Chad Greenway hopes to return ...

[fiestavike]

This thread is starting to remind me of the song 'Big Yellow Taxi'. The idea that we can stick any of the other guys on the team in for Greenway and they'll do just as good is pure speculation and probably wishful thinking. If the team could have picked up a better player to replace him then sure, go ahead and do what is necessary. That person doesn't seem to be out there.

As far as price, who cares? We aren't personally paying him and his cap hit isn't going to stop the team from signing other players.

did you just pull out a joni mitchell reference on the vikingsmessageboard?

[dead_poet]

LOL DP, I know Greenway doesnt play ILB. My point was, we should have low balled him, since his performance has droped so much, and with that money, get Spikes.

Two things: 1) I think low-balling is a bush league move. If you want to move on from a guy, cut him and move on. Otherwise offer him a contract that reflects his value. A low-ball move would've been insulting to a leader that's been here his entire career. They obviously still value what he's able to do. I'd guess a small fraction of the cash is based on his long tenure and respect, which I have zero problem with. The Vikings are now paying him a base salary of $3.4 million as opposed to $7 million. For some perspective, that's only $1 million more than guys like Hodges, Mauti and Watts. I wouldn't consider it grossly overpaying him for his performance. 2) As I mentioned before, even without cutting his $7 million contract the Vikings could fit Spikes under the cap. His contract wasn't preventing them from signing Spikes. It sounds like Spielman doesn't want to pay what Spikes believes he's worth. The fact that Spikes (who is still a capable two-down ILB) is still out there this late into free agency means there are many other teams that agree his asking price needs to come down. That's just being fiscally responsible. To put another way, why is it not OK to "overpay" for Greenway (if you think he still is) only to do the same with Spikes?

I have a feeling we can get him a bit cheaper then his asking price. The Bills have made so many moves this year, I dont think Spikes is even on their radar.

According to Bills GM Doug Whaley on March 27, they have a desire to re-sign Spikes. I think Spikes is reluctant to return because Whaley made it clear he'd be a two-down LB only and Spikes still wants to be an every-down LB (which shouldn't happen and seems the market is agreeing).

[Cliff]

did you just pull out a joni mitchell reference on the vikingsmessageboard?

I did.

[mmvikes]

Two things: 1) I think low-balling is a bush league move. If you want to move on from a guy, cut him and move on. Otherwise offer him a contract that reflects his value. A low-ball move would've been insulting to a leader that's been here his entire career. They obviously still value what he's able to do. I'd guess a small fraction of the cash is based on his long tenure and respect, which I have zero problem with. The Vikings are now paying him a base salary of $3.4 million as opposed to $7 million. For some perspective, that's only $1 million more than guys like Hodges, Mauti and Watts. I wouldn't consider it grossly overpaying him for his performance. 2) As I mentioned before, even without cutting his $7 million contract the Vikings could fit Spikes under the cap. His contract wasn't preventing them from signing Spikes. It sounds like Spielman doesn't want to pay what Spikes believes he's worth. The fact that Spikes (who is still a capable two-down ILB) is still out there this late into free agency means there are many other teams that agree his asking price needs to come down. That's just being fiscally responsible. To put another way, why is it not OK to "overpay" for Greenway (if you think he still is) only to do the same with Spikes?
According to Bills GM Doug Whaley on March 27, they have a desire to re-sign Spikes. I think Spikes is reluctant to return because Whaley made it clear he'd be a two-down LB only and Spikes still wants to be an every-down LB (which shouldn't happen and seems the market is agreeing).

Great post DP. Agree.

[mmvikes]

I wonder... that's starting to seem like the prevailing philosophy of some Vikings fans. A player is over 30? Trade him!

The repeated deprecation of Greenway's game drives me nuts because it gets so over-the-top. The guy can still play and play at a pro level. Frazier valued him, Zimmer values him and that's not just due to sentimentality. Zimmer had no reason to love a player who had never played for him. Greenway played an important role on a significantly improved defense last year. Are we really supposed to believe he's an over-the-hill incompetent with nothing left to offer but his knowledge of the game?

Yup. We have a HC now who looks to be the best coach we have had since Bud. He feels that Chad is valuable to the team. I will take his word for it.

[Mothman]

Yup. We have a HC now who looks to be the best coach we have had since Bud. He feels that Chad is valuable to the team. I will take his word for it.

I will too. I respect his view, especially when it comes to defense. However, after one 7-9 season, I can't yet get on board with the idea that Zimmer looks to be the best Vikings head coach since Bud Grant. He did a nice enough job under the circumstances last year, and I like his personality, but he has a lot more to prove.

[PurpleKoolaid]

Two things: 1) I think low-balling is a bush league move. If you want to move on from a guy, cut him and move on. Otherwise offer him a contract that reflects his value. A low-ball move would've been insulting to a leader that's been here his entire career. They obviously still value what he's able to do. I'd guess a small fraction of the cash is based on his long tenure and respect, which I have zero problem with. The Vikings are now paying him a base salary of $3.4 million as opposed to $7 million. For some perspective, that's only $1 million more than guys like Hodges, Mauti and Watts. I wouldn't consider it grossly overpaying him for his performance. 2) As I mentioned before, even without cutting his $7 million contract the Vikings could fit Spikes under the cap. His contract wasn't preventing them from signing Spikes. It sounds like Spielman doesn't want to pay what Spikes believes he's worth. The fact that Spikes (who is still a capable two-down ILB) is still out there this late into free agency means there are many other teams that agree his asking price needs to come down. That's just being fiscally responsible. To put another way, why is it not OK to "overpay" for Greenway (if you think he still is) only to do the same with Spikes?
According to Bills GM Doug Whaley on March 27, they have a desire to re-sign Spikes. I think Spikes is reluctant to return because Whaley made it clear he'd be a two-down LB only and Spikes still wants to be an every-down LB (which shouldn't happen and seems the market is agreeing).

Greenway is a 2 down back and just got a nice contract, even with the pay cut. I like Greenway, love his leadership, and the community work he does. But signing a guy that almost everyone can see has lost a step or two, and getting long in the tooth, isnt the way this team was supposedly moving forward, esp. with all the LBs on our roster that havent gotten enough playing time. I guess there has to be a exception for every rule though.