9 Comments
User's avatar
RyanH's avatar

It seems to be the new standard for NFL contracts. Big numbers that sound nice but plenty of ways for the club to opt out or trade away the player later.

Kuehn Observations's avatar

That’s actually not terribly new, it’s just getting more creatively complicated.

Jim Pen's avatar

The option bonus taken to this extreme is scary imo

Al Stahl's avatar

Does the $39.1M dead money hit in 2030 give Kerby leverage toward another extension, or do you think the team views that as irrelevant?

Al Stahl's avatar

Based on this contract, would you expect the Lions to structure a Hutch extension the same way, or utilize the space in the next few years that a deal like this provides as a means to affording that contract?

Justin Rogers's avatar

Hutchinson will get so much more guaranteed.

Al Stahl's avatar

I guess it's a bit like apples and oranges in that regard.

I guess I mean do you think Hutch will have a lot of his contract's money pushed out into the future, or do you think the FO is doing this with other extensions like Kerby's so that they don't have to do it with Hutch's deal?

Chad Braun's avatar

Really interesting in that inflation (salary cap) is inherent. I think as you suggest, Hutch’s contract will differ. A number one Edge is a lot harder to replace.

Justin Rogers's avatar

I would say most large NFL contracts are backloaded in a significant fashion. So probably.