Redskins 2012 Salary Cap Status

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by CrazyCanuck

I'd think the opposite. We should get a $1M credit if he exercises his option.

There would definitely be a credit some where. I think he's saying it's $1 mil extra in 2012, and then if he exercises, there's a $1 cap credit in 2013 (although we'd still owe the remaining amortized SB deadcap, so $2.25 million - $1 million in cap credit).

I'm suggesting that while what he says makes sense, I think that there would probably be an offsetting clause for purposes of the 2012 cap. If this was going to cost the Redskins 1/9 of their remaining cap space in 2012, it would have made more sense to just make next year (2013) voidable with no buyback.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinster

I am very excited to see how the redskins will structure all their contracts when the season comes. Considering we are looking at Royal, Ross, Grubbs, Winston; I am baffled as to where our cap space comes from this year AND next year when we will not get the 13 million in cap credits we got this year (I think...unless using this years 18 mil in unused cap next year to cancel out is the silver lining). Anyone know how cap credits are to work for us next year? Or what we can salvage as compensation?

Anything we don't use can be rolled over. Which is a huge cap credit that never existed in the past.

We won't be able to roll over $18 million of what we don't use, per the penalty. Unless of course, the NFL overturns it, and then we get an $18 million rollover in 2013.

The Redskins still have a lot of cap space in future seasons, but if they spend up to the limit this year (which you'll know if they start to restructure veteran deals), then they won't have any additional cap room next year.

No matter what happens, they (along with the rest of the league) will have a ton of cap room in 2014. Which is why it makes sense to put some deadcap there to lessen the hit in the next two years.

The problem with the structure of the receiver deals from yesterday is that the Redskins don't have much financial flexibility to move those guys if they don't work out next year. The only addition we'll make to the receiving corps between 2012 and 2013 is by subtraction. Which makes their cuts at the position this year EXTREMELY important.

Free Agency Day 1: The Insightful and the Incoherent - The Triangle Blog - Grantland

Originally Posted by Bill Barnwell

While the Redskins were seemingly down to Santana Moss and flotsam at wideout, they already had a useful receiver sitting in Mike Shanahan's ample doghouse. Anthony Armstrong spent most of 2011 on the bench because Shanahan thought he couldn't get off press coverage at the line of scrimmage, but Armstrong's production as a starter in 2010 was arguably better than Garcon's, despite the fact that the former swapped out Peyton Manning for Donovan McNabb and Rex Grossman:

2010 Catches Targets Catch % Yards Yds/Catch
Garcon 67 119 56% 784 11.7
Armstrong 44 86 51% 871 19.8

Garcon might be the better player, but it's not a clear case. At the very least, the difference between the two of them over the next two seasons certainly isn't $21.5 million in guaranteed cash. As bad signings go, this isn't bringing in Albert Haynesworth, since Haynesworth was at least at the top of his game in the two seasons before the Redskins paid too much for him. This is more like the signings of DeAngelo Hall or Brandon Lloyd, when the Redskins acquired (or retained) a B-list player by giving him A-list money. You can make the case that Washington needed to upgrade at wide receiver and give RG3 options, but you don't accomplish that by throwing $21.5 million at league-average receivers.

[skinster]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Anything we don't use can be rolled over. Which is a huge cap credit that never existed in the past.

We won't be able to roll over $18 million of what we don't use, per the penalty. Unless of course, the NFL overturns it, and then we get an $18 million rollover in 2013.

The Redskins still have a lot of cap space in future seasons, but if they spend up to the limit this year (which you'll know if they start to restructure veteran deals), then they won't have any additional cap room next year.

No matter what happens, they (along with the rest of the league) will have a ton of cap room in 2014. Which is why it makes sense to put some deadcap there to lessen the hit in the next two years.

The problem with the structure of the receiver deals from yesterday is that the Redskins don't have much financial flexibility to move those guys if they don't work out next year. The only addition we'll make to the receiving corps between 2012 and 2013 is by subtraction. Which makes their cuts at the position this year EXTREMELY important.

Free Agency Day 1: The Insightful and the Incoherent - The Triangle Blog - Grantland

Another question. We used 13 mil in cap credits this year. What we don't use of that will we be able to roll over to next year?

[MTK]

Originally Posted by skinster

Lol, so do most people. But to me what makes football far and away better than any other sport is how it is structured from a business perspective, specifically the cap rules. Its fun for me to follow the numbers, which is why I came to thewarpath in the first place...the cap sheet.

I hear ya, I follow it, I just don't get too hung up on the details

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinster

Another question. We used 13 mil in cap credits this year. What we don't use of that will we be able to roll over to next year?

In theory, yes.

[GTripp0012]

The Montgomery restructure seems like a clear way to make enough room to add Fletcher.

At that point, we're fresh out of cap space. Probably extend Fred Davis and do something with Cooley's contract so we can sign our rookies.

[SkinzWin]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

The Montgomery restructure seems like a clear way to make enough room to add Fletcher.

At that point, we're fresh out of cap space. Probably extend Fred Davis and do something with Cooley's contract so we can sign our rookies.

Or cut someone currently on the roster.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SkinzWin

Or cut someone currently on the roster.

Hall and Gaffney are the only guys on the entire roster who could save meaningful cap room in a release situation. Maybe Doughty, but I'd have to see his contract. And he might be our best safety at this point.

Beck gives you just under a million, but I think they want him in camp as an extra arm.

[Swarley]

I'm guessing some more restructures are possible though?

[IrMitchell]

Originally Posted by GreekSkin

I'm guessing some more restructures are possible though?

You'd think they'd look to restructure Silverback's .

[SkinzWin]

“@ProFootballTalk: Team-by-team remaining cap space, as of Thursday http://t.co/h5Nh6sWp”

According to this we still have $11 mil?

[SFREDSKIN]

Originally Posted by SkinzWin

“@ProFootballTalk: Team-by-team remaining cap space, as of Thursday http://t.co/h5Nh6sWp”

According to this we still have $11 mil?

NFL.com Blogs » Blog Archive Remaining salary-cap room for all 32 teams «

[SkinzWin]

Originally Posted by SFREDSKIN

NFL.com Blogs » Blog Archive Remaining salary-cap room for all 32 teams «

My question was how do we still have that much? Everyone is making it sound like we are going to have to restructure contracts just to sign another player

[Swarley]

I wonder if the cap hit we're taking from the NFL is included in those numbers.

[NYCskinfan82]

Originally Posted by GreekSkin

I wonder if the cap hit we're taking from the NFL is included in those numbers.

I beleive so.