Did We Shoot Ourselves In The Foot??

[Riggo44]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Maybe someone can help me with this. Why are we going to pay the remaining 5 mil of his signing bonus. I understand it was a signing bonus but he wants out of his contract not us. I understanding the cap hit regardless of if we pay him I just don't understand why we are paying it.

Who knows. We gave D. Sanders all his money too. :vomit-smi

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Riggo44

Who knows. We gave D. Sanders all his money too. :vomit-smi

So what your saying we could have negotiated with him and not paid the 5mil.

[offiss]

It's a good move if we can get our #1 signed we won't have a prob finding the room for the rest of our pick's they won't be high priced after the #1, and we clear Cole's contract for next year when we will be in a more realistic position [hopefully] to make a serious push at a SB.

I am more than willing to go into this season without Smoot, and at this point I don't want him for the money he's asking, I believe it's to much, nobody else has so much as come close to anything we have offered for Smoot, I wonder why?

[joecrisp]

Wow, there's some really good points being made on both sides of this debate. Like most fans, I'm incredibly frustrated with this whole situation, and Laveranues Coles is now officially on my "least favorite athlete" list, and would probably be at the top of that list-- if it weren't for the fact that Terrell Owens plays for the Eagles.

I agree with the sentiment that this was pretty much a lose-lose situation, and the only person you can really put any blame on is Coles himself. He bears the sole responsibility and culpability for this mess. His yards-per-catch have been on a downhill slide since he injured his toe, he refuses to get the toe surgically repaired, and now he blames Gibbs' conservative approach to his statistical decline. While Gibbs certainly-- and voluntarily-- bears some of the blame for the offense's failures, the poor performances of the players within that offense are equally accountable for the overall ineptitude, and Coles is just as guilty for his inability to seperate from defenders as Brunell is for failing to throw catchable passes, and Gardner is for dropping half the passes that were catchable.

Coles decided to take the Redskins hostage this offseason, blame Gibbs for his problems, and force the team to lose valuable cap space to grant him his wish of leaving only two seasons after Snyder generously gave him a huge signing bonus-- a bonus the Redskins will honor, despite his refusal to honor the terms of the contract which brought him that bonus.

Yes, the Redskins got screwed cap-wise for 2005. But the silver lining is that removing Coles from the books for 2006 definitely eases the burden of that cumbersome cap year, and the Redskins were able to get a valuable player in exchange for Coles. Most importantly, they rid themselves of a player that would have been a distraction and a potential locker room cancer. You might argue that he kept quiet last season, but the fact is, there are players who heard or otherwise sensed his disgruntlement throughout the season. Maybe that's why guys like Randy Thomas were so quick to say they'd rather not have a player like that around.

[sportscurmudgeon]

celts32:

You hit it on the head. They could have released him and saved that $5M bonus money back in February. That is the deal Coles thought he had struck but then "things changed". Gibbs called it a misunderstanding; Coles said the Skins "reneged". But the chance for an outright release with a savings of that bonus money was on the table and the Skins' FO fumbled the ball.



Regarding the jump in the salary cap and the "Skins already planning for it", I'm afraid that all they Skins have done is spend money in that year based on the increased cap they expect to be there. They will NOT be 20M under the new cap. And by the way, think about this scenario:

The cap goes up in 2007.
The players know this.
The players know that Danny Boy did not do will with players who made big demands on him (Coles, Bailey, Smoot...)
So what stops an already signed player from asking for his release or a fat new deal as 2007 arrives? Based on what has happened here this year, what does he have to lose?


Oh yeah, I know. They'll all be "true Redskins" by then and wouldn't think of doing something like that... Maybe the Easter Bunny will be the Offensive Coordinator by then too. Remember last season when everyone here deluded themselves into believing that Smoot was such a "true Redskin" he would play here at a discount just for the honor of being with a Hall of Fame coach and a team with such a proud heritage. Don't say it didn't happen; the threads are still here.


Please factor in a sizeable contract for Santana Moss sometime soon. If the Skins don't do that, odds are he'll get lowballed by the FO next January and decide to go FA shopping. If you were he, wouldn't you?


Please remember that Sean Taylor thinks he got screwed by the contract he signed as a rookie last year and his new agent is Drew Rosenhaus. It's only a matter of time until Taylor seeks a newer and bigger deal. Don't be angry wehn it happens because it's gonna happen. Given the cap trouble the team has this year, Rosenhaus will probably not make a big deal about this just yet, but sometime next January might be when he begins to grumble just a bit...


Please remember that Patrick Ramsey's deal is done soon and they will either have to sign him to a comfortable deal or lose him and go find another "experienced QB" who will not come here cheaply.