Buyers remorse? Will Suh agree to take less of a slice of the pie for a little bit? Interesting how this plays out.
"By the time we get to the first day of the league year, we should have plenty of room to address the needs that we have," Tannenbaum told reporters, per ESPN. "Certainly we will be looking at Suh's contract."
The best defensive tackle in the league, Suh signed a six-year, $114 million contract in March, with $60 million guaranteed, making him the highest-paid defensive player in NFL history. However, the 'Fins only paid Suh a base salary of $985,000 in 2015 -- he received a $25.5 million signing bonus. In 2016, Miami is expected to dole out $23.4 million to Suh, a number usually reserved for franchise quarterbacks.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...ns-consider-restructuring-ndamukong-suhs-deal
Page 1 of 2
-
Even if it wasn't built into his contract....how does restructuring a deal that pays the man the same amount and doesn't change conditions constitute a question about "buyer's remorse"?
Conuficus, PhinGeneral, gunn34 and 1 other person like this. -
The Dolphins are back tracking to restructure his deal because they ****ed up and gave to many to much all at once. They got very little money and this team is in desperate need of talent. There were a few on here, myself included, who were shaking their heads at this nonsense.
Why not just do **** right the first time? What happened to the "CAP Guru"? Apparently she must have been out of the building.
Does someone have a copy of Suh's contract? Where does it say he has to restructure?
Lets also ignore the fact that they attempted to patch up the offensive line last year with a bunch of reject's because they couldn't afford anything else.
SUH's contract could come back to Haunt Dolphins
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on...hs-contract-could-come-back-to-haunt-dolphins -
I don't think it would be smart to restructure his contract, because that just makes him less tradable, after next season he becomes tradable, but if you restructure that becomes really difficult due to the amount of "bonus" money his salary would have to turn into, or increasing his salary into the 20 mil and over range for multiple years, instead of just 1.
It was a bad deal, this would just make it worse imo.gunn34 likes this. -
Guest
-
Larryfinfan 17-0...Priceless Club Member
-
Larryfinfan 17-0...Priceless Club Member
gunn34 likes this. -
While it's valid that the restructure does nothing to prove buyer's remorse, you're kidding yourselves if you think the Dolphins do not have buyer's remorse with Suh. They surely realize by now what some of us realized before the paperwork was signed - throwing money at a DT is not a winning move in the NFL. Even if Suh played as dominantly as he did with the Lions (which he did at times), it was still a poor signing and created many of the weaknesses that doomed this team in 2015. And the trouble is just starting with this contract.
Finster likes this. -
Where has all the talk gone that was prevalent at his signing? "it doesn't really matter who we have a LB or at the other corner spot, because Suh make everyone around him better, and you can't throw the ball when you're on your back..."
Many people saying he was better than any 2 players we could have signed at that spot, and where has that gotten us? We were as bad on defense as we have been since the early 90s, Suh made no one better, in fact, it seems like some players got worse, so where is this great boon we were supposed to get from Suh?
His fellow players and coaches and writers from around the league not casting their votes for him says a lot, because that's the only way a super popular player doesn't get into the probowl, his play here this year was above avg, but that's about it, he's not the great player everyone assumed, but after I watched a ton of his Detroit tape after we signed him, I found that out myself, and I said it before the season started, and what I said held out to be true.
So it has nothing to do with me not liking Suh, I like him as a player, but what I don't do is overvalue him as a player, and paying Suh franchise QB money is quite possibly the stupidest football move this team has ever made, he's no where near worth it. -
-
It is the opposite. If the Dolphins had buyers remorse they wouldn't restructure his contract.
Fin D likes this. -
Larryfinfan 17-0...Priceless Club Member
-
Problem is what actually happened is totally the opposite even though he played well (though not at a top 3 level league-wide in 2015). It's still a mystery to me how the discrepancy in DL performance was so great. -
finfansince72 Season Ticket Holder Club Member
-
-
dgfred likes this.
-
Suh is a great player and someone this franchise has been starving to build around, even if some of our teams fans can't understand this that doesn't mean it was a bad decision and we have remorse. Our football guys like Tannenbaum aren't exactly seen as world beaters by anyone and for good reason, but they're a hell of a lot football smarter than our average fan who thinks they know what they are talking about and post on the internet about how stupid this team is lol. -
We're a rebuilding team, we need to keep what talent we can and Suh is 29 years old already, there really is no reason to keep him around after next year. -
2010: 24/24
2011: 23/30
2012: 16/24
2013: 6/20
2014: 1/1
So, 2014 is really an outlier.
Not sure what that little exercise proves. Probably nothing. But it seems to show that Suh alone is not enough to give you a great run defense.
Edit -- In 2015, the Lions fell back to 20/20. So maybe giving him up means you won't have a great run defense, either.
Incidentally, the Dolphins were 28/13 last year, and 24/21 the year before that. In 2011, the year Sparano got fired, we were 3/3! Go figure.2socks likes this. -
finfansince72 Season Ticket Holder Club Member
-
However, the bold is my point, IF they want to POSSIBLY get rid of Suh next year then they can't restructure his contract this year, it's much better to be able to be flexible imo, and as far as the "investment", how many have we signed and it not worked out? Too many to want to count, lol, the point is to build a SB contending team, and if they have a better chance doing that by trading Suh next year, then that's what they should do. -
The way Suh was used early this season is an example of forcing a scheme on a player, and not adapting to their strengths. -
-
1. Your claim that he said that Suh was a scheme fit, as you tried to bring the tailoring the offense argument here
And
2. That early in the season Suh was asked to react to the defense, per our scheme, instead of allowing him to attack the oline and disrupt. -
Personally I hate the 4-3. If played straight up and not in a hybrid is a weak defense. Especially for players like SUH because often there are more blockers then rushers and he will continue to be double teamed. Res you want to attack me because I differ in some of your opinion's. Why don't we just bury the hatchet and I will respect your's and you respect mine.:yes:
So lets look at the guy going to run the defense. No experience as a DC. A defensive backs coach. Sorry if I can't get all excited. Now I am hearing he intends to run a defense which will most likely by design neutralize's the best player on the team(SUH), regardless of how I feel about his contract going to come back and haunt us. Oh by the way The Cap Guru is leaving for Detroit. Guess she won't have to deal with the mess she created. Edit: Now report is she is staying. Somethings up.
As far as the inexperienced DC, he must be awful high on himself, because the 4-3 needs great linebackers and corners due to the number that are on the field.
WE dont have any -
- They should have gotten Clay under contract sooner.
- They should have signed Odrick sooner.
- If they didn't resign Odrick, they should have brought Starks back.
- They could have drafted Marcus Peters in the first round.
- They could have drafted Denzel Perryman in the second round.
-
Page 1 of 2