Do we have to cut Red Bryant to make room for Bennett?

[jblaze]

One word... re-structure.

Why would Red agree to restructure? Dude had another great year and is one of the main reasons our run defense is so stout.

Restructuring is about having leverage over a player due to a down year, which doesn't apply to Red.

No run defender is worth that kind of money. He has no value as a pass rusher for a 2 down player he is grossly overpaid.

He doesn't need to have value as a pass rusher. Avril has no value as a run stopper, but he's still paid well.

Red stops half of what opposing offenses are trying to do, run the ball. If that's not "vital" then I don't know what it.........and Pete/John know that. Red will be back, either at full pay or an extension to alleviate his cap hit.

Pass rushers get paid, run stoppers to a lesser degree. Run stopping is more of a collective effort while pass rushing is more individualistic.

 

[drdiags]

I think Clemons got a massive contract because he was regularly posting 50 tackle, 11 sack seasons. Bennett's production was actually slightly worse this year than it was at Tampa Bay in 2012, and he didn't command any significant multi-year deals at that time. Bennett greatly contributed to the success of the team this year, but the author is correct that he also greatly benefited from it.

Then let Bennett and his agent get another wake-up call. How can the author say he doesn't deserve 10M but then say he is disappointed Bennett wouldn't offer to sign for a discount? Those two ideas don't seem to mesh. I guess we will see soon what his value is.

I am not saying he deserves 10M/yr but I surely don't think I can tell him what I think he should be signing for.

 

[rideaducati]

One word... re-structure.

Why would Red agree to restructure? Dude had another great year and is one of the main reasons our run defense is so stout.

Restructuring is about having leverage over a player due to a down year, which doesn't apply to Red.

Re-structuring is about a number of factors. Do you think Brady restructures his deal every few years because they have leverage on him?

When a player has no guarantees, it does benefit them to restructure because they generally get a new signing bonus to give them a similar or greater salary with a lesser cap hit.

Restructuring is used to turn base salary into a bonus. Bonuses can be spread throughout the length of the contract whereas salary counts for that year.

 

[Tical21]

I think you could fairly easily make an argument that Red is one of the top 3 or 4 players on our defense, just because of his unique ability to stop the run, which tends to make teams more one-dimensional, and then allows Avril and the LOB to do their thing. He's also a tone-setter, which will never show up on paper. Mebane much more important? Maybe, but I don't know how to build that argument.

I think the second you sign Bennett to a long deal, you are in essence saying goodbye to Richard Sherman. Therefore, I don't think we even make an effort to keep him, other than possibly franchising him, which just holds Sherman's money or him. To be honest, I don't think we can keep Red either. Maybe, maybe, maybe at a pretty big discount on a longer term deal, but even that is a stretch. I tend to think they're both gone.

 

[HawkFan72]

Red could have left to play for the Patriots a couple years ago and didn't. That says something about his want to stay here.

Yep. He said the Pats offered the same (or slightly more) than the Seahawks, but he wanted to stay.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Pass rushers get paid, run stoppers to a lesser degree. Run stopping is more of a collective effort while pass rushing is more individualistic.

The game of football is a collective effort. Without Red occupying two blockers on virtually every play, other players along the line and our LB's aren't freed up to do their thing..........and if our opponent can't run the ball it means the LOB can feast on opposing QB's. It's all tied together for our D.

Now is Red worth 8 million a year? That's debatable. But he's certainly worth doing everything we can to keep him, so if you're minimizing his value to our D, then I just can't agree. He's AS vital as anyone on that D line.

 

[hawknation2014]

Pass rushers get paid, run stoppers to a lesser degree. Run stopping is more of a collective effort while pass rushing is more individualistic.

The game of football is a collective effort. Without Red occupying two blockers on virtually every play, other players along the line and our LB's aren't freed up to do their thing..........and if our opponent can't run the ball it means the LOB can feast on opposing QB's. It's all tied together for our D.

Now is Red worth 8 million a year? That's debatable. But he's certainly worth doing everything we can to keep him, so if you're minimizing his value to our D, then I just can't agree. He's AS vital as anyone on that D line.

Good post.

 

[jblaze]

Pass rushers get paid, run stoppers to a lesser degree. Run stopping is more of a collective effort while pass rushing is more individualistic.

The game of football is a collective effort. Without Red occupying two blockers on virtually every play, other players along the line and our LB's aren't freed up to do their thing..........and if our opponent can't run the ball it means the LOB can feast on opposing QB's. It's all tied together for our D.

Now is Red worth 8 million a year? That's debatable. But he's certainly worth doing everything we can to keep him, so if you're minimizing his value to our D, then I just can't agree. He's AS vital as anyone on that D line.

Based on his role on the line and his age, he's overpaid. I don't think there's incentive from the Hawks side to restructure, he's going to walk.

It's all a collective effort, of course, but there are aspects of defensive play that aren't 100% spread across all members and that's my point. His dollar amount doesn't translate to the importance on the whole. Bennett will do just fine in his place on rush downs at DE and with two big DT's in the middle, I don't see a dropoff.

Don't get me wrong, he's a stud and a part of our history but it's not worth the money or an extension imo.

 

[Largent80]

With all of these "market players" getting more and more money every year, i think it is time for the NFL to restructure the salary cap. But they won't because they want "parity".

 

[MVP53]

This article has an interesting take on Bennett. I tend to agree with much of it. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

http://network.yardbarker.com/nfl/artic ... e/15810110

Easy for the author to say. Bennett already gave a "discount". The author sounds like a jilted lover. If Bennett wants 10M, let him and his agent figure out what the market is. Chris Clemons is close to that number at age 33, it isn't like the guy is asking for something astronomical for the positions of DE/DT that he plays. The whole "I guess he doesn't want another ring" line is self-righteous. This same guy would be waxing poetically about how them are the breaks when an athlete is asked to take a pay-cut or is terminated out of his contract to benefit the same organization that signed him to that contract.

The teams are all about me, the fans are all about me. Only seems right that the player be all about me.

Good post. Pretty unfair article.

I think Bennett's "home town discount" comments have been misunderstood. I think his point was he doesn't give discounted effort, so why should he put his services "on sale"? If a team thought his value was X number of dollars, why should he expect 75% of X? I didn't take it to mean he would go to Cleveland for $1 more than Seattle offered.

 

[volsunghawk]

This article has an interesting take on Bennett. I tend to agree with much of it. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

http://network.yardbarker.com/nfl/artic ... e/15810110

That article is ridiculous, and the following line is a big reason why:

Bennett’s decision to not take a pay cut disappointed me to say the least.

That's just stupid. Even had Bennett not performed as admirably as he did this past season, he ALREADY took that paycut when he signed with the team for $5 million last year. Bennett is more versatile than most DEs out on the market because he can be effective playing from inside as well as rushing from the outside. That's not easily replaceable, no matter what people like to think.

Now, if Bennett is firm in this reported $10 million per year goal, then the Seahawks have to let him take that from some other team. But he's definitely worth $8 million a year, and if Bryant has to be cut loose to make that happen, I'm perfectly fine with that.

 

[jblaze]

With all of these "market players" getting more and more money every year, i think it is time for the NFL to restructure the salary cap. But they won't because they want "parity".

They just did in the last CBA...

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I think Bennett's "home town discount" comments have been misunderstood. I think his point was he doesn't give discounted effort, so why should he put his services "on sale"? If a team thought his value was X number of dollars, why should he expect 75% of X? I didn't take it to mean he would go to Cleveland for $1 more than Seattle offered.

A lot of fans think the players should be AS passionate and loyal to their team as they are, and that's just not true.

The NFL is their job, as in I want to make as much money as possible before my knees prevent me from walking normal (or walking at all) in my 60's. If they can maximize their value with a good team? Then that's great, but to think players OWE us anything, or their city anything is ludicrous.

The reason you hear "it's a business" 1,000 times a year with players talking about their contracts is because................wait for it..................it IS a business.

 

[Hawks46]

I have a feeling that either Red or Clem will be let go in order to get Bennett, Earl, and Sherman done (Okung extended too in order to lower his 11.2M cap hit).

I agree, but I think Bryant is such a vocal leader in the locker room and has such huge ties to the area and the team, that I can easily see him restructure his deal and stick around. Clemons will be 33 this year and Bryant turns 30, so they both have age creeping up on them. It wouldn't surprise me if both took less money to stay here, but Clemons has the best shot to make a bit of good money on a 2-3 year deal somewhere else. Bryant is really built for Pete's defense, I'm not sure he'd find other teams would value him as highly as we do.

It's funny, but I see things completely opposite. Clemons isn't quick enough to sideline to sideline to play OLB, so I think he's the one tailor made for Pete's defense. Bryant is a fairly typical 3-4 DE that plays a different position in our defense. I think Red would flourish as a 3-4 DE; he's big enough to stop the run and absorb a double team, yet he can still get penetration.

I also think Clemmons is either restructured or gone, and Bryant needs to be restructured. Bryants best asset to this team is now his intangibles, namely leadership. Don't get me wrong, he's still damn good, but if we lost Bryant somehow, it wouldn't show up. Bennett rates just as good against the run as Bryant does, and we could rotate Bennett with Scruggs to keep him fresh. I also think McDonald could rotate out to Bryant's spots on run downs and be just fine; he holds up against Guards, I can't see Tackles washing him out very easily.

 

[drdiags]

McDonald being a free agent, you have to figure he may get better action than he did this past summer when he was cut in the move to the final 53. I don't expect to see him back.

 

[HawKnPeppa]

This article has an interesting take on Bennett. I tend to agree with much of it. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

http://network.yardbarker.com/nfl/artic ... e/15810110

That article is ridiculous, and the following line is a big reason why:

Bennett’s decision to not take a pay cut disappointed me to say the least.

That's just stupid. Even had Bennett not performed as admirably as he did this past season, he ALREADY took that paycut when he signed with the team for $5 million last year. Bennett is more versatile than most DEs out on the market because he can be effective playing from inside as well as rushing from the outside. That's not easily replaceable, no matter what people like to think.

Now, if Bennett is firm in this reported $10 million per year goal, then the Seahawks have to let him take that from some other team. But he's definitely worth $8 million a year, and if Bryant has to be cut loose to make that happen, I'm perfectly fine with that.

I have to agree. Saying that Bennett should take a 'pay cut' after he made major contributions to a successful Super Bowl run is flat-out ridiculous. Now, if actually means accepting slightly less than a few other teams would give him so he can stay with a good organization, I can almost buy that.

 

[Grahamhawker]

One word... re-structure.

Why would Red agree to restructure? Dude had another great year and is one of the main reasons our run defense is so stout.

Restructuring is about having leverage over a player due to a down year, which doesn't apply to Red.

How come everyone i read about is always "one of the main reasons our defense is so stout." I know I left out "run" but that's a qualifier. You can always put something in their to make it work for each starter. Basically, everyone on the defense is somehow the MAIN REASON why the defense is so good. The point of "main" is that it is relegated to a handful --out of 11 starters, it can only be 2-3 players. And it especially cannot be a player who only plays 40% of the snaps.

Red Bryant is not a main reason for anything on this defense. Mebane for instance is much more important, even if you clarify and only look at run defense. Avril/Bennett were both more important than Red Bryant. That's 3 players just on the defensive line. Clem vs Red? Toss up.

This was a historic defense, so it has great players at every position. In my opinion, Red Bryant was one of the least important players on this defense. Wagner/WRight/Smith/Irvin --the four LBs were all more important. They tended to play more snaps than Red. All members of the LOB were more important, that's 4 players. And as said prior, Bennett/Avril/Mebane and perhaps Clem were more important on the line. Heck, I would put Mcdanial/Mcdonald in the same category as Red.

A team cannot allow sentiment to get in the way of good footballing decisions. REd is a "leader" on this team, but is he more so a leader than Robinson who was cut last year? One thing is for sure, Red is not very important to this defense, at least when compared to all the other players who get paid a fraction of his price. Red needs to understand that he got paid, now it's time for others on this team to get paid. Is it fair for Sherman to get paid $600k so Red can get his $9mil?

Good stuff here. And I love me some Red Bryant.

If he doesn't restructure, do you think any other team would come up with near 8.5 mil for him? Or even the 5 mil difference after dead$$?

 

[Penman96]

I don't see Bennett on running plays when the D would want a 5-tech, he's not big enough. As it is (approximately) Red plays 1/3 of the snaps, Bennett plays 2/3 of the snaps. Both are specialists and replaceable for a reasonable amount (say, below 6 million), or replaceable through the draft. When we cut or restructure Clem we can free up money for a replacement DE. Suppose that could be Bennett if the price is right, but surely there are other options if the price isn't right.

 

[Lynch Mob]

Bryant I think will re-structure he won't get top dollar anywhere these days. So it would seem he would stay here for a reduced salary with a good chance of winning and playing in big games.

Clemons is gone too much salary and if they do sign him it will probably be after the season starts. Clemons could be next years M. Robinson.

that should be enough room to pay Bennett for the next 4yrs.