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......

[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.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by whistler

Remember they have to be willing to restructure!

As Ruhskins said, usually a restructure is favorable to the player, or at least minimally impactful to them. For example, why would TW not change his base salary of 13.9mill this year to a 10mil and a 3.9 million salary. That move alone would change his cap number from 13.9Million this year to 6.4 (3.9+2.5 prorated "bonus")million which nets a 7.5 million dollar cap savings this year. Based on GTripp's salary cap numbers, he already accounts for Fletcher counting somewhere in the neighborhood of 6million this year, so that combined with the minor restructure above would mean LF's number could be 13 Million without having to cut anybody.

Also remember that due to the rule of 51, and the fact that rookies won't likely sign until after June 1st. There is plenty of time to massage the cap numbers using many different methods without causing us to be forced to cut someone to pay for Fletcher's contract.

Things I guarantee, Fletcher's contract will not cause us to cut TW or Orakpo. And if Cooley or Moss goes, I think it's as much production based as anything related to keeping Fletcher.

[81forHOF]

I'm happy that Flecth is back. We still need to draft an inside linebacker, tho.

[FRPLG]

Whistler, many if not most board members here have a good grasp of the salary cap and how it works. Most got that way by reading explanations here. Restructures are ALWAYS player friendly. Nothing is special about our situation.

[Evilgrin]

I don't give a rats ass about pro bowls, but the people saying he is slowing down? Didn't he just get named to the All Pro team? Lead the league in total tackles, if that's slowing down then we should expect him to just be top five this year.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by Evilgrin

I don't give a rats ass about pro bowls, but the people saying he is slowing down? Didn't he just get named to the All Pro team? Lead the league in total tackles, if that's slowing down then we should expect him to just be top five this year.

Good point.

Usually when we say so and so is slowing down, we're comparing him to Calvin Johnson or Patrick Willis.

[REDSKINS4ever]

Originally Posted by Evilgrin

I don't give a rats ass about pro bowls, but the people saying he is slowing down? Didn't he just get named to the All Pro team? Lead the league in total tackles, if that's slowing down then we should expect him to just be top five this year.

Fletcher is not slowing down by any means. The proof of this is that he was the most productive linebacker(outside, middle, or inside) in the NFL last season. Age is nothing but a number. It's beyond me that people like to put so much emphasis on an athlete's age. Age doesn't mean a thing. George Foreman is the oldest heavyweight boxing champion of all time and he did it well into his 40s.

London Fletcher is just as good as anybody playing linebacker in the NFL today.

[TheSmurfs22]

Glad we kept London he is invaluable to this franchise!

[los panda]

fletch vomited into a mason jar for me, i keep it in my medicine cabinet for emergencies. he's the only redskin to ever do that for me. he's also the only redskin to ever be considered for darrell green blood transfusions, not sure if he was approved or not, just that he was being considered

i am very glad he is back for the next 2 seasons

[skins89moss]

Im glad we got a deal done with London and I think 2 years is fine. Don't let age fool you 37yrs old is not old if you take care of your body and stay in shape year around. London has not had a major injury thus far in his career which has allowed him to play so many games at a high level. Good to have him backthe best free agent Synder has ever signed.

[skinsfan69]

All I'm saying is his chances of keeping up his level of play at 37-38 is 50/50. I'm not mad he's back. Hell I'm happy they signed him and gave him the raise he deserved. I would've just did it for one year and maybe given him 8 mil or so. Two years at 14 mil at that age? ... at that position? We'll see.

[whistler]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

All I'm saying is his chances of keeping up his level of play at 37-38 is 50/50. I'm not mad he's back. Hell I'm happy they signed him and gave him the raise he deserved. I would've just did it for one year and maybe given him 8 mil or so. Two years at 14 mil at that age? ... at that position? We'll see.

I'm glad that all are tickled that LF is back. All I've said is that at some point the skins have to move on and find another ILB and that it would be better to do it a year too soon thatn a year too late. LF was not going to get the same money anywhere else. Why the skins didn't wait until after June 1st and not over pay is a mystery to me.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by whistler

I'm glad that all are tickled that LF is back. All I've said is that at some point the skins have to move on and find another ILB and that it would be better to do it a year too soon thatn a year too late. LF was not going to get the same money anywhere else. Why the skins didn't wait until after June 1st and not over pay is a mystery to me.

It was the right thing to do. As others have said, he's been here day in day out, year in, year out, sets a great example and does his job. He desreved that raise in the worst way. But to me, it's awful front office work not to have someone behind a 37 year old inside linebacker.