Create Account

Or log in with Facebook


Log in

Or log in with Facebook

Restructuring Contracts: Packers Mike Daniels and Nick Perry

By Category

Restructuring Contracts: Packers Mike Daniels and Nick Perry

When it comes to contracts, we as fans tend to look at things from the team’s perspective rather than the player’s perspective.  To actually accomplish anything both parties have to agree on a new deal.  So, let’s try to look at the players’ side of things because it takes two to tango.  David Michalski suggested restructuring the deals of several players, which to me includes pay cuts, extensions and manipulating the cap.  Let’s look at that from both sides now.  A note: I have never been a sports agent or a general manager for a team.  This article is employing mostly common sense (I hope).  I have negotiated thousands of insurance settlements and also attended mediation and arbitration sessions.  I acknowledge that there is a qualitative difference.


Mike Daniels:

Daniels is scheduled to earn $8.5 million dollars in cash in 2019.  $8.5 million is also his cap savings number.  Daniels has $500,000 in incentives for an unknown number of sacks.  He has $2.4 million in dead money if released or traded.  His cap number is $10.712 million.

Daniels is still a really good player according to all the film gurus.  PFF ranked Daniels as the 60th best interior defensive player with a 71.2 grade.  [PFF ranked Wilkerson and Lowry a little higher than Daniels, which I find ridiculous.]  Daniels was on pace for 8 QB hits.  From 2015 to 2017 he had 9, 11, and 11 QB hits.  In 2018 Daniels was on pace for 29 combined tackles, far below the 49 he put up in 2015 and 2017 in full seasons.  He was on pace for 2 tackles for loss, far less than the 8 he averaged over the previous three seasons.  I would suggest that he is still a very good player who showed some modest regression in 2018.

What is he worth in 2019? Daniels is probably as good as to Derek Wolfe and he is easily better than DaQuan Jones.  They are scheduled to receive $8.55 million and $7 million, respectively.  He was not as good as Sheldon Richardson or Jurell Casey, who is due $11.15 million due in cash.

Player’s Viewpoint:  Daniels’ market for 2019 is something in the area of $8.5 million in cash on the open market.  A straight pay cut cannot be forced upon Daniels.  Assuming his level of play does not significantly change in 2019, he should be able to get $8 million AAV on a three-year deal even though I will be 31.  Therefore, Daniels should be pretty certain to get $8.5 million cash in 2019 and another $8 million in cash after the 2019 season in salary and signing bonuses.  He could get an insurance policy for one year if necessary.  Drafting an interior defensive lineman high in the 2019 draft does not really affect this calculation.  At worst Daniels (and his contract) would be traded.  So, $16.5 million over two years should be the baseline.


The Potential Deal:

The parties could decide to tack on 3 years and $24M onto Daniels' current contract.  Green Bay saved $3.012 million on the cap in 2019.  The spreadsheet below seems like a good result with a decent two-year out.  The dollars were increased for 2021 on the chance that it could be an uncapped season or a lock-out situation in 2021.  The Packers could back-load the deal more to free up additional cap, but should be reluctant to do that with rising cap hits from Rodgers, Bakhtiari, Linsley and Adams and due to Daniels' age.



Nick Perry:

Perry's current contract has a $14.437 million cap hit and $11.1 million in dead money overall.  Perry is scheduled to earn $11M in cash in 2019.  PFF rated him below average with a 53.1 grade and ranked him as the 100th best edge player.  His statistics, suffice to say, are terrible.  I suspect that Perry's ankle never fully healed because he seemed to be unable push off on it.  That negated his bull-rush, which is his only real pass-rushing strength.  A small minority of fans have noted that Perry has had a very good sacks per snap rate until this year.  In 2016 and 2017, Perry had 16 and 13 QB hits to go with 12 and 6 tackles for loss, respectively.  In 2018, Perry had just 3 QB hits and 2 tackles for loss in 2018.

The team’s perspective ought to be that $11 million in new dollars is a lot to pay to find out if Perry can produce in 2019, especially if it is spent just to save $3.7 million in dead money.  A lot depends on whether the team thinks it has something in Fackrell or if 2018 was a fluke, and also on the team's intentions towards Clay Matthews.

Player's Viewpoint: Perry’s biggest leverage is the dead money on his contract, along with the lack of talent on the roster at his position.  Perry probably knows that if he is released his market is somewhere between the veteran’s minimum and a few million dollars on a prove-it deal, little of which is likely to be guaranteed.  Perry knows that the Packers will be looking to use a high pick to acquire his replacement, but due to Perry's $4.8 million roster bonus, due March 15, the team will not know which players will be available at pick number 12.  The combine will have concluded on March 4, so the team will have seen those results and interviewed prospects.


The Deal:

Perry should consider accepting a huge pay cut.  How much depends on one’s view of Perry’s upside but mostly on his current market if he is released.  He is not generally considered to be effective in pass coverage even when he is healthy.  The team should insist on the complete elimination of Perry's $4.8 million roster bonus currently due on March 15th.  Since workout bonuses essentially act as guaranteed money, the team should insist on reducing it from $400,000 to something much smaller or eliminating it altogether.

I would suggest cutting Perry's possible cash payment from $11 million to about $3.5 million by eliminating all roster, game-active, and workout bonuses, and reducing his base salary from $5.2 million to $3.5 million.  That is essentially Ahmad Brooks money.  The two have similarities: both are good run defender who can take on offensive linemen and hold out the possibility of some pass rush.  I would not be opposed to including some significant but difficult to reach incentives.  Given Perry's poor season in 2018, practically any incentive would be unlikely-to-be-earned, and thus would not count against his cap hit unless and until earned.  The cap savings with that base salary and his prorated bonus would be $7.237 million.

Perry essentially faces a prove-it year.  It can be done in Green Bay or with some other team, assuming one will sign him if released.  Perry might want to go elsewhere if he feels that Pettine's scheme did not suit him or if he thinks he might fare better as a defensive end in a 4-3 scheme.  Perry turns 29 on April 12, 2019, so the sooner the better for his prove-it season.  Perry might want to stay in Green Bay for his prove-it season since there are no changes to the terms of his contract for 2020 or 2021.  He is scheduled to earn over $10 million in each of those years.          

Aside from the cap savings, this deal relieves pressure on the Packers to sign Clay Matthews, overpay in free agency, or to reach in the draft for multiple edge rushers just to have bodies at OLB.  That depends on GM Gutekunst’s view of Matthews, the free agent possibilities (when they become known), and the draft prospects.  Perry knows Pettine's system and perhaps the coaches still feel production can be coaxed out of him.  Short of Perry retiring or being suspended by the NFL for some infraction, there is no way to eliminate Perry's dead money.  This renegotiation whittles down the dead money issue that the Packers will face again in 2020 if Perry is retained under a modified deal, and it costs less to find out about Perry.

Coming Up: Bulaga, Tramon Williams, and Jimmy Graham.

NFL Categories: 
  • Like Like
  • 2 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (71) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

ricky's picture

In brief, keep Daniels around and try to get him re-signed to a team friendly extension. Renegotiate Perry and have him take a huge financial hit or hit the road. What is not mentioned is that the OLB position is thin at least in part because Perry is playing hurt or on the sidelines. The danger with giving Perry a "prove it year" is the same as it was during his contract year- suddenly he'll be healthy and productive, and once is guaranteed more money, he'll again be hurting. If he's willing to swallow his pride and the huge cut, great. Otherwise, bye.

Hawg Hanner's picture

I hate to see Daniels who is a big effort guy take a cut. Perry is a no brainer and frankly may not be worth the money he'd get if he was restructured. Haven't seen much from Perry who is yet another Thompson bust. Matthews is worth another go at a far lesser number with lots of incentives.

TheVOR's picture

So here's the real problem with this. With Bulaga, they asked him to restructure his deal and take a haircut. He told the Packers to go pound sand. He won the battle!

If you ask either Perry or Daniels to take the same haircut, you're in the same boat. You have to be prepared to cut the football player. Bulaga knew he was in a place of power. I would suggest that GB really doesn't want to walk away from Mike Daniels, he's a decent football player and a bad @$$. In fact I'm not even sure he's not worth his contract.

Perry on the other hand is exactly what you're suggesting he is. The difference is, he misses so many games that GB wouldn't technically miss the player. Furthermore, if he was cut, I think he'd have a hard time getting a deal for 1/2 of his salary number. He's a guy that you could in fact say, we're cutting you unless you renegotiate, and he'd be an idiot to leave GB UNLESS, he simply wants out of GB, then he'd be glad to be released. I would definitely be pressuring Perry to take the haircut. Its a win win, even if they cut him, its a win.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

I didn't intend for Daniels to accept a haircut. I made sure that he got his $16.5M in cash baseline. I did think that teams might take his age into consideration when the extension years kicks in (ages 31, 32, and 33), so I kept his AAV reasonable. Extending Daniels was always going to be an issue due to his advancing age. I suppose $8M AAV is of course less than the $10M he got previously, but he was 26 when he got the $10M AAV and not 30 or 31 like now.

zoellner25's picture

I'd keep Daniels for sure and get rid of Perry. He's a waste of a roster spot. "100th best edge player" out of 32 teams!

Censored's picture

Pay cut or be cut that's it for Perry. I would rather have 11.1m in dead money then having 14.4m on the IR.

comeonman's picture

They should package Perry in a trade for whatever they can get, maybe a 7th? If Gutey can trade Perry to a team desperate for on OLB/D Lineman, it would be his Biggest Coup to date

Nick Perry's picture


Since '61's picture

Keep Daniels and work out a deal if possible.
Chuck Perry take the cap hit and move on.
Thanks, Since '61

Skip greenBayless's picture

again with the "chuck" it's become epidemic. Having said that I like the word. Keep it up.


Bearmeat's picture

Agreed, 61. It's past time to part with Perry. And IMO let CM3 walk.

Minniman's picture

James, thanks for this.

I wonder what his insurance payout would be if he retired? If his ankle is truly done then he'll find it hard passing the physical at a new team.

Financially, from what I read here, If I'm Nick Perry (NOT Minniman) I agree to nothing and make the Packers cut me. I get paid several years pay (according to the above numbers) and I bank it. I take my chances at a near vet minimum offer on another team and see if I can resurrect my career........ but my money's already in the bank if not and I risk nothing.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Perry has no more guaranteed money. He has a roster bonus due, but it isn't guaranteed. If he doesn't accept this proposal (and make the 53), he won't see another penny from GB. He would find out what his is worth on the open market.

Minniman's picture

Got it. thanks for that. It will be an interesting "tell" which ever way he (or the Packers) decides.

fthisJack's picture

lowball him and if doesn't take it, he can see what he will get on the open market.... which I don't think would be much.

Lphill's picture

cut ties with Perry he is a liability, re work Daniels who I said all along is good but not irreplaceable .

jeremyjjbrown's picture

"Restructuring Daniels deal"

Yeah, I can hear his agent laughing from here.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Most extensions completed with a year to go on an existing deal re-write the specific terms of the last year of the existing contract. The agent would hear that GB is proposing an extension, not a restructuring.

Aaron Rodgers was supposed to make $19.8M in base pay for 2018. When he was restructured/extended, his base pay went down to $1.1M. AR got more cash in 2018 than he was scheduled to get. Under my proposal, so would Daniels.

The agent probably would push for higher numbers, but he would have no reason to laugh.

@Rossonero: Nor am I putting Daniels in the same class as Perry. I intend to consider whether any mutually satisfactory changes in contracts can be reached for Bulaga, Graham, Tramon, and any other player that makes enough money to be worth the effort. Working off of the 2018 salary cap, Daniels and Perry came up in order as potentially interesting players to think about.

jeremyjjbrown's picture

Ok then, I think this is not well described as "restructuring" at all. He has 1 year left on his deal. Your proposing an extension that pushes salary into the new bonus, which is an obvious procedure.

Mike Daniels is not over paid. He was asked to free up Kenny Clark a lot last year which he did. There is certainly more than one team that knows why his sacks are down and would love to have him at a 10 mil cap number. If he leaves he'd sign a new deal in that range quickly.

Rossonero's picture

Gotcha - thanks for clarifying Reynoldo.

MikeS's picture

Why pay for a player who can't stay on the field? Time to move on from Perry.

Rossonero's picture

Putting Mike Daniels into the same category as Nick Perry is a complete no-go.

Daniels has had one season where he missed significant time with an injury, and there was zero reason to bring him back and risk further injury in a lost season.

On the other hand, Nick Perry has never played 16 games and only had one good season. He is one of the worst signings in franchise history and another in a long line of 1st round defensive busts (Datone Jones, Damarious Randall, Haha Clinton-Dix, etc. etc.)

alforno54's picture

Just thinking Any thoughts on moving Perry to Inside Linebacker. Looks strong enough and don't really have to worry about coverage all that much.

mnklitzke's picture

Cut Perry he was a waste of a 1st round pick. TT couldn't admit to that after 1 good season and move on, no he threw money at a guy who is never healthy and medicore when healthy.

Lare's picture

My opinion on keeping vs releasing players always comes down to whether their production justifies their costs. IMO, the reason the Packers haven't been more successful on a consistent basis is that they always pay a lot of money to players for past production, not current production.

Minniman's picture

..... and whose defining year was on the back of pre-PED cloud Matthews, Peppers and Daniels all taking the lead against opponents premier offensive line players. Injuries also had an impact.

Tarynfor12's picture

Restructuring Perry or resigning Matthews is the first step in hindering the new culture in GB, which is not just an offense issue.
GB has a new HC and a 2nd year DC who have a few players to grow with in the new GB era,hopefully, and discarding the most useless from the old is paramount.

sam1's picture

Perry is a no brainer, simply gone. Bring Daniels back he is still a force! Bring back Matthews with a pay cut, he still can play with a position change to the middle I believe. If not, however, agree to lower pay time to cut bait!

Donster's picture

Daniels stays. Perry goes. Just cut him, thank TT for another one of his foul ups, and move on. Actually Perry is a double TT foul up. One, TT drafted him. Two, he gave him a huge contract for one good season.

albert999's picture

when is the time frame for starting to cut and or restructure player deals?

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

There really is no specific timeframe for Daniels.

Packers have to decide what to do with Perry prior to March 15 when the non-guaranteed $4.8M roster bonus is due. If they pay that, they've made their decision. So, cut, trade or re-do the deal by March 14.

PAPackerbacker's picture

Keep Daniels if a deal can be reached and let Perry go. Draft a couple of top players at LB and/or DE.

Guam's picture

I would consider keeping Perry on TGR's proposed deal, but I seriously doubt Perry will go for it. Player egos often take precedence over common sense. I suspect GB will part company with Perry before the roster bonus on March 15th.

I will be very interested in TGR's proposal for Graham. I believe he will be another cap casualty.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

My big debate was between reducing his pay to $2.5M or $3.5M. GB does not have to pay Perry one single more dollar if it doesn't want to. So, if you are Perry, do you think some other team is going to give you more? Is GB bluffing about cutting him?

Some team might give him a small contract with no guaranteed money. I think it could be less than $2M. As a vested veteran, if he is on the roster for game one, he gets his base salary. Maybe some team will give him a bunch of incentives.

Guam's picture

I agree TGR that another team is not likely to pay Perry much, but what we think doesn't count. It's what Perry and his agent think he is worth on the open market that will drive Perry's decision. Too many athletes are not realistic about their value as their play declines. Perry may be different, but somehow I don't think so.

I thought you were generous with the $3.5 million offer, but I also believe it will take an offer like that to keep Perry from trying out the market.

Minniman's picture

I've said it before, this is a good year to be a FA. Plenty of ca$shed up teams looking for depth - if he still thinks that he has gas left in the tank then he may take his chances

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

My history is being too about 10% too low on what a player will make on the open market. Exceptions include Bulaga, Lang, and Hayward. I thought Bulaga would snare $7.5M AAV and Hayward about $7M. OTOH, I never thought Breeland would only get vet min on a qualified contract. $3.5M with nothing guaranteed was my maximum for Perry. I'd want to pay less in base if he wanted a work out bonus and some incentives. Admad Brooks money was an easy reference for Packer fans. IIRC, Raji and Jennings turned down nice deals and got less eventually.

Guam's picture

I spent some time thinking about Minneman's point that teams have lots of cash this year and, as usual, the FA edge rusher pool will be shallow so Perry may get more than I believe. Particularly if Clowney and Lawrence don't get to the free agent market (which I suspect will be the case), there will be Ziggy Ansah and not much else. I doubt Perry will get big money, but he may well get more than the $3.5 million that I thought was generous.

fthisJack's picture

I don't think with his injury history that many if any teams are that desperate for OLB help. and if they are, it would only be for a year to show what he has. he should take a 3.5 mil offer and be happy.

dblbogey's picture

"Player egos often take precedence over common sense."

See: Dez Bryant and Kaepernick. Both turned down millions, ended up with nothing.

Jonathan Spader's picture

Kaepernick wound up with a Nike deal that paid him millions. I wouldn't call that nothing. Dez signed a new deal and got paid to get hurt and not play.

4thand1's picture

It's always a risk paying big bucks to anyone in the salary cap era. Perry had a good year and cashed in, that's the value of edge rushers. Once a player gets his money, you're not going to see him part with it, would you? Draft a young edge rusher who can stay the field and contribute, cut your loses with Perry and move on.

CAG123's picture

I try not to complain about player contracts because as a GM it’s pretty much damned if you do and damned if you don’t. If Ted had let him walk and he goes on to produce elsewhere then everyone is complaining that he should have resigned him.We complain about Casey Hayward as if he numbers didn’t steadily get worse after his rookie season and when they tried to play him on the outside he was getting burnt like toast.I can say that the Packers wouldn’t be in these situations if they stopped DRAFTING GUYS OUT OF POSITION! Datone Jones, Nick Perry, Demarious Randall were all drafted from their natural positions and then guys like Casey Hayward and Josh Jackson weren’t scheme fits (both are zone guys). I’m sure Perry said he wanted to play somewhere that ran a 4-3. So hopefully this stops no more tweeners no more Swiss Army knife players none of these jack of all trades master of none type players.

Jonathan Spader's picture

I agree with the 1st half of what you side damned if you do damned if you don't. Fans will chastise you for your mistakes and ignore your successes until you retire and sometimes not even then.

Completely disagree with the 2nd half of what you said. Every teams drafts players and has them switch positions. Honey Badger was asked to switch from safety to ILB AMD excelled. People switch from DEs to OLB all the time. The Packers constantly switched LTs to RTs and Guards.

Your second half of your argument completely contradicts your first half. You focus on some of the failures of people who played out of position and ignore the successes. Look at switching TY from WR to RB. Sam Shields from WR to CB. We just need coachable athletes, football IQ, and some luck or 2 of the 3.

CAG123's picture

Okay Honey Badger did not switch from CB to LB that would be ridiculous he played multiple positions in Arizona but his small frame clearly couldn’t take all the punishment he’s a safety and can cover the slot. Also the first thing I said was “player contracts” so them constantly drafting guys out of position isn’t a contradiction to what I said at all. Other teams doing that has nothing to do with the Packers doing it and failing that’s 3 first round picks wasted because they made guys switch. Lastly the Packers didn’t switch Shields from WR to CB he made that change his final year in college.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

I agree, Cag on the damned if you do or don't. I thought someone would suggest that giving Perry a few million on a prove-it deal was "playing it safe." If we cut Perry and he has a banner year elsewhere, there might be some criticism, though in Perry's case not too much since fans have been pretty vitriolic about his case.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

double post

CAG123's picture

Yeah if they were to cut him now and he produced elsewhere then it was just meant to be. I don’t think anyone would complain at this point.

Minniman's picture

To the theme, if he were to excel elsewhere then it would be more likely that he's being used sparingly and to his strengths rather than playing a lead role.

dobber's picture

"I don’t think anyone would complain at this point."

CAG, I think you underestimate people... ;)

packerbackerjim's picture

Re Daniels: does a rating from PFF bear any resemblance to reality? Pure Fucking Foolishness is more like it.

Jonathan Spader's picture

Yes it does. See Andy Hermann's grading when he compared it to PFF's grades. The only thing that's foolish is criticizing someone else's work without doing any yourself.

packerbackerjim's picture

Yeah well, PFF had Clinton-Dix rated 2nd best safety. I believe my eyes vs their bullshit rating. Daniels 60th Best interior DL? Believe what you want. I believe PFF sucks

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

My articles aren't supposed to be about my player evaluations so much, so I am looking for objective evaluations of others. I used PFF because it is readily available (and criticized PFF in the article because PFF rated Lowry and Wilkerson higher than Daniels). I looked at Andy's grades and Pro Football Reference as well.

packerbackerjim's picture

My post was an observation of PFF, nothing more.

dobber's picture

I would love for a GM or pro personnel scout to come out and say just what they think of PFF and other rating services. I'm sure most of those guys would much rather watch tape and make their own assessments.

Jonathan Spader's picture

Great article TGR love your insights into the Packer cap situation. It's sad how no one that commenting actually read what you said. Keep Perry if he agrees to bend over and accept a reasonable contract for his pathetic recent contributions or cut him. Daniel's has been good so extend him and save some cap space as other contracts inflate.

I would love to see an article about what Antonio Brown's cap hits against the Packers would look like if the Packers did make a trade for him. He only had 3.8 mil guaranteed each year so I imagine the dead $ against the Steelers wouldn't be too bad for their side.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Is Brown going to insist on a new contract? Based off his current deal, his cap for 2019 would be either $12.625M or $15.125M (he has a $2.5M roster bonus, so it depends on whether Pittsburgh pays it or the acquiring team). In 2020 it would be $11.3M and $12.5M in 2021. Brown's contract would have no dead money.

IF he is willing to play out his contract as it is w/o a renegotiation, his cap numbers are very moderate, assuming his age doesn't catch up to him (he'd be 31, 32, and 33).

Brown would come with other concerns though. It would be a $21M dead money hit for Pittsburgh with a $1M plus cap savings OR about $18.5M dead money hit and $3.5M cap savings if the acquiring team pays the roster bonus. Kind of similar to Nick Perry's cap savings if cut or traded.

albert999's picture

There sure is a lot of angry cocky people on here who are full of themselves

Jonathan Spader's picture

NFL teams are full of them as well so it fits right in.

Since91's picture

I am a bit confused...If you cut Perry post June 1st
$3,700,000 Dead Money
$10,737,500 Cap Savings
Info from
This makes the decision obvious!
James Reynolds do you agree with these numbers?

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Yes. In that scenario $7.4M in dead money would count in 2020. GB would not get that cap savings until June 2, but that might work out okay.

Since91's picture

Graham is gone too! based on the numbers....
$3,666,666 Dead
$9,000,000 Savings
See yah!

Since91's picture

Bulaga he gone!
$1,600,000 Dead
$6,750,000 Savings
Smell yah later!
Im not a math guy but that is a savings of over 26 million if we cut those three players....BYE BYE BYE

fthisJack's picture

who you got at RT if you cut Bulaga?

Wilment's picture

Mike Daniels brings a degree of nasty to the Packers d line and defense in general. Id pay handsomely for five or six more like him. Be thankful he is there.. As far as him being ranked below Wilkerson and Lowry, I don't have a clue> Daniels is routinely being doubled. If the Packers can get some effective rush from the edge, Daniels numbers will go up. Perry...whoever put that contract together must have been sipping sterno. What a disaster. Ask him for a pay cut and hope he blinks.

Since91's picture

Oh wait Kizer see yah!
$0 Dead
$914,856 Savings
Over 27 Million saved thats Clowney and a Safety!

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

By my rough count, 6 people would keep Perry if he accepted a huge pay cut and 12 want him released or traded, and there were a few I wasn't sure about their position. Options are:

1. Play out his contract. No support.
2. Take a pay cut. 33% support.
3. Cut/trade him. 67%

Options 2 and 3 have sub-options. 2 mainly is the how much to pay Perry, maybe the structure. 3 includes whether to use a June 1 designation. I assume those who are ok with a straight cut would trade him for whatever can be gotten. Teams can't use a June designation in a trade, and Perry has that nasty big roster bonus due in March, so GB can't realistically wait until June to trade him.

Bure9620's picture

Reynoldo, it's also my understanding if Perry is cut post June 1, we wipe $10 mil off the books and his dead money number would be in the $3 million range?? ( according to over the cap) In that case, the Packers would have had to already paid him his $5 mill roster bonus in March, so my confusion is, wouldn't that March roster bonus still count as part of his dead money number? as the Packers would already have paid this out in March?? Perry has one of the weirdest contracts I've seen.

dobber's picture

My understanding is that you can label a guy a June 1 cut at any time, he just doesn't become a cut until June 1. I'm not 100% sure this circumvents the roster bonus, but I thought it did.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

I previously researched this. Dobber (IMO) is correct. If GB released Perry on March 14 (before the roster bonus is due), the player is off the roster and thus the roster bonus wouldn't get paid. Using the June 1 designation opens up a roster spot immediately, for example, and Perry could sign with another club the same day since GB no longer holds any rights to him. And since GB no longer has any rights to Perry once it releases him with a June 1 designation, GB can no longer trade Perry.

By rule, the contract still counts against the cap as written with all clauses artificially considered to count until June 1, so no cap relief is gained until June.

I wondered if GB would get the $4.8M as cap relief on March 15 since no roster bonus would in fact have been paid. The CBA seems to say no. The cap consequences are frozen until June 1. Teams can only use 2 June 1 designations per season. Most teams don't use any. Only 5 in 2017.

Log in to comment, upload your game day photos and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.

Or log in with Facebook

Packers Tickets, Ticket King


"I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious."
"The Bears still suck!"
"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "