KillerB":22t75n1c said:
Rocket":22t75n1c said:
I think the decision is 100% money. If he restructures then we should keep him, cuz he hasn't shown any reason to dump him other than money. I think he'll restructure.
I just don't think we ought to be kicking the dude to the curb just yet...
This. If Marshawn is agreeable to a re-structure that nets the team most of the savings they would get by cutting him, then by all means keep him around. And the Seahawks could pay him $5M+, couldn't they, while still getting the same cap savings as releasing him?
You aren't understanding how dead money works. Whether he plays or not, the Seahawks have ALREADY paid him 5 million for next year (in terms of the cap). He is due $6.5 million more if he plays (in terms of the cap). If he is cut or retires, the Hawks could theoretically demand 5 million back, but that never happens,
Now, have a quick look at the
available running back free agents for next year and tell me which could step in and replace the production we can expect from Beast. Matt Forte is the only one I see, and he would be way more expensive. Which rookie RB could replace him?
Yes Rawls looks to be the real deal replacement, but we really can't trust either him or Beast to stay healthy for the full year.
For $6.5 million, I say keep the guy. UNLESS, the distractions are detrimental to the team. I think the whole "distractions" thing is overblown on this board, but only the team knows for sure, and they aren't going to say.
The only way I see cutting him is if we just need a few million more to sign a stud left tackle free agent, or if he really is a distraction to the team or is milking his injury and sucking off the teat.
Of course, he may just want to retire.
- bsd