Antoine Winfield Might Be Back Next Season After All

by Christopher Gates on Dec 13, 2011 12:19 PM CST in Minnesota Vikings

After Antoine Winfield got injured earlier this year and was placed on injured reserve by the Vikings, we speculated that because of his salary ($7 million), he might not be back with the Vikings next year, along with a bunch of other high-priced veterans.

Well, as it turns out, Winfield's salary for next year is going to be significantly less than that, according to Tom Pelissero of 1500 ESPN. It appears that the injuries that have kept Winfield off of the field for most of the year have triggered a clause in his contract that will drop his 2012 salary from the original $7 million figure down to something in the much more manageable $3 million range. He can still make $7 million, but now that number is going to be largely based on incentives rather than just being a part of his base salary.

It was originally thought that the salary reduction would only be triggered if Winfield was moved into a nickel role rather than being a starter, but apparently the lack of snaps he's gotten this season has been enough to trigger the clause.

I'm not sure how far down the Vikings' list of priorities this moves the cornerback spot. When he's healthy, Winfield is still pretty damn good, and the injuries haven't been to his legs or anything like that, so if he's going to lose a step, it won't be because of the injuries. Then again, I don't know how much the Vikings need to be relying on a cornerback that's going to turn 35 just before the start of camp next season, either.

With this revelation, however, hopefully Winfield will be back with Minnesota next season. With the complete overhaul the secondary is likely going to get, it would be nice to have one solid, productive veteran leader back there that people can look towards to solidify things.

Tweet Comment 31 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I wouldn't mind seeing Winfield used as the Nickle-CB,

The Vikings D-secondary is in such bad shape that they really have no choice but to use Winfield again next year…

Winfield has gotten to the point where the Vikings can’t rely on him to stay healthy enough to hold a starting spot. But they would have a much better chance of Winfield staying healthy if they limit his role to Nickle-situations… or in rotation to keep other DB’s fresh.

With that said. It would be best for the Vikings to keep Winfields role as limited as possible, so that releasing him the following year would be a much easier transition.

by chaosg on Dec 13, 2011 12:37 PM CST reply actions

I agree.

Our CB depth chart will be going through some major transformations soon. It appears Cedric Griffin’s days as a Viking CB are done… and possibly as a Viking altogether. That makes, what, Benny Sapp and Asher Allen the ‘vets’? No thanks. If we’re rehauling the secondary, we absolutely need a solid vet to get things going on the right track… and Winfield at 3 mil is absolutely the right guy at the right place.

Furthermore, I believe his contract is up after next year? I’m guessing that at that point, he will probably retire. It’d be great too then if he did so as a Viking.

261 Daily Norseman readers and counting say I am a genius... the masses have spoke!

...and those who voted 'moron' were secretly Packer trolls.
Follow @KJSegall

Daily Norseman

by KJSegall on Dec 13, 2011 12:41 PM CST reply actions

place= price

dammit.

261 Daily Norseman readers and counting say I am a genius... the masses have spoke!

...and those who voted 'moron' were secretly Packer trolls.
Follow @KJSegall

Daily Norseman

by KJSegall on Dec 13, 2011 12:41 PM CST up reply actions

I thought he has 2 more years on his contract…

by michiganpat on Dec 13, 2011 1:29 PM CST up reply actions

This means

Next year we have:

CB1: Winfield
CB2: Rookie/free agent/Cook
Nickel: Cook/Sapp
Dime: Sapp/Allen

I think that would be okay.

by amiller92 on Dec 13, 2011 1:48 PM CST up reply actions

I think he should be the nickel since....

next year will be his last.

If Cleveland wanted to trade us thier two first round picks (possibly the 7 and 17), for our #2 or #3; then I could see us drafting:

7-Kirkpatrick or Claiborne
17- Reiff or Smith
2-1- Toon, McNutt or Floyd (depending on who is available)

I would feel much better about giving our new DB starting (and primary) CB2 reps, with Winfield providing a safety valve and veteran leadership in what will assuredly be his last year. The only problem I see outside of my draft scenario (trade), is the likelihood of injury for Winny.

We will see….

I will not be PONDERing anything, ever again....I'm so tired of this pun. Maybe we could use antonyms to be different, like: "FORGET about last season, as we COGITATE about winning in 2011!"...Whatever, SKOL VIKES!!!

by J.RO on Dec 13, 2011 2:53 PM CST up reply actions

Not Reiff and Smith...

Reiff and Martin. Brainfart.

I kind of doubt that either will be there at 17, but this draft will be QB heavy like last year. QB’s going early tends to throw the BPA theory out of wack, and very good players fall. I can see O-Lineman suffering in this draft with the lack of quality CB’s and Safeties and the abundance of quality QB’s and WR’s.

by J.RO on Dec 13, 2011 3:10 PM CST up reply actions

Reiff and Martin?

Ohhhh…. That would be sweet. Pardon me, I have to go to the bathroom for fifteen minutes.

by jimbo55403 on Dec 13, 2011 4:14 PM CST up reply actions

I guess it's a little strange

To debate where he should be in a hypothetical depth chart where the other members are undefined.

But he should be where his abilities rank him whether it’s his last year or not. My guess is his abilities will still rank him as #1, and if that’s right, he should be the number one corner.

by amiller92 on Dec 13, 2011 5:10 PM CST up reply actions

My 2 cents!

I don’t think it would be wise for the Vikings to “Depend” on Winfield being the primary #1 or #2.
In the last 2yrs Winfield has missed way too many games.
Winfields role will need to be minimized, but his experience and leadership will be needed when they play against an explosive offense….making him worth that extra money spent.

FA that is ready to go.
Cook
Winfield
I’m not sure on contracts but cut the fat :)
Rookie

by chaosg on Dec 13, 2011 2:53 PM CST up reply actions

We need him back

Even if he does lose a step next year, he’s still two full steps better than anything else we’re trotting out in the secondary right now. We need Winfield back and lots of other outside help to shore up what’s easily one of the worst units in the league.

Proud contributor to Daily Norseman and SB Nation Minnesota.
Follow @eric_j_thompson

by Eric J. Thompson on Dec 13, 2011 12:55 PM CST reply actions

I have a feeling we'll be seeing Cook again next year too.

Unless Cook is found guilty and his jail time actually interferes with the NFL scheduling, I think he will remain in purple. I don’t think the FO will release Cook or accept a trade, unless that trade is respectable to the 32nd overall pick.

I know all this Cook talk is a bit off topic, but if the Vikes can manage to keep both Winfield and Cook next year, and snatch a decent FA or two ! …The Vikings D-sec could drastically improve next year.

by chaosg on Dec 13, 2011 1:22 PM CST reply actions

I think that's right

I suspect that Cook will get his legal situation resolved before training camp and will be back.

by amiller92 on Dec 13, 2011 1:51 PM CST up reply actions

If Cook is NOT found guilty...

Then his lawyer should be all of our lawyer.

Even so, I’d boot his wife-beating ass off the team. Men that beat women don’t tend to stop. In fact, the problem tends to get worse, until they kill somebody.

by jimbo55403 on Dec 13, 2011 4:17 PM CST up reply actions

Then KWill wouldn't be here either!

Until the NFL changes it’s policy on Domestic Violence, players like Cook and K. Williams will be allowed to play in the NFL.

Point is: If they’re going to allow some people a 2nd chance, then they have to allow everybody a 2nd chance!

by chaosg on Dec 13, 2011 5:25 PM CST up reply actions

This is good news

This means that one piece of the rebuilding puzzle doesn’t need to be addressed this off season. That’s one less d-back that needs to be added, and that helps a lot.

I’m not sure his time needs be limited to avoid injury, though, especially as the problem with injuries (for the team) is that he can’t play. Not having him play so he doesn’t get hurt sounds like shooting yourself in the foot.

by amiller92 on Dec 13, 2011 1:47 PM CST reply actions

Also

It’s not like he had a concussion or tweaked a vertebrae or anything. You typically don’t see consecutive collar bone injuries. As long as he keeps up with his conditioning once he’s healthy, he should be good to go for next season.

by Amrius on Dec 13, 2011 4:13 PM CST via mobile up reply actions

Secondary

I dont know about Winfield even as a nickle back at 3 mil that seems a bit expensive. I would only keep Winfield if Cook was traded or cut. Otherwise I would sign Carlos Rogers or Brandon Carr. Then in the second round draft Stephon Gilmore. I like the line up of Rogers/Carr and Cook as the starters then have gilmore play nickle back and back up Cook or and have him back up at safety. Sign Laron Landry at strong safety and then draft George IIoka for free safety and have Mistral Raymond back up at either safety spot and also be the dime back. Raymond has potential and he did play some corner in college.

by Viking King on Dec 13, 2011 2:02 PM CST reply actions

this point says it all

With the complete overhaul the secondary is likely going to get, it would be nice to have one solid, productive veteran leader back there that people can look towards to solidify things.

couldn’t agree more — cutting ties with Winfield simply b/c of age is illogical, IMHO.

"Th_r_'s n_ h_p_ f_r _ssh_l_ f_ckw_ts."

Can I buy a vowel...?? +1, Kluwe.

by rj-b on Dec 13, 2011 2:03 PM CST reply actions

yup

by amiller92 on Dec 13, 2011 3:00 PM CST up reply actions

Winfield to SS

Antoine Winfield is a good enough tackler to make it at strong safety, despite being small. We should acknowledge that the defensive secondary is going to be a patchwork job for next year, so we will likely see an influx of draft picks, free agents and trades. Hard to imagine it will be worse than this year, but it may be only a few ticks better. That said, Winfield would shore up the defensive backfield with a guy that really knows the game back there, keeping big plays from turning into touchdowns.

by jimbo55403 on Dec 13, 2011 4:25 PM CST reply actions

I would only keep him if I could not sign a free agent or two

The simple fact is he is not as good as some of the free agents that are going to be available and they are much much younger. Considering the track record of the front office in drafting DBs, I am more inclined to want to get a couple of CBs (or just one if Cook stays).

I would take Brandon Carr, Cortland Finnegan, Tracy Porter, Richard Marshall, and maybe Terrell Thomas or Brent Grimes over Winfield easily. This is for the long term future of the team.

If they cannot sign any free agents then they will keep Winfield. I will go on record and say that I expect his play to decline more and that he probably will get hurt again.

by MarkSP18 on Dec 13, 2011 4:29 PM CST reply actions

I will say it again

I don’t see how you get better by getting rid of the capable players you have and making more holes you have to fill. Especially where you would be cutting instead of trading a guy. This isn’t fantasy football.

Other people are going to be interested in those potential free agents, so why would want to put yourself in a position where you MUST sign two of them or be stuck with thee dregs of the league (again)?

by amiller92 on Dec 13, 2011 5:14 PM CST up reply actions

+1

"Th_r_'s n_ h_p_ f_r _ssh_l_ f_ckw_ts."

Can I buy a vowel...?? +1, Kluwe.

by rj-b on Dec 13, 2011 6:10 PM CST up reply actions

I do not know how to explain it easier for you amiller92

I said IF they sign a CB or two THEN they can and should release Winfield. At least that is what I would do.

They do not have to do anything with Winfield until they sign someone. If they do not then I guess he stays.

I do not know how else to explain it to you besides saying they do not release Winfield first. They sign free agents first.

by MarkSP18 on Dec 13, 2011 6:53 PM CST up reply actions

I'd be interested in seeing how big of a cap penalty there'd be for cutting Winfield.

I’m all for signing FAs that are upgrades but Winfield could be well worth 3 million in a reduced role with a FA and possibly Cook starting ahead of him. Just for example let’s say cutting Winfield saves his 3 million dollar salary but results in a cap penalty of a million dollars. For the sake of saving a net of 2 million we lose a quality nickel corner and I don’t think that’s a big enough savings to justify releasing him. This is just a rough example as I don’t have a clue how much of Winfield’s contract is guaranteed with all of the performance clauses in it but cap penalties should be factored into this decision as well as his salary.

by CanadianViking on Dec 13, 2011 5:59 PM CST up reply actions

There is no cap hit for releasing Winfield because they converted his entire 16 mil signing bonus into his first year salary

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/minnesota-vikings/antoine-winfield/

The problem is that there is a fear of letting go of an old player who is going to decline and has been hurt two out of the last three years.

Maybe he can have one more good year? Maybe he gets hurt again?

by MarkSP18 on Dec 13, 2011 7:00 PM CST up reply actions

Thanks for the link. Do those misc. $280,000 bonuses from 2011-13 not count if he's released though?

It’s still less than 1 million in penalties if they do count which isn’t a big deal but I’m just curious. I don’t have any problem cutting him but to justify it I think we need to have 3 CBs that are better than him before that move should be made. If we got 2 FA upgrades as you suggested and Cook can play for us next season than it’s a no brainer to cut him but that’s a lot of iffs at the moment.

by CanadianViking on Dec 13, 2011 7:58 PM CST up reply actions

I think all unpaid bonuses count but I am not sure or worried too much about it

The simple fact is that if the Vikings do NOT replace Winfield this year with a top FA then they most likely will have to decide next year if they want to keep a 36 year old CB for the 2013 season. And then will there be any worthwhile free agents in 2013?

This is my point. The free agents are out there to TRY and sign. I realize that many teams will be going after these players and that the Vikings will NOT be at the top of many players lists of places to go play. That is why I think they will have to overpay. But I can live with that as long as the contract is structured so that if they cut one of the FAs three or four years later they will not take a cap hit.

If they do not sign any free agents then so be it. I am only saying what I would want to do. Some think it is Madden or something like that. I do not know since I have never played a video game EVER. This is real and the Vikings should at least TRY to sign free agents like they did with Eric Weddle and Otogwe this past year.

by MarkSP18 on Dec 14, 2011 11:22 AM CST up reply actions

Keep him for cheap.....

but not as a starting corner. Unfortunately, he is lumped in with one of the worst secondaries in team history. Yes, he is, pound for pound the best tackler in the game, but, what has that meant in the big picture? Not much. The Vikings need ball hawks in the backfield, who will hit and make receivers think twice about roaming freely.
Oh, and the team needs to handle this as if Cook won’t be back as well.