Dan Connor.. why not cut instead of pay cut?

[Verdict]

I thought Connor didn't play well last year and is a liability. I would cut him based on his play alone. It doesn't make sense to me to keep him around, even with a pay cut. Is there some cap advantage to keeping him around for another year at a reduced salary?

 

[Frozen700]

He can't cover...or run sideline to sideline

He's only good for runs up the middle, and maybe as a goaline linebacker.

So he has little to no value

 

[Cowboys22]

Because if he takes the payout he becomes valuable veteran insurance against training camp injuries. He can be cut at anytime so why do it now and risk being thin at the LB spot coming out of camp or the preseason?

 

[cheftjpeck]

He can't cover...or run sideline to sideline

He's only good for runs up the middle, and maybe as a goaline linebacker.

So he has little to no value

+1000!!!!!!
Dead on summary

 

[CyberB0b]

He was an OK #3 ILB, but he was brought in to compete with Carter last year to start. It was clear why he is a career backup. He sucks.

He is a better fit as a 3-4 ILB than any LB position in a 4-3.

 

[Eskimo]

He was an OK #3 ILB, but he was brought in to compete with Carter last year to start. It was clear why he is a career backup. He sucks.

He is a better fit as a 3-4 ILB than any LB position in a 4-3.

I think he is best fit as a 4-3 Mike than anywhere else where his run-stuffing ability is most amplified.

In a 3-4 ILB position he will often end up defending out in the flats where his lack of speed is on full-display.

He is an okay backup but needs a backup type salary to stick. He was brought on as insurance in case Carter couldn't grasp the defense because of the difficulties he had getting up to speed in his rookie year coming off of the PUP list. Many of us were worried so it made sense to hedge our bets and Connor served this purpose. Upon seeing a larger body of work it became clear that he was a major liability in coverage and in outside runs towards the sidelines.

I think our new LB crew will be Lee, Carter, Albright, ?Wilber, vet (?Sims or Connor) and a rookie. Unfortunately most of our old LBs don't have the speed to play Kiffen's schemes. Thankfully 2 of the 3 leftovers who can play the scheme are Pro Bowl caliber players and man the two most important positions.

 

[Galian Beast]

I think he is best fit as a 4-3 Mike than anywhere else where his run-stuffing ability is most amplified.

In a 3-4 ILB position he will often end up defending out in the flats where his lack of speed is on full-display.

He is an okay backup but needs a backup type salary to stick. He was brought on as insurance in case Carter couldn't grasp the defense because of the difficulties he had getting up to speed in his rookie year coming off of the PUP list. Many of us were worried so it made sense to hedge our bets and Connor served this purpose. Upon seeing a larger body of work it became clear that he was a major liability in coverage and in outside runs towards the sidelines.

I think our new LB crew will be Lee, Carter, Albright, ?Wilber, vet (?Sims or Connor) and a rookie. Unfortunately most of our old LBs don't have the speed to play Kiffen's schemes. Thankfully 2 of the 3 leftovers who can play the scheme are Pro Bowl caliber players and man the two most important positions.

The mike has the most coverage responsibilities in the tampa 2. He doesn't really have much range as a mike.

If he played mike or any other linebacker position it would be sparingly in short down and distance situations.

 

[Bowdown27]

Basically just for another body on the sideline in case of injury. If willing to take paycut I'll keep him otherwise adios

 

[Eskimo]

The mike has the most coverage responsibilities in the tampa 2. He doesn't really have much range as a mike.

If he played mike or any other linebacker position it would be sparingly in short down and distance situations.

Yes, he is basically a 1-dimensional run stuffing Mike. He is a dinosaur in modern football. He can still be a useful role player in limited duty but at a vet minimum salary.

 

[TwoCentPlain]

Is it a stretch to say I'd rather have any of the top 50 college LBs in this years draft than Connor? If it is, it's not by much.

Connor will perhaps take the vet min, compete in camp, and most certainly get cut. Waste of a roster spot if you ask me.

 

[jobberone]

He's marginal against the run and and unable to cover. The mike has to drop deep in this defense and cover enough for it to matter so I see little use for him.

I like Lemon and Albright more as backup Mikes and I don't know enough about the other non-starters to comment. I think the Mike is ok although you could move Lee to corner esp Sam if you found someone better at Mike; which is very unlikely.

 

[Deep_South]

Connor is just so slow. We need someone better.

 

[HeavyBarrel]

Is it a stretch to say I'd rather have any of the top 50 college LBs in this years draft than Connor? If it is, it's not by much.

Connor will perhaps take the vet min, compete in camp, and most certainly get cut. Waste of a roster spot if you ask me.

Amen, I absolutely promise Dan Connor is not better than any number of available young LB, it's the general manager/scouting dept. jobs to find that player(s).

 

[Verdict]

These are some great responses but none actually respond to my original post. I agree he sucks. So why keep him? Does it have anything to do with the cap implications of cutting him. He isn't even insurance if he can't play and he has no upside at all.

 

[cheftjpeck]

Actually a couple posters did respond / answer your question
He would simply be signed as a veteran insurance policy at a lower rate. There is no financial benefit to keeping him at his current rate and we would save cap space by outright cutting him...