|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234
Hall of Famer
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234 |
Since this pertains to multiple players, not just J.J. & Shaffer, I thought it deserved its own thread. . .
http://www.cleveland.com/browns/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/sports/1236933445148520.xml&coll=2
Bonus contracts handcuff Browns
Friday, March 13, 2009
Tony Grossi
Plain Dealer Reporter
A rash of cash roster bonuses, most owed to players today, has led to the release of at least two veteran Browns players and prompted the club's new management team to ask for relief from others.
The Browns released offensive tackle Kevin Shaffer on Thursday rather than pay him a scheduled bonus of $1 million and $2.65 million base salary. Shaffer was considering whether to return at a reduced contract or enter free agency, agent Alan Herman said.
On Wednesday, the Browns released popular receiver Joe Jurevicius, who was owed a $250,000 bonus and $2.4 million base salary. Jurevicius declined a pay reduction to the NFL veteran minimum salary.
Almost $30 million more in roster bonuses is owed in contracts inherited by new General Manager George Kokinis and coach Eric Mangini.
The roll call:
Defensive linemen Shaun Rogers and Corey Williams each is scheduled to receive $6 million in roster bonuses in contract extensions given by the Browns after trading for the players last March.
Quarterback Derek Anderson has a guaranteed bonus of $5 million owed today as part of his three-year, $24 million contract.
Receiver Donté Stallworth is owed a bonus of $4.75 million in his seven-year, $35 million contract.
Running back Jamal Lewis is owed a $4 million bonus in the second year of a three-year, $17 million contract he signed last February.
Left tackle Joe Thomas is owed a bonus of $3.44 million in the third year of his rookie contract signed in 2007.
All of those contracts were negotiated by former General Manager Phil Savage and his chief negotiator, Trip MacCracken. Savage was fired in December.
A week ago, the Browns named Dawn Aponte, formerly with the NFL Management Council and the New York Jets, as vice president/football administration.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 478
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 478 |
Thanks for posting Brownoholic. This article puts alot of the things in perspective and it is nice to see that Tony Grossi can write an informative article.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Handcuff? Everybody knew about those bonuses, what´s the problem? where do they handcuff the new regime? that´s BS....there´s still more than enough cap space
and looking at the bonuses and players getting them, it should be clear who doesn´t deserve it...fire Stallworth NOW
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,523
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,523 |
Thanks for the article bud.
One question,were these RB's previously included in the cap figures?Or do they get added in after being paid?
Indecision may,or maynot,be my problem
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
They're already included in the cap figure.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877 |
Yeah, it's not like the bonuses suddenly popped up.
The only handcuffs would be if they released the player and had to accelerate the money into the cap all in one year. Like they have to do with Shaffer's bonus. (and JJ's for that matter).
Savage may have been a financial doofus (I don't know). But from what I've read before Trip McCracken is pretty well thought of in the NFL. So either both these guys had brain cramps or this article is leaving something out.
"People who drink light 'beer' don't like the taste of beer; they just like to pee a lot."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
The Browns are in plenty good cap shape even with these bonuses.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
Actually if you guys just think about it , are most of these guys worth the bonuses they're scheduled to recieve? Rodgers is , although his mentality is league minimum  Williams...I wouldn't bother him after just one year..he played injured all season. Will they just release Stallworthless ???Please???? If anyone needs to be talked to about restructuring it's him..he's a player you do the Carfax on..flood damage..
Last edited by Attack Dawg; 03/13/09 10:52 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
So either both these guys had brain cramps or this article is leaving something out.
My guess is that what it is leaving out is... how is this not normal? There is no baseline of comparison to know what other teams are faced with on a year to year basis for roster bonuses.... I would think that on a 50+ man roster, quite a few of them have roster bonuses and you are going to get several large ones rolling around each year.... so, and I'm not asking this facetiously, why is this a big deal?
If the argument is that some of the bigger bonuses are going to aging and less than productive players, then I can buy that... but is this purely a money article or is it a value article? I'm not sure.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,959
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,959 |
Quote:
Handcuff? Everybody knew about those bonuses, what´s the problem? where do they handcuff the new regime? that´s BS....there´s still more than enough cap space
Ah Come on Django.. of course it handcuffs them. They didn't sign those deals, they inherited them.. THey are stuck with some that are worth it like Thomas and probably Lewis.. but some of them aren't worth it so it does handcuff them. If they didn't have to deal with it, then maybe they wouldn't have had to release Shaffer and JJ..
So it's NOT BS at all.. it's real.
That stallworth bonus,, that's bugging me to know end...
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,201
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,201 |
I may be wrong on this, but I gotta go with DeepThreat on this one: No, it does not handcuff them... those bonuses are already figured into our current cap standing because they fall under the category of "likely to be earned".
Thus, even if we pay ALL of them, we are STILL WAY under the cap by the exact amount that we currently are.
If someone can find something in the CBA to show where those bonuses do not get counted toward the cap until they are paid, then I will recant, but I'm pretty sure that is not the case and all of this money is already accounted for.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,267
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,267 |
Cost of doing business. No? Doesn't every team deal with this on a regular basis? Paying salaries in general could be labeled a handcuff. If we could get players for free, we'd have a big leg up. No? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
Here's how it works: The bonuses are already figured into our cap, but if we cut/trade the players with the bonuses are due before we pay the bonus, we have that much more cap room. You are correct when you say they are considered likely to be earned.
I'm sure you already knew that, but my guess is that there are others who did not.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,622
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 34,622 |
j/c
The only thing I KNOW is that they had better NOT mess around with JT's money.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,201
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,201 |
Here's a question that a discussion in another thread made me think of:
Has this year's Cap Limit number been officially set and stated yet?
'Peen mentioned that a letter was sent to season ticket holders saying that the league was expecting a 20% drop in revenues or something as a result of the economy.
It seems to me that would directly impact the NFL's shared revenues, and thus the Cap Limit.
Is perhaps the Cap Limit going to be decreasing this year?
[Edit]
(p.s. this still doesn't explain crap about Shaffer's release because with his accellerated bonus money I do believe that it still ends up having him cost us more this year by him not being here than it would have had we just kept him, plus he costs us next year as well... so I can't believe a damn thing about this Cap crap they are trying to shovel to us).
Last edited by PrplPplEater; 03/13/09 11:03 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,267
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,267 |
I'm beginning to wonder if Slo Lerner is not as flush with cash as most assume. First they fire a bunch of average Joe types saving chump change compared to player salaries. Now it looks like their trying to squeeze the last dime from player salaries. I can see it with guys like Shaffer who really didn't get it done on the field but for a player like JJ who did is job it just seems cheap. Easy for me to say it's not my 2.4 million. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475 |
The handcuff part is this:
1. Commitment for those RBs to certain players who just don't deserve it...They evaluated the team and they look at this guy and say - ehhhh we got to upgrade on him sometime in the near future. And the result also is we have to REWARD them??? We don't want to start a precedent of rewarding Mediocre play! But in that regard we are handcuffed to.
2. Handcuff also cause if you take away all those deals made for tomorrow for a Cheeseburger today...we'll just call them a "Wimpy" Deal  we would be big time players in the FA market - so that if there was ONE GUY we really wanted we could have pursued him. Instead we went with the upgrade the depth.
3. All those RB's were made on the premise that the players would have played excellent ball and earn them. The ones who did not are being dealt with.
4. All those who dislike this regime with some bias...openly or inside. Will keep bringing up Stallworth's name to anger other posters. But although I cannot tell you what, if we did not release him or negotiate with him...its because we have a POISON PILL in there where we lose out if we release him. It was mentioned in an article that we are STUCK with Stallworth and have no options this year.
No, do I think its at a catastrophic - OH NO level (handcuff) no
but it has handcuffed them...if only for the fact they have to set a precedent in their first year of their regime of REWARDING economically players who did not deserve the reward. Even if its Savage's deal it still is against their philosophy...they want the words "BONUS" to actually mean something!!
And when a Roster Bonus is put in - its suppose to be for some achievement of excellence. In that regard of reward a big time Handcuff!
JMHO
Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!
GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,177
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,177 |
If we are going to cut people, cut Jamal, Donte, trade DA....guys that arent going to be productive starters. And I hope these guys don't start this "handcuff" bull, everyone knew these bonus's were coming.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 5,109 |
I believe it is set at $127 million.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,201
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,201 |
Quote:
And when a Roster Bonus is put in - its suppose to be for some achievement of excellence.
No it isn't a reward for "achievement of excellence" - what a load that is, it is simply an accounting mechanism for getting more money to a player in a given year without violating the limits set on salaries by the CBA. Salaries cannot differ by more than 25% year-to-year... roster bonuses and workout bonuses are simply a way to get a player more money while still fitting within the CBA's rules. It is money for simply still being on the team - that's it, nothing else.
Quote:
but it has handcuffed them...if only for the fact they have to set a precedent in their first year of their regime of REWARDING economically players who did not deserve the reward. Even if its Savage's deal it still is against their philosophy...they want the words "BONUS" to actually mean something!!
That isn't a handcuff, that is a rationalization.
"Handcuffed" means that they have no choice, that their hand is being forced .... they are NOT. We have the space, all of that money is already accounted for... they are NOT handcuffed.
Your #2 argument holds no water whatsoever - not a drop. We have, and have had, the room to go after anyone we wanted to - even the ridiculous contracts. We went after no one.
#3 - See my initial point - those roster bonuses are NOT based upon "excellent play" - they are simply "are you still on the team". That's it - don't try to make more out it than it is... it isn't some employee reward program.
"Handcuffed" is lame spin put out by the team, and it's a load of horsecrap.
Plain and simple - the team is dumping salary left and right everywhere they can, and even where they can't (there is no replacement for Shaffer any cheaper than what he is/was).
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
I'm beginning to wonder if Slo Lerner is not as flush with cash as most assume.
Well, the stock market is off huge, I'm sure most of his investments are in those types of securities.. it only makes sense that his net worth has taken a beating... so you know what he needs? He needs to pay more taxes. 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,267
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,267 |
Quote:
Quote:
I'm beginning to wonder if Slo Lerner is not as flush with cash as most assume.
Well, the stock market is off huge, I'm sure most of his investments are in those types of securities.. it only makes sense that his net worth has taken a beating... so you know what he needs? He needs to pay more taxes.
Apparently he seems to think he needs to pay more NY Jet flotsam.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,523
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,523 |
Actually that would be jetsom,the flotsom comes from Baltimore.
Indecision may,or maynot,be my problem
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,558
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,558 |
j/c
I think they are just being fiscally responsible, like someone else said. Remember, i think it was last year when people were clamoring for Ty Law to be signed but it was reported that Lerner wouldn't allow it because we had already met what he wanted to spend for the year. This will allow us more flexibility in signing a player if another player gets hurt after the start of the season and will also allow us to have more money to spend on future Free Agents.
#gmstrong
Live, Love, Laugh
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,267
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,267 |
Quote:
Actually that would be jetsom,the flotsom comes from Baltimore.
That too! Koki-nuts? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
Quote:
And when a Roster Bonus is put in - its suppose to be for some achievement of excellence.
No it isn't a reward for "achievement of excellence" - what a load that is, it is simply an accounting mechanism for getting more money to a player in a given year without violating the limits set on salaries by the CBA. Salaries cannot differ by more than 25% year-to-year... roster bonuses and workout bonuses are simply a way to get a player more money while still fitting within the CBA's rules. It is money for simply still being on the team - that's it, nothing else.
Quote:
but it has handcuffed them...if only for the fact they have to set a precedent in their first year of their regime of REWARDING economically players who did not deserve the reward. Even if its Savage's deal it still is against their philosophy...they want the words "BONUS" to actually mean something!!
That isn't a handcuff, that is a rationalization.
"Handcuffed" means that they have no choice, that their hand is being forced .... they are NOT. We have the space, all of that money is already accounted for... they are NOT handcuffed.
Your #2 argument holds no water whatsoever - not a drop. We have, and have had, the room to go after anyone we wanted to - even the ridiculous contracts. We went after no one.
#3 - See my initial point - those roster bonuses are NOT based upon "excellent play" - they are simply "are you still on the team". That's it - don't try to make more out it than it is... it isn't some employee reward program.
"Handcuffed" is lame spin put out by the team, and it's a load of horsecrap.
Plain and simple - the team is dumping salary left and right everywhere they can, and even where they can't (there is no replacement for Shaffer any cheaper than what he is/was).
very good post.
also, wanted to comment generally on something that I think is being overlooked at next year's "uncapped year"
look for teams to cut players that they normally would not cut because they can accelerate their bonus against next year's "uncapped" year...meaning it could very well end up being a "get out of jail free card" for a team like the Redskins that give a bunch of players huge longterm contracts with big bonuses that they do not live up to.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877 |
Quote:
look for teams to cut players that they normally would not cut because they can accelerate their bonus against next year's "uncapped" year..
But that won't work until next year (2010). Anyone they cut before 1/1/2010 will count against the cap this year and their bonus would be accelerated into this year's cap.
So it would make sense to sign a player with big numbers this year and not worry about cutting him next year. But cutting guys like Shaffer or JJ just to save money is stupid because you're not saving money. Not this year.
Plus, don't forget that while the likelihood is that next year will be uncapped there is still a chance that with new leadership the Players Union might be more willing to negotiate a deal that the owners will be willing to live with. Then the cap might still be in play next year. Unlikely, yes. Impossible, no.
"People who drink light 'beer' don't like the taste of beer; they just like to pee a lot."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,959
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,959 |
Quote:
No, it does not handcuff them... those bonuses are already figured into our current cap standing because they fall under the category of "likely to be
Just cause it was figured in and they knew about them, doesn't mean that they aren't handcuffed by them.. It still, no matter what, is an issue they gotta deal with.. so I say that if they didn't have those contracts, they would approach things differently....
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
I realize that, I just haven't seen my thoughts on the uncapped year posted anywhere here yet and wanted to add that to the discussions.
As for the cuts this year, I am sticking by the actual $$$ from Lerner's pocket and not the cap figure being the real reason for them.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877 |
But they've known about the bonuses from the day they walked in the door. It's not like you walked in and said "oh, yeah, forgot to tell you, the team owes $10 million in bonuses next week".
There are absolutely no hancuffs being applied by paying these bonuses. Unless Lerner is broke and planning on pocketing any money he can save from the Browns to live on.
But if that was the case I think he'd stop pouring money into his soccer team. Which he hasn't. In fact they appear to be doing much better than the Browns. Go figure.
"People who drink light 'beer' don't like the taste of beer; they just like to pee a lot."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877 |
Quote:
As for the cuts this year, I am sticking by the actual $$$ from Lerner's pocket and not the cap figure being the real reason for them.
So you think he's having this done to put money into his pockets? That this is his way of "pleading poor"? Or am I misunderstanding your meaning?
"People who drink light 'beer' don't like the taste of beer; they just like to pee a lot."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
My comment will be taken in various contexts depending on where you stand on the state of the team.......
Those contracts appear prohibitive now. However, had those players lived up to those contracts, they'd still be earning them, in which case that money would have been well-spent.
In short, Savage gambled on Shaffer and JJ and Tucker and Anderson and Stallworth earning their money. They haven't, so here we are.
I'm also going to take some exception to the notion that those monies "handcuffed us." We had the caproom regardless of the bonuses. Those players simply didn't live up to the bonuses, so they aren't being paid out.
Just saying......
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 786
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 786 |
DANG TOAD!!!! I have never agreed so much with you lately.....  I have not seen a questionable guy let go for whatever reason....i have though questioned some signings but i have not had a WHAT ARE THEY THINKING moment yet. Some people on here and writers are simply amazing at the knee jerk reactions. I feel if the season started today....we could win 4 freckin games!!!! And we havent drafted a soul yet nor entered into the 2nd FA period when teams release guys after the draft. AMAZING!!!! 
You dont have to win every game just the next one!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877 |
Quote:
I feel if the season started today....we could win freckin games!!!!
I admire your "can do" spirit. But since we haven't addressed any of our big needs yet and have actually created holes where none were before........Not to mention the fact that even with the guys that were let go we were only 4-12........
How do you figure we could win games?
"People who drink light 'beer' don't like the taste of beer; they just like to pee a lot."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 786
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 786 |
I edited my post....thats what i was referring too....WE could win 4 games with what we have now.
Do you not agree?
You dont have to win every game just the next one!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 15,188 |
Purps got the best summation of this .. at the end of the day it is just a way to MANIPULATE THE SALARY CAP and get the the $$ to count against the cap in a year that is good for the team cap wise.... no more, no less ...
the "bonuses" are no more than salary in the year they are recieved ... so it allows teams to shift money around in the contract and ignore the 25% "raise" rule placed on "salaries" from one year to the next ... it is merely a way to get around that restriction ..
I can see the other sides argument also .. they are WRONG but I can see it .... it is restrictive ... but it is just how business is done in todays NFL ... I bet every team in the league has the same damm things going on we do .. see Vrabel from NE and Coles from the Jets ..
the players like it also .. they get a nice chunk of change in March (thats when these things are usually due in case the team does not want to meet them they got time to find another team) ... and I would bet they get more money then they would have as these are basically just deferred signing bonuses ... and the teams have to pay for that ...
its a WIN/WIN when your doing the original contract ... then it becomes a "restriction" when the bonus is due ...
Grossi sensationalizes everything ... and the use of the word handcuffed is no more than that ... he is just sensationalizing this common occurence with the use of the word handcuffed ...
the one thing I would like to know .. is WHEN are these bonuses due the other guys ...
tabber ... and the "poision pill" someone else reffered to in Donte's situation is that if we cut him now the entire SB he got last eyar would be accelerated into this years cap ... and that would be a pretty big number ....
I have NO CLUE how this guy will stay on the team .. the cap stuff should be NO WORRIES as we have way more money right now then were ever going to spend unless we do a mega player for player deal .... and that does not happen in todays NFL ...
quite frankly I thought one of the reasons we were clearing so much cap space was so we could clear room to absorb Donte's hit and get rid of him ..
and if he stays on the team ... my initial impression of these guys will not be a good one .... its way to early to start blasting them ... WAY TO EARLY ... but my initial impression will be that they need to IMPROVE DRAMITICALLY cause they were hoodwinked by sumptin they saw in Donte ..
hes fools gold ... alot like DA .... he "looks" great and can do alot of things ..... just like DA has the "cannon" and that can blind alot of people into thinking they can make them football players ... when U can't make DA any smarter or accurate U can also not make Donte anymore durable or want it more .. (the want it more is just my perspective of Donte .. when he was in NO they questioned his motivation .. then after a decent year with the Iggles they let him walk for peanuts to NE .. and there was a reason for that .... ) ..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 34
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 34 |
DIamdawg, the only rational reason I can think of, and I discussed this very thing with Dad and he says it's the only one he can think of too, is that they might keep Stallworth on the roster this year so that they can cut him in the uncapped year and not lose capspace. That is assuming that they know more about the negotiations and likelihood of next year being uncapped, which I'm sure they do. It does make sense to handle it that way if ther will be an uncapped year next year.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,160 |
I popped my hammy after reading that 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877 |
Quote:
It does make sense to handle it that way if ther will be an uncapped year next year
True. But combined with the other moves so far it tells me they're a lot more concerned with the balance sheet than they are with winning this year.
And that bothers me. Because had they told me that this was going to be a "throw-away" year I would have acted accordingly regarding my tickets. (Which I may still do).
"People who drink light 'beer' don't like the taste of beer; they just like to pee a lot."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877 |
Quote:
I edited my post....thats what i was referring too....WE could win 4 games with what we have now.
Do you not agree?
Today, at this point in time......No.
Perhaps by the time TC comes around I'll feel differently. I sure hope so.
"People who drink light 'beer' don't like the taste of beer; they just like to pee a lot."
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Bonus contracts handcuff Browns .
. .
|
|
