Stl Bills Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 I thought the franchise tag for CBs dropped 3 million from 8 to 5 million but a couple of people have posted links that had the 2006 CB tag at the original 8 mil. I thought I remembered ESPN saying it dropped this year but I drink a lot so I only sort of remember. Whats the deal with this years tag? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D' men Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 I still think it's still 8 mil. Either way i don't want Clements back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsGuyInMalta Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 The AskTheCommish numbers of 8 million that some people were quoting were the 2005 numbers. I remember ESPN making a big deal that the CB numbers were dropping in 2006, but we probably wont know for sure until the 2006 salary cap limit is announced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 I still think it's still 8 mil. Either way i don't want Clements back. 591386[/snapback] By all reputable accounts it will be closer to 5 million. it would be 8 million TODAY...but, that all changes big time when the new #s come out. Winfields big # won't be there as well as one or two others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfladave Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 I still think it's still 8 mil. Either way i don't want Clements back. 591386[/snapback] Who do you suggest we plug in there? Do you really think we can afford to get cheap in this position? Nate didn't have a pro bowl year but he is still one of the top CBs in the league (top 10). He got burned a few times, but so did Woodson, Bailey and every other top CB in the league. In fact someone had posted a stat that showed both Bailey and Woodson have been burned more than Nate for the last 3 years. If we upgrade our DL you'll immediately see an improvement in our whole secondary. We won't have the safeties coming up closer to the box or worse constantly blitzing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 By all reputable accounts it will be closer to 5 million. it would be 8 million TODAY...but, that all changes big time when the new #s come out. Winfields big # won't be there as well as one or two others. 591408[/snapback] Yup. Winfields number wont be there, woodsons 10 mil is off the books, and ty law's inflated numbers are off the books. Those were 3 of the top 4 or 5 CB salaries last year. Everything i have heard is that it is going to drop to about 5 mil or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like A Mofo Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 I still think it's still 8 mil. Either way i don't want Clements back. 591386[/snapback] If its 8 million, then Im gonna start thinking of new screenames on here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 Yup. Winfields number wont be there, woodsons 10 mil is off the books, and ty law's inflated numbers are off the books. Those were 3 of the top 4 or 5 CB salaries last year. Everything i have heard is that it is going to drop to about 5 mil or so. 591507[/snapback] your right about winfield and ty's salaries dropping, but not woodson -- he earned 10.5M in pure salary for '05.......thus, he will be counted in the '06 calculation....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 Yup. Winfields number wont be there, woodsons 10 mil is off the books, and ty law's inflated numbers are off the books. Those were 3 of the top 4 or 5 CB salaries last year. Everything i have heard is that it is going to drop to about 5 mil or so. 591507[/snapback] unless i'm missing someone, these are the 5 that will make up the '06 calculation: woodson -- 10.5M bly -- 4M barber -- 3.75M madison -- 3.42M law -- 2.5M average -- 4.834 those are straight salary figures above, so they wouldn't include any performance based incentives earned (which likely are included in the calculation as they are paid immediately to the player)........if i missed a CB with a higher salary it will throw the number off as well....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 your right about winfield and ty's salaries dropping, but not woodson -- he earned 10.5M in pure salary for '05.......thus, he will be counted in the '06 calculation....... 591516[/snapback] isn't it based on last year's numbers? wouldn't that mean that woodson's are included? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 isn't it based on last year's numbers? wouldn't that mean that woodson's are included? 591529[/snapback] He's right and he is saying that Woodson's is included. Also, I would think Ken Lucas who signed a huge contract last year is one of the five. I would imagine it is just below $6 at the end. At that price, we need to franchise Nate, even though he often sucked this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fake-Fat Sunny Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 All signs point to it being the lower number rather than the higher number. The main reference folks used to state it is an $8 figure is based on incorrect reading of the Ask the Commish site. It flat out states that the cap figures are for what is correct for the today;s cap caculation (this season) rather than a cap calculation based on nexr season's pay and cap calculation. Folks interpreted the statement that it was accurate based on what we know today as somehow meaning that it was accurate based on what we will know tomorrow (actually March) when the salary cap for next season kicks in. The $8 million cap number for Clements is false unless the cap numbers for next year are the same as for this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 I just dont understand why someone "wouldn't want back" a over 6' tall over 200 lb corner with speed who can tackle and also is a awesome punt returner..... The more I think about it...the more I dont even want to franchise and trade him.... Bring back nate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stl Bills Posted February 2, 2006 Author Share Posted February 2, 2006 What about Antrell Rolle's contract, for some reason I remember it being huge...bigger than Pacman Jones who was taken ahead of Rolle. Anyone know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SACTOBILLSFAN Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 Nate didn't have a pro bowl year but he is still one of the top CBs in the league (top 10). He got burned a few times, but so did Woodson, Bailey and every other top CB in the league. In fact someone had posted a stat that showed both Bailey and Woodson have been burned more than Nate for the last 3 years. 591412[/snapback] He got burned a few times each game i think is what you meant to say. that being said schobel is overrated as a pass rusher (his sacks are mostly coverage sacks) even though his numbers are sexy and the rest of the line is deplorable, so the reason we didn't see the same great year from nate is because the defense can't rush the passer and compensated by blitzing milloy 92.73% of the time. Get some push so guys like sage rosenfels don't have 2 minutes to throw and you'll see what nate can do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 He's right and he is saying that Woodson's is included. Also, I would think Ken Lucas who signed a huge contract last year is one of the five. I would imagine it is just below $6 at the end. At that price, we need to franchise Nate, even though he often sucked this year. 591593[/snapback] lucas only made 900K in salary in '05.........his signing bonus (which was hefty) does not get counted in regards to the franchise number......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfladave Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 lucas only made 900K in salary in '05.........his signing bonus (which was hefty) does not get counted in regards to the franchise number......... 591762[/snapback] I think that any salary, roster bonus or signing bonus counts. That's why Winfield counted over $10 million on the figures last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsWatch Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 I think that any salary, roster bonus or signing bonus counts. That's why Winfield counted over $10 million on the figures last year. 591768[/snapback] Nope. Winfield got almost all in salary because Minnesota had lots of cap room and decided to do it that way to get cap all at once. Bonus does not count. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfladave Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 Nope. Winfield got almost all in salary because Minnesota had lots of cap room and decided to do it that way to get cap all at once. Bonus does not count. 591841[/snapback] Nope not the case, according to the NFLPA web site he only had a salary of $1.6 million in 2004. edit: It may have been paid to him in the form of a roster bonus instead of a signing bonus, which has an affect of how it counts against the cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 Nope not the case, according to the NFLPA web site he only had a salary of $1.6 million in 2004. edit: It may have been paid to him in the form of a roster bonus instead of a signing bonus, which has an affect of how it counts against the cap. 591855[/snapback] bingo -- it was a roster bonus, hence his inflated cap number in '04.......signing bonus doesn't count in the franchise number calculation........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts