PDA

View Full Version : Marco Rivera


leroyisgod
03-05-2007, 02:31 PM
How badly would be hit against the cap if we released Rivera?

Poet3334
03-05-2007, 02:49 PM
If we cut him now, it will cost 1.2 million on this year's cap. That is the 4.875 signing bonus minus the 3.625 salary. If we cut him June 1, then the hit is 1.625 million this year, and 3.2 million next year.

TNewFan41
03-05-2007, 04:22 PM
So cut his a** now.

jdnoyes
03-05-2007, 05:52 PM
His base salary is only 2M this year according to NFLPA, but he also has roster/workout bonuses in the 300K range according to my notes. But yeah it is a negative net cap hit either way, although my guess is that he'll be a post June 1 cut.

Poet3334
03-05-2007, 05:54 PM
His base salary is only 2M this year according to NFLPA, but he also has roster/workout bonuses in the 300K range according to my notes. But yeah it is a negative net cap hit either way, although my guess is that he'll be a post June 1 cut.

I agree 100%

LSUALUM99
03-05-2007, 06:08 PM
Why cut him at all if it's a negative cap hit? Why not keep him on the roster. It's not like we have 10 pro bowl lineman waiting for their chance to play. Keep him on the team and go through training camp and play the best player at G (Davis or Rivera).

What's the point of cutting a guy if you can keep him? It's not like they get to keep any of the excess cap room they have at the end of the year.

TNewFan41
03-05-2007, 06:09 PM
So you think he will be cut?

Poet3334
03-05-2007, 06:23 PM
Why cut him at all if it's a negative cap hit? Why not keep him on the roster. It's not like we have 10 pro bowl lineman waiting for their chance to play. Keep him on the team and go through training camp and play the best player at G (Davis or Rivera).

What's the point of cutting a guy if you can keep him? It's not like they get to keep any of the excess cap room they have at the end of the year.

He may not be cut. If he can't play because of his back he may decide to retire.

D-Unit
03-05-2007, 06:26 PM
He may not be cut. If he can't play because of his back he may decide to retire.
I'm hoping that's the case because I no longer think he's an NFL caliber player.

TNewFan41
03-05-2007, 06:29 PM
Neither do I. Its to bad though, seeing that he is a first ballot HOFer.

jdnoyes
03-05-2007, 07:12 PM
I think it all depends on two factors the status of his back, and whether or not we resign Columbo, if Davis has to play RT and Rivera is healthy why cut him? At worst he is a good mentor for Procter who competes with Rivera for the starting spot. If his back is not healthy or we resign Columbo and it looks like Procter and big Pat are making progress he could get cut because of a numbers thing. But in any case I think it'll be a post June 1 move to save cap room and to give him every opportunity to get healthy.

GB12
03-05-2007, 07:13 PM
Neither do I. Its to bad though, seeing that he is a first ballot HOFer.

Ah no he isn't.

jdnoyes
03-05-2007, 07:31 PM
Neither do I. Its to bad though, seeing that he is a first ballot HOFer.

yeah um no way in hell he gets into the hall on any ballot.

TNewFan41
03-05-2007, 07:34 PM
Are you serious? Isn't he a double digit pro-bowler? I know he has atleast 8, thats is MORE than enough.

GB12
03-05-2007, 07:38 PM
Are you serious? Isn't he a double digit pro-bowler? I know he has atleast 8, thats is MORE than enough.

He had 2 with the Packers and one with Dallas.

TNewFan41
03-05-2007, 07:39 PM
No way in hell. I remember seeing a report of him being a 10-time pro-bowler. No way.

GB12
03-05-2007, 07:40 PM
No way in hell. I remember seeing a report of him being a 10-time pro-bowler. No way.

He has only been in the league for 11 years and didn't play his rookie year.

Paul
03-05-2007, 07:42 PM
Ahhh I love wiki Marco Rivera Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marco_Rivera)

3-time

GB12
03-05-2007, 07:44 PM
Ahhh I love wiki Marco Rivera Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marco_Rivera)

3-time

;)

Where did you even hear ten time

TNewFan41
03-05-2007, 07:46 PM
I thought I saw 10 time pro-bowler. Now that I know he is 3, never mind.