Seahawks Insider

Carroll on cutting Bryant and Rice: ‘Maybe we have a chance to get them back, maybe we don’t; we’ll have to wait and see”

Post by Todd Dybas / The News Tribune on March 3, 2014 at 7:50 pm with 31 Comments »
March 3, 2014 7:50 pm

Had a quick chance to slip-in a football question for Pete Carroll at Monday night’s premiere of the Seahawks season highlight movie in downtown Seattle.

Here’s what he had to say about cutting Red Bryant and Sidney Rice, voluntarily adding an open-ended statement at the end:

“We’ve had some difficult choices to make,” Carroll said. “Every season teams are faced with these kinds of decisions. Again, we’ve taken it under great advisement, we’ve done what we’ve had to do at this point. There are other tough decisions that will come up I’m sure, but the magnitude of these were really impacting for our football team and guys we’re going to miss. Maybe we have a chance to get them back, maybe we don’t. We’ll have to wait and see.”

Leave a comment Comments → 31
  1. Red coming back would be huge, him and Lynch are clearly the heart and soul of the team. Rice had some awesome moments with the team. The WR passes, game winning catches against NE, and Chicago immediately come to mind. I’m really glad he got a ring, but Im also hoping Hawks land a good WR in this years draft (Jordan Matthews, Quincy Enunwa)

  2. Speaking of this documentary / highlight movie, mine will be arriving on blu ray today from Amazon for $22.

  3. HawkfaninMT says:

    Hmmm… I think that since the players have been cut their cap hit from unpaid bonuses has been excellerated to hit this year, regardless if they are re-signed now or not. Do the players take this into consideration when re-signing with a team? By this I mean the Hawks have already committed 3m (I think?) of the cap to Red. Say they are willing to pay him 4m per year, would they pay him 4m this year? Or offer 1m and say “we already have 3m of the cap committed to you.” Not really sure how that works cap-wise

  4. I see no chance Bryant is brought back for the reasons you stated but they might be able to bring Rice back on a 1 year veteran minimum deal with no salary guarantee.

    No one is going to offer him anything more than that.

  5. Southendzone says:

    Where he signs has no effect on the cash in Red’s pocket, or the impact of his PRIOR contract on the Hawks salary cap.

    Hawks bring him back, they don’t get to do anything special with their dead money, nor do they ‘owe’ any of it as a cash payment to Red.

    The basic equation comes down to “Can we bring Red back at a current year salary that’s acceptable to both parties?”

  6. I think both Red and Sidney could have a role on the team, but they can likely get a more significant role and salary from other clubs. So unless they have a desire to remain Seahawks, there is little practical possibility they will be back.

  7. CDHawkFan says:

    I got to believe both are gone for at least this year.

    Talking Red number’s; the cap hit now that he is cut is 3 million, he was due to make 7 million.

    The only way they would sign him back up is if he take 4 million or less for the is year, otherwise they would be paying more this year than just keeping him in the first place. That is a bit simplistic, but in general that is the logic. So can Red get more than 4 million, I am guessing he thinks so otherwise he would have redone his contract if the Hawks and his ego were willing.

    I am guessing both had a chance to renegotiate, I assume the Hawks threw out a number they didn’t like. I wouldn’t bet on them coming back this year.

  8. Even the broke-down and chronically underachieving Rice should find a team willing to pay him more than Seattle will, by a good bit. IF he’s healthy and can run.

    He will never be the WR he was for that one year with Favre, injuries have robbed him of that. But he can still play. And despite the glut of WR’s on the market, many arent very good.

    Big Red will find a team willing to pay him well.

    The only way I wanted Rice back was if Tate leaves, and on the Super Cheap. He really should have stayed to win another ring, given the fact he only earned about half what Seattle paid him–he should pretty much work for free out of embarrassment.

    Big Red deserves to be paid and used like a starter, and Seattle cant do that. I wish he’d come back, but I think we do okay without him. Undoubtedly they will miss his personality and leadership though.

    Best of luck to them both.

  9. GeorgiaHawk says:

    NFL may experiment with 42 yard extra points this pre-season.

  10. FleaFlicker says:

    Local product Bishop Sankey listed as Mayock’s #1 RB for the draft:

    Mayock is also bullish on David Yankey, who Todd highlighted yesterday.

  11. Rice tore his ACL in mid-season. That alone is cause for concern with respect to him being ready and able to contribute from the get-to next year. As much as I like Rice, I’d prefer to move on. He’s not AP.

  12. HawkFromDay1 says:

    Maybe this is dumb – but my #2 team (by a long distance) is the Panthers since I live in NC. Would love to see Rice down here. They have needed a reliable receiver for years (to complement Steve Smith).

    He’d be a perfect fit for the Panthers.

    I’m sure Red’s agent already has a deal worked out with the Jaguars.

  13. chuck_easton says:

    I will assume that comment from Carroll is about Rice in particular.

    Red’s starting cap is 3million. If they sign him for 2 million he has a cap hit of 5m. That is approaching what they would have had if they just kept him.

    Some other team will easily pay Red 4-6 million for the year. Seattle can’t touch that when you have to add the 3m dead money on top.

  14. Southendzone says:

    Red’s dead money has no bearing on whether or not they re-sign him. That logic makes no sense saying his starting cap is 3M.

    The only factors are how much do they need to spend to put a body in that position, and how good is that body.

    It’s not like if there was a FA out there named “Blue” Bryant, and he was the exact same player as RB, we could bring him in for $5M but only offer $2M to the REAL Red Bryant because of the dead money.

  15. yankinta says:

    Would love to get Rice and Bryant back for vet minimum but don’t expect that to happen. They’ll get 2-3 mil a year from someone else….

    I think we should not offer more than 7 Mil a year for Bennett. Maybe 8 mil a year, if he’s willing to take a 3 year deal for $24 mil…but that’s not likely either. I think he is gone as well.

    But I’m not worried, we’ll sign another Michael Bennett for cheap. Can’t wait to see Greg Scruggs plays 5 technique… :)

  16. seahawkNJ says:

    This is old, but probably good reading for this time of year.

  17. MoSeahawk12 says:

    Eric Williams taking over for Blount? Maybe just helping out this week. Anyone know?

  18. doubledink says:

    I agree totally. The 3 mil dead money is dead money, water under the bridge, regardless of who is signed to the position. It is now just an issue of who they can sign to fill that spot for the best value.

  19. SandpointHawk says:

    Mo, Eric did one last week also on Browner also. Blount is still posting. They also list Eric as the Chargers reporter. The insider piece looks like it was written by committee…. Louis Riddick, Khaled Elsayed, Matt Williamson,
    John Clayton, KC Joyner, Mel Kiper

  20. Southendzone says:

    That’s because the Seahawks are so awesome, no single reporter can handle the duties of writing about them. (except of course Michael Bowie, he could easily do it)

  21. The Playoff game with the Packers will be on NFLN Thursday at midnight.
    The “We want the ball we’re gonna score” game..

  22. MoSeahawk12 says:

    Thanks SandpointHawk.

  23. Hasselbeck loved the 4th quarter/OT INT in the close playoff game. The closer the game, the more he liked to throw them. I’d rather not relive those.

    With my new Super Bowl 48 Champions Blu Ray (3 hours), I got plenty of Seahawks stuff to put on the big screen.

  24. chuck_easton says:


    The dead money is not irrelevant in Red’s case.

    He was cut to avoid having to pay him his base salary of 4.5m plus his 3m roster bonus 7.5m pay as well as the 1m from the original signing bonus.

    By cutting him the final three years of the bonus are excelerated into the one time cap charge of 3m.

    Cutting Red dropped his 2014 Cap hit from 8.5m to 3m or a savings of 5.5m on the cap.

    If they turn around and sign Red to anything approaching 4 to 5 million the 2014 cap hit wout be between 7 and 8 million or a savings against the cap of 500k to 1.5m.

    At that point they would have just kept him and took the 8.5m cap hit.

    Red was cut for cap savings and not because he wasn’t performing.

    So you are incorrect. The team won’t turn around and sign him if it ends up with little or no cap savings.

  25. Southendzone says:

    The timing of the cut means that there was actual savings in both cap and cash paid due to missing the roster bonus.

    The reason the dead money is irrelevant is because it has no bearing on the value they place on him as a player for the 2014 season (and possibly past that year).

    That dead money doesn’t get worse or better if you re-sign RB or someone else. That’s why it’s irrelevant in terms of bringing him back.

    Say the best DE in the league wanted to come to Seattle to replace RB and was willing to take 2M under market to do it. You wouldn’t say “Oh no, we already have $3M in dead money at that position, we can’t do it”.

    The release of RB does indicate that they don’t think HE specifically is properly valued on their roster at the current year salary he was scheduled to make, and the dead money would factor into any decision on whether or not to cut a player, but once that’s done, it doesn’t impact any future transaction.

  26. HawkfaninMT says:


    “He was cut to avoid having to pay him his base salary of 4.5m plus his 3m roster bonus 7.5m pay as well as the 1m from the original signing bonus.”

    What you are saying here is correct from my view of the situation. The only hole in your argument that I see is that part of the cap hit he would incur now, is with next years 1.5M wiped away. So if he were to sign a contract for 1 year, 4.5M, he would count 7.5 against the cap. SO that would be a cap savings 1M. In addition it would remove the 1.5M from the cap hit for next year.

    To Summarize:
    Pre-cut: he costs 8.5M this year, 1.5M next year even if he does not play
    Post cut: If He signs for 4.5M (just using your number) he cost 7.5M this year and nothing next year.

    So while it is only a savings of 1M this year, and 1.5M next year, the idea is not as cut and dry as I feel like some are portraying it to be. Of course this all comes with the assumption that Red would only cost 4.5M to sign for the year.

  27. Macabrevity says:

    Send Red to our farm team in Jacksonville :P

  28. I think what SouthEndZone said is correct – at this point the cap hit from releasing Red is set. It does not matter whether we re-sign Red to a $4M contract or sign some new player to a $4M contract – the total cap hit will be the same in either case. It seems unlikely Red would be re-signed since the team obviously feels that they can fill his shoes with someone who will take less money than Red.

  29. Seattle no doubt would have preferred re-signing Red to a new contract and ending his old one to cutting him, as that caused Dead Money, BUT, if they can get him for a good deal cheaper than 8 million–say 3-4 million a year, they will still take him back (the 3-4 million is a guess, they may only be willing to pay him 2-3).

    So the Dead Money matters, but it wont preclude them from taking him back. I just think he’s gonna get offers to make more money than Seattle is willing to spend on him, so he’s gone gone gone…

We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0