Armstead to Rework or Restructure Contract

[andyahs]

Depends on what happens here.

If we are just transitioning guarantees into signing bonuses and kicking the can down the road I'll be disappointed.

If we are lowering his number to mitigate the risk and then clearing space this year without over leveraging the future I'll be stoked.

Kinda hoping it's that so you can stay pissed off.

 

[GRYPHONK]

None of those were FA signings. Seiler was a great get though off of Balt PS and Chubb is part of the problem of why we are where we are at money wise. Gave away a 1st to acquire him then signed him to big money. The combo of not hitting on picks, trading away picks and getting picks taken away has put us in a tough spot

I didn't say that. Why was GRYPHONK quoted as saying that lol

 

[E30M3]

I didn't say that. Why was GRYPHONK quoted as saying that lol

Glitch in the matrix.

 

[andyahs]

I didn't say that. Why was GRYPHONK quoted as saying that lol

You are so quotable.

 

[Mach2]

We all knew that some restructuring was coming.

...and yet, brothers will still kick and scream at each one.

It's kind of funny.

That is because some feel it is the wrong path going forward and the ends do not justify the means.

The fact that it was a foregone conclusion doesn't make it more palatable.

 

[Mach2]

now the suspense is killing me....at first I thought he might be taking a pay-cut but who knows what this is?

Why would he do that? He has guaranteed money and retirement would actually be worse for this season's cap.

From his POV, taking a pay cut wouldn't make sense, would it?

 

[Marino2.0]

This is almost definitely not a restructure in the traditional sense. This sounds to me like a renegotiated deal with different terms.

It should be impossible to complain about a reconstructed deal until we know the details of the reconstruction. But some folks on this board expand the horizons of what is possible.

 

[Mach2]

Depends on what happens here.

If we are just transitioning guarantees into signing bonuses and kicking the can down the road I'll be disappointed.

If we are lowering his number to mitigate the risk and then clearing space this year without over leveraging the future I'll be stoked.

What would the mechanics of the second paragraph look like.

I ask because I do not think that is even possible, short of TA taking a huge voluntary pay cut, and even then I doubt the NFLPA would go along with it.

 

[Marino2.0]

now the suspense is killing me....at first I thought he might be taking a pay-cut but who knows what this is?

Very unlikely to be a pure pay cut. But he had a big cap hit this year and was virtually guaranteed to get cut after this season. He is likely restructuring his deal to lower his cap number this year in return for a deal that makes it less likely he gets cut after this season (based on more guaranteed future money).

 

[50 Years a Fan]

Holding back any thoughts until I see what this really is going to be. Hoping for a lower cap hit this year for sure.

 

[GatorFin73]

Whatever we are doing here I have to think it’s an overall positive for the MD or else we wouldn’t be doing it. We could have gotten out of the contract relatively easily next offseason so I’m sure we are clearing some cap space now and hopefully, lessening the dead money next year by spreading it out a bit.

 

[Marino2.0]

That is because some feel it is the wrong path going forward and the ends do not justify the means.

The fact that it was a foregone conclusion doesn't make it more palatable.

How can you say whether it’s palatable or not until you know the details?

Armstead is currently set to count $21 million against our cap for the next three years. But if we cut him after this year, he will only count $21 million this year and $12.7 million next year.

Let’s say we restructure his deal so that instead of $21 million, $21 million, $21 million through 2026 (if we keep him) or $21 million / $12.7 million through 2025 (if we cut him), we restructure the deal so his cap hits are $12 million / $12 million / $12 million / $12 million through 2027—almost all up front.

He makes an extra $14 million as compared to being cut and gets it all today, we get an extra $9 million in cap space this season, and the only “downside” is we lock ourselves into 2 extra years of Armstead at a very reasonable $12M price tag.

 

[Bridgeburner]

Kinda hoping it's that so you can stay pissed off.

Sounds about right for you. You'd prefer the Dolphins be worse off so that forum members who disagree with you are frustrated. Many of us would prefer the Dolphins be int he best position to win as possible.

 

[andyahs]

Sounds about right for you. You'd prefer the Dolphins be worse off so that forum members who disagree with you are frustrated. Many of us would prefer the Dolphins be int he best position to win as possible.

Joke went over your head.

Not surprised.

 

[Mach2]

How can you say whether it’s palatable or not until you know the details?

Armstead is currently set to count $21 million against our cap for the next three years. But if we cut him after this year, he will only count $21 million this year and $12.7 million next year.

Let’s say we restructure his deal so that instead of $21 million, $21 million, $21 million through 2026 (if we keep him) or $21 million / $12.7 million through 2025 (if we cut him), we restructure the deal so his cap hits are $12 million / $12 million / $12 million / $12 million through 2027—almost all up front.

He makes an extra $14 million as compared to being cut and gets it all today, we get an extra $9 million in cap space this season, and the only “downside” is we lock ourselves into 2 extra years of Armstead at a very reasonable $12M price tag.

I was speaking in general terms, which is how I understood the post to which I was replying. Some don't want any more restructuring than absolutely necessary because, no two ways about it, it negativity affects future flexibility as well as increased dead money when we ultimately have to move on from some of these guys.

In this specific case, do you really see TA playing two years down the road when we are still taking pretty large cap hits? I have my doubts. We really haven't much choice now, but that is a situation management brought up on itself by doing questionable moves like this in the past.

I'm not arguing specific moves, or even suggesting what I believe would be a better course, though I have my opinions. I am merely stating that there is merit to the idea that kicking the can is not a viable, long term solution.

Now, some couldn't care less about ramifications beyond this season, but let's not pretend they aren't there.