Derek Carr won’t take a pay cut for 2025 but willing to restructure to help the cap (1 Viewer)

[CowtownSaint]

Opinion: Derek Carr's latest comments come off arrogant and delusional

Derek Carr recently told ESPN's Katherine Terrell wasn't willing to play ball with the New Orleans Saints by taking a pay cut, and that is fine. Players are owed the guaranteed money in their contracts. It's his rationale that is the issue. Carr said he doesn't fee

saintswire.usatoday.com

Clickbait...Yep
Leaves out McCoy's injury.
But it has some truth to it.

While the question maybe shouldn’t have been put forth publicly, especially right now end of season, I have to agree with the headline. The first thing that popped into my mind was “what an arrogant answer who the hell does this guy think he is?”

Truth be told he doesn’t have to take a pay cut, but the tact and way he could have approached the answer to me, shows his true nature, just like last season when we was screaming at players on the field and the bench. That’s his true character not the phony facade he tries to put on. He’s business first. Team second.

Now again, he doesn’t have to take a pay cut but his answer reminded me of that McCoy issue last year and Carr lost me then as I simply don’t see leader in that. And when asked about it back then he had a chance to be a leader and I don’t think his answer was quite good to be honest.

 

[St. Widge]

I hope they have other moves they can make w/ out having to touch his. Or, hopefully the restructure still allows us to move on after 2025 w/ out this huge cap hit. Either way I think he should be on the team in 2025

It's certainly not ideal. I think they could try to get some of those guys to take pay cuts instead. But they could obviously say no.

 

[St. Geezy]

I hope they have other moves they can make w/ out having to touch his. Or, hopefully the restructure still allows us to move on after 2025 w/ out this huge cap hit. Either way I think he should be on the team in 2025

I think if you want to tread water next season, you restructure Carr. If you want to be bad next season, you cut Carr and extend the other guys. If you want to give yourself your best shot at a surprise run by opening up space, you restructure Carr and the other guys.

 

[ELLIASJWILLIAMS]

I think if you want to tread water next season, you restructure Carr. If you want to be bad next season, you cut Carr and extend the other guys. If you want to give yourself your best shot at a surprise run by opening up space, you restructure Carr and the other guys.

Loomis likely takes the 1st or 3rd option.

 

[Clintonrebel]

But why would it be painful? We need upgrades at pretty much every position, we need to do that through the draft, the sooner we can take our lumps the better. Loomis is delusional in this approach that we are keeping the continuity from the old era, next season will be 5 years since the playoffs or being truly a competitive team, that’s half a decade with dwindling results and the same cap problems.

Carr isn’t the answer he was the last attempt from a lame duck head coach that is now fired. We are going to have to take our lumps for a couple season and close the old chapter for good. We can run from it for another two years if we want but it’s coming one way or the other.

I'm just saying take your salary cap lumps with Cam, maybe Taysom and Honey Badger and probably a few aging linemen and let Carr bridge that period. Cutting or trading Carr eats up too much cap, meaning you get stuck with all these aging vets aging another year or two on the roster. I think QB is toward the end of the rebuild.

 

[ELLIASJWILLIAMS]

It's certainly not ideal. I think they could try to get some of those guys to take pay cuts instead. But they could obviously say no.

It's possible. Carr has a point, outside of his games missed his statistics were good, good enough that asking him to take a paycut was never likely to be complied w/.

 

[St. Widge]

It's possible. Carr has a point, outside of his games missed his statistics were good, good enough that asking him to take a paycut was never likely to be complied w/.

Yes. I certainly don't blame Carr for refusing to take a pay cut. The Saints gave him that contract and he's really being paid at a level that is equal to the type of QB he is.

 

[St. Widge]

I'm just saying take your salary cap lumps with Cam, maybe Taysom and Honey Badger and probably a few aging linemen and let Carr bridge that period. Cutting or trading Carr eats up too much cap, meaning you get stuck with all these aging vets aging another year or two on the roster. I think QB is toward the end of the rebuild.

That's certainly a reasonable option. I'd just prefer to see what Rattler can do with a mediocre team around him so we know if we need to go find a young QB in 2026. Carr is likely gone in 2026 no matter what so we will need a young QB then anyway. If Rattler doesn't play, we won't know if he is the young QB we need. There isn't much more learning he can do on the bench. He needs to get on the field to develop further.

 

[Elvis]

I mean, it's not like they are mortgaging the future to keep Carr around 1 more year, unless I'm missing something.....But I totally get what you are saying....

Every dollar pushed into a future year is a mortgage to some degree. We can either take as many lumps this year as possible and take less lumps next year or we can split them up and take the same amount of lumps both years. I'd rather just do as much at once right away so the next coach doesn't have to be burdened with the last coaches players that they may not want. But like St. Widge has been saying all along that the next coach should make those decisions.

 

[Kamara41]

It was a dumb thing to say by Carr. Why respond at all to a question like that, all it serves to do is further alienate him from the fans who pay his wages.

(edit: dumbed down for st.geezy's benefit)

 

[Just Win Maybe]

Good ole Derek Carr, loves to stick it to the Saints so he can go back and play for the Raiders with Gruden as their coach.

We don’t want either of them back but thanks

 

[DSnfla]

No, there really aren't that many mid-QB's who make the Super Bowl, much less win it. Johnson and Dilfer had generational defenses. I'll give Flacco and Foles credit and Foles played as a backup. Hostetler did the minimum and won the SB when Norwood blew the easy kick. No one cares about the SB losers.

Derek Carr will never lead or take a team to the Super Bowl. His mental skillset (no route tree, lack of focus) is so below the guys you named, who won or lost it. Carr can't handle the pressures of an approaching rusher, a timing throw, or the end zone. 0-1 in the playoffs in a long-career.

It's funny now to realize the Saints would not play him late, because they did not want to risk the $10M auto payment if injured on the day the league year turns over.

Loomis created this roster and contract dilemma, again thinking he outsmarted the league, when he just falls on his face post-Sean on almost everything he does. He's just an empty suit at this point, turning everything he touches into crap.

Saints should keep Carr for at least 2025. No more restructures, extensions, or dead money. He can enter camp in July as the presumed starter, but he has to compete and they need to develop Rattler and prep him as a starter. Haener, another non-serious and wasted draft pick, can work in the laundry service next year.

LOL I just named a dozen, and there are more if I wanted to go dack further. And your assessment of DC is ridiculous, no route tree??? DC can make every throw and QBs don't have route trees, WRs do.

DC didn't play the last couple of games because he could not grasp the ball well enough with his left hand SMH or maybe you don't believe Rizzi.

You sir are just delusional

 

[Stalwart385]

They aren't expressing any "hate" toward Carr and I'm not either. Carr is a solid QB somewhere around #15 to #10 depending on the day. But that doesn't mean it makes sense to pay him what he will be making on a team that is in a rebuild. Given Carr's age, at some point you have to move on and find a young QB to build around. I would prefer to do that now and find out what we have in Rattler because he's not going to get any better sitting on the bench and needs game time to get better. If he's not the answer then we need a QB in 2026. Having Carr on the roster only serves to delay finding out what Rattler is and use up money we could use to get the cap in order and build depth for the rebuild.

If you disagree with the strategy and want to stick with Carr and give it one more go at making the playoffs with him, I get it. I just think it's time to take a step back, look for your future QB, and build for the long term. It's not about hate for Carr.

If you want to claim Nick and Trip don't know what they are talking about, fine, but I frankly trust them more than a poster I don't know on an internet site. Moreover, I think Rouxble who has a lot of credibility regarding cap issues on this site says it is difficult to do but possible. If I'm wrong, he can correct me.

It's not about hate or like. It's not about what you are me want. It's about setting realistic expectations. It doesn't work. Anyone can work out the numbers themselves. You can't go into an offseason with 0 dollars. Telling people cutting Carr is a real option is bad reporting and will cause unnecessary unrest.

 

[MikeyF]

I think if you want to tread water next season, you restructure Carr. If you want to be bad next season, you cut Carr and extend the other guys. If you want to give yourself your best shot at a surprise run by opening up space, you restructure Carr and the other guys.

My only thought about this is...Carr can still play.
The other 3 old guys we have on the team can't run with today's NFL players anymore...
I doubt they permanently get picked up by any other team if we cut them...ala Michael Thomas...
You clear future cap space with them.

Hopefully Rattler progresses enough in the off-season to take over the starting QB job
& Carr will be requesting a trade by next year's trade deadline.