For a combo of playing time and, get this, improved offensive production (!!!).
| Solder has played 83 percent of the offensive of the offensive snaps. He will earn $1 million...Solder only achieved the incentive if the team also improved in points scored, net yards, sacks allowed or completion percentage and was better than the bottom five in the league in the category(s). Solder will narrowly earn the incentive based on the Giants’ reduction in sacks allowed. They’ve allowed 35 sacks this season, which is tied for 16th. That’s an improvement from last season when they allowed 50 sacks, which ranked 29th in the league. As they did last season, the Giants rank in the bottom five in points, yards and completion percentage. |
Does this FO know how to write 'em up or what?
Solder - (
New Window )
Or maybe we will end up restructuring/extending another bad contract to pay him? Wonder who it will be? Shepard? Barks? Ryan?
Just be better than bottom 5, baby! Now we know what the great culture is that Judge has been so glowing about.
Getts...is that you?
They throw the ball 10 times a game.
Why even bother with that incentive? The Giants were horrific on almost every single offensive metric last year - it would have been almost impossible to have been any worse than they were last year (although they did come pretty close this year).
Quote:
Which I am shocked to hear, especially with Glennon/Fromm getting so many snaps. Watching every Sunday hasn’t suggested that they have taken a step forward.
They throw the ball 10 times a game.
Nope Bergen is correct.
Giants OL has allowed a much lower pressure percentage this season versus last year, improving from about 30% to about 23% this year. We should be airing it every week.
just need QBs and WRs & TEs...
It's not 16 vs 1. This is not the only money NS got this season.
Or maybe we will end up restructuring/extending another bad contract to pay him? Wonder who it will be? Shepard? Barks? Ryan?
It would have been a NLTBE incentive, so it will count against the 2022 cap.
His money counts against the cap; theirs doesn't.
This is the same team that doesn't have enough $$$ to field a full active roster today.
Quote:
This is his final game with the organization and frankly I’d rather he have the money than the corporate morons that run the team
His money counts against the cap; theirs doesn't.
For context last year last year Flemming cost $3.5m
he was credited with 7 penalties, 6 sacks last year, 58 grade by PFF over 913 snaps
Solder is at 5 penalties, 6 sacks, 59 grade over 867 snaps
but by all means let's hold every deck chair on this titanic accountable.
I can appreciate the strong work ethic but at some point there needs to be a return on that investment. Simply put, the roster is not good enough. The coaching is not good enough. The front office is not good enough.
That’s one of the most embarrassing incentives I’ve ever seen. Shame on the Giants.
The fiscal irresponsibility piles up. Now you get 5M instead of 4M in dead money for Solder next year.
Don’t forget the Giants had an opportunity to rollover saved money to cover cutting him when he opted out. They then spin up the silliest restructure and keep paying him.
The Giants are dumb, but if the other side has some leverage you have to give them something
For context last year last year Flemming cost $3.5m
he was credited with 7 penalties, 6 sacks last year, 58 grade by PFF over 913 snaps
Solder is at 5 penalties, 6 sacks, 59 grade over 867 snaps
but by all means let's hold every deck chair on this titanic accountable.
The idea is to get better.
Not miss on evaluating Peart as a starter, ignore Tackle during the offseason, be satisfied that Solder can still ultimately play because we owe him money anyway, make that $ liability worse, and now have hole the size of Mt. Rushmore at Right Tackle once again entering this offseason.
But thanks for the context you provided...
If the Giants cut Solder outright, the 4M in 2022 bonus money would have accelerated and his dead money cap hit would have been 10.5M.
By restructuring and lowering his salary to 3M in 2021, and voiding 2022, the Giants were able to keep the bonus cap charges split over time.
In short, the leverage was the Giants obviously needed that 4M in 2021.
Quote:
but he made just 3m in new $ this year and regardless of salary should have been a backup. his performance was a lot less disappointing than Peart's, or the simple fact that they didn't acquire someone better then him as a starter.
For context last year last year Flemming cost $3.5m
he was credited with 7 penalties, 6 sacks last year, 58 grade by PFF over 913 snaps
Solder is at 5 penalties, 6 sacks, 59 grade over 867 snaps
but by all means let's hold every deck chair on this titanic accountable.
The idea is to get better.
Not miss on evaluating Peart as a starter, ignore Tackle during the offseason, be satisfied that Solder can still ultimately play because we owe him money anyway, make that $ liability worse, and now have hole the size of Mt. Rushmore at Right Tackle once again entering this offseason.
But thanks for the context you provided...
isn't the idea when responding to a post to actually read the post?
Quote:
this was an incentive from the original contract or from the renegotiation? Solder had some kind of leverage in the renegotiation, right?
If the Giants cut Solder outright, the 4M in 2022 bonus money would have accelerated and his dead money cap hit would have been 10.5M.
By restructuring and lowering his salary to 3M in 2021, and voiding 2022, the Giants were able to keep the bonus cap charges split over time.
In short, the leverage was the Giants obviously needed that 4M in 2021.
Of course they needed it. It helped generate those 4 wins.
For all the comments I recall reading on here last Spring suggesting the Giants could do far worse than Solder as your backup Tackle, they were correct...
...you could have him as your starter.
so they could have cut him June 1 and he'd have counted the same amount against the cap (perhaps less this 1m bonus) and then found a different OL for his roster spot with net new $.
or do the exact paycut they did, give him a little bit of new $/incentives, and carry an extra player "for free". There is no way to justify him entering the season as the starting RT but his performance justified a swing T role that likely saved them 2-4m on someone else (like Flemming).
Quote:
In comment 15536960 Eric on Li said:
Quote:
but he made just 3m in new $ this year and regardless of salary should have been a backup. his performance was a lot less disappointing than Peart's, or the simple fact that they didn't acquire someone better then him as a starter.
For context last year last year Flemming cost $3.5m
he was credited with 7 penalties, 6 sacks last year, 58 grade by PFF over 913 snaps
Solder is at 5 penalties, 6 sacks, 59 grade over 867 snaps
but by all means let's hold every deck chair on this titanic accountable.
The idea is to get better.
Not miss on evaluating Peart as a starter, ignore Tackle during the offseason, be satisfied that Solder can still ultimately play because we owe him money anyway, make that $ liability worse, and now have hole the size of Mt. Rushmore at Right Tackle once again entering this offseason.
But thanks for the context you provided...
isn't the idea when responding to a post to actually read the post?
I read it just fine. Was just trying to look closer at those deck chairs...
I do give Solder credit. I thought his ceiling was lower. He was only terrible, not catastrophic.
Quote:
this was an incentive from the original contract or from the renegotiation? Solder had some kind of leverage in the renegotiation, right?
If the Giants cut Solder outright, the 4M in 2022 bonus money would have accelerated and his dead money cap hit would have been 10.5M.
By restructuring and lowering his salary to 3M in 2021, and voiding 2022, the Giants were able to keep the bonus cap charges split over time.
In short, the leverage was the Giants obviously needed that 4M in 2021.
Thanks. I don't have the motivation to keep up with cap details anymore. So it sounds like probably more of a strategic error (priorizing 2022) than a negotiating error.
Yes, and we kept doing them a favor by hoarding Solder all to ourselves for the last four years...
For context last year last year Flemming cost $3.5m
he was credited with 7 penalties, 6 sacks last year, 58 grade by PFF over 913 snaps
Solder is at 5 penalties, 6 sacks, 59 grade over 867 snaps
but by all means let's hold every deck chair on this titanic accountable.
Clearly this isn't about Nate Solder - it's about the people who made the decisions to give him all of this money and keep him on the team, when he really shouldn't have been on an NFL roster.
The Flemming comparison is a poor one. Flemming was only age 27 when the Giants signed him to a 1-year deal . . . it was a reasonable acquisition and contract for someone who still maintained some potential and could have earned another contract.
It didn't work out with him but the Giants could have sought out another similar type player and gave him the $3 mil as opposed to trotting out 33-year old Solder once again who has no future with the Giants. Just like with their insistence on putting Mike Glennon on the field, this team just seems intent on wasting time (and money) with players who won't be in the league next year.
I do give Solder credit. I thought his ceiling was lower. He was only terrible, not catastrophic.
the alternative without the restructure/adding the void year was spending net new money on whoever replaced him with the same cap penalty as incurred by keeping him with the new terms also still on the books.
Quote:
If I’m reading this correctly, the silver lining is the Giants paid the same money for the same terrible output?
I do give Solder credit. I thought his ceiling was lower. He was only terrible, not catastrophic.
the alternative without the restructure/adding the void year was spending net new money on whoever replaced him with the same cap penalty as incurred by keeping him with the new terms also still on the books.
You mean spend money on someone that may have value at Offensive Tackle in the NFL going forward?
Giants OL has allowed a much lower pressure percentage this season versus last year, improving from about 30% to about 23% this year. We should be airing it every week.
just need QBs and WRs & TEs...
Somehow we need to also evaluate whether this is partly related to play calling. Did Garrett run plays with shorter routes so the GB can get rid of the ball quickly?
This is the same team that doesn't have enough $$$ to field a full active roster today.
I've never paid attention to this, but is this a norm where a team can't afford to field a full roster at any point in the season? It feels like an egregious cap management, but again I haven't paid attention nor heard it ever happening.
Quote:
In comment 15537056 christian said:
Quote:
If I’m reading this correctly, the silver lining is the Giants paid the same money for the same terrible output?
I do give Solder credit. I thought his ceiling was lower. He was only terrible, not catastrophic.
the alternative without the restructure/adding the void year was spending net new money on whoever replaced him with the same cap penalty as incurred by keeping him with the new terms also still on the books.
You mean spend money on someone that may have value at Offensive Tackle in the NFL going forward?
a) they didn't have much money to spend (basically whatever the amount was they gave fulton)
b) how good of a player going do you expect exists as a low cost swing tackle willing to compete for a spot with TBD playing time available since Peart was considered the likely starter at RT?
the mistake was the evaluation of Peart which forced them to start their 3rd T. Whether it was solder or a different deck chair in the same price range.
nobody is looking past the original deal - in March '21 there wasn't a person on earth who didn't categorize it as a sunk cost. the only question was how to best minimize that cost, which ended up being a 7m paycut.
His cap charge in 2021 would have been the 6.5M in bonus charges, and 4M in 2022.
See you later, goodbye.
The Giants chose to pay him 3M in 2021, and additionally this pathetic incentive.
Swing tackles like Dennis Kelley and Sam Young drew contracts of around 1.5M.
Sam Beal's was worse. $3 million for 1 pass defense and 20 solo tackles.
This is the same team that doesn't have enough $$$ to field a full active roster today.
It's always baffled me as to why the Giants have mediocre to average players and never have any cap room.
Swing tackles like Dennis Kelley and Sam Young drew contracts of around 1.5M.
is it wrong to compare either to deck chairs on the titanic? Sam Young literally hasn't played a snap this year.
Quote:
remind me again why Kevin Abrams is considered a "cap guru"?
This is the same team that doesn't have enough $$$ to field a full active roster today.
It's always baffled me as to why the Giants have mediocre to average players and never have any cap room.
they had the cap room to add Golladay and Jackson. Cap room wasn't the problem, the choices were.
Quote:
Giants OL has allowed a much lower pressure percentage this season versus last year, improving from about 30% to about 23% this year. We should be airing it every week.
just need QBs and WRs & TEs...
Somehow we need to also evaluate whether this is partly related to play calling. Did Garrett run plays with shorter routes so the GB can get rid of the ball quickly?
without question
End-of-career swing tackles demanded about 1.5M dollar contracts last off season. That’s the reality.
Solder had the added benefit of having been out of the league for a year and having been atrocious his last time out.
The Giants chose to give him a 3M salary, and this idiotic, embarrassing, pathetic incentive. It was a stupid move, and unsurprisingly he sucked.
Quote:
In comment 15537086 Eric on Li said:
Quote:
In comment 15537056 christian said:
Quote:
If I’m reading this correctly, the silver lining is the Giants paid the same money for the same terrible output?
I do give Solder credit. I thought his ceiling was lower. He was only terrible, not catastrophic.
the alternative without the restructure/adding the void year was spending net new money on whoever replaced him with the same cap penalty as incurred by keeping him with the new terms also still on the books.
You mean spend money on someone that may have value at Offensive Tackle in the NFL going forward?
a) they didn't have much money to spend (basically whatever the amount was they gave fulton)
b) how good of a player going do you expect exists as a low cost swing tackle willing to compete for a spot with TBD playing time available since Peart was considered the likely starter at RT?
the mistake was the evaluation of Peart which forced them to start their 3rd T. Whether it was solder or a different deck chair in the same price range.
You are getting closer to the point. Almost everything this regime has done with respect to the OL has been poorly conceived. Misjudging Peart's readiness was one, continuing to have Solder bleed money on both the cap and the field is yet another.
Just comical - a critical evaluation year on DJ in 2021 and these morons decided to up-the-ante on stupid and actually "disinvested" in the Offensive Line year-over-year.
Well, you know better than anyone, something had to pay for guys like big Leonard, amongst others. So the OL took their hit too...
Quote:
In comment 15536871 Jimmy Googs said:
Quote:
Giants OL has allowed a much lower pressure percentage this season versus last year, improving from about 30% to about 23% this year. We should be airing it every week.
just need QBs and WRs & TEs...
Somehow we need to also evaluate whether this is partly related to play calling. Did Garrett run plays with shorter routes so the GB can get rid of the ball quickly?
without question
Yes, that’s one of the reasons Golladay has done practically nothing here. They dump the ball of so fast because of poor line play that he can’t get downfield.
Exactly. Despite recent developments the Giants actually are allowed to do smart things.
Keep this in mind. The Giants restructured Solder in March, and guaranteed his salary. This is before he’d stepped on the field for the year, and had missed a year.
Not only did they fail to try and meaningfully upgrade the position, they locked themselves into the money before the draft.
If the Giants picked Slater, and cut Solder they were locked into the money. Now of course why would the Giants draft a year one All Pro type tackle. But that’s another thread.
Link - ( New Window )