Cardinals | Stewart Bradley could be released

[imaCafan]

Cardinals | Stewart Bradley could be released
Sun, 18 Mar 2012 12:13:25 -0700

The Arizona Cardinals could release LB Stewart Bradley this offseason or work on restructuring his contract so they can gain some salary cap space.

Read more: http://www.kffl.com/hotw/NFL?page=1#ixzz1pVddsHw6

 

[Jetstream Green]

now weez talkin'

 

[BullheadCardFan]

If we release him how much do we save on the cap for this year?

 

[overseascardfan]

What the heck are we going to use the $$$ on? All the big FA's are gone. It seems like ARZ is officially calling the 2011 offseason a dud which we can all agree on.

 

[Jetstream Green]

Kameron Wimbley Kameron Wimbley Kameron Wimbley Kameron Wimbley ... Kameron Wimbley

 

[PJ1]

He isn't worth what we are paying him. He needs to restructure if he wants to stay. What is he going to get somewhere else?

 

[Jetstream Green]

and if not Kameron Wimbley, Bell at OT

 

[joeshmo]

We will get a whopping 1 mill of cap space.

Why cut a guy who was playing well and about 50% of the snaps when our D was finally playing well for a whopping 1 mill in cap space.

 

[Jetstream Green]

he was playing OK to me and nothing more

 

[Phrazbit]

We will get a whopping 1 mill of cap space.

Why cut a guy who was playing well and about 50% of the snaps when our D was finally playing well for a whopping 1 mill in cap space.

Maybe targeting LBs early in the draft?

 

[Goldfield]

and if not Kameron Wimbley, Bell at OT

No reason we can't or shouldn't sign both.

 

[Jetstream Green]

No reason we can't or shouldn't sign both.

as a Cardinal fan, I thought that would be expecting a little too much lol

 

[BullheadCardFan]

We will get a whopping 1 mill of cap space.

Why cut a guy who was playing well and about 50% of the snaps when our D was finally playing well for a whopping 1 mill in cap space.

So it's better to restructure and keep him.

 

[PJ1]

We will get a whopping 1 mill of cap space.

Why cut a guy who was playing well and about 50% of the snaps when our D was finally playing well for a whopping 1 mill in cap space.

I give him no credit for the improvement of our D. When he was in it was worse.

 

[Vermont Maverick]

We will get a whopping 1 mill of cap space.

Why cut a guy who was playing well and about 50% of the snaps when our D was finally playing well for a whopping 1 mill in cap space.

We would actually get $2M. He's due to make $5M plus $1M prorated signing bonus = 6M. There is $4M remaining on his bonus, therefore $2M

Or we could save $5M on this years cap by deferring the final $3M to next years cap with the new "exception" rule.

Not to mention saving $5M in cash.

 

[az jam]

Article is pure speculation from Pro football weekly.

 

[joeshmo]

So it's better to restructure and keep him.

If you don't mind having count another 1+ mill against the cap in future years. Restructure doesn't mean pay less, it means pay more later.

 

[joeshmo]

I give him no credit for the improvement of our D. When he was in it was worse.

So he goes from playing 10% of the snaps to 50% of the snaps during our best D performance the last half of the season and he wasn't apart of that resurgence. Not saying he was the whole reason or even the majority of the reason, but that huge of a increase in snaps shows he was at least PART of it. To say otherwise is just bashing for the sake of bashing. Good run defender the last half of the season, was taking on blocks and setting up some good edges for Washington to clean up.

 

[PJ1]

So he goes from playing 10% of the snaps to 50% of the snaps during our best D performance the last half of the season and he wasn't apart of that resurgence. Not saying he was the whole reason or even the majority of the reason, but that huge of a increase in snaps shows he was at least PART of it. To say otherwise is just bashing for the sake of bashing. Good run defender the last half of the season, was taking on blocks and setting up some good edges for Washington to clean up.

Actually if he had played anywhere near what we had hoped our D would have been that much better. He has trouble learning the system? Give me a break.

Giving Bradley any of the credit for our improved D last year tells me you weren't watching too closely. The fact we couldn't play him more with what he was being paid was a disgrace. This wasn't an unproven rookie and he certainly wasn't paid like one.

 

[WildBB]

We would actually get $2M. He's due to make $5M plus $1M prorated signing bonus = 6M. There is $4M remaining on his bonus, therefore $2M

Or we could save $5M on this years cap by deferring the final $3M to next years cap with the new "exception" rule.

Not to mention saving $5M in cash.

Yeah, I also think they just want to get out of the rest of the deal which is four more yrs. Way too much.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

So it's better to restructure and keep him.

+1.

I think he should have his contract restructured, and have more performance based.

Even shorten the length of the contract maybe.

I would like to see him stick around. If he does not, then our both our ILB and OLB core is in dire need of depth, and future plans.

 

[Dayman]

I would be ecstatic if we cut Bradley and sign Jameel McClain.

 

[Mitch]

I would be ecstatic if we cut Bradley and sign Jameel McClain.

Word.

 

[Duckjake]

Actually if he had played anywhere near what we had hoped our D would have been that much better. He has trouble learning the system? Give me a break.

Giving Bradley any of the credit for our improved D last year based on the increased number of snaps he took as the year went on is telling me you weren't watching too closely. The fact we couldn't play him more with what he was being paid was a disgrace.

Yeah Bradley must have been playing great to get 8 tackles the last 9 games of the season total. Paris Lenon during that same stretch had 43.