randle restructures for seahawks..

[pinnacle]

Randle restructures...clearing space/freeing up money to throw more at holliday?

Based on below..it appears randle took a pay cut..and did not receive any more years tacked onto his contract and he did not get a new signing bonus or anything (roster bonus was due and already in his contract)..

question: has a cardinal player to anyones knowledge taken a paycut or redone their deal in a manner that did not actually cost more money (i.e. a straight paycut)?


Seahawks | Randle Restructures - posted at KFFL (http://nfl.kffl.com)
18:30 PT: John Clayton reports for ESPN.com Seattle Seahawks DT John Randle restructured his contract by giving back $2 million of base salary to the team. Randle was schedule to make $5 million this season, $4 million of which in base salary. He received a $1 million roster bonus the first week in March, but he reduced his salary from $4 million to $2 million. He is currently in the third year of a five-year contract.

 

[Houdini]

Originally posted by pinnacle
Randle restructures...clearing space/freeing up money to throw more at holliday?

question: has a cardinal player to anyones knowledge taken a paycut or redone their deal in a manner that did not actually cost more money (i.e. a straight paycut)?

I don't know, but I thought the Cardinals should have done that with Grut instead of cutting him. Offer him a lower salary. If he shows he's healthy during the preseason you can keep him at a low salary for some depth on the O-line, and if he gets injured during the season you don't lose a big salary. If he shows he's still banged up during the preseason, then cut him before the season starts and you don't owe him his salary for the upcoming season. I'm surprised the Cardinals didn't try to restructure his contract to a lower salary. If Grut wouldn't accept a lower salary you could always cut him then.

 

[jmr667]

I don't think the Cards restructure contracts as an organization at all. The only times it may have happened is when a player held out.
It sounded like at one time Jake Plummer may have offered to restructure but the Bidwills were not interested. If they wouldn't restructure THAT contract based on performance and need for salary cap space they probably won't restructure any of them.

Kind of goes along with the whole contract "bells and whistles", "spirit of CBA, not the letter" type things that the Bidwills are always getting bad-mouthed for.

I think the Cards are committed to the KISS method of contract writing.

 

[pinnacle]

I know that most of the contract restructures I read about are usually completed in a manner where the player gets a new signing bonus - but the payout in future years is less than the old contract - or the deal is redone and more years are added onto the contract..so at the end of the day I am not sure in the long run many of the contracts are actually beneficial to the team..but they may help the short term salary cap situation.. With Jake - I would have not been in favor or a restructure that added more years to his deal...

I do not see many deals done like randle's where a player just takes less money for nothing up front and no years added to the contract..

On a guy like Grutts..yea..we should have called him and said hey - we owe you $1.75 next year - but we will give you a million or we are going to cut you...we need a center for 16 games and you have been a warrior trying to come back..but it is a very important position ..and besides, if someone else picks you up - you will probaly make less anyway due to injury question marks..

my thinking is that the cards did not want grutts on the roster for maybe a couple of reasons..1. we had targeted someone like garcia and knew we could get hiim..or 2. we knew alot about grutts injuries and knew he could not play at a high level again and figured we may as well prepare our young guys.. He probably would have been a good guy to negotiate with...

 

[Houdini]

Originally posted by pinnacle


I do not see many deals done like randle's where a player just takes less money for nothing up front and no years added to the contract..

It's not done often, but I do see it once in awhile. The Packers do it with their older players to add depth if they have younger guys who have developed waiting in the wings to replace the older players. They did it last year with Frank Winters, Gilbert Brown, and Earl Dotson who all accepted pay cuts to stay with the team. I think Grut would have been the perfect Cardinal to ask for a paycut to add some depth if he came to camp healthy.

 

[ajcardfan]

Brad Ottis took a paycut a few years back for the Cardinals. Nothing on the scale of Randle though.

Also, Grut has yet to be released. Not saying he won't be, it just seems a little odd this was announced about two weeks ago but hasn't been done yet.

 

[az643dp]

The main reason that the Cardinals do not have to restructure contracts is that, for the most part, they sign the players to deals that won't get them in trouble. Wheather that is the right way to do business is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[az643dp]

Originally posted by ajcardfan


Also, Grut has yet to be released. Not saying he won't be, it just seems a little odd this was announced about two weeks ago but hasn't been done yet.

It was announced in the media, not by the team as far as I saw.

 

[pinnacle]

I think graves confirmed he would be released..but he did not actually say that he had been released.

 

[JeffGollin]

I think graves confirmed he would be released..but he did not actually say that he had been released.
Could this be one of those wait until June 1 "escape the cap hit" deals?

 

[ajcardfan]

Originally posted by JeffGollin
I think graves confirmed he would be released..but he did not actually say that he had been released.
Could this be one of those wait until June 1 "escape the cap hit" deals?

That wouldn't matter since it's the last year of his deal. We're going to clear 1.725 mil from the cap whenever he is released.