'Hawks officially release Sidney Rice & Big Red Bryant

[hawksfansinceday1]

Best wishes Sid and Red. Thank you.

 

[onanygivensunday]

You cannot pay a DE starter $$$ to only play 20 snaps a game. I really think Red will be back.

Where did you get your numbers? Looks to me like you made them up.

Red played 460 snaps this year and he missed one game due to a concussion.

That equates to 30 snaps/game and I'm not counting special teams snaps either.

Snaps number source... http://www.rotowire.com/football/player.htm?id=6367

 

[onanygivensunday]

Going to miss them both... especially Red.

But you know... both got paid so I don't feel sorry for them with the exception that they are both losing a huge family that they are members of... and, they won't get a chance to repeat

 

[McGruff]

I don't like the Bryant cut because he didn't drop off, and probably had a better year in 2013 than in 2012 (though he was carrying an injury then).
I understand, it's a big number for the job he does... but the FO said he was worth it 2 years ago, now they're telling him "actually, no you're not".
it's certainly something that the rest of the team will notice when contract negotiations are on, and it will make things more difficult in the future

Actually, the front office gave him a contract, which he and his agent agreed to, which by the numbers said that unless you develop some pass rush moves and grow into an elite DE, you are probably going to get cut in 2014. Every player knows it and understands it.

Is that what the contract said for real? I find that hard to believe seeings he hasnt played in passing downs since PC took over and nothing about the system supports that at all.

By the numbers . . . Meaning Red and everyone else knows that you don't pay 8.5 million dollars to a part time run stuffig end who is approaching 30 years old.

 

[Subzero717]

I don't like the Bryant cut because he didn't drop off, and probably had a better year in 2013 than in 2012 (though he was carrying an injury then).
I understand, it's a big number for the job he does... but the FO said he was worth it 2 years ago, now they're telling him "actually, no you're not".
it's certainly something that the rest of the team will notice when contract negotiations are on, and it will make things more difficult in the future

Actually, the front office gave him a contract, which he and his agent agreed to, which by the numbers said that unless you develop some pass rush moves and grow into an elite DE, you are probably going to get cut in 2014. Every player knows it and understands it.

Is that what the contract said for real? I find that hard to believe seeings he hasnt played in passing downs since PC took over and nothing about the system supports that at all.

By the numbers . . . Meaning Red and everyone else knows that you don't pay 8.5 million dollars to a part time run stuffig end who is approaching 30 years old.

Completely agree and thus he was cut. I dont think the intent was for him to ever rush the passer although before last or the year before he said he wanted to work on it. I think Quinns system and other guys needing to be paid made it happen. On top of that IMO the emergence of Kam and others as a leaders made it easier. IMO I see Kam being D captain next year.

 

[themunn]

I don't like the Bryant cut because he didn't drop off, and probably had a better year in 2013 than in 2012 (though he was carrying an injury then).
I understand, it's a big number for the job he does... but the FO said he was worth it 2 years ago, now they're telling him "actually, no you're not".
it's certainly something that the rest of the team will notice when contract negotiations are on, and it will make things more difficult in the future

Actually, the front office gave him a contract, which he and his agent agreed to, which by the numbers said that unless you develop some pass rush moves and grow into an elite DE, you are probably going to get cut in 2014. Every player knows it and understands it.

Is that what the contract said for real? I find that hard to believe seeings he hasnt played in passing downs since PC took over and nothing about the system supports that at all.

By the numbers . . . Meaning Red and everyone else knows that you don't pay 8.5 million dollars to a part time run stuffig end who is approaching 30 years old.

They just paid him 7.6m last year, I don't see why Bryant "knows" he's not going to see through his contract, if players "thought" they weren't going to see the end of it, they'd take a contract with smaller numbers that is less likely to see them get cut.
What's the point in taking 35m over 5 years if you only see 40% of it, better to take a contract 70% of the size and see the whole thing right?

 

[Scottemojo]

@themunn.
Which is why paying attention to the total numbers on a contract is a mistake. Follow the guaranteed money.

 

[Subzero717]

To kind of echo what Scott said its all about garuntees. On top of that with the lack of garuntees in the NFL, why would a player sign a contract for less dollars to "see it through" when he can be cut at any time for any reason.

 

[themunn]

To kind of echo what Scott said its all about garuntees. On top of that with the lack of garuntees in the NFL, why would a player sign a contract for less dollars to "see it through" when he can be cut at any time for any reason.

Because it also reduces your chance of getting cut?
At the end of the day, why would you accept a contract that offers 14 million guaranteed and 35 million total but you "know you'll get cut" at the end of year 2 when you could accept 14 million guaranteed, 28 million total where you actually have a realistic chance of seeing the 28 million?

No player accepts a contract where they "know" they'll get cut at the end of the second year, they more than likely sign it expecting to see it through to the end unless their performance dips (which Bryant's did not, and if anything, probably had one of his best seasons as a Hawk). Literally hundreds of players make it to the end of their contracts every year, players being cut because their salary is too high without any dip in performance is the exception, not the rule, and usually they would see offers of a restructure before anything else.

 

[Scottemojo]

To kind of echo what Scott said its all about garuntees. On top of that with the lack of garuntees in the NFL, why would a player sign a contract for less dollars to "see it through" when he can be cut at any time for any reason.

Because it also reduces your chance of getting cut?
At the end of the day, why would you accept a contract that offers 14 million guaranteed and 35 million total but you "know you'll get cut" at the end of year 2 when you could accept 14 million guaranteed, 28 million total where you actually have a realistic chance of seeing the 28 million?

No player accepts a contract where they "know" they'll get cut at the end of the second year, they more than likely sign it expecting to see it through to the end unless their performance dips (which Bryant's did not, and if anything, probably had one of his best seasons as a Hawk). Literally hundreds of players make it to the end of their contracts every year, players being cut because their salary is too high without any dip in performance is the exception, not the rule, and usually they would see offers of a restructure before anything else.

I can't speak for Cali, but while you are right, I wasn't saying he KNEW he would get cut, just saying he and his agent had to be aware that the contract made it possible.

Think about it from the persective of Bryant and his agent. He signs a deal that guarantees the first two years. Leaving him 29 if he gets cut at the end of that 2nd year, and not being 30 in free agency is a big deal. Also, we have no way of knowing how big the deal he was offered by the Patriots was two years ago, but the fact that he signed in Seattle would seem to indicate it topped the patriots offer.

Also, we have no idea if Bryant was offered a restructure.
I see your point of view, I really do. I just think our front office is out in front of an issue, not a step behind an issue. Red saw 18 snaps in the SB facing a pass happy team. If the front office is forecasting a more prolific offense with Harvin and Wilson, the need to have Red stuffing the run is lessened, and his money is needed for pass rush. Paying Red like he is a 3 down player is fiscally irresponsible moving forward when his money could be better used elsewhere, it really is that simple.

Making moves a year early is better than a year late.

 

[Subzero717]

To kind of echo what Scott said its all about garuntees. On top of that with the lack of garuntees in the NFL, why would a player sign a contract for less dollars to "see it through" when he can be cut at any time for any reason.

Because it also reduces your chance of getting cut?
At the end of the day, why would you accept a contract that offers 14 million guaranteed and 35 million total but you "know you'll get cut" at the end of year 2 when you could accept 14 million guaranteed, 28 million total where you actually have a realistic chance of seeing the 28 million?

No player accepts a contract where they "know" they'll get cut at the end of the second year, they more than likely sign it expecting to see it through to the end unless their performance dips (which Bryant's did not, and if anything, probably had one of his best seasons as a Hawk). Literally hundreds of players make it to the end of their contracts every year, players being cut because their salary is too high without any dip in performance is the exception, not the rule, and usually they would see offers of a restructure before anything else.

I see your point but, if he took less a year to see it through, he would potentially make the same over four years that he did in his two of garunteed. On top of that this is the NFL. Its all about garunteed money as contracts mean nothing. Say he signs a contract for less to see it through and two games in he blows a knee out, needs micrfracture surgery. Now what? His 24 guarunteed he could have taken as opposed to his 10 million to "see it through" is logical. Many times players no damn well they wont see the end of the contract.

In Reds case his play may not have diminished but his roll did. We unlike a lot of teams rotate 8 plus guys. He is a run stopping end in a passing league and we are in nickle I cant remember the official number but it was 65% or so. He may have been asked to restructure and didnt want to as Scott pointed out.

As far as hundreds of players completing their contracts its typically rookie deals.

 

[blkhwk]

You cannot pay a DE starter $$$ to only play 20 snaps a game. I really think Red will be back.

Where did you get your numbers? Looks to me like you made them up.

Red played 460 snaps this year and he missed one game due to a concussion.

That equates to 30 snaps/game and I'm not counting special teams snaps either.

Snaps number source... http://www.rotowire.com/football/player.htm?id=6367

Yep. took a guess. I didn't actually calculate the number of snaps/game. But 20 or 30 snaps a game is not enough for the amount of $$$ he is being paid. Red is pretty much a liability vs. the pass, and the league, outside of the NFC west, is a spread-passing league. He is more valuable in our defense than in others. I wouldn't be surprised to see him back at a cheaper rate.

 

[Subzero717]

You cannot pay a DE starter $$$ to only play 20 snaps a game. I really think Red will be back.

Where did you get your numbers? Looks to me like you made them up.

Red played 460 snaps this year and he missed one game due to a concussion.

That equates to 30 snaps/game and I'm not counting special teams snaps either.

Snaps number source... http://www.rotowire.com/football/player.htm?id=6367

He is more valuable in our defense than in others. I wouldn't be surprised to see him back at a cheaper rate.

If that was the case I believe he would have restructured. NE and a few others made a run at him during his last FA. He could be a productive 3-4 end in other systems.

 

[blkhwk]

You cannot pay a DE starter $$$ to only play 20 snaps a game. I really think Red will be back.

Where did you get your numbers? Looks to me like you made them up.

Red played 460 snaps this year and he missed one game due to a concussion.

That equates to 30 snaps/game and I'm not counting special teams snaps either.

Snaps number source... http://www.rotowire.com/football/player.htm?id=6367

He is more valuable in our defense than in others. I wouldn't be surprised to see him back at a cheaper rate.

If that was the case I believe he would have restructured. NE and a few others made a run at him during his last FA. He could be a productive 3-4 end in other systems.

He probably has a number from Seattle, he will test the market and if he can get more he will. Otherwise, I would expect him back.

 

[Subzero717]

You cannot pay a DE starter $$$ to only play 20 snaps a game. I really think Red will be back.

Where did you get your numbers? Looks to me like you made them up.

Red played 460 snaps this year and he missed one game due to a concussion.

That equates to 30 snaps/game and I'm not counting special teams snaps either.

Snaps number source... http://www.rotowire.com/football/player.htm?id=6367

He is more valuable in our defense than in others. I wouldn't be surprised to see him back at a cheaper rate.

If that was the case I believe he would have restructured. NE and a few others made a run at him during his last FA. He could be a productive 3-4 end in other systems.

He probably has a number from Seattle, he will test the market and if he can get more he will. Otherwise, I would expect him back.

If he was a FA testing the waters I would agree. He was cut. I dont see it.