Eric Berry says he 'definitely' won't play under Chiefs tag in 2017

[KC Warpaint 3,235]

KANSAS CITY, Mo. -- Safety Eric Berry played the 2016 season for the Chiefs as their franchise player, but once apparently is enough.

Berry told NFL Network he wouldn't play for the Chiefs under the franchise tag again in 2017.

 

"I'm definitely not going to play under the franchise tag this year,'' Berry said. "I want to end my career in Kansas City. I want to play there. I love the city, I love the vibe. I love my teammates. I really look at them more than teammates. We've been through a lot, and they supported me a lot.

 

"But I don't feel comfortable playing under the franchise tag this year."

 

The Chiefs designated Berry as their franchise player last year after the sides couldn't agree on a long-term contract. Berry skipped the offseason practices and the early portion of training camp but eventually signed the Chiefs' mandatory one-year contract worth about $10.8 million.

 

Berry, 28, had perhaps his best NFL season. He returned an interception for a touchdown to spark a fourth-quarter rally to beat the Carolina Panthers in November and returned one for a touchdown and another for two points to lead the Chiefs to a win over the Atlanta Falcons in December.

 

Berry, speaking before an NFL Play 60 event in the Kansas City area last week, told ESPN he wanted to remain with Kansas City and that the Chiefs had been in contact with his agent only the day before.

[Calichief 3,016]

Good for him.

[WichitaZRide 321]

This is agent influence 101. Have you ever heard a franchised player NOT say publicly that they will sit if tagged again? Just part of the game...

[eraser 722]

Berry would be crazy to let on as if he would accept being franchised again. He is nearing the age that players tend to decrease in productivity. The Chiefs will either pay him, and risk paying future dollars for a time when he is no longer in his prime. They will pay or they will have to part ways.

 

Maybe there is a way. The Chiefs would have to convince Berry to consider taking pay for performance for the final two years of his contract, but the Chiefs will have to guarantee money.

 

Troy Polamalu, and Earl Thomas are two safeties who can be used to measure Berry. Polamalu is retired, but his career is one that Berry might hope to emulate. He was drafted 7 years before Berry. Thomas was picked in 2010, nine picks after Eric Berry. Most people valued Berry more than Thomas, but both were highly regarded.

 

Troy Polamalu was injured in 2009, and only played in 5 games. At this point in his career Palamalu had played in 93 games, and started 77 of those. TP had 453 tackles,  7 sacks, deflected 64 passes, and intercepted 20. By contrast, Berry played in 69 games, had 350 tackles, 5.5 sacks, 2 forced fumbles, and 10 interceptions. On the surface, Polamalu was the better player statisticaly, but after 7 years, Troy was on the down turn. TP played 5 additional years, in 65 more games. His production on every level was down. He signed a two year extension in 2014, but only played on year.

 

Odds are against Berry playing more than 6 years, and likely not more than 5. During the same time, Earl Thomas played in 27 more games, had 197 more tackles, 11 more interceptions, and 7 more forced fumbles. Earl Thomas signed a five year extension in 2014 worth $44.725 M. He was healthy. Berry missed his second season (knee), and half of the 2014 season (cancer). If the Chiefs extend Berry for 6 more years, he will be 35 years old at the end on his contract. Berry will probably want at least $65 M with $35 M in guaranteed money.

 

What to do? It is not as easy as it seems. Not signing Eric Berry would be unpopular, and could hurt the solidarity of the team. The final two years on Earl Thomas' contract have $3.8 M in dead money in 2017, and $1.9 M in dead money in 2018. This shows, the Seahawks provided most of the guaranteed funds in the first three years of his five year deal. The Seahawks are free to renew a contract, and restructure it, or allow Thomas to hit the street.

[liquidfriend 1,151]

I liked Berry more than Thomas leading up to the 2010 draft, but Thomas has been the better player overall.

 

The Chiefs should work to keep Berry, but they gave to stop grossly overspending to keep guys. He needs to be kept with a market appropriate deal.

[wilkie 1,518]

Give the man his money.

[Calichief 3,016]

I liked Berry more than Thomas leading up to the 2010 draft, but Thomas has been the better player overall.

 

The Chiefs should work to keep Berry, but they gave to stop grossly overspending to keep guys. He needs to be kept with a market appropriate deal.

I don't think Thomas is better. He plays with chancellor and Sherman. Berry was doing it solo for some time.

[azchief21 5,278]

I liked Berry more than Thomas leading up to the 2010 draft, but Thomas has been the better player overall.

 

The Chiefs should work to keep Berry, but they gave to stop grossly overspending to keep guys. He needs to be kept with a market appropriate deal.

I'd take Berry. He's a game changer.

[eraser 722]

I am not arguing Thomas is better. I think an argument can be made Thomas was a better value, especially considering the games he did not miss due to injury or illness. Berry could not help he had a knee injury or got cancer. However, the production was there for Thomas. I don't think he missed a single game.

[Okiechief1 425]

You have to least ask what is the most that he should be paid.

[liquidfriend 1,151]

I wouldn't hold injuries or Cancer against Berry. Wouldn't even factor injuries into the equation.

 

Earl Thomas overall has been the better player, while Berry had the better 2016 campaign. They are both game changers, but Thomas is a stronger player in coverage. Berry gets shredded by TE's a bit too much for my liking, while I remember Thomas handling Gronk just fine.