![]() |
|
|||||||
| Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion |
| View Poll Results: Your opinion on the Redskins signing Larry Johnson | |||
| Thumbs up |
|
119 | 76.77% |
| Thumbs down |
|
36 | 23.23% |
| Voters: 155. You may not vote on this poll | |||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
|
#1 | |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 38
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
Quote:
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 31 Spooner St.
Age: 51
Posts: 9,534
|
Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
In particular, drop Portis. I applauded the effort of dropping Randel El, but not dropping Portis is a head scratcher unless we decided to get a rookie and let Portis mentor him. We really need youth. We had a lot of issues revolving around older players, and while we have gotten rid of a lot, we also lost a lot of talent (ie: Thomas / Samuels retirement). I just don't agree with signing a 30 year old to a 3 year contract at a position that hands down needs to be young.
__________________
Zoltan is ZESTY! - courtesy of joeredskin |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 | |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 38
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
Quote:
If we cut Portis in 2011, and there's a cap, we'll take a $5 million dollar deadcap hit. If we cut Haynesworth in 2011, and there's a cap, we'll take a $19.8 million deadcap hit. ($3 million unrecognized of 2009 bonus + $16.8 million of unrecognized 2010 bonus). If we cut him today, we would owe him $25 million "cap dollars" (which come at no cost, this year) to get the heck out, but we'd recover $63.4 million of the "100 million dollar deal." If we kept Haynesworth though 2012 (it's effectively a four year deal), we would save $52.3 million of the 100 million. So Haynesworth's deal is essentially 4/48, as many before me have written. Or it can be 1/36. The marginal difference for the next three years of Albert Haynesworth is just $12 million dollars of bonuses and salary. If we cut Hall in 2011, and there's a cap, we'll take a $13.4 million deadcap hit. But we'd save $28.5 million of the $53.5 million. So essentially, his deal would become 2/25. There's no real marginal gain on the Hall contract, so he's progressively more likely to get released every year, as opposed to Haynesworth, who is almost certainly going to be held through 2012, and then released. If there's still no cap in 2011, I'd suggest that Hall is more likely than not to get released. Compared to some of our more highly paid players, Portis is real easy to get rid of in 2011 even if there is a cap. We actually would SAVE $5 million over having him on the roster. It's Haynesworth and Hall who become huge strains on the cap if it gets reinstated in 2011. I agree with you that if we decide we're not going to use him, we should release him prior to opening day.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Special Teams
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 118
|
Re: Redskins Sign Larry Johnson
You know, the more I think of it, the more i am begining ot like these moves. At first it thought of them in the replacement aspect. As replacements taking a number one spot, Rex and JL are HUGE mistakes! i mean, Rex at his best is HORRIBLE. LJ is even older than CP. And when it all adds up, neither replacement has anything in their resume that makes them a clear #1.
BUT!!!! If you compare them to the number 2 guys, it TOTALY makes sense. Betts vs LJ is laughable! Comparing either their bests or average years make the decision very easy. As for Todd vs Rex... don't get me started. Todd has hardly any GAME experience and is too old to even JOKE that he has 'fresh legs'. I'll take a loser that lost a superbowl over a loser that hasn't won a starting spot in over a decade. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|