Why not bring back Manny Lawson?

[Flyingiguana]

but if we add another OLB who can rush, maybe we increase the amount of times we send five? this should give the opposing QB less time and at very least, disrupt their offensive 'rythmn'. again, this rushing specialist comes in for Haralson on passing downs.

whereas if you add Lawson, you have no option to increase pressure with the other OLB. i'd rather have the option to add pressure, versus add coverage.

well it doesnt matter now anyways. but our d doesn't seem to be a heavy blitzing defense. having a coverage olb fits with our current system and players. resigning brooks will put willis in coverage more often much like this year.

then again, can't argue with the results we got this year, this might have been the best defense of the cap era

 

[maniax]

Now that we've re-signed Brooks, I would still rather take the money we are paying Parys ($2.7M) and give it to Manny.

Then draft a mid round 3-4 OLB as well.

So we'd have a nice set of OLBs. Brooks, a good rusher and 3 down player, All-Done stud rusher and possibly a 3 down player, Manny our best coverage LB (I think he's slightly better than Willis and Bowman), and a rookie.

 

[Crimsoncrew]

Now that we've re-signed Brooks, I would still rather take the money we are paying Parys ($2.7M) and give it to Manny.

Then draft a mid round 3-4 OLB as well.

So we'd have a nice set of OLBs. Brooks, a good rusher and 3 down player, All-Done stud rusher and possibly a 3 down player, Manny our best coverage LB (I think he's slightly better than Willis and Bowman), and a rookie.

Manny's not going to come back to fulfill a backup role. He's a starting-caliber player. PFF rates him as the second-best OLB in this FA class. He can play in the 4-3 or 3-4. I think he'll generate plenty of interest this year.

Ranking the 2012 Free Agents: Outside Linebackers | ProFootballFocus.com

It's worth noting that they also graded him negatively in coverage, given the earlier discussion about putting him on top TEs.

 

[EaseUrStorm]

Don't think we'd be able to re-structure Harlason's deal because he's likely to get a reasonable salary elsewhere. Ideally we can keep him around for another year. It all depends on how Brooks' contract is structured. He's a good rotational guy who can fill in for an injury and can also help a younger OLB develop. On first glance it looks like we'd just cut him loose, but the hit we'll take factors into the decision process.

 

[dredinis21]

Don't think we'd be able to re-structure Harlason's deal because he's likely to get a reasonable salary elsewhere. Ideally we can keep him around for another year. It all depends on how Brooks' contract is structured. He's a good rotational guy who can fill in for an injury and can also help a younger OLB develop. On first glance it looks like we'd just cut him loose, but the hit we'll take factors into the decision process.

I disagree that Parys gets a reasonable (as in as much as he currently is making or more) salary elsewhere based on a simple premise....he's just not that good. He is no better then average in virtually everything he does and below average in pursuit and coverage. I think he provides adequate depth but nothing more. 3 mil for a player like that doesn't seem reasonable.

 

[Ray_Dogg]

Technically it is less than 3 mill, just sayin.

 

[CalamityX11]

Don't think we'd be able to re-structure Harlason's deal because he's likely to get a reasonable salary elsewhere. Ideally we can keep him around for another year. It all depends on how Brooks' contract is structured. He's a good rotational guy who can fill in for an injury and can also help a younger OLB develop. On first glance it looks like we'd just cut him loose, but the hit we'll take factors into the decision process.

depends, define reasonable. For what Parys does, he is overpaid(he got his contract off a good year for him but never went above that performance and barely matched it IMO)

 

[Ray_Dogg]

I'd like to know exactly how much you guys consider Parys overpaid? Then factor in how much dead money he'll be against the cap plus what his replacement will cost. Is it really worth all that effort especially since the guy you bring in will most likely have to learn the system? What are you gonna save? A few hundred k?

 

[EaseUrStorm]

He plays an elite position that is hard to fill, even though he is an average player. We locked him in pretty cheap as a starter.

A lot of teams that are hurting for starting caliber OLB's. Contracts are determined by supply and demand. It's a good time to be on the market at OLB because of the few OLB options in this draft. Also, not many impact OLB FA's are available this year. For those reasons, he'll get some interest to fill a starting OLB role. These are the same driving forces behind the Brooks deal. If there were viable alternatives we wouldn't be nearly as aggressive to pen Brooks.