London Fletcher re-signs with Redskins

[whistler]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

I thought contract restructures were pretty player-friendly. Anyone that knows about this more care to elaborate?

They usually are. However in this case the skins are not able to make player friendly restructures because if they are player friendly they are not team friendly. With the cap problems the skins have that would not be workable. That would mean pay-cuts. The LF signing means good-bye Cooley and others or take a pay-cut (can you say veterans minimum).

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by whistler

They usually are. However in this case the skins are not able to make player friendly restructures because if they are player friendly they are not team friendly. With the cap problems the skins have that would not be workable. That would mean pay-cuts. The LF signing means good-bye Cooley and others or take a pay-cut (can you say veterans minimum).

Making the assumption that something negative will accompany the Fletcher signing without....any real info to support it is just more of the same....tired ass "sky is falling" rhetoric......

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Hog1

Making the assumption that something negative will accompany the Fletcher signing without....any real info to support it is just more of the same....tired ass "sky is falling" rhetoric......

Yup, let's wait and see how the deal is structured.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by Hog1

Making the assumption that something negative will accompany the Fletcher signing without....any real info to support it is just more of the same....tired ass "sky is falling" rhetoric......

But the sky IS FALLING!!!!!!!

[takethecake]

My two cents:

The redskins ABSOLUTELY DID NOT overpay for Fletcher. As others have said, it's not just the league leader in tackles you're getting; you also get the leader of our team, and reward a player who has worked his butt of the last few years. For the other Caps fans out there, this deal kind of reminds me of the deal Laich got recently. Yeah Laich's probably not worth all the money he's making, but he deserves it for being a consistent, solid player who has a huge influence in the locker room.

And for everyone saying its risky to give a multi-year contract to an older player, that only applies to older players who AREN'T physical freaks. Think of this as giving the same contract to a 32 year old.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by whistler

They usually are. However in this case the skins are not able to make player friendly restructures because if they are player friendly they are not team friendly. With the cap problems the skins have that would not be workable. That would mean pay-cuts. The LF signing means good-bye Cooley and others or take a pay-cut (can you say veterans minimum).

I know I won't get everything right, but I was under the impression that when a player is asked to restructure their contract, it typically entails lowering their base-salary to give the team cap room and turning that money into guaranteed money. Although the cap room helps, to me it seems that it is slightly more beneficial for the player. I believe the only time it is not beneficial for the player is when they are asked to take a pay cut.

In terms of cutting players to get more space, right now the biggest benefit would come from cutting Hall, who would give us about 5 mil in space. The benefits of cutting Cooley would be about 1.6 mil. Right now, I think the best course of action for the team would be to restructure contracts, instead of releasing players and creating additional holes/needs.