Why did we overpay so much for Brooks? And where does that leave us now?

Originally posted by Marvin49:
And it's likely that Spencer and Harlason will be cone giving us them roughly 6 mil more.

Anyone still freaking our about Brooks? I was fine with the way the deal was reported before, I'm even happier now.

I'm not so sure we get rid of Haralson. For sure if we lost Brooks we would need him as a 2 down guy and then a rookie pass rusher for passing downs. Now that we have him he is a bit less needed but we have no depth at that position and if we keep only 3 OLBs do you really want one of them to be a rookie? If (no jinx) Aldon or Brooks get hurt I'm not sure I want a mid to late round guy coming in. So even though I expect Aldon and Brooks to be every down players and play almost all the snaps of the season baring injury I'm not sure I want to cut Haralson to save a measly 2.2 (?) million.

As you wish.

Originally posted by defenderDX:
We didn't over pay him.

http://blogs.nfl.com/2012/03/01/brooks-six-year-deal-with-49ers-heavy-with-incentives/

It's loaded with incentives.

Interesting. Different info than what Maiocco has. This always happens, two different sources. His numbers(lacanfora) add up to Maicco's 2.85M cap figure, Maiocco says 50K per game roster bonus, which would be 800K, compared to 500K and 100k workout from lacanfora.