Story by
Rob Brzezinski's comments on Vikings trading Jonathan Greenard raise a major red flag about the future
- Story by
- Rob Brzezinski's comments on Vikings trading Jonathan Greenard raise a major red flag about the future
We knew that the salary cap situation the Minnesota Vikings has was far from idea, but the process is baffling.
The Minnesota Vikings finally made the move we had been expecting to happen by trading edge rusher Jonathan Greenard. It was a fascinating move for a multitude of reasons, but hte more interesting aspect is what they got in return.
Advertisement
Only getting two third-round picks is a brutal return for a fringe top-10 edge rusher. They should have gotten more for Greenard, but interim general manager Rob Brzezinski highlighted the market is only what someone will pay.
“The value ends up being what the market will pay, you know. Obviously, JG is a great player, and I’m sure people have a lot of opinions as far as what the appropriate value should be for him. All I can say is, considering everything we thought it was in the best interest of all parties. Again, people can judge whether or not it was fair or reasonable for a player of that caliber, and we understand that. But it’s what the market would pay and, and ultimately, we thought it was best for all parties, and that’s why we decided to do it.”
Rob Brzezinski’s comments raise significant red flags
Deferring to the market is one thing, which in itself tells you the Vikings just wanted to move on. Even so, moving on at that little of a price is crazy considering he is a top-10 player at a premium position.
Advertisement
It’s not all about the fact that the Vikings traded Greenard, but the real red flags came from the explanation of the trade.
“We want to make it perfectly clear that this has nothing to do with us or the Wilf’s not wanting to spend money or cutting back in any way, pulling back the reins on our spending. We have just spent so much money the last several years that it’s not sustainable. For us to move forward, our salary cap situation has been very, very challenging. And Jonathan had two years left on his contract, and that’s not an easy situation to navigate either and so, like we said, there’s just a lot of factors involved. No decision is just made in a vacuum regarding just Jonathan Greenard and his situation. You have to look at all the aspects and what we think is best for the team.”
First off, the fact that Brzezinski had to say that about the Wilf’s is a big red flag. The lack of cash spending this offseason is odd when you look at their history. The Wilf’s have always been willing to spend money overall, just look at TCO Performance Center. Plus, they are a top-two organization per the NFLPA report cards. Even so, the lack of overall cash spending is weird.
Second off, using the salary cap as an excuse is a really poor process. Even though Greenard had a $22.3 million salary cap hit, giving him the four-year, $100 million contract would have lowered the cap hit considerably, possibly more than the $12.55 million they will be saving with the trade.
Advertisement
Insinuating that the Vikings felt like they didn’t have the flexibility to keep Greenard long-term. They absolutely did have that, but it signals how the Vikings have other plans with the money. Not having him in their plays is very questionable in itself, especially with Andrew Van Ginkel set to be a free agent.
If the Vikings just wanted to prioritize other players, just say so instead of beating around the bush. It’s a weird process with how Brzezinski communicated this entire situation to the media, and it raises serious questions about their future plans.
