Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14
  1. #1
    Prophet Guest

    Sid speaks up about Moss trade.

    Sid Hartman: Money was main reason behind the Moss trade
    Sid Hartman, Star Tribune
    May 6, 2005 SIDH0506

    There were several new faces at Winter Park last week during Vikings minicamp who wouldn't have been there if Randy Moss had not been traded. Moss would have counted about $11 million on the Vikings salary cap for the 2006 season, and $40 million for the rest of his contract.

    So as it turned out, financial reasons were one big reason for the Moss trade, and not just because of Moss' strange actions at times.

    Rob Brzezinski, vice president of football operations for the Vikings, said that without the Moss trade, the Vikings would not have had the money to sign free-agent cornerback Fred Smoot and possibly defensive lineman Pat Williams and safety Darren Sharper.

    Smoot received a signing bonus of $10.8 million and a six-year contract worth $34 million. Williams was paid a $6 million signing bonus and a three-year contract for $13 million. Sharper's deal included a signing bonus of $1 million, a guaranteed roster bonus of $3 million and a total of $14 million over four years.

    Yes, there was a lot of talk that the Moss trade was made because players went to coach Mike Tice to ask him to trade Moss because of his foolish actions, and to improve team chemistry.

    But in the end, money had as much to do with the Moss trade as anything.

    "Well, one thing we try to do is, from a salary cap perspective, strive for long-term competitive excellence, and what I said was that the Moss trade did not only just net [first-round draft choice] Troy Williamson and linebacker Napoleon Harris," Brzezinski said. "But in addition to that, the side benefit to the Moss trade is we freed up over $40 million dollars in future salaries, which gave us greater flexibility to be aggressive in free agency and add the defensive players -- Pat Williams, Smoot and Sharper and guys like that -- knowing that in the future we could handle those contracts and still be sound from the salary cap perspective."

    A lot of people at Winter Park in the know credit owner Red McCombs for the decision to trade Moss, but Brzezinski disagrees.

    "No, Red didn't say that," Brzezinski said. "And I'm not saying that's why we traded Randy. I'm just saying that if you are going to analyze the Randy trade, the benefit to the club is more than just the draft pick and the player that we got. It allows greater flexibility in the future to add players and still remain economically sound."

    Sid Article

    -----------------------------------------

    Florio's take:

    MOSS TRADE MONEY DRIVEN?

    There's some revisionist history being circulated in Minnesota, not long after the events in question transpired.

    Specifically, the Vikings now claim that money concerns drove the team's decision to trade receiver Randy Moss.

    "Well, one thing we try to do is, from a salary cap perspective, strive for long-term competitive excellence, and what I said was that the Moss trade did not only just net [receiver] Troy Williamson and linebacker Napoleon Harris," said V.P. of football ops Rob Brzezinski. "But in addition to that, the side benefit to the Moss trade is we freed up over $40 million dollars in future salaries, which gave us greater flexibility to be aggressive in free agency and add the defensive players -- Pat Williams, [Fred] Smoot and [Darren] Sharper and guys like that -- knowing that in the future we could handle those contracts and still be sound from the salary cap perspective."

    That's a load of crap, in our view. Since the departure of coach Dennis Green, the Vikings have managed the cap well. Too well, in the view of some.

    In fact, we suspect that Brzezinski's comments might have been intended to take the steam out of rumors that the team's decision to trade Moss was sparked by a February confrontation between Moss and owner Red McCombs, during which Moss called McCombs a "cheap bastard" for carrying a huge salary cap bulge into 2004, in lieu of spending the money on defensive help.

    As the rumor/urban legend goes, Moss and/or his agent, Dante DiTrapano have told others that the "cheap bastard" comment resulted directly in the trade between the Vikings and the Raiders. We sent an e-mail to DiTrapano regarding this rumor once we caught wind of it, but we've yet to hear back from him.

    The fact is that the Vikings could have kept Moss for 2005 and made a big splash in free agency. Sure, he would have had an eight-figure cap number in 2005, but the acceleration of his bonus offset most if not all of his salary, probably resulting in some dead money.

    And if at some point in 2006 or beyond his "Paragraph 5" salary was too high to permit proper cap management, he could have been given a contract extension.

    Bottom line -- if you really want a guy, there are ways to keep him around, and to stay fiscally sound. The Vikings clearly didn't want Moss, and McCombs probably is leaning on guys like Brzezinski to put the best possible spin on the move in the event that the team doesn't live up to expectations that inexplicably have increased even with the departure of one of the best players in the NFL.

    What's that, you say? McCombs doesn't care because he'll soon unload the team? Regardless, these moves occurred on his watch, and he knows that he'll be villified if the team stinks it up in '05. What better way to address that criticism than to set the table now for an argument that the trade wasn't made to win the Super Bowl this year, but to enable the team to be competitive in the future?

    pft

  2. #2
    Pigskin Bigs Guest

    Re: Sid speaks up about Moss trade.

    I think the trade freed up a lot of cap space and put the Vikings on the road to being a TEAM. The money issues are only a part of the total equation. Yes, we gave up one of the best ever at WR and didn't get much in return. (yet). If Williamson proves he was worth an early pick and Napolean Harris helps the D, then it was a great trade. However, the greatest part may be the positive effect it has on the locker room, not the money the was freed up!!!

  3. #3
    ajefx's Avatar
    ajefx is offline Rookie
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    81

    Re: Sid speaks up about Moss trade.

    I'm not sure of the exact figures - the article mentions his base salary this year was about $11M - but with the acceleration of his signing bonus against the cap, doesn't Moss still count about that much against our cap? But, that signing bonus is money Red has already paid; he doesn't need to spend that $10M or so in cap to meet the minimum requirements.
    <<Hates Ted Cottrell with a passion

  4. #4
    cc21 is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,599

    Re: Sid speaks up about Moss trade.

    i still wish that we would have kept moss. but its too late now and i like our new team. that would have been really nice though too keep him

  5. #5
    VikingMike's Avatar
    VikingMike is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    5,820

    Re: Sid speaks up about Moss trade.

    I love Moss's talent, but 2 things jump out at me:

    1- Seven years with Randy and no Super Bowl.
    2- We've now got what should be a very respectable defense AND still one of the top offenses in the league.

    Sure, I'll miss Randy's exciting plays and his incredible ability, but not his moping and moaning and bad attitude. Whatever the story as to why he was traded, this is what we've got now. And I guarantee we'll be better off with this team.

    Any man who afflicts the human race with ideas must be prepared to see them misunderstood. - H.L. Mencken

    Come from the land of the ice and snow...

  6. #6
    mnjamie's Avatar
    mnjamie is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,536

    Re: Sid speaks up about Moss trade.

    Sid Hartman is a Pompus, Blowhard. Next.

  7. #7
    Caine's Avatar
    Caine is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    5,135

    Re: Sid speaks up about Moss trade.

    I am much more inclined to believe the rumor of the fight between Randy and Red "Goat-Grabber" McCombs than any line of tripe about the Vikings needing the money or aboput Randy being too disruptive.

    Truth is, 98% of the people who had a problem with Moss were...you guessed it...the MEDIA. I never heard anything about Players asking Tice to trade Randy (Anyone with a verified source, feel free to link it). I never heard anyone bashing Randy as he left town. In fact, the ONLY people saying that the team has "Improved" in the morale is the friggin' MEDIA.

    I think it was all bollux. I think the media made the "Issues", I think they facilitated the trade, and I think that they try and justify it by claiming that the Vikes are now a more "Unified team".

    Truth is, we COULD have had our cake and eaten it too...but Red is a cheap a$$ (Sorry, a spending spree on your way out does not alter the facts), and the media is full of dumba$$es.

    Caine

  8. #8
    akavikefan1969's Avatar
    akavikefan1969 is offline Training Camp
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    32

    Re: Sid speaks up about Moss trade.

    Agree Caine!
    Red spent 20 mill of Fowlers money not Randys!
    and at 30 mill under the CAP thats 50 mill you have!
    The glaring thing we will see is the Safety move up on the Run game now with no Moss, and the WR corp. will be covered as D's will not put 2 to 3 guys on Moss. This will take our high scoring ( Moss scores )
    O from a op 5 to a team in the teens. As for upgrades to the D.....Fat Pat Yes, Smoot Yes....but there are very big Q marks for the others imo.
    The Moss trade may over take the worst Trade in NFL History....which trade was that you asked....Ding Ding Ding you win it was the Walker trade.
    40 for 60
    1969 NFL Champions

  9. #9
    PurplePackerEater is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,738

    Re: Sid speaks up about Moss trade.

    "VikingMike" wrote:
    I love Moss's talent, but 2 things jump out at me:

    1- Seven years with Randy and no Super Bowl.
    2- We've now got what should be a very respectable defense AND still one of the top offenses in the league.

    Sure, I'll miss Randy's exciting plays and his incredible ability, but not his moping and moaning and bad attitude. Whatever the story as to why he was traded, this is what we've got now. And I guarantee we'll be better off with this team.

    Wow, a genius! :roll:

    "1- Seven years with Randy and no Super Bowl." -VikingMike

    Seven years with RED and no Super Bowl. Randy did his job.

    And your comment "moping and moaning and bad attitude". Who doesn't?? I know that I'm pisssed when our offense puts up 30+ points in a game and still loses!!!

    Anyone that disagrees with that, I'd of liked to have been at your house on Sundays. Must've had some nice things going on to take your mind off of that.

  10. #10
    ItalianStallion's Avatar
    ItalianStallion is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,615

    Re: Sid speaks up about Moss trade.

    6 years with Culpepper and no superbowl, do we trade him? NO.

    That being said though trading Moss did relatively nothing to this years cap number because of the accelerated bonus it did free up something like 40 million he was due for the remainder of his contract.


    I m like a Ja Rule poster, cause I'm off the wall.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Moss Trade
    By South Carolina Vikefan in forum Free Beer!
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 02-27-2005, 10:46 AM
  2. Moss speaks!
    By GQVikesfan in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 02-12-2005, 10:26 AM
  3. Moss speaks
    By Calmwind in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 01-06-2005, 11:23 PM
  4. Whoa, Keyshawn Johnson speaks on Randy Moss
    By RandyMoss8404 in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 09-11-2004, 10:22 PM
  5. Moss speaks! Moss opens up in an interview
    By whackthepack in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 09-10-2004, 06:00 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •