2013 FA Thread (Updates on OP) New: Merling, Brace, Pashos, Trueblood, EJBig, Tapp, White, Williams, MATTHEWS; Re-up: Rex, Hall, Davis, Paulsen, DY, RJax, Lich, Sundberg, Baker, Sav, Golston, Kehl, Polumbus; Paycuts: Carriker, Moss, BMeri, J. Wilson

[DogofWar1]

The thing with Hall is that he gets the blame for a lot of things that were Williams's fault. Even in 2011 in those Dallas games, he was put on an island with Dez and basically told to cover for 6 or 7 seconds.

Hall isn't Revis, but he's good enough to deserve a starting role. The problem isn't skill, but his contract.

While ultimately I think we could find a replacement and maybe more (either in quantity or quality) with the money we would save by cutting him, considering he's willing to restructure, we should take that course.

Cutting him creates a hole that we would have money to fill, but money =/= guarantee of adding a player. If we suddenly lose out on bidding for Lewis, Toler, and a couple others, we'd be in a heap of trouble without Hall there.

If Hall was not outright willing to restructure, and we were dealing with Hall's current contract vs. potential FA, the weight might lean towards cutting, but with Hall willing to restructure I think the weighing of options leans towards restructuring to save several million and pursuing someone with that over cutting him.

[SemperFi Skins]

Michael Johnson - DL - Bengals NFL.com's Albert Breer reports there's "not much traction" on a long-term deal between the Bengals and RE Michael Johnson.
Along with RT Andre Smith, Johnson is one of the Bengals' two most critical free agents. Coach Marvin Lewis says the team is undecided on using the franchise tag. The Bengals have long been known for spendthrift ways, but it would be highly surprising if neither Johnson nor Smith was tagged before the March 4 deadline. That's because it would be even more surprising if the sides hammered out a long-term deal in the next 12 days. Related: Andre Smith
Source: Albert Breer on Twitter Feb 20 - 2:04 PM

Aqib Talib - DB - Patriots Neither CSN New England nor WEEI Boston expect the Patriots to use the franchise tag on free agent CB Aqib Talib.
WEEI's Chris Price points out that the Patriots have "never given a DB that kind of payday," while CSN's Tom Curran believes it would be an "uncharacteristic panic move." Tagging Talib makes sense on paper, as the Pats could be without Alfonzo Dennard in 2013, while it's fair to wonder how the mercurial Talib would conduct himself under a long-term deal. But the $10.7 million tag would only further weigh down a top-heavy cap situation, and the Pats may need it for RT Sebastian Vollmer. If Talib reaches the market, the Pats are unlikely to be the top bidder.
Source: Tom Curran on Twitter Feb 20 - 1:14 PM

---------- Post added February-20th-2013 at 03:15 PM ----------

Gotcha. So I should stop hoping?

Still a possibility of William Moore of ATL hitting FA but I doubt it... Goldson may not get tagged either... Both very pricey IMO. I'd hope for Corey Lynch at best.

[DC9]

Still a possibility of William Moore of ATL hitting FA but I doubt it... Goldson may not get tagged either... Both very pricey IMO. I'd hope for Corey Lynch at best.

Late yesterday the report that Dimitroff wasn't going to use the tag on Moore was rebutted. Moore wants long money though. I doubt he gets it if Demitroff thinks the Falcons can make a run in 2013.

EDIT: And Hitman, yes, there is pretty much 0% chance that J-Byrd hit's the market.

[SemperFi Skins]

Late yesterday the report that Dimitroff wasn't going to use the tag on Moore was rebutted. Moore wants long money though. I doubt he gets it if Demitroff thinks the Falcons can make a run in 2013.

EDIT: And Hitman, yes, there is pretty much 0% chance that J-Byrd hit's the market.

They'll release Michael Turner and save a good amount of money with that, like $8 mil or so. That figures to sign Moore/Baker... still leaving Brent Grimes and possibly Tony Gonzalez needing a paycheck.

[Skinsinparadise]

Hall isn't Revis, but he's good enough to deserve a starting role. The problem isn't skill, but his contract.

I agree and it was the only point of the post that was taken by a person as a big shot at D. Hall. Only issue I got with D. Hall is contract coupled with age. IMO 8 million a year would give us a decent shot at signing a younger and better player. not becuase Hall stinks, he's fine as a starter. but if we are going to behave like perennial contenders like the Patriots and Giants -- we got to be practical and not emotional about our players Vinny style who would deal with the cap by restructuring a late 20s Clinton Portis contract years forward and create dead cap money ultimately. IMO D. Hall isn't going to get 8 million a year in free agency so why just give it to him? Yeah restructuring buys us time -- but borrowing from Peter to pay Paul is what has partly killed this team over the years.

If you follow what the Giants did with Ahmad Bradshaw, they are tight around the cap. They didn't restructure but released him. They aren't ruling out resigning him but they would do it at market value.

If Hall was not outright willing to restructure, and we were dealing with Hall's current contract vs. potential FA, the weight might lean towards cutting, but with Hall willing to restructure I think the weighing of options leans towards restructuring to save several million and pursuing someone with that over cutting him.

I'd agree if paying Hall 8 million was about right and that he's slightly overpaid. But IMO that's not the case. Why couldn't we outbid teams for Hall if he's released? Teams do release players and then sign them soon after -- it does happen. Bottom line for me is 8 million is a lot of cap room, if Keenan Lewis for example is as purported asking for 5-6 mill a year, i'd gather we can get him at 8 million a year. I am just using Lewis as a hypothetical, I got no idea who the FO loves or doesn't love.

Edit: To you point about Hall getting blamed for what really are M. Williams miscues, i don't really see that too much. I'd say M. Williams is by a mile the biggest scapegoat of the secondary's woes by both board members and the media -- and justifiably IMO so.

[ConnSKINS26]

Gotcha. So I should stop hoping?

Yeah, unfortunately.

[21MadFan]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...f-122-million/

PFT- Source: Cap will be north of $122 million

Though the salary cap won’t be spiking this year (and, despite the looming impact of the new TV deals, in any year), this year’s smoothing will be a little less smooth that previously believed.

A source with knowledge of the situation tells PFT that the team-by-team spending limit will exceed $122 million in 2013.

While a move to $122 million represents an increase of only $1.4 million per team, every dollar helps, given the number of teams in cap trouble.

An increase in the unadjusted cap also increases the per-team minimum spending requirement, which commences this year. On a four-year rolling average, teams must spend in cash 89 percent of the annual unadjusted cap.

Last year, the teams and the league had to borrow against future years’ cap space to ensure that the spending limit would not decrease. It’s unknown whether any similar robbing-Peter-to-pay-Paul will occur in 2013.

[Momma There Goes That Man]

A. I think a guy like Keenan Lewis is better.
B. Keenen Lewis is younger
C. We likely can get Keenan Lewis or a player of his caliber cheaper at the same price or cheaper than 8 mill
D. D. Hall will be 30 and will unlikely get 8 million from anyone on the market

Conclusion: So if you want D. Hall back why pay him like he's one of the best corners in the game especially into his 30s? The fact that i don't think he is one of the elite corners in the game or deserves to be paid as much into his 30s -- doesn't mean the opposite extreme that he's terrible.
.

The argument should be if Lewis is better than Hall +1-2 other players. Because if we keep Hall and he restructures, saving us 4 million or so then we can go get at least one more person to help maybe 2 depending on who they are.

You are correct though that if everything is equal, paying Hall $8million a year instead of Lewis makes no sense but that isn't exactly the situation we are in.

We have other needs and keeping Hall while restructuring allows us to hold onto one of our best defensive players at a position of need while also improving the team in at least one more area. Hall knows his time here is limited and we can hang on to him for his last 1-2 good years.

All our CB will look a lot better with improved safety play, like if we bring in Lynch with the money saved from Hall restructuring.

[rick1796]

A. I think a guy like Keenan Lewis is better.
B. Keenen Lewis is younger
C. We likely can get Keenan Lewis or a player of his caliber cheaper at the same price or cheaper than 8 mill
D. D. Hall will be 30 and will unlikely get 8 million from anyone on the market

A. Yes Keenan Lewis is better
B. Yes keenan lewis is younger
C. Keenan lewis might not count8 mil this year but his contract will be HUGE. He is a young player playing at a high level at a premier position. Would not be surprised to see his contract exceed 8 mil a year (though again i agree his first year payout would probably be less)
D. Hall will; not make 8 mil this year (with us or another team) but he could sign a contract elsewhere.

with your points listed mostly valid other than everyone thinking we're the only one's who like keenan lewis, why not just do as most think they will and restructure(pay cut) him? why create a hole we might not be able to fill? We have enough holes creating more just to try and fill them with new players makes me nervous.

[pjfootballer]

I agree and it was the only point of the post that was taken by a person as a big shot at D. Hall. Only issue I got with D. Hall is contract coupled with age. IMO 8 million a year would give us a decent shot at signing a younger and better player. not becuase Hall stinks, he's fine as a starter. but if we are going to behave like perennial contenders like the Patriots and Giants -- we got to be practical and not emotional about our players Vinny style who would deal with the cap by restructuring a late 20s Clinton Portis contract years forward and create dead cap money ultimately. IMO D. Hall isn't going to get 8 million a year in free agency so why just give it to him? Yeah restructuring buys us time -- but borrowing from Peter to pay Paul is what has partly killed this team over the years.

If you follow what the Giants did with Ahmad Bradshaw, they are tight around the cap. They didn't restructure but released him. They aren't ruling out resigning him but they would do it at market value.

Don't take this the wrong way, but with you saying some people in here are trying to hang on to players because of sentimental value and they are still looking at doing business like the Vinny days, you are kind of being hypocritical because you are basically saying that the FO is still doing business like that, when in reality, we're in the best cap shape (despite the penalty) we've been in in years. Allen is a cap specialist. That is one of the main reasons he was brought in. I'm one of the people who was upset that Cooley was let go, but I understood why and had no problem with it. Everything needs to be done for whats good for the team as a whole.

But I do want to point out one thing about the Giants. The Giants have not been able to re-sign alot of their players, not because they figure "oh well, we just have one behind him," but because they've been hard up against the cap the last few years. That's usually the price you pay for winning a couple of Super Bowls. The Packers have been the same way. They've had a hard time re-signing guys because guys want to get paid after winning titles. The Patriots havn't had to deal with that because they havn't won squat in quite a while. I really hate comparing ourselves to other teams. I don't want to do things the "Patriot Way" or the "Steeler Way," because what works for them, may not work for us. There once was a time when we would do things the "Redskins Way," while winning SBs. I'll be curious to see if the Patriots are still lauded for doing things the "Patriot Way," a year or two after Tom Brady retires. My bet is no.

[DC9]

They'll release Michael Turner and save a good amount of money with that, like $8 mil or so. That figures to sign Moore/Baker... still leaving Brent Grimes and possibly Tony Gonzalez needing a paycheck.

Yep, saw that Quiz was "ready for anyone" the Falcons may draft at RB.

---------- Post added February-20th-2013 at 07:06 PM ----------

Last year, the teams and the league had to borrow against future years’ cap space to ensure that the spending limit would not decrease. It’s unknown whether any similar robbing-Peter-to-pay-Paul will occur in 2013.

And this is going to lead to a strike in the next four years or so. Bank on that. And it's going to be an ugly one. DeMaurice Smith is an idiot and got outfoxed... he is not a war-time consiglieri (sp?)...

---------- Post added February-20th-2013 at 07:34 PM ----------

The Ravens plan to touch base with free agent CB Cary Williams' representation at the Combine.
"The ultimate goal, if possible, is for Cary is to stay a Raven," Williams' agent said. "It's tough terrain with them because of their cap situation and them having to pay their quarterback. If it doesn't work out with Baltimore, I think Cary has elevated his game and himself. ... I'm expecting him to very much be a wanted man by teams." Both the Baltimore Sun and Carroll County Times expect Williams to walk in free agency.

The Ravens will meet with free agent ILB Dannell Ellerbe's player rep at the Combine.
"I'm sitting down with them, and I hope we'll have some constructive talks," said Ellerbe's rep. "I think Dannell has proven himself to be one of the elite young linebackers in the NFL. ... Hopefully, there's a home for him in Baltimore. If not, I'm sure plenty of other teams will be happy to have him on their roster." The comments are a strong indication "hometown discount" won't be a part of Ellerbe's lexicon this spring. Baltimore may be less than 50-50 to keep Ray Lewis' planned successor.

The Browns have yet to reach out to free agent Josh Cribbs about a new deal, and haven't scheduled talks for the Combine.
Cribbs wants to return to Cleveland, but the feeling doesn't appear to be mutual. Cribbs' agent anticipates "plenty of interest from other teams," but seems unaware that his client caught just seven passes in 2012 and will soon turn 30. In Cribbs' defense, he did have his best year returning punts and kicks since 2009 last season. Cribbs should be a return specialist wherever he ends up.

Redskins ILB London Fletcher still hasn't decided whether he'll play in 2013.
"It’s still a process," Fletcher said. "(When) you get older in your career, you have to evaluate everything. Health is one thing. Can I still do it at the level that I want to do it at and play at?" Fletcher tallied a team-high 139 tackles last season, but struggled at times as he played through a host of minor injuries. He graded out as the third-worst inside linebacker in Pro Football Focus' ratings. He's under contract for $5.5 million. It's doubtful he walks away from that.

According to "people familiar with the situation," the Texans will meet with free agent OLB Connor Barwin's agent at the Combine, and "both sides" are hopeful of a new deal.
Beat writer Tania Ganguli would be "surprised" if Barwin didn't reach the open market, but it sounds like the sides will at least give extension talks a college try. Barwin previously turned down extensions both before the 2012 season and after his breakout 2011 campaign. The Texans' salary-cap situation isn't as dire as it was last offseason, but they still have little flexibility. Barwin, meanwhile, saw his sack total dip from 11.5 in 2011 to three last season.

Sources from "within the front office" tell DallasCowboys.com the Cowboys will meet with free agent OLB Anthony Spencer's agent at the Combine.
How shocking that DallasCowboys.com was able to get a scoop from the Dallas Cowboys. According to writer Nick Eatman, it remains unlikely the Cowboys franchise tag Spencer for the second consecutive season. Executive VP Stephen Jones said Tuesday that the tag hadn't been completely ruled out, but is far down the list of possibilities. The Cowboys clearly want to keep a player coming off a career season, but it would require some major salary-cap sorcery.

Bengals.com reports Cincinnati would like to re-sign free agent CB Pacman Jones, and that the sides will meet at the Combine.
The Bengals gambled on Jones three years ago and were rewarded with his first productive season in over half a decade in 2012. Going on 30, Pacman is going to want to get paid, but there's every reason to believe he'll be more valuable to the Bengals than anyone else.

Chargers claimed CB Johnny Patrick off waivers from the Saints.
The 2011 third-rounder was waived on Tuesday. It bodes poorly for Patrick's future that a team as talent deficient as the Saints on defense would waive a day-two pick less than two years after the fact — especially in February — but he's still only 24. He should compete for a spot on special teams in Chargers camp.

ESPN's Adam Schefter "doesn't see" the Vikings trading Percy Harvin.
Schefter is just passing along his gut feeling in a mailbag column, but his gut feeling is surely informed by league chatter. Schefter believes the Vikings would be "out of their minds" to trade Harvin for less than "premium value." Most reports have suggested premium value is something the Vikings will have trouble getting for a player who wants to break the bank with his next contract.

http://www.rotoworld.com/sports/nfl/football

[Skinsinparadise]

The argument should be if Lewis is better than Hall +1-2 other players. Because if we keep Hall and he restructures, saving us 4 million or so then we can go get at least one more person to help maybe 2 depending on who they are. You are correct though that if everything is equal, paying Hall $8million a year instead of Lewis makes no sense but that isn't exactly the situation we are in. We have other needs and keeping Hall while restructuring allows us to hold onto one of our best defensive players at a position of need while also improving the team in at least one more area. Hall knows his time here is limited and we can hang on to him for his last 1-2 good years. All our CB will look a lot better with improved safety play, like if we bring in Lynch with the money saved from Hall restructuring.

I am thinking beyond just this year especially with a player who will be 31 during the 2014 season. I always understood restructuring as generally about converting the contract into a bonus/guaranteed money that moves into future years. So the cap hit ends up having the same amount of pain over time, its just spread out over years, and if you ultimately want to release that player during the contract, its your tough luck, you'll be paying that guy the guaranteed money for the length of the contract. And that was the game Vinny played a lot, its all about living for today and don't worry about tomorrow -- and at some points it indeed burned them, take the year for example they traded Coles, they took a cap hit for that trade and they in turn supposedly couldn't afford to keep Antonio Pierce.

If I got this wrong, let me know. If i have it right, you are still giving D. Hall the same amount of guaranteed money if not more depending on the extension/restructure. If so, why do it? If we release him, he has to start over when it comes to securing guaranteed money, will another team give him what he'd currently get from us in a restructured deal? I seriously doubt it. As for not releasing him, I get more the argument of what if we can't find a replacement. I think in theory we could find a replacement but they obviously have an idea of how the market is shaping up behind the scene whereas I don't.

[J-bomb]

Skinsparadise:[\QUOTE]Edit: To you point about Hall getting blamed for what really are M. Williams miscues, i don't really see that too much. I'd say M. Williams is by a mile the biggest scapegoat of the secondary's woes by both board members and the media -- and justifiably IMO so.[/QUOTE]


You must no vist extremeskins much LL (skins insider) already broke down williams constant miscues in the srcondary...its been proven that the mistakes were in fact williams not Halls, the only people that think its dhalls fault have an agenda against him personally cause if you watch the game correctly or visit this forum enough you would understand how our secondary plays there schemes.

[JamesMadisonSkins]

I am thinking beyond just this year especially with a player who will be 31 during the 2014 season. I always understood restructuring as generally about converting the contract into a bonus/guaranteed money that moves into future years. So the cap hit ends up having the same amount of pain over time, its just spread out over years, and if you ultimately want to release that player during the contract, its your tough luck, you'll be paying that guy the guaranteed money for the length of the contract. And that was the game Vinny played a lot, its all about living for today and don't worry about tomorrow -- and at some points it indeed burned them, take the year for example they traded Coles, they took a cap hit for that trade and they in turn supposedly couldn't afford to keep Antonio Pierce.

If I got this wrong, let me know. If i have it right, you are still giving D. Hall the same amount of guaranteed money if not more depending on the extension/restructure. If so, why do it? If we release him, he has to start over when it comes to securing guaranteed money, will another team give him what he'd currently get from us in a restructured deal? I seriously doubt it. As for not releasing him, I get more the argument of what if we can't find a replacement. I think in theory we could find a replacement but they obviously have an idea of how the market is shaping up behind the scene whereas I don't.

If I'm not mistaken, Hall is owed something like $9 million this year, $1 million of which is guaranteed. That's why the team would "save" $8 million by releasing him outright. That being said, the Redskins hold the cards here. Hall is in no position to demand guaranteed money and seems willing to renegotiate. Honestly, I have no idea what they would offer him or what he would take, but if they settled on a 3 year $15 million extension ... with say ... $4 million on the books for '13 ... $5 million for '14 and $6 million for '15 ... but make 2013 fully guaranteed and make 2014 half guaranteed. I know there are limits to what percentage of a contract can be guaranteed so I might be off ... but that would allow them to keep Hall around inexpensively for two more years (relative to his current payout) and part ways with him in 2015 without taking a cap hit. If he doesn't want the restructure, release him and go get Toller or Lewis and draft a CB in the 3rd or 4th. The Skins hold the cards here and Hall knows that ... and $9 million over the next two years isn't anything to sneeze at for Hall, either. Just take that $9 million he is owed this year and make it guaranteed over the next two years.

[darrelgreenie]

If it were me the easy decision would be instead of restructuring Hall, release him. You get 8 mill worth of cap room and use part of it to sign Lewis, hes younger and better than Hall. If they want Hall back, I'd let him become a FA and see where the market goes, hard for me to imagine him where he is pushing 30 to get a big contract from anybody. If we restructure it just pushes back the pain and IMO its not worth it with him, I'd let him go and see how it plays out.

+1 I like Hall, I think he's underrated by many fans. He's a playmaking CB and a solid tackler. But, if there's a chance to sign Toler or Lewis (especially Lewis) for less money then I'm all aboard with taking that shot. Tell Hall, we want you back in Burgundy and Gold but we're up against the cap hit and can't afford you at that number. Shop around and see what you can then come back and talk to us. This gives us time to strike a deal with Lewis/Toler.

Forgot to complete my thought: Then if a deal can't be brokered with Lewis, hit up Hall and bring him back at a reasonable number.