No decision yet on Spencer- UPDATED likely to get tagged

[jiggyfly]

That maybe so, but I am not paying alot of money to a guy who couldn't beat one on ones down the stretch nearly every snap.

I just think this is the exact wrong guy to pay.

So you must want Ware to give some money back as well because he had problems doing the exact same things.

 

[Sheik]

What if Spencer signs the tag?

He'd be god damned fool not to. Hell never get that kind of money in a single year again(playing football).

 

[jiggyfly]

What if Spencer signs the tag?

He'd be god damned fool not to. Hell never get that kind of money in a single year again(playing football).

But he could get the 16 million signing bonus Brooks got in SF guaranteed if never played another down due to injury.

Don't act like he could never make that kind of money on the open market, suppose he goes down to injury this year?

 

[Hoofbite]

I think you are reaching badly.

I'm sure if keeping Spencer meant the team couldnt do anything else, they'd let him go.

There's no reason they cant keep Spencer, sign a quality CB, probably add a quality OL and maybe another reasonbly priced starter as well.

Of course it doesn't prohibit them from doing whatever they wanted.

Signing all those players never stopped Washington from signing more.

Being able to do something is no excuse for doing it if you don't have good reason.

Fact is, they could do more with more so no matter how you look at the situation Spencer is still prohibitive to some extent.

Add 9M to whatever cap space you want and it's always going to be 9M more.

 

[Hoofbite]

But he could get the 16 million signing bonus Brooks got in SF guaranteed if never played another down due to injury.

Don't act like he could never make that kind of money on the open market, suppose he goes down to injury this year?

Brooks didn't get 16M in signing bonus. He got 7.5M, the other 10M is in the form of other bonuses that he wouldn't get if he never played another down.

 

[dbair1967]

What if Spencer signs the tag?

He'd be god damned fool not to. Hell never get that kind of money in a single year again(playing football).

Actually he'd probably be an idiot to sign it. He will definitely get a long term deal for significant money somewhere if its removed.

There will be alot of interest in him around the league if he gets free, no question about it. He's a better player than Ahmad Brooks is, and he just got a really nice deal to stay in SF.

 

[Theebs]

So you must want Ware to give some money back as well because he had problems doing the exact same things.

Yes your right ware is just like Spencer.

 

[jiggyfly]

lol

Yes your right ware is just like Spencer.

I knew you would take it there.lol


Way to overlook anything else I said and completely ignore the point of YOUR post.

 

[dbair1967]

Brooks didn't get 16M in signing bonus. He got 7.5M, the other 10M is in the form of other bonuses that he wouldn't get if he never played another down.

The report said he got 17.5 mils guaranteed. If he never plays a down for team, he'll get 17.5mils. The only exception might be if the Niners built in some sort of behavior/league conduct cluases which specifically negated the guaranteed money if he were disciplined by the league or something.

It doesnt matter if its a "signing bonus" or "xyz bonus" if its considered guaranteed, he gets it.

 

[jiggyfly]

Brooks didn't get 16M in signing bonus. He got 7.5M, the other 10M is in the form of other bonuses that he wouldn't get if he never played another down.

He gets 8.25 million and some pretty easily attainable incentives.

Brooks received $7.5 million to sign, and his $750,000 base salary for 2012 is fully guaranteed. (Then again, as pointed out last night, the first-year base salary is always as a practical matter guaranteed, because no player gets cut in the first year of a multi-year deal, especially where the base salary represents 10 percent of the signing bonus.)

That’s the extent of the fully guaranteed money in Brooks’ contract.

In 2012, Brooks also will receive a per-game active roster bonus of $31,500 — which for the full season becomes $500,000, and he’s eligible for a workout bonus of $100,000.

So the fact remains Spencer could easily get more that 9 million in guaranteed money because he is the younger player with a far better track record.

 

[Sheik]

I never said he wouldn't get a long term deal.

I said he'd never have a year financially like he would this upcoming year if he signed the tag, if he he was released.

Im sure plenty of teams would have interest. He's not a complete bum, he's just not good enough for my team.

 

[jiggyfly]

Here are the full details of Brooks deal I would love to resign Spencer to this kind of deal.

Ahmad Brooks gets $8.25 million guaranteed on signing
Posted by Mike Florio on March 2, 2012, 9:20 AM EST
New Orleans Saints quarterback Drew Brees (below) is sacked in the fourth quarter by San Francisco 49ers outside linebacker Ahmad Brooks during their NFL NFC Divisional playoff football game in San Francisco Reuters

Plenty of you appreciate the fact that we cut through the incomplete and/or misleading reports regarding the value of a given contract and supply the facts. (Then again, plenty of you don’t, because it’s hardly the most exciting aspect of following the NFL.)

For those of you who don’t like it, we recommend the scroll button. For those of you who do, it’s time to get out your Rain Man notebook and start writing, because we have the details on linebacker Ahmad Brooks‘ new six-year deal with the 49ers, courtesy of a league source with knowledge of the contract.

Brooks received $7.5 million to sign, and his $750,000 base salary for 2012 is fully guaranteed. (Then again, as pointed out last night, the first-year base salary is always as a practical matter guaranteed, because no player gets cut in the first year of a multi-year deal, especially where the base salary represents 10 percent of the signing bonus.)

That’s the extent of the fully guaranteed money in Brooks’ contract.

In 2012, Brooks also will receive a per-game active roster bonus of $31,500 — which for the full season becomes $500,000, and he’s eligible for a workout bonus of $100,000.

For 2013, Brooks has a $4.3 million base salary with an injury guarantee on signing. As of April 1, 2013, the salary becomes fully guaranteed, if Brooks is still on the roster.

The $4.3 million base salary also contains a so-called de-escalator; it can drop by up to $2.5 million based on Brooks’ sack production (or lack thereof) in 2012. The salary also can increase by up to $500,000. The deal contains for 2013 a $46,875 per-game active roster bonus ($750,000 for the year), and a $100,000 workout bonus.

In 2014, the base salary increases to $5.15 million. Of that amount, $4.95 million is guaranteed for injury only at signing. If Brooks is on the roster as of April 1, 2014, the $4.95 million becomes fully guaranteed. There’s a $2.5 million de-escalator tied to sacks in 2013; the de-escalator for 2014 goes away if the de-escalator applies in 2013. (Yep, I already have a headache.) The contract also contains another $46,875 per-game active roster bonus and a $100,000 workout bonus.

For 2015, a $6 million base salary could become partially guaranteed based on a complex formula of “ifs” and “ors.” The main factor for any base salary guarantee in 2015 is that Brooks must be on the roster as of April 1 that year. There’s also a de-escalator of up to $2.5 million based on 2014 sacks. The $46,875 per-game active roster bonus and the $100,000 workout bonus apply once again.

In 2016, the base salary is $6.5 million, with another de-escalator of up to $2.5 million based on 2015 sacks. Ditto for the $46,875 per-game active roster bonus and the $100,000 workout bonus.

In 2017, everything is the same, with the base salary moving to $6.95 million.

So it’s a one-year, $8.25 million fully-guaranteed contract with another $9 million or so in injury guarantees and an annual team option to pull the plug and move on.

 

[Hoofbite]

He gets 8.25 million and some pretty easily attainable incentives.


So the fact remains Spencer could easily get more that 9 million in guaranteed money because he is the younger player with a far better track record.

Well, he's not younger. Spencer is actually older by like 2 months. Not that it really matters.

Additionally looking at track records, one guy has shown improvement especially in the last couple of seasons and the other guy has been stagnant for a few years.

It depends on what you want I guess. Solid, yet unspectacular player or a guy who's play as gotten better every year for the last couple of years and is currently on the level of the solid starter.

 

[Hoofbite]

http://cowboysblog.dallasnews.com/ar...ce=twitterfeed

David Moore / Reporter

dmoore@dallasnews.com | Bio

8:32 PM on Sun., Mar. 4, 2012 | Permalink

Anthony Spencer has mixed emotions over what will happen Monday afternoon.

The outside linebacker wants to stay with the Cowboys. But he'd prefer to do so with a long-term contract rather than the franchise tag the club is expected to use to prevent him from hitting the open market.

"It looks like they are going to put the tag on me,'' Spencer said. "That's a good thing and a bad thing.

"It's good because it shows how much they think of me. But you don't want to be playing on a one-year contract. You want a longer deal and the security that gives your family.

"But hey, I understand. It's a business.''

Well. This sucks.

 

[Theebs]

lol

I knew you would take it there.lol


Way to overlook anything else I said and completely ignore the point of YOUR post.

The point of your post was stupid and intentionally ignorant.

Why would bother giving any response to be honest.

 

[jiggyfly]

The point of your post was stupid and intentionally ignorant.

Why would bother giving any response to be honest.

Do you even know what the point of my post was?

By your response its evident it went right over your head.

 

[dbair1967]

I never said he wouldn't get a long term deal.

I said he'd never have a year financially like he would this upcoming year if he signed the tag, if he he was released.
Im sure plenty of teams would have interest. He's not a complete bum, he's just not good enough for my team.

Sure he would. He'd easily get a deal with alot of up-front money, making it a better 1yr deal than simply playing for the tag.

 

[dbair1967]

Well, he's not younger. Spencer is actually older by like 2 months. Not that it really matters.

Additionally looking at track records, one guy has shown improvement especially in the last couple of seasons and the other guy has been stagnant for a few years.

It depends on what you want I guess. Solid, yet unspectacular player or a guy who's play as gotten better every year for the last couple of years and is currently on the level of the solid starter.

Exaggerate much?

 

[Theebs]

Do you even know what the point of my post was?

By your response its evident it went right over your head.

No it didn't. But I am nit going to debate whether or not ware beats one on one blocks. His career speaks for itself.

If you want to insinuate that ware doesn't beat a one on one block every time that is your business and it's just ignorant.

Nobody expects anybody to win every play or beat every block. So again your comment is ignorant.

Protections and qb movement is all geared towards avoiding ware, so if on occasion he is blocked by one person it is not expected that he is going to win every time, but unless your blind or are just looking for an argument you would know he beats his guys more than pretty much every other pass rusher in the league.

Now if you want to say that is the same as spencer who is almost always blocked alone and doesn't out up big numbers that is your business.

 

[marionbarberthe4th]

So far so good.

Spencer at $9m or Mario at 5/75?