Sean Rhyan missed out on $2 mil bonus by 3 snaps

[Sunshinepacker]

Article in CBA states that any player drafted in rounds 3-7 that "participated in a minimum of 35% of his Club's offensive or defensive plays in any two of his first three regular season or participated in a 'cumulative average' of at least 35% of his Club's offensive or defensive plays over his first three regular seasons" qualifies for the proven performance escalator. His cumulative average snap count over his past three seasons fell 3 snaps short of 35% and so he misses out on a raise of $2,042,429. Is he a great player? No. Does losing out on $2mil suck because of 3 snaps, absolutely. I just wish someone in the front office or the coaching staff would pay attention to things like this to help out the players. He played in 34.952% of the offensive snaps and some contracts include language that allows players to round up to hit the 35%, apparently the Packers don't.

 

[Firethorn1001]

Just a fluke of numbers. He played 100% of the offensive snaps the last 4 games so, as an offensive lineman not like they could have generated more snaps for him unless they had the ball more so, not like they pulled him.

Also, the Packers can't just say ah well, here is 2M close enough because it is in the CBA so teams can't just give money without it being in the contract or he needs a new contract. Guess you could bash them for not rounding up, but then you could just have a case of someone at 34.493 or something..

 

[OldSchool101]

Just a fluke of numbers. He played 100% of the offensive snaps the last 4 games so, as an offensive lineman not like they could have generated more snaps for him unless they had the ball more so, not like they pulled him.

Also, the Packers can't just say ah well, here is 2M close enough because it is in the CBA so teams can't just give money without it being in the contract or he needs a new contract. Guess you could bash them for not rounding up, but then you could just have a case of someone at 34.493 or something..

Yep. Or have a clause if you’re splitting hairs (rounding would get you to the threshold etc) you split the bonus.

 

[Pkrjones]

Rhyan's offensive & ST snaps by year:
'22 0 offense, 1 ST
'23 183 offense, 13 ST
'24 963 offense, 85 ST

Plenty of opportunity, just didn't show enough early to help his cause. No reason why a game day active OL can't shine on ST early in career to give starters a rest. Monk, Glover, & Telfort did so in '24... got themselves onto the field on ST.

 

[OldSchool101]

Rhyan's offensive & ST snaps by year:
'22 0 offense, 1 ST
'23 183 offense, 13 ST
'24 963 offense, 85 ST

Plenty of opportunity, just didn't show enough early to help his cause. No reason why a game day active OL can't shine on ST early in career to give starters a rest. Monk, Glover, & Telfort did so in '24... got themselves onto the field on ST.

So here’s a 3rd Rounder who across 2 seasons averaged a total of 100 snaps in all phases? That’s really bad contractually.
Looks like he’s making up ground though also. Had a productive 3rd season. Would’ve liked to see that more Year 2

 

[tynimiller]

Had Morgan stayed healthy he would have missed it by A LOT

 

[Schultz]

Why I do not feel bad for Rhyan.
1. If he played 100% of the snaps in the meaningless week 18 Bear game that tells me they were trying to get him the bonus. Going by an earlier post. Did not confirm.
2. 0 snaps as a rookie may have been a result of his suspension. Going from memory.

 

[Firethorn1001]

1. If he played 100% of the snaps in the meaningless week 18 Bear game that tells me they were trying to get him the bonus. Going by an earlier post. Did not confirm.

I had referred to https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/R/RhyaSe00/gamelog/2024/

 

[Thirteen Below]

No reason why a game day active OL can't shine on ST early in career to give starters a rest. Monk, Glover, & Telfort did so in '24... got themselves onto the field on ST.

That's actually one thing that kind of concerned me about Monk last year. For a guy who the staff was supposedly so high on in the preseason, he really didn't get a lot snaps on teams - fewer than 10%. He had 43 snaps over 10 games, and 65% of them were in September.

He played in all 4 September games, then sat out 7 of the remaining 13. It just doesn't seem me like a promising trajectory.

 

[El Guapo]

You're probably right, but sometimes these guys get whipsawed in their rookie seasons and then figure it out for Year 2.

 

[gopkrs]

Honestly. I think when coaches say they are very high...you should take them at their word.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Just a fluke of numbers. He played 100% of the offensive snaps the last 4 games so, as an offensive lineman not like they could have generated more snaps for him unless they had the ball more so, not like they pulled him.

Also, the Packers can't just say ah well, here is 2M close enough because it is in the CBA so teams can't just give money without it being in the contract or he needs a new contract. Guess you could bash them for not rounding up, but then you could just have a case of someone at 34.493 or something..

Some teams put language in the player’s contract allowing them to round up for purposes of counting performance bonuses. So, yes, there is a way the packers could say “close enough”, they just chose not to.

 

[Firethorn1001]

So, yes, there is a way the packers could say “close enough”, they just chose not to.

Yes. In the actual contract they can say close enough. They can't now outside of the contract.

Regardless of whatever 'close enough' they put in the contract there can always be this situation.

What I stated, but you didn't read that.

 

[PikeBadger]

Article in CBA states that any player drafted in rounds 3-7 that "participated in a minimum of 35% of his Club's offensive or defensive plays in any two of his first three regular season or participated in a 'cumulative average' of at least 35% of his Club's offensive or defensive plays over his first three regular seasons" qualifies for the proven performance escalator. His cumulative average snap count over his past three seasons fell 3 snaps short of 35% and so he misses out on a raise of $2,042,429. Is he a great player? No. Does losing out on $2mil suck because of 3 snaps, absolutely. I just wish someone in the front office or the coaching staff would pay attention to things like this to help out the players. He played in 34.952% of the offensive snaps and some contracts include language that allows players to round up to hit the 35%, apparently the Packers don't.

Imo, This falls into the category of ........... Tango Sierra. Everyone in both the front office and on the coaching staff should be concerned with maximizing player improvement and winning more games. Period. End.

 

[PackerDNA]

It is what it is that's the contract. But on the flip side I think such a thing could be bad for morale and is a bad perception.