Carucci: Glenn likely "odd man out" in contract extensions

[dave mcbride]

Glenn had an off year due to supposedly a kidney infection last year. He played outstanding the two years prior. We have to find a way to pay him decent money. The leverage is now. Pay him early as he'll admit to a bad year. He'll cost less if we do it now.

One thing that no one knows here is the extent to which concerns about Glenn's health is driving the thinking.

[HT02]

Is anyone starting to have flashbacks of the previous LT situation we went through with Peters? I know I am.

I was thinking the same thing! The thing that makes me feel better about it is that Peters was let go because Wilson refused to spend the money that's not an issue with Pegula,

[BarleyNY]

What if we sign him to a long term deal now and he has just as poor or worse year than last year? Plus, why would Glenn sign a contract now for less than what he could get next year. Many fans always look at contracts from one side, saying to sign someone early at a bargain price, the players agent is there to make sure something like this doesn't happen. If Glenn/agent feel he is a top tier tackle, no way he signs a bargain deal.

It all depends on if the player wants to risk it. The upside of playing for a bigger deal is that they might make a lot more if they stay healthy and perform well, but the downside isn't so much having an off year as it is having a bad injury. That's the killer. Imagine what having a horrible knee injury would cost Glenn. FWIW most players hate playing out the last year of their contracts due to this risk. Plus the very high performers know they run the risk of being in the same spot the following season due to potentially being tagged. There are exceptions, but that's the rule.

[thebandit27]

This is a tough nut to crack.

 

Because the CBA prevented Glenn from being extended prior to this offseason, he couldn't even be approached about a new deal prior to then, so this presents the first opportunity the team has to get something done.

 

Now, of course, Glenn is one season away from being on the open market, at 26 years old, with 4 seasons of starting experience. That means that he'd have to be blown away with an offer to sign before then.

 

From the team's perspective, you've got a guy that's coming off of his worst season as a pro. Now, he wasn't bad; he just wasn't the same player he was in the previous two seasons, which makes it tough to go in and offer him Branden Albert-type money ($9.5M/year). He'll almost certainly get that on the open market, since he'll be one of the top 2 or 3 OTs available, assuming the following list is accurate:

 

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents/2016/tackle/

 

Further muddying the situation are the cap ramifications. Right now, Dareus is (and should be) priority number 1, since he's a top-3 DT in the league. After that, it makes the most sense to extend Gilmore, given (a) the quality of the player, and (b) his $11M cap hit for 2016, which can be lowered significantly by an extension.

 

It almost seems like the team wants to wait on Glenn in order to see if Henderson AND Kouandjio can handle the OT spots, which would take care of the problem for them. Given the cap tightness, that's not an altogether bad idea.

[KD in CA]

No, there's nothing that should be controversial about saying a team must prioritize. But here's the rub - the Bills have already put some players ahead of some of the ones on that list. Shady and Clay are two big money acquisitions this past offseason. Will the difference between their production versus that of either a) the next player on the depth chart or b) an inexpensive replacement be bigger than the difference between Glenn or Gilmore and theirs? Or Dareus and his? That is a question I can't answer definitively right now, but I'll be watching games with that thought in mind. What worries me most are that the relative values of the positions in question. I'd much rather spend bigger on a CB, a DT and/or a LT than a RB and/or a TE.

 

Also this is where I think about The contracts of Eric Wood and Chris Williams. If Wood was paid more in line with his recent production and CW was never signed I'd feel a bit better about the overall situation. But here we are.

 

I would say the McCoy deal was pretty necessary -- you can't have a below-average RB corps when you have EJ/Cassel at QB. They had to find a dynamic, multi-threat back and they found one of the best. The add'l cost over Spiller was not that dramatic and they have a much better player. You can make a case they overpaid for Clay but again, looking for a dynamic TE the below-average QBs can rely on. Without those upgrades to the offense, there was no reason to believe it would have been any different than last year.

 

But yes, absolutely agree that each of those 4 needs to be evaluated against the alternative and relative cost.

[PromoTheRobot]

Is anyone starting to have flashbacks of the previous LT situation we went through with Peters? I know I am.

So Cordy Glenn is Jason Peters now?

 

The salary cap says you can't pay everyone $10MM a year. So if not Glenn then who do you let walk? Dareus? Gilmore? Bradham?

[thebandit27]

So Cordy Glenn is Jason Peters now?

 

The salary cap says you can't pay everyone $10MM a year. So if not Glenn then who do you let walk? Dareus? Gilmore? Bradham?

 

Well, I'd rather Bradham walk than Glenn, but I don't think that's reality. Bradham is probably a $5M/year player; Glenn is close to $10M/year. That's not really an either-or scenario. I think the real choice is Gilmore or Glenn, and there's no doubt in my mind about that one. Gilmore is an ascending player that's already among the top-10 in the NFL at his position IMO. Glenn is a nice player, a potential top-10 LT.

[BarleyNY]

I would say the McCoy deal was pretty necessary -- you can't have a below-average RB corps when you have EJ/Cassel at QB. They had to find a dynamic, multi-threat back and they found one of the best. The add'l cost over Spiller was not that dramatic and they have a much better player. You can make a case they overpaid for Clay but again, looking for a dynamic TE the below-average QBs can rely on. Without those upgrades to the offense, there was no reason to believe it would have been any different than last year.

 

But yes, absolutely agree that each of those 4 needs to be evaluated against the alternative and relative cost.

I don't see things turning out that way. McCoy's contract is $8M per year, Spiller's is $4M per year - and Spiller isn't the Gold Standard here as many solid RBs are considerably less. Plus McCoy cost us Kiko who was a very good player on a cheap rookie contract. At least Shady might be a top 5 back this year and that can't be overlooked. Value can be reasonably argued, but paying premiums for RBs is always a concern for me - especially with the amount of guaranteed money assigned to him. Clay is more worrisome. He's the 4th highest paid TE in the league now and I just don't see the value (again with so much guaranteed). He's good at everything - which is a very good asset in a TE (and one I personally love), but he's not great at anything. That's a big worry. Spending these premiums on these positions is going to force the Bills to lose out on better values at more important positions, including some of their own impending FAs. That's going to hurt them starting next offseason. I wouldn't have an issue with it if they had an aging QB and were pushing for a SB, but to go this route with Cassel, Manuel and Taylor? I don't see the point.

[NoSaint]

I don't think Glenn will command top 5 money because there are 5 UFA's that were ranked higher then him last year. Unless he has a huge break out year (which I would be down for); he will not get top 5 money for a LT.

 

the next level argument is that whatever kept him out of camp, coupled with the issues at guard next to him, and years on his resume better than last year add up to looking at 2014 in a vacuum may not be how the discussion actually plays out.

[YattaOkasan]

This is a tough nut to crack.

 

Because the CBA prevented Glenn from being extended prior to this offseason, he couldn't even be approached about a new deal prior to then, so this presents the first opportunity the team has to get something done.

 

Now, of course, Glenn is one season away from being on the open market, at 26 years old, with 4 seasons of starting experience. That means that he'd have to be blown away with an offer to sign before then.

 

From the team's perspective, you've got a guy that's coming off of his worst season as a pro. Now, he wasn't bad; he just wasn't the same player he was in the previous two seasons, which makes it tough to go in and offer him Branden Albert-type money ($9.5M/year). He'll almost certainly get that on the open market, since he'll be one of the top 2 or 3 OTs available, assuming the following list is accurate:

 

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents/2016/tackle/

 

Further muddying the situation are the cap ramifications. Right now, Dareus is (and should be) priority number 1, since he's a top-3 DT in the league. After that, it makes the most sense to extend Gilmore, given (a) the quality of the player, and (b) his $11M cap hit for 2016, which can be lowered significantly by an extension.

 

It almost seems like the team wants to wait on Glenn in order to see if Henderson AND Kouandjio can handle the OT spots, which would take care of the problem for them. Given the cap tightness, that's not an altogether bad idea.

I limited my list to LTs next year and I thought there were more than 5 that had a better year in 2014. I understand he will likely improve this year, but I don't think he'll be in the top 2 or 3 for UFA (would love to be wrong though) of all tackles, unless you are weighting LTs more (but why not just limit it to LTs then).

[NoSaint]

I limited my list to LTs next year and I thought there were more than 5 that had a better year in 2014. I understand he will likely improve this year, but I don't think he'll be in the top 2 or 3 for UFA (would love to be wrong though) of all tackles, unless you are weighting LTs more (but why not just limit it to LTs then).

are you including guys like Penn and whitworth who will be 33 and 34 next offseason, and combined for 2 career probowls as guys that will be above him in the pecking order though? i suspect GMs wouldnt agree, and the contracts will clearly reflect that.

[Buffalo_Stampede]

I'm surprised Bradham over Glenn is the majority thinking. Not sure I understand that.

[thebandit27]

I limited my list to LTs next year and I thought there were more than 5 that had a better year in 2014. I understand he will likely improve this year, but I don't think he'll be in the top 2 or 3 for UFA (would love to be wrong though) of all tackles, unless you are weighting LTs more (but why not just limit it to LTs then).

 

I'm thinking he'll be one of the top 2 or 3 OTs available, as I don't figure many of them will hit the market.

 

If I'm ranking the guys on that list, based on total body of work in the NFL and potential going forward, here's my shot at the top 10:

 

1. Trent Williams

2. Andrew Whitworth

3. Russell Okung

4. Donald Penn

5. Kelvin Beachum

6. Cordy Glenn

7. Nate Solder

8. Andre Smith

9. Anthony Castonzo

10. Joe Barksdale

 

If we assume that Williams, Okung, and Beachum get re-signed (based on age, cap room, and propensity for those teams to keep FAs), then I have Glenn as the #3 available OT.

I'm surprised Bradham over Glenn is the majority thinking. Not sure I understand that.

 

As I said above, I'm not sure it is...I don't think it's Bradham or Glenn; I think it's Gilmore or Glenn. Bradham's probably going to get half of what Glenn does.

[NoSaint]

 

I'm thinking he'll be one of the top 2 or 3 OTs available, as I don't figure many of them will hit the market.

 

If I'm ranking the guys on that list, based on total body of work in the NFL and potential going forward, here's my shot at the top 10:

 

1. Trent Williams

2. Andrew Whitworth

3. Russell Okung

4. Donald Penn

5. Kelvin Beachum

6. Cordy Glenn

7. Nate Solder

8. Andre Smith

9. Anthony Castonzo

10. Joe Barksdale

 

If we assume that Williams, Okung, and Beachum get re-signed (based on age, cap room, and propensity for those teams to keep FAs), then I have Glenn as the #3 available OT.

and you have him behind guys in their mid 30s at negotiations, who have also had ups and downs. if im a GM looking for a long term answer glenn is ahead of those two, assuming he takes even a small step back towards his previous form.

[thebandit27]

and you have him behind guys in their mid 30s at negotiations, who have also had ups and downs. if im a GM looking for a long term answer glenn is ahead of those two, assuming he takes even a small step back towards his previous form.

 

I agree with that from a money perspective. I was merely attempting (which if I'm reading you correctly, you understand) to rank the players in terms of quality of play during their NFL career.

 

I think that, next to Williams and Okung, Beachum/Glenn would be the highest-paid LTs on the market (if all 10 hit it...which is very unlikely).

[Kelly the Dog]

I agree with that from a money perspective. I was merely attempting (which if I'm reading you correctly, you understand) to rank the players in terms of quality of play during their NFL career.

 

I think that, next to Williams and Okung, Beachum/Glenn would be the highest-paid LTs on the market (if all 10 hit it...which is very unlikely).

Glenn showed promise as a rookie. His second year he was outstanding, and gave up two sacks the entire season as well as being a decent to good run blocker. Last year he was average at best. It's very easy to see it as a combination of his illness, the terrible offensive coaching, and the woefull performance of the guys next to him.

 

This year he reportedly came into camp in tremendous shape and will get better coaching from Kromer and Roman. He will be playing alongside veteran Richie Incognito at LG.

 

We are going to find out a lot about Cordy Glenn this year. He could be anywhere from 1-10 on that list. I agree he's probably going to end up around 3 but we just don't know.

[BarleyNY]

This is a tough nut to crack.

 

Because the CBA prevented Glenn from being extended prior to this offseason, he couldn't even be approached about a new deal prior to then, so this presents the first opportunity the team has to get something done.

 

Now, of course, Glenn is one season away from being on the open market, at 26 years old, with 4 seasons of starting experience. That means that he'd have to be blown away with an offer to sign before then.

 

From the team's perspective, you've got a guy that's coming off of his worst season as a pro. Now, he wasn't bad; he just wasn't the same player he was in the previous two seasons, which makes it tough to go in and offer him Branden Albert-type money ($9.5M/year). He'll almost certainly get that on the open market, since he'll be one of the top 2 or 3 OTs available, assuming the following list is accurate:

 

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents/2016/tackle/

 

Further muddying the situation are the cap ramifications. Right now, Dareus is (and should be) priority number 1, since he's a top-3 DT in the league. After that, it makes the most sense to extend Gilmore, given (a) the quality of the player, and (b) his $11M cap hit for 2016, which can be lowered significantly by an extension.

 

It almost seems like the team wants to wait on Glenn in order to see if Henderson AND Kouandjio can handle the OT spots, which would take care of the problem for them. Given the cap tightness, that's not an altogether bad idea.

http://overthecap.com/position/left-tackle/

 

I like the OTC table because it is just LTs and shows year of contract expiration. I totally agree that Albert money is too much. I see Glenn in the $7M-$9M per year range depending on guarantees and structure. Has anyone heard what his asking price is?

 

I looked, but no dice. I did see that he's expected to get more than Jared Velheer who just got a 5 year, $35M deal. That makes sense. That was from buffalobills.com.

Edited June 23, 2015 by BarleyNY

[thebandit27]

http://overthecap.com/position/left-tackle/

 

I like the OTC table because it is just LTs and shows year of contract expiration. I totally agree that Albert money is too much. I see Glenn in the $7M-$9M per year range depending on guarantees and structure. Has anyone heard what his asking price is?

 

I looked, but no dice. I did see that he's expected to get more than Jared Velheer who just got a 5 year, $35M deal. That makes sense. That was from buffalobills.com.

 

I actually think that Albert money is right on for Glenn. Both college guards that switched to tackle, started as rookies, missed a few games here and there, but were mostly good. Albert didn't make the pro bowl until his 6th year in the NFL, so they're tracking very similarly IMO.

 

I think if Glenn wanted only $8M/year or so, this deal would be a no-brainer. If I were his agent, I'd be telling him not to even respond to offers that don't start with a 9.

[KD in CA]

I don't see things turning out that way. McCoy's contract is $8M per year, Spiller's is $4M per year - and Spiller isn't the Gold Standard here as many solid RBs are considerably less. Plus McCoy cost us Kiko who was a very good player on a cheap rookie contract. At least Shady might be a top 5 back this year and that can't be overlooked. Value can be reasonably argued, but paying premiums for RBs is always a concern for me - especially with the amount of guaranteed money assigned to him. Clay is more worrisome. He's the 4th highest paid TE in the league now and I just don't see the value (again with so much guaranteed). He's good at everything - which is a very good asset in a TE (and one I personally love), but he's not great at anything. That's a big worry. Spending these premiums on these positions is going to force the Bills to lose out on better values at more important positions, including some of their own impending FAs. That's going to hurt them starting next offseason. I wouldn't have an issue with it if they had an aging QB and were pushing for a SB, but to go this route with Cassel, Manuel and Taylor? I don't see the point.

 

Clearly new ownership is making a push right now which brought the McCoy and Clay deals. I suspect if they didn't have the excellent defense in place they wouldn't have gone that route. From an ownership perspective it's hard to argue with the results so far -- record season ticket sales. Obviously they'll need to find a QB if they want to win a championship but breaking the playoff drought would be a big step.

 

I liked Clay a lot two years ago in Miami but agreed he needs to out perform his history to live up to that contract.

[Kelly the Dog]

Clearly new ownership is making a push right now which brought the McCoy and Clay deals. I suspect if they didn't have the excellent defense in place they wouldn't have gone that route. From an ownership perspective it's hard to argue with the results so far -- record season ticket sales. Obviously they'll need to find a QB if they want to win a championship but breaking the playoff drought would be a big step.

 

I liked Clay a lot two years ago in Miami but agreed he needs to out perform his history to live up to that contract.

I truly think Clay can and will warrant his big salary without putting up huge or pro bowl numbers simply by being on the field and doing all the little things that make Roman's offense work. He's really the key to the offense and why he was their clear number one target and they were willing to pay that much. He could easily be worth that money and have 60 catches and 6 TDs and fans will call him a bust while his coaches thinking he's right up there as MVP of the offense.