the Redskins are in serious trouble, along with a number of other teams. But if the CBA does get extended, the Redskins should be able to fit under the cap right nicely.

I'm betting that the CBA gets extended. When push comes to shove, I see free agency getting postponed, and a CBA extension getting signed by mid-March as all interested parties begin to give ground to preserve their best interests.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by CrazyCanuck

As for the article, it's pretty much your run-of-the-mill Snyder bashing piece. But it does make some valid points. Without a new CBA we will be in trouble, but we won't be the only ones. If there is a new CBA we should be able to clean up our cap and be ok for 2006 and the future, but the writer doesn't spend much time discussing this.

I guess you can chalk this one up as more anti-Skins rhetoric, with a hint of credibility.

Yeah it struck me as a very narrow-minded piece. He absolutely trashes Snyder's cap management based solely on the assumption that the league will enter 2006 without a new CBA. Typical shoddy writing. Absolutely no foresight to mention the various scenarios that may play out, such as a CBA extension. And as usual, journalists show very little understanding of basic business; negotiations tend to go into the 11th hour for a reason. The writer seems to assume that since the two sides are far apart on CBA negotiations in the here and now, that there will be no CBA extension. It's irresponsible to trash someone based solely on that one possibility, especially when that possibility isn't even the most likely to actually play out.

It's your typical Chicken Little piece. OMG THE SKY IS FALLING!!!