pcbothwel Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 I also think they will do the same with Roberts (Eat 2M this year, Net Savings of 3M) so they dont deal with it next year. This allows us enough space to bring back Reed, Cousins, Baker, and 1 of Garcon/Jackson. And dont be surprised if Hall has a borderline Pro-Bowl year at S. He has proven that he can come up in run support, and his eyes on the QB are 2nd to none. He'll pull in 5+ picks this year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Est.1974 Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 Shame really, liked him. More proof Scot doesn't mess around. Would be happy if he came back when fit on less money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSSkinz Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 Does anyone know if the void clause changes any of these numbers when it comes to dead cap pre and post Jun 1st? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcbothwel Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 Does anyone know if the void clause changes any of these numbers when it comes to dead cap pre and post Jun 1st? No. His original contract gave him a 5M signing bonus (1.25M per year), while also guaranteeing his base salary of 3M last year and 8M this year for a total of 16M in guarantees. His suspension allowed us to void the guaranteed base salary this year (8m), but we still are charged the 3.75M from his signing bonus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjinhan Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 Man, this doesn't make much sense, we are not talking a few dollars here, but 2.5 million. That is a lot of cap space wasted, I wonder why he did that, unless there is a push to bring him back at a lower salary. Actually with the new cap rules... It really doesn't matter because we are now allowed to carry left over cap space over year to year... As long as we are not short on salary cap and have to cut people this year (and we are not in that situation) then it doesn't matter when the cap number clears our books... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBass1724 Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 I'm not really attached to Cully and am totally cool with him being cut. Plenty of low budget guys can perform as well as him. Besides, two ACL tears = damaged goods. This is the business side of the NFL, so it was time to move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carex Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 did they void the deal or play nice and cut him so he gets what he's officially owed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conn Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 did they void the deal or play nice and cut him so he gets what he's officially owed? The guarantee is what was voided, though. Not the whole contract, if that makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carex Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 The guarantee is what was voided, though. Not the whole contract, if that makes sense. it really doesn't but I guess it doesn't matter to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 Feels like the right business and roster move. Feel a little bad for the player. He tried to fight through injury for the team. I appreciate that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koolblue13 Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 Doors still open if he doesn't get the money he's looking for.that's what I'm hoping for. I like Cully. Seems like he wants to play for us too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Blaster Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 did they void the deal or play nice and cut him so he gets what he's officially owed? He got $8 million in his pocket for the 6 games he played last year. That's enough IMO Feels like the right business and roster move. Feel a little bad for the player. He tried to fight through injury for the team. I appreciate that. I was thinking the best move would have been to place him on short-term IR with the depth at CB now, but paying him $8 million for maybe 8 games this year after paying $8 million for 6 games last year doesn't make much sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 GMSM is on record saying Garcon is not going anywhere this year. He's said that several times and I believe him. Hail Em Up! Agree. Getting tired of armchair GMs in here trying to get rid of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommDownMan Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 The guarantee is what was voided, though. Not the whole contract, if that makes sense. it really doesn't but I guess it doesn't matter to me The original contract had 8 mill guaranteed if he played this year with the skins or not. We would have taken a bath to cut him this year. Had he played this year, he could have earned the 8 mill. He was cut, the guarantee is gone, so the only money that he has and keeps is the signing bonus and last years salary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Est.1974 Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 Culliver clearly won't be healthy by September. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommDownMan Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 Agree. Getting tired of armchair GMs in here trying to get rid of him. Next year (2017) with Doctson (2nd year) and Crowder (3rd year), I really think they will keep one of DJax and Garcon. Based on how SM talks and the money involved, I really like Garcons chances of staying after this year. He might get a similar offer/option to test FA like Cully is being told to do (and guys like Pot Roast, Pierre Thomas and Goldson). I think DJax is the likelier to net a comp pick and higher cap cost. Maybe they go outside the org, but if SM likes him as much as he says he does and he likes to reward in house guys over new guys, we'll see Garcon for a bit longer. Says an armchair GM from another viewpoint.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redrobert Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 Not sure I like the move... Does this mean we may be close to something long term with Cousins? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momma There Goes That Man Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 There isn't a single reason why we should keep Garcon after this year over DJax. Garcon does nothing at an elite level. He's an above average WR with an overinflated sense of his ability and salary expectations. DJax still has elite level ability in speed and as a deep threat which brings something that nobody else on the roster can. What Garcon brings to the table is easily replicated. I would prefer to cut or trade him now but I get that we won't do that for whatever reasons. Either way, I wouldn't want him back next year anyway, especially not over DJax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yeen80 Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 There isn't a single reason why we should keep Garcon after this year over DJax. Garcon does nothing at an elite level. He's an above average WR with an overinflated sense of his ability and salary expectations. DJax still has elite level ability in speed and as a deep threat which brings something that nobody else on the roster can. What Garcon brings to the table is easily replicated. I would prefer to cut or trade him now but I get that we won't do that for whatever reasons. Either way, I wouldn't want him back next year anyway, especially not over DJax But you also have to consider how much longer DJax has as an elite playmaker with elite speed. He's been in the league since 2008 and durability is a great concern as was evidenced last year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSO Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 Doors still open if he doesn't get the money he's looking for. That's great to hear, really. I hope he comes back, feel bad for him, but also because of what it can mean in terms of trust between Scot and the players. Had to be a tough call to do that, considering the whole "spirit of the contract" stuff we were hearing from the team. But, business is business. I just hope the hard feelings aren't something they're unable to overcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abdcskins Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 Good luck to him. If I'm being honest I won't miss him that much. I thought we overpaid and he didn't show much when he was in there (I can't forget him dropping that pick 6 - I'm sure some people know which play I mean). Coming off a major injury this move makes a lot of sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinC Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 Count me as someone who is still confused how we could cut Culliver while he is injured. Has that been explained? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yeen80 Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 Good luck to him. If I'm being honest I won't miss him that much. I thought we overpaid and he didn't show much when he was in there (I can't forget him dropping that pick 6 - I'm sure some people know which play I mean). Coming off a major injury this move makes a lot of sense. Dropping a pick-6? Umm if we are talking about the same play, he had the clean pick-6 but the refs called him for a bull**** illegal blow to the head on Olsen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abdcskins Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 Dropping a pick-6? Umm if we are talking about the same play, he had the clean pick-6 but the refs called him for a bull**** illegal blow to the head on Olsen. Nah I'm talking about another game. Can't recall which one. It was just one play but it stuck out in my mind. He dropped an easy INT and had nothing but green field in front of him. We lost that game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ncr2h Posted May 2, 2016 Share Posted May 2, 2016 While I feel bad for how things turned out for Culliver here, this move also makes the Norman signing much less of a head-scratcher. I still am uncomfortable with the amount of money we gave up for Norman, but at least we'll have room on our depth chart now to develop future CBs. I kind of view the Culliver/Norman moves as us paying several million dollars to get a "do-over" on Culliver (i.e. when we signed Culliver, we thought we were getting a solid #1 CB with potential upside to be elite). Norman Breeland Blackmon Fuller Dunbar / UFA That's a good rotation - 3 veterans (1 with upside) and 2 developmental guys. Nah I'm talking about another game. Can't recall which one.It was just one play but it stuck out in my mind. He dropped an easy INT and had nothing but green field in front of him. We lost that game. It was the first game of the year against Miami. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.