Rumor from Tony Pauline

[speedkilz88]

They converted $7 million of his base salary this year into a bonus and spread that over the remaining years of the contract. By doing that, instead of saving millions as a regular cut next year, he's now only a net cap savings of $400K. They'd have to make him a June 1 cut to make it worthwhile but the reality is that if you are cutting a guy a year after a restructure, that's just bad cap management.

When you restructure, the ideal plan is have the player play out multiple years because you can spread the restructure over a long period. You don't want to cut a guy one year after you just restructured him. That's just not very smart roster building there.

As he pointed out that it doesn't matter. They were going to have to pay that on the cap anyway. It's just when is the only difference. And the money that was saved on this years cap may not even be used and can be pushed into next years.

 

[gimmesix]

........... fans giving up on players after only a year is odd.

Seems to be the way things are going. I still stick with the Landry idea that you have to give some players three years. I know that is difficult in this salary-cap age, but just because there's a salary cap doesn't mean that all players develop quickly.

The reality is that if you draft a player in the third round and beyond, you shouldn't expect them to be ready to contribute right away. They didn't go in the first couple of rounds because there is some clear imperfections in their game that need work. For that matter, some first-rounders and many second-rounders also didn't hear their names called early in the first round because of questions about their play. Some answer those questions quickly while others need some time or never get there.

 

[xwalker]

As he pointed out that it doesn't matter. They were going to have to pay that on the cap anyway. It's just when is the only difference. And the money that was saved on this years cap may not even be used and can be pushed into next years.