Plindsey88 wrote:With the prospect of an un-capped 2007 season, I'm sure the Bucs would have loved to sign Simms long-term, but it's doubtful his agent was keen on the idea....
Think about the money Simms could get if he performs well in '06 and becomes a free agent in an un-capped '07....
He easily could demand the truly enormous bucks from a team like Washington or Oakland in '07 if he proves in '06 that his performance in '05 wasn't a fluke...
Picture this scenario, if you will:
Washington cuts Brunell (cap casualty) and starts 20+ rookies in '06, as expected....
Jason Campbell struggles accordingly...
Simms puts up respectable numbers in Tampa (3200 yards and 20 TD's)....
Simms goes into '07 as a free agent, and Danny Snyder all of a sudden has no cap to worry about...
Chris Simms could easily sign a $75-million deal with Washington in that kind of situation.... (assuming his daddy lets him play for the 'Skins)
if the redskins turned into the yankees of baseball, i would commit suicide. the salary cap makes football better than baseball. i hate the yankees, and i would definitely hate the redskins (more) if they started doing what the yankees do right now in baseball.
Well, I have to agree that the NFL is more fun to watch because of cap-induced parity, but make no mistake about it, if Danny Snyder no longer has to contend with a salary cap, the Redskins will be buying a Super Bowl in no time flat...
yea, thats because ur a redskins fan, and you wouldnt know how it would feel to be the worst in the nfl every single year.
see??? im already really mad at you, and it hasnt even happened yet. buying a championship proves nothing. with the salary cap, teams have to be smart, bring in good coaching, and scout and pick up the right players. without the cap, it just requires writing a lot of fat checks. wheres the skill in that???
Kudos to Leber for the amazing sig and to Metroid for the userbar and making them both fit 2008 and 2009 Defunct Dynasty League Champion
I really don't think Gruden is that high on Simms. He's obviously not going to command franchise QB money right now in his career, and I doubt he gets cheaper in the future unless he fails to perform this season. Other than gambling on an uncapped 2007 season that isn't going to happen, what purpose does a 1 year contract accomplish other than to make him easily replaceable?
P.S. - Rattay AND Griese are both better QBs than Simms IMO
Plindsey88 wrote:Well, I have to agree that the NFL is more fun to watch because of cap-induced parity, but make no mistake about it, if Danny Snyder no longer has to contend with a salary cap, the Redskins will be buying a Super Bowl in no time flat...
I believe the Dynasty that was huge right before the salary cap was this one team from North Texas... the... Rancheros? No, that's not it.
Snyder is definitely Steinbrenner Jr., but Jerry Jones is his bastard cousin.
Plindsey88 wrote:With the prospect of an un-capped 2007 season, I'm sure the Bucs would have loved to sign Simms long-term, but it's doubtful his agent was keen on the idea....
Think about the money Simms could get if he performs well in '06 and becomes a free agent in an un-capped '07....
He easily could demand the truly enormous bucks from a team like Washington or Oakland in '07 if he proves in '06 that his performance in '05 wasn't a fluke...
Picture this scenario, if you will:
Washington cuts Brunell (cap casualty) and starts 20+ rookies in '06, as expected....
Jason Campbell struggles accordingly...
Simms puts up respectable numbers in Tampa (3200 yards and 20 TD's)....
Simms goes into '07 as a free agent, and Danny Snyder all of a sudden has no cap to worry about...
Chris Simms could easily sign a $75-million deal with Washington in that kind of situation.... (assuming his daddy lets him play for the 'Skins)
If he performed that well, why wouldn't we franchise him?
Plindsey88 wrote:With the prospect of an un-capped 2007 season, I'm sure the Bucs would have loved to sign Simms long-term, but it's doubtful his agent was keen on the idea....
Think about the money Simms could get if he performs well in '06 and becomes a free agent in an un-capped '07....
He easily could demand the truly enormous bucks from a team like Washington or Oakland in '07 if he proves in '06 that his performance in '05 wasn't a fluke...
Picture this scenario, if you will:
Washington cuts Brunell (cap casualty) and starts 20+ rookies in '06, as expected....
Jason Campbell struggles accordingly...
Simms puts up respectable numbers in Tampa (3200 yards and 20 TD's)....
Simms goes into '07 as a free agent, and Danny Snyder all of a sudden has no cap to worry about...
Chris Simms could easily sign a $75-million deal with Washington in that kind of situation.... (assuming his daddy lets him play for the 'Skins)
If he performed that well, why wouldn't we franchise him?
i think Simms got a 2 mil tender on him (team has to give up a 1st rounder to sign, plus Bucs get chance to match).
Plindsey88 wrote:Well, I have to agree that the NFL is more fun to watch because of cap-induced parity, but make no mistake about it, if Danny Snyder no longer has to contend with a salary cap, the Redskins will be buying a Super Bowl in no time flat...
I believe the Dynasty that was huge right before the salary cap was this one team from North Texas... the... Rancheros? No, that's not it.
Snyder is definitely Steinbrenner Jr., but Jerry Jones is his bastard cousin.
LOL.... No arguments, there.... Nobody spends money like the NFC East....
no1cowboysfan wrote:i think Simms got a 2 mil tender on him (team has to give up a 1st rounder to sign, plus Bucs get chance to match).
Correct, although it's a 1st and a 3rd.
no1cowboysfan wrote:Franchising = a lot more than 2 mil.
Thats a given, but if something is done with Simeon Rice this season(which is the consensus, that something has to give between he and Brooks eating all our cap space) we will be able to afford Simms. If he continues to improve and show he's "the guy", chances are we aren't just going to let him walk out the door. When's the last time that happened in the NFL?