Live&DieBillsFootball Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 The Raiders are $15.7 million over the $85.5 million salary cap, not counting the Jerry Porter contract and the future acquisition of wide receiver Randy Moss, who has a $7.25 million salary. ESPN story Franchise tenders can backfire. Woodson signed it and is guaranteed the $10.5 million. The Raiders probably hoped to do a cap friendly deal to keep him. Now they have major cap problems.
nodnarb Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 BWAHAHAHA Raiders: Fuggem. It's just more of the same ol' Raiders and their committment to excrement.
NavyBillsFan Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 He just laid the bomb on the Raiders with that one. What the hell are the Raiders thinking now days? see that cap hit when Moss comes in the picture?
kasper13 Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 Good. I hope they go $50 million over and have to cut all but a handful of players and have to sign 41 guys to minimum contracts. Their team will consist of Moss, Porter, Collins, Woodson and 41 rookies and reject free agents.
Bill from NYC Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 The Raiders are $15.7 million over the $85.5 million salary cap, not counting the Jerry Porter contract and the future acquisition of wide receiver Randy Moss, who has a $7.25 million salary. ESPN story Franchise tenders can backfire. Woodson signed it and is guaranteed the $10.5 million. The Raiders probably hoped to do a cap friendly deal to keep him. Now they have major cap problems. 253580[/snapback] That is great stuff! "Franchise" contracts are guaranteed, so the Raiders cannot get out of this if Woodson wants to stay, and why wouldn't he? He can start all over next year as a ufa, sign with another team, and get a huge bonus. This had to be one of the dumbest moves by a front office that I have ever seen. Now, do we all see why TD didn't place the tag on Jennings?
Corp000085 Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 does this mean that i should start a new thread proclaiming: "Lets sign woodson next year"
Charlie68 Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 does anyone have a good link to the Raiders 2005 salary cap #'s (player by player)? If they are looking to dump some players, there might be some interesting trade possibilities
Ramius Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 Good. I hope they go $50 million over and have to cut all but a handful of players and have to sign 41 guys to minimum contracts. Their team will consist of Moss, Porter, Collins, Woodson and 41 rookies and reject free agents. 253613[/snapback] well, its not the raiders, but this is what the deadskins are gonna look like after the 2006 season i believe...snyder has really f8cked that team good...
plenzmd1 Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 this is why teams do not put the tag on every FA. It has been stated many times on this board that put the tag on JJ or Pat, and if you cannot get a trade for them simply remove th etag. But it appears that if the dude sends you a signed offer before it is removed, you gotta eat it.
obie_wan Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 well, its not the raiders, but this is what the deadskins are gonna look like after the 2006 season i believe...snyder has really f8cked that team good... 253805[/snapback] The CBA expires in 2007, so 2007 will be an uncapped year unless the CBA is extended. Snyder is rolling the dice that the extension will be delayed long enough so his overspending can be washed out in 2007.
Larry Playfair Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 this is so stupid. they are screwed. over the cap by 15 mil, and they havent even added in moss and porter!! haaaa! that is some serious cap mismanagement. they are going to have to do seom serious cutting. and they pretty much sucked last year. we play them again next year - lets chalk that baby up for a w.
BillnutinHouston Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 With these huge contracts to a handful of players, the Raiders are becoming the anti-Patriots. HAven't they been watching the Pats the last few years? There are still 52 slots to fill on each roster, correct? Who's that toothless GM they have over there? Raiders = dumb
BillnutinHouston Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 Who's that toothless GM they have over there? 253905[/snapback] Oh, yeah, Ernie LoCasale, right?
MadBuffaloDisease Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 Teams have to be under the cap by March 2nd, right? I seriously doubt anyone has offered to sign Woodson and give the Raiders draft picks. In that case, the Raiders probably won't be able to trade for Moss without a major roster purge.
Mike32282 Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 I always wondered how long it would take until a player would SCREW the team that slapped the tag on them. This is great. I'm not suprised that the first agent to tell his player to do it...is the Poston brothers. What !@#$s.
Coach Tuesday Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 Teams have to be under the cap by March 2nd, right? I seriously doubt anyone has offered to sign Woodson and give the Raiders draft picks. In that case, the Raiders probably won't be able to trade for Moss without a major roster purge. 253913[/snapback] Umm... actually... can't the Raiders simply send Woodson to the Vikings as part of the deal (letting the Vikings negotiate a long-term deal with Woodson beforehand)?
MadBuffaloDisease Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 (edited) Umm... actually... can't the Raiders simply send Woodson to the Vikings as part of the deal (letting the Vikings negotiate a long-term deal with Woodson beforehand)? They could, but I'm sure if the Vikes had wanted Woodson, they would have traded Moss for him originally. I doubt the Raiders would want to give their 7th overall AND Woodson AND Harris for Moss. But who knows? Edited February 26, 2005 by MadBuffaloDisease
Coach Tuesday Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 They could, but I'm sure if the Vikes had wanted Woodson, they would have traded Moss for him. I doubt the Raiders would want to give their 7th rounder AND Woodson AND Harris for Moss. But who knows? 253939[/snapback] Perhaps... but Woodson definitely will be going somewhere. All this does is guarantee him a long-term deal with a team of his choice - and the Raiders have little leverage as to the terms of the trade.
GG Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 Perhaps... but Woodson definitely will be going somewhere. All this does is guarantee him a long-term deal with a team of his choice - and the Raiders have little leverage as to the terms of the trade. 253942[/snapback] There is some flexibility. Gannon counts over $10M for the cap, and he'll be cut along with other moves to get Raiders just under the cap by March 2. Even if Woodson didn't sign the tender, the amount of the tender counts in the salary cap computation, and Raiders would have been over the cap anyway. So I don't know what the fuss is, other than Woodson is now guaranteed to make $10M in '05. Jerry Porter is signed through 2005, so the Raiders will have to wait to finalize his deal until Woodson is resolved, same with the Moss trade.
Coach Tuesday Posted February 26, 2005 Posted February 26, 2005 Wouldn't a Woodson-for-Rudi Johnson or a Woodson-for-Larry Johnson trade make complete sense??
Recommended Posts