| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
BlackWidow
Joined: 03 May 2012
Posts: 436
|
 Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 12:20 am Post subject: Tommy Kelly a top candidate for release |
 |
|
|
Tommy Kelly - DL - Raiders
ESPN's Bill Williamson classifies Raiders NT Tommy Kelly as a "top candidate" to be released.
Kelly has two years left on his monster seven-year, $50.125 million deal, but his cap number for 2013 is reportedly over $11 million. He's started all 16 games over each of the last five seasons, but Kelly recorded just one sack in 2012 after notching 14.5 in the previous two seasons. The Raiders defensive line should see an extreme makeover with Richard Seymour and Desmond Bryant also set for free agency.
_________________
RIP Layne Staley. Your wings are no longer denied.
[quote="RaidersAreOne"]BlackWidow is a chick? Everything makes so much more sense all of a sudden.[/quote] |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
BlackWidow
Joined: 03 May 2012
Posts: 436
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 12:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
See ya! We don't need you or your yellow flags you produce every game
_________________
RIP Layne Staley. Your wings are no longer denied.
[quote="RaidersAreOne"]BlackWidow is a chick? Everything makes so much more sense all of a sudden.[/quote] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bo_Spice
Joined: 17 May 2009
Posts: 7076
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 12:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
He really regressed last season and with his contract there's no reason to bring him back. It's time to move on from the Kelly-Seymour duo and move forward with Bryant, Bilukidi, and hopefully a new nose tackle that we acquire this off-season.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CaliforniaKid7
Joined: 23 Jan 2010
Posts: 4182
Location: Cali
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 1:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Bo_Spice wrote: | | He really regressed last season and with his contract there's no reason to bring him back. It's time to move on from the Kelly-Seymour duo and move forward with Bryant, Bilukidi, and hopefully a new nose tackle that we acquire this off-season. |
yeah, lets hope for a Bryant, Bilukidi, Star/Hill/Knighton rotation.
_________________
props to macklemore on the sig |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bo_Spice
Joined: 17 May 2009
Posts: 7076
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 1:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| CaliforniaKid7 wrote: | | yeah, lets hope for a Bryant, Bilukidi, Star/Hill/Knighton rotation. |
I'd love to see Desmond Bryant at UT with a run stuffing NT next to him and Bilukidi playing NT on passing downs.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DOCLEW 28
Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 10586
Location: East Oakland
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 2:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
This doesn't mean a thing. Williamson is just guessing like we all are.
But I do hope that they would try and find a trade partner, however unlikely that is with his contract. I would rather get something for him. I can remember Bellicheat being in love with Kelly a while ago. Maybe we can get something out of that sour puss.
_________________
Raider X hooked me with the sig |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
agarcia34
Joined: 24 Feb 2011
Posts: 1808
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 2:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Been a long time coming. He just plays stupid football.
_________________
I-O_O-I Hanley Ramirez " I SEE YOU! " |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Raiiiiidersssss
Joined: 23 Jan 2007
Posts: 4117
Location: The Black Hole
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 2:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
this is bing bong beautiful
_________________
If the Raiders don't trade back at 3, I want Fisher, Ziggy, or Star. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DOCLEW 28
Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 10586
Location: East Oakland
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 6:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
According to reports the team could save about $7M by cutting or trading Kelly.
_________________
Raider X hooked me with the sig |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rolni
Joined: 08 Jun 2008
Posts: 2162
Location: Europe
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 8:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| DOCLEW 28 wrote: | | According to reports the team could save about $7M by cutting or trading Kelly. |
Those reports are not accurate!
They don't count in his 2012 restructure.
After the 2012 restructure here is his deal:
2012: 825000 salary + 4599267 signing bonus = 5424267 total
2013: 6500000 salary + 4599267 signing bonus = 11099267 total
2014: 7000000 salary + 1725000 signing bonus = 8725000 total
With a cut or trade now we could have 6324267 dead money.
So we can save 4775000 with either move.
_________________
WIN LOSE OR TIE...RAIDER FAN 'TIL I DIE!!
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Darbsk
Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Posts: 612
Location: Wales, UK
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 12:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Bo_Spice wrote: | | He really regressed last season and with his contract there's no reason to bring him back. It's time to move on from the Kelly-Seymour duo and move forward with Bryant, Bilukidi, and hopefully a new nose tackle that we acquire this off-season. |
That would be us playing him at NT, not regression. He is and always has been a good penetrating DT or possibly a 3-4 end who can get after the QB. In the right system I beleive he could put up great numbers (as evidenced by 14.5 sacks in 2 seasons here), albeit with a few daft and needless penalties thrown in while trying to guess the snap count.
Shame we didn't get a true run stopping DT next to him and allow him to do his thing, we never fully utilised his skills. I'm not sad to see him go but I don't get why some of you guys are so tough on him, he said himself he didn't want to play NT but did it the best he could for the team for which he should be applauded 
_________________
“It may take us a short while, but we'll get that nastiness of the Raiders back.”
Mr. Al Davis RIP |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TiberiusRising
Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 5553
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 12:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Darbsk wrote: | | Bo_Spice wrote: | | He really regressed last season and with his contract there's no reason to bring him back. It's time to move on from the Kelly-Seymour duo and move forward with Bryant, Bilukidi, and hopefully a new nose tackle that we acquire this off-season. |
That would be us playing him at NT, not regression. He is and always has been a good penetrating DT or possibly a 3-4 end who can get after the QB. In the right system I beleive he could put up great numbers (as evidenced by 14.5 sacks in 2 seasons here), albeit with a few daft and needless penalties thrown in while trying to guess the snap count.
Shame we didn't get a true run stopping DT next to him and allow him to do his thing, we never fully utilised his skills. I'm not sad to see him go but I don't get why some of you guys are so tough on him, he said himself he didn't want to play NT but did it the best he could for the team for which he should be applauded |
My main issue with him was the penalties and his contract. Wouldnt mind keeping him at the right price. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
McRaider
Joined: 07 Feb 2009
Posts: 243
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 12:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
i really hope and expect kelly to be cut. this guy should be paying the raiders for theft.
he was horrible this season and reggie has his eyeballs on his ridiculous contract byebye kelly.
our line will finally see the make over it needs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
McRaider
Joined: 07 Feb 2009
Posts: 243
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 12:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Rolni wrote: | | DOCLEW 28 wrote: | | According to reports the team could save about $7M by cutting or trading Kelly. |
Those reports are not accurate!
They don't count in his 2012 restructure.
After the 2012 restructure here is his deal:
2012: 825000 salary + 4599267 signing bonus = 5424267 total
2013: 6500000 salary + 4599267 signing bonus = 11099267 total
2014: 7000000 salary + 1725000 signing bonus = 8725000 total
With a cut or trade now we could have 6324267 dead money.
So we can save 4775000 with either move. |
holy  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
holyghost
Joined: 18 Jan 2007
Posts: 5302
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2013 12:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Darbsk wrote: | | Bo_Spice wrote: | | He really regressed last season and with his contract there's no reason to bring him back. It's time to move on from the Kelly-Seymour duo and move forward with Bryant, Bilukidi, and hopefully a new nose tackle that we acquire this off-season. |
That would be us playing him at NT, not regression. He is and always has been a good penetrating DT or possibly a 3-4 end who can get after the QB. In the right system I beleive he could put up great numbers (as evidenced by 14.5 sacks in 2 seasons here), albeit with a few daft and needless penalties thrown in while trying to guess the snap count.
Shame we didn't get a true run stopping DT next to him and allow him to do his thing, we never fully utilised his skills. I'm not sad to see him go but I don't get why some of you guys are so tough on him, he said himself he didn't want to play NT but did it the best he could for the team for which he should be applauded |
I disagree with this man. Vehemently. How was he never utilized? He played UT for years. He gave us exactly what he is and the most he'll ever be. A tweener sized UT with strong pass rush and poor gap discipline, minimal leadership and generally undisciplined play capable of flashing great ability on occasion.
It's all there in the games, just watch em. Noone told him to leave his gap. Noone coached him to ride the blocker off the play. Noone told him to stand up straight and not move while the ball carrier ran by.
In 8 years he was never greater than that and it's not due to misuse.
It's the same thing as a guy like Huff. Does anyone believe if these guys were such good players that even if they were in the wrong position that at least they would consistently flash such skill, this forcing the team to reconsider their use? You can pigeonhole a guy in the wrong place for a couple years, maybe even 4 years. But 8 years, and still nothing emerges in them? Come on...
Every defense plays multiple looks all year long. If Kelly, or Huff, or any of the guys like them were so good as players, it would have shown in the look that is the right fit for them. It didn't. They're inconsistent, physically talented, undisciplined, and mediocre footballers. And they're not going to all of a sudden become something more in a different situation, not by scheme change and not here or elsewhere.
But I do agree with what you are saying if you are saying that the team blew it for themselves by not shielding Kelly's flaws and playing to his strengths. That I can agree with. That way you can get more out of the guy you have, for what he is. Problem with that is the defensive personnel we have assembled over the last 10 years is so disparate and ill fit that it's really really hard to come up with looks that hide all of their weaknesses and accent all of their strengths. They were never built together as a unit, only plucked as superior athletes and tossed together. Turns out a man on man beat em individually defense is in fact the best fit for a group like that. And now we see why that's such a terrible drafting and defensive philosophy. In the modern NFL, at best, you can be mediocre trying to physically outsize and outrace the competition. At worst you can be a defensive abomination. Because most other teams can now match you physically, and then beat you cohesively and strategically. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
