- Thread starter
- #1
SteelersPride
Well-Known Member
NBC Sports - ProFootballTalk: Steelers cut CB Cortez Allen
Steelers cut CB Cortez Allen
Steelers cut CB Cortez Allen
The Steelers must have tried really hard to keep Cortez in the plans. Because if they didn't want him they would have designated him as a June 1st cut over a month ago and they would have saved even more money than the $1.7mil in cap room they get now. That tells me that Cortez had a change of heart and turned his back on any prior talks they had. Because it makes zero sense to wait so long to cut him when the market is completely dried up.Good, glad thats finally done with
You aren't the only one. I remember specifically being for the release of Keenan Lewis because of all the crap I read from coaches saying that Cortez was the more athletic & talented of the two.Sadi thought he was gonna be good
I know right, Fd that upYou aren't the only one. I remember specifically being for the release of Keenan Lewis because of all the crap I read from coaches saying that Cortez was the more athletic & talented of the two.
The dead money left over from Allen's contract will impact the Steelers' salary cap in the amounts of:
$4.05 million in 2016-2017;
$2.7 million in 2017-2018; and
$1.35 million in 2018-2019.
Steelers receive extra cap space in the amounts of:
$1.7 million in 2016-2017;
$2.95 million in 2017-2018; and
$4.3 million in 2018-2019.
That's good to hear. I had a feeling I wasn't understanding it correctly. So basically smaller savings, but removing him off the books completely was their choice as opposed to bigger savings now, but spreading out CH's over 2-3 years.Late to the party on this one.
Dave Bryan...from Steelerdepot is kind of a cap head of sorts.
His take is...by releasing him now...PIT only gets $1.1mil in cap savings, they do take the $4.0 mil dead money hit this season, but according to him he's off the books completely in '17 with this option...if they had designated him post Jun 1...they would have had a larger cap savings this year, but would have resulted in the $2.7 mil dead money hit for '17 in addition to the money in '16.
It does seem like talks broke down on him taking a pay cut, because the timing was a little odd. Not sure why, but it does seem as if they had some interest in keeping him if the price was right.
That's good to hear. I had a feeling I wasn't understanding it correctly. So basically smaller savings, but removing him off the books completely was their choice as opposed to bigger savings now, but spreading out CH's over 2-3 years.
Makes sense now. If they can absorb the dead money hit now, they might as well before handing out contracts in the future with AB & Bell.