On Now
Coming Up
  • Mon., Oct. 23, 2017 7:30 PM - 7:50 PM EDT Live Redskins-Eagles Pregame Show Tune in to watch the pregame happenings from the Washington Redskins' Week 7 game against the Philadelphia Eagles at Lincoln Financial Field.
  • Mon., Oct. 23, 2017 11:30 PM - 11:59 PM EDT Live Jay Gruden, Kirk Cousins At The Podium Tune in to watch head coach Jay Gruden and quarterback Kirk Cousins talk to the media at Lincoln Financial Field.
  • Tue., Oct. 24, 2017 12:00 AM - 1:30 AM EDT Live Jay Gruden, Kirk Cousins At The Podium Tune in to watch head coach Jay Gruden and quarterback Kirk Cousins talk to the media at Lincoln Financial Field.

Putting $36 Million In Perspective

Posted by Brian Tinsman on March 12, 2013 – 12:28 pm

DEU BKA Kriminalitaet

Yesterday’s press conference with general manager Bruce Allen and head coach Mike Shanahan marked the first time that the Redskins have made extensive public commentary on the $36 million salary cap penalty levied against the team.

One of the more interesting facets of the discussion revolved around the value of the penalty. Sure, the Redskins are subject to a $36 million dollar reduction in spending, but what does that actually mean?

During his Q&A session, Shanahan put the money in terms of players, assuming a salary cap somewhere in the reported ballpark of $123 million dollars:

“I think if you go on any football team and you take a look at $18 million or $36 million, you’ll take off the best, maybe, six to eight players on each team.”

In other words, that’s six to eight premium NFL starters that the team simply does not have. That’s 27-36 percent of the team’s 22 starters, and 11-15 percent of the team’s total 53-man roster.

Shanahan continued, referencing the salaries of some of the top players in last month’s Super Bowl:

“I could go through the Super Bowl teams, and I could talk about Baltimore and I could talk about San Francisco,” he said, “and if you went through $36 million on each team, it would probably overwhelm you on how many of those players make up $36 million. That’s 30 percent of your total revenue.”

Shanahan expressed optimism that the team would still be able to recoup some of the penalized money, but praised his team for being able to win the NFC East with such a dramatic financial disadvantage:

“Obviously we’re dealt a certain hand and we’re going to deal with it and we’re going to do the best job we possibly can,” he said. “We’ve got some excellent free agents, some excellent draft choices over the last few years. Thank God our draft choices have worked out because we’ve got some character. We’ve got some players.

“We did a lot of good things offensively and defensively, especially defensively in the second half of the season. A lot of those people will still be with our football team so I’ve got some high expectations even though there will be a few bumps.”




Tags: , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | 9 Comments »

9 Responses to “Putting $36 Million In Perspective”

  1. By poppyshoes on Mar 12, 2013 | Reply

    This ticks me off. If it was an uncapped year, it should not have been a penalty. It just isn’t right. No matter what anyone says it’s flat out wrong. AND MARA NEEDS TO MIND HIS BUSINESS…JERK!

  2. By Paul on Mar 12, 2013 | Reply

    There was no salary cap (fact). The league approved these moves (fact). A year later an owner from a team in the Washington/Dallas division squawks to the comish that this was unfair (fact). DC has been blown off for hosting the Super Bowl as “the weather is unpredictable” (fact). SB ends up in said owner’s home despite being a hundred plus miles NORTH of DC. This is prima facie collusion between the Mara and Goodell. Roger is the Vince MacMahaon of the NFL these days.

  3. By rascaltobe on Mar 13, 2013 | Reply

    Mara is the one that started all of it. He could not stand it when Washington got the 2nd pick in 2012 & got a franchise quarterback. Well guess what Mara, we still won the division. This was a travesty of fairness, to allow John Mara, owner of a team in our division to be on the panel deciding the Redskins Salary cap case fine. He should have been excused for conflict of interest. It was collusion between him and his buddy Roger Goodell..

  4. By criggo44 on Mar 13, 2013 | Reply

    I believe I have read that the money spent in 2010, the uncapped year, was submitted to the NFL for approval before it was spent and the NFL gave its approval. So, how can they now take it away?

  5. By stevejacek on Mar 13, 2013 | Reply

    The NFL has penalized the Redskins $36M, but in reality it is $72M. While the Redskins have had $18M taken away from them for two consecutive years, the other teams have been given that $36M on top of the existing salary cap, effectively doubling the Redskins penalty.

  6. By stevejacek on Mar 13, 2013 | Reply

    In reality this penalty is $72M – the Redskins have had $36M taken away from them, but the other teams have had $36M given to them, putting the Redskins at a total disadvantage of $72M.

  7. By Paul Sherman on Mar 13, 2013 | Reply

    The 36 million was shared by all teams. Each team got a little more than a million. Each team didn’t get 36 million.So the Skins lost the 18 m not 72m but I agree the whole thing stinks! It has held spending Danny in check but since Allen came in the dumb signings have ceased which has allowed us to build the right way. I’m believe the money games have stopped and this team has built smart. We have a young team with only a couple guys 30 and over. I figured it out at the end of last season and the average age is 26 yrs old.We will get a couple of secondary guys to strenthen the worst part of our team. Next yr we can add a couple big FA, I think a true #! Wr unless the young guys explode. It would yave been great to add rb Bush to this team and a big name S but we will upgrade and draft . Next yr put the final touches on our SB quest. HTTR! I’m proud of our building and direction,it’s been a longtime since we have had stability with a plan. Snyder is fiunally being patient getting to the top!

  8. By stevejacek on Mar 14, 2013 | Reply

    Paul – I agree we didn’t lose $72M to any particular team, but we do lose $72M to the collective set of teams. Remember we lost $18M last year and $18M this year. Over those two years, that $36M was meted out to the rest of the league. This amounts to a total of $72M – the $36M they took from us and the $36M they gave to them. This was done to placate the union – the same amount of cap room is available. Now if the league’s premise was reasonable and they were trying to be fare, they would have either taken a total of $18M away and given the other teams $18M additional, or they would have just taken the money away from the skins and made the union live with it.

  1. 1 Trackback(s)

  2. Aug 8, 2013: The Redskins Blog | Excitement For Rookies Entering Big Show

Post a Comment

%d bloggers like this: