Report: Redskins won’t cut McNabb after 2010

We pointed out earlier today the latest example of what Rosenthal calls “ESPN-on-ESPN crime.”  On Monday, ESPN’s Michael Smith reported that Redskins quarterback Donovan McNabb’s new deal includes $40 million in guaranteed money.  On Tuesday, ESPN’s Adam Schefter reported that the deal includes only $3.5 million guaranteed.

ESPN has made no attempt to reconcile the inherently conflicting reports, and Smith has defended his report on Twitter.  “There’s injury guarantees in his deal that become fully guaranteed when/if he’s on the roster,” Smith wrote earlier today.  “Besides, only thing truly guaranteed in NFL is signing bonus.  Oh and Skins have a 10 mil ‘non-exercise fee’ next year FYI.”

For starters, Smith should have provided these additional facts on Monday, instead of reporting without further explanation that the deal includes $40 million in guaranteed money.  Without any such explanation or qualification, the audience is entitled to conclude that $40 million guaranteed means $40 million guaranteed.

Also, while Smith’s assertion regarding the “non-exercise fee” as to the $10 million option bonus is accurate, the “non-exercise fee” goes away if the player is cut.  Indeed, agent Fletcher Smith tells Jason La Canfora of NFL Network that the Redskins indeed have the option to cut McNabb after the 2010 season with no further money due to McNabb.

La Canfora also reports that it’s “virtually certain” that the Redskins won’t release McNabb.  And we agree with La Canfora.

If anything, the Redskins would trade McNabb.  He’s under contract for 2011 at $12.5 million, which is far less than the expected value of the franchise tag for the position.

So by giving him an extra $3.5 million now, the Redskins were able to close the books on the ugliness of the past two weeks and purchase the exclusive ability to decide whether to keep McNabb or to trade him.

The primary unknown factor in this regard is the trigger for the payment of the option bonus.  Many contracts negotiated in 2010 with option bonuses due in 2011 extend the period from the first day of the league year until the day after the first regular-season game.  If McNabb’s new deal contains that language, the Redskins would have plenty of time to swing a deal — and also plenty of time to figure out an alternative plan for the quarterback position.

19 responses to “Report: Redskins won’t cut McNabb after 2010

  1. McNabb sucks. Andy Reid has taken a lot of flack for making that trade, but you know what?? It was a great move. Reid knew exactly what he had….and didn’t have. He fleeced the Redskins, who will never win with McNabb, or any QB for that matter. That team’s culture has LOSER written all over it. McNabb’s a great guy, but let’s face facts: Dude is a loser when it comes to playing QB in the NFL.

  2. I think a trade is the one slight fall back for the Skins since actually McNabb is only making $2.5 (before the roster and being active incentives) million, so some team could look to acquire him for pennies. The bad news is the Skins would eat $10 million against the cap.

    One point $12.5 might be lower than a franchise tag…but umm could anyone justify paying McNabb even that much (or even half that much)?

  3. No way they DON’T cut him after 2010. You just don’t bench a guy with 2:00 left in a winnable game that you think is worth $12.5MM.

    Bottom line: this was a $3.5MM “apology” to Donovan. Could cost him in the long run, though. Trying to cut a new deal after being traded and cut in successive years ? Other NFL teams will assume Reid and Shannahan both aren’t stupid. Oh, and none of them will pay him $12.5MM a year either.

  4. katmanduu says: “That team’s culture has LOSER written all over it.”

    I am a die hard skins fan and that statement is something I agree with.
    Ever since Snyder took over its been this same old crap. The teams culture hasnt had LOSER all over it always. Just since Danny boy screwed us up so bad with paying over the hill washed up no account players and giving away draft pics to aquire them. It takes years to recover from that type of mis management. I also am a minority in the opinion that free agency is a good thing. I hate it. I liked it when you could have players on a team for a decade, or longer..D Green! I mean look at next year…..Vick will break the bank when/if he’s a free agent next year.

    Great game last night Eagles. That was a history making azz whuppin and a half.

  5. i have been a skin fan since1943 and this is the worst ownership i have ever seen please ds sell the team or or lets get rid of the 30 and over and lets get younger at the cost of a couple of more years,jkc we miss you,we wouldnt be going thru this if you were still here

  6. It was a poor move to trade so much for McNabb. And an even poorer move to pay him so much. Redskins FO still do not understand the “time” value of a draft pick.

    A player’s draft pick value (not counting busts or washed up) goes down about 1 pick every 3-4 years.

    So a 2nd round pick after 3 years is worth a 3rd rounder, after 6 years is worth a 4th rounder, etc.

    It is why NE traded Seymore(sp?) for a 3rd round pick. He was a good player (about 2nd round quality), but had 9 years in the league, so he is worth a 5th round, but they got a 3rd round for him… Simple economics: Buy low, sell high.

  7. And since New England traded Seymour for a 1st round pick you have no idea what your talking about…lol

  8. Report: Due to the fact the Redskins will not cut McNabb, they are also not going to win many games. Instead, they will sign yet another low-life, washed up ninny to vacate those ugly-ass uniforms. Not to mention, overpay this future ballsack and find a reason to bench him.

    Honestly, the Bills are 1-7 and have 10x the class of this excuse for an organization. What an embarrassment.

  9. regardless of if he stays or goes, washington still sucks…theyll probly draft a bust or sign a washed up hasbeen

    cut bruce allen, then well talk

  10. Question: Who was the last really good QB for Redskins?

    It can’t be a cooincidence that since Snyder has owned the team they have been abject failures in that position. If you notice Shanahan didn’t have a whole lot of success after Elway retired either. Until they change their act in DC they will never have a Manning or a Brady.

  11. Mcnabb will be either a Viking or a Cardinal next season.

    And Brett Favre will be a Raider. Just you watch. No longer under contract. Vikes will not sign him again. And Al Davis LOVES the long jump balls, which Favre can still toss. I can see the press conference now. Davis and Favre at the table with Davis talking about how grizzled old Favre reminds him of George Blanda. And since the Raiders are looking up now there will be the media buzz of Favre “helping the Raiders make a run”. You heard it here first.

  12. Ths Skins backed the Brinks truck up to McNabb, as I predicted via Shanarat’s decision making. The Skins are on the hook big time. Either they made a bad mistake or will flourish with a knocked around QB who doesn’t have 5 years left in the tank. They overpaid for an average veteran QB, now overpay more because they dissed him. Snyder does not have a clue on how to run a team. ShanaRat is an overrated coach. Between the two I see many more years of failure before the Skins sniff the postseason.

  13. McNabb chokes, but usually not until January. He has way too many picks this year. I would guess that’s because the D is getting them behind early. They certainly did on Monday. They may be calling hero plays all the time. I think Shanahan is maybe the worst SB coach ever. He kept Denver low to the ground with awesome talent in a lousy division. The only team they could beat when it counted was NE, so I double hate the guy. “Mr President!” Anyway he’s no more competent than Zorn, he’s just better at faking it- Get rid of him and stick with McNabb and the skins would be a contender for the playoffs at least….the talents there.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!