When the Packers signed McKinney in March 2024, they weren’t simply buying interceptions. They needed a defender who could keep Jeff Hafley’s secondary organized when coverage assignments shifted, particularly against quarterbacks capable of identifying defensive looks before the snap.
His first game provided an immediate return. Against Philadelphia in São Paulo, McKinney undercut a deep throw from Jalen Hurts and intercepted the ball, giving Green Bay possession at the Eagles’ 19-yard line. The Packers converted the takeaway into an early field goal, but the interception revealed only part of what they had purchased.
A safety must recognize formations, communicate adjustments and react when receivers attack different levels of the field. One missed rotation can leave a cornerback stranded against a vertical route, turning a complicated defensive call into a touchdown.
McKinney eventually collected eight interceptions during the 2024 season and earned first-team All-Pro honors. Yet his greatest value extended beyond those takeaways. Green Bay had acquired a defender who could protect the back end while giving Hafley greater freedom to disguise coverage.
NFL front offices now face a difficult financial calculation: how much should they pay a safety whose best work might never appear in the box score?
Split-safety coverage has changed what NFL teams expect from the position
The traditional distinction between free safety and strong safety once offered scouts a relatively straightforward evaluation framework. One defender protected the deep middle, while his partner operated closer to the formation, challenged tight ends and attacked running backs entering the second level.
Modern offenses have made those assignments harder to separate. Quarterbacks recognize static coverage shells quickly, and offensive coordinators use motion, condensed formations and route combinations to expose defensive responsibilities before the snap. Consequently, coordinators increasingly disguise their intentions until the quarterback begins his drop.
NFL Next Gen Stats reported in February 2026 that defenses used split-safety coverage on 42.0% of pass plays in 2025, compared with 32.9% in 2018. Every NFL defense exceeded 30% split-safety usage during the 2025 season, reflecting a significant change in how teams protect against explosive passes. NFL
Those figures represent more than a preference for placing two defenders deep. In Cover 4, commonly called quarters, safeties and cornerbacks divide the deep field into four zones. Pattern-matching rules can turn those assignments into man-like coverage once receivers release into their routes. Cover 6 combines Cover 2 principles on one side with quarters on the other, forcing defenders to recognize different coverage responsibilities across the formation.
Consider a receiver breaking toward the flat while another pushes vertically. Under certain Palms coverage rules, the cornerback attacks the underneath route while the safety handles the deeper threat. If either defender hesitates, the quarterback finds an opening before the pass rush can arrive.
Those responsibilities demand different skills. A safety must understand coverage leverage, recognize route combinations and communicate adjustments without sacrificing the toughness required to tackle when offenses run directly at him. Defenses increasingly need players who can handle that workload without forcing coaches to substitute whenever an offense changes personnel.
The challenge isn’t simply finding someone capable of playing several positions. It’s identifying defenders who can execute multiple assignments against NFL speed while preserving the disguise that makes the coverage effective.
That distinction explains why defensive scheme changes are influencing free agent safety valuations. Teams may pay substantially different prices for productive players because their responsibilities, and the risks associated with them, vary so widely.
McKinney and Bynum reveal the financial value of coverage intelligence
Green Bay’s pursuit of McKinney began with a coaching change. Hafley replaced Joe Barry as defensive coordinator in January 2024, and the Packers needed dependable communication alongside greater flexibility across their secondary.
They weren’t guessing about McKinney’s experience. According to Green Bay’s March 2024 signing analysis, Pro Football Focus tracked his 2023 alignments with the Giants as 46% deep safety, 38% in the box and 16% in the slot. PFF also awarded him a 91.2 coverage grade that season, the highest among qualifying NFL safeties. Packers+1
Those figures matched what general manager Brian Gutekunst wanted. Before free agency, he had discussed acquiring interchangeable defenders capable of handling deep safety, box and slot responsibilities. McKinney offered experience in all three, although Hafley didn’t need to move him constantly to benefit from that versatility.
His range made him especially valuable deep, where he could read developing routes and protect cornerbacks against vertical threats. Meanwhile, his experience closer to the formation gave Green Bay options when offenses changed personnel or attacked the middle of the field.
The investment delivered immediate results. McKinney intercepted a pass in each of his first five appearances with the Packers, becoming the first NFL player since the 1970 merger to accomplish that feat with a new team. He finished 2024 with eight interceptions and eleven passes defended, strengthening the case for a signing that had initially attracted considerable attention.
Green Bay had purchased reliability at one of the defense’s most demanding positions. With McKinney protecting the back end, Hafley could rotate other defenders into aggressive assignments without consistently exposing the deep middle.
Green Bay found its answer in McKinney’s range and coverage discipline. Indianapolis faced a similar problem the following offseason, but Lou Anarumo needed a safety who could recognize offensive looks and keep the entire secondary on the same page.
Camryn Bynum gave Indianapolis an organizer, not merely another playmaker
The Colts signed Camryn Bynum to a four-year, $60 million contract in March 2025, acquiring an experienced defender familiar with complicated coverage systems. Bynum had spent four seasons in Minnesota, where Brian Flores relied on disguised coverage and aggressive pressure packages.
His value came from recognizing offensive formations, understanding route combinations and communicating adjustments before the quarterback received the snap. Those abilities mattered to Indianapolis because Anarumo’s system depended on defenders interpreting offensive movement without surrendering their assigned leverage.
One of Bynum’s clearest examples of defensive intelligence came during Minnesota’s 22-17 victory over San Francisco in October 2023. He intercepted Brock Purdy twice in the fourth quarter, including a takeaway that followed a correction he had made after recognizing an earlier offensive formation.
According to the Vikings’ official account, Bynum had initially aligned too far from Brandon Aiyuk’s side when San Francisco ran a particular concept. When the 49ers returned to the same look, he adjusted his positioning, anticipated the passing combination and moved into the throwing lane before Jauan Jennings could reach the ball. Minnesota Vikings
That recognition appealed to Indianapolis, although his responsibilities continued changing after he arrived. The Colts initially assigned Bynum the defensive green-dot communication role in 2026, making him responsible for relaying Anarumo’s calls. After communication problems in the season opener, Indianapolis shifted those duties to linebacker Akeem Davis-Gaither for Week 2.
The adjustment illustrated how difficult the position had become. Bynum understood the coverage, but relaying calls from deep in the secondary left him less time to organize his own responsibilities. Moving the headset closer to the line allowed him to concentrate on communicating with defensive backs rather than managing the entire huddle. Indianapolis Colts
The Colts’ decision didn’t diminish his coverage intelligence. Instead, it exposed the practical limits of asking one defender to handle too many responsibilities at once.
McKinney and Bynum represented related investments with different applications. Green Bay valued exceptional range and alignment versatility, while Indianapolis paid for recognition and experience within aggressive coverage systems.
McKinney and Bynum helped their defenses eliminate confusion before the snap. Carolina wanted to create that same confusion for opposing quarterbacks, using Tre’von Moehrig as a threat from nearly every alignment.
Carolina’s Tre’von Moehrig deal shows why hybrid safeties command premium money
Carolina entered the 2025 free-agent market with a different defensive requirement. Ejiro Evero wanted a safety who could attack the formation rather than spend every possession protecting the deep middle.
The Panthers signed Tre’von Moehrig to a three-year, $51 million contract, making him one of the league’s better-paid safeties. His salary reflected a role built around physical disruption and positional flexibility rather than traditional deep coverage alone.
Moehrig could align near the line of scrimmage, cover the slot, rush the passer or retreat into deep coverage. His ability to handle those assignments allowed Carolina to disguise pressure without constantly changing personnel. An offense could see the same defensive grouping on consecutive snaps and still face entirely different coverage and pressure combinations.
That freedom became obvious during the 2025 season. According to Carolina’s December team analysis, Moehrig was one of eleven NFL defenders to record at least 50 snaps in four alignment categories: defensive line, linebacker, slot cornerback and safety.
He also recorded twelve tackles for loss, leading NFL defensive backs at that point. His production included twelve quarterback pressures, two sacks and 28 run stops, illustrating how often Carolina deployed him near the action. Carolina Panthers
Those aren’t typical deep-safety numbers. On one snap, Moehrig might challenge a tight end near the formation. On the next, he could rush off the edge while another defensive back replaced him in coverage. A running back preparing to bounce outside could find Moehrig attacking downhill before the blocking developed.
The flexibility also affected quarterbacks. A defender who appears responsible for the slot can suddenly become an extra rusher, forcing the offensive line to account for pressure it didn’t anticipate.
Evero valued that uncertainty because it reduced the offense’s ability to identify coverage through personnel and alignment alone. Instead of announcing a blitz package with a substitution, Carolina could change the defensive call while keeping the same eleven players on the field.
The Panthers had effectively purchased a defender capable of performing some linebacker and nickel responsibilities without surrendering his instincts as a safety.
McKinney’s value came largely from protecting Green Bay’s coverage structure. Moehrig earned comparable money by attacking offenses from within Carolina’s scheme.
Their contracts illustrate how defensive scheme changes have created different routes to premium compensation. A safety no longer needs one universal profile to command a substantial deal. He needs skills that materially expand what his defensive coordinator can call.
Moehrig proved how valuable a safety could become near the line of scrimmage. In Seattle, Mike Macdonald demonstrated the other side of that versatility, building a championship secondary around disciplined rotations and interchangeable coverage responsibilities.
Coby Bryant and Nick Cross expose the widening gap in safety valuations
Mike Macdonald’s Seahawks relied on disciplined coverage rotations throughout their Super Bowl LX championship run. Seattle used split-safety concepts extensively, asking defenders to exchange assignments without surrendering deep passing lanes.
NFL Next Gen Stats found that the Seahawks deployed split-safety coverage on 54.8% of pass plays from Week 14 of 2025 through the Super Bowl, following Julian Love’s return from injured reserve. The scheme allowed Seattle to protect against deep routes while forcing quarterbacks to identify which defender controlled each passing lane.
Coby Bryant became a valuable part of that structure after moving from cornerback to safety. Although he initially resisted the position change, the move expanded his responsibilities and strengthened his market appeal.
Bryant worked primarily at free safety while occasionally handling assignments closer to the formation. During the 2025 regular season, he recorded four interceptions and seven passes defended across fifteen starts, giving prospective employers evidence of his development within Macdonald’s system.
Chicago responded in March 2026 with a three-year, $40 million contract. Defensive coordinator Dennis Allen, hired by the Bears in January 2025, wanted physical defenders capable of handling different coverage responsibilities without restricting the playbook. Over The Cap
Bryant’s experience suited that approach, and Chicago reinforced its investment by selecting Dillon Thieneman in the first round of the 2026 NFL Draft. Together, the additions pointed toward a secondary with greater flexibility between deep coverage and box assignments.
However, Bryant’s contract quickly exposed the risk attached to expensive projections. He suffered a knee injury during training camp in August 2026 and underwent surgery, prompting coach Ben Johnson to announce a four-to-six-month recovery timeline.
The injury threatened to sideline Bryant for most of his first season with Chicago, delaying the defensive flexibility the Bears had purchased. His absence also forced Allen to adjust assignments without the veteran expected to stabilize the secondary. chicagobears.com
Bryant’s injury doesn’t erase his Seattle production, but it illustrates why schematic fit and financial return aren’t always the same thing. A team can identify the right player for its system and still struggle to receive the expected value.
Washington took a less expensive approach to the position during the same offseason.
The Commanders signed Nick Cross to a two-year, $13 million contract, averaging $6.5 million annually. Cross arrived after four seasons with Indianapolis, including consecutive years as a full-time starter.
His production against the run was particularly impressive. NFL Next Gen Stats credited him with 33 run stops resulting in an unsuccessful offensive play during 2025, tied for the league lead among safeties.
Washington highlighted that figure when announcing his signing, alongside Cross’s 2.5 sacks and six quarterback hits. Washington Commanders
The run-stop metric identifies plays where the defense prevents the offense from achieving a successful rushing result. It captures a form of disruption that ordinary tackle totals can obscure, particularly when a defender repeatedly forces difficult down-and-distance situations.
Cross supplied that physical resistance, yet his contract averaged less than half Bryant’s annual salary.
The difference doesn’t establish which player is more talented. Contract length, negotiating leverage and demand for particular coverage skills all influence the market. What the comparison reveals is how differently teams can price proven production when they envision different defensive assignments.
Cross and Bynum had even shared Indianapolis’ secondary during the 2025 season. The Colts paid Bynum a premium for his coverage intelligence, while Cross secured a smaller commitment after leaving the following offseason.
Two productive safeties from the same defensive system occupied different financial tiers. Their contracts reflected different team needs, projected responsibilities and negotiating circumstances rather than a simple ranking of talent.
The real financial risk lies in paying for the wrong responsibilities
The contracts signed by McKinney, Bynum, Moehrig, Bryant and Cross reveal how much the safety market depends on defensive fit.
Carolina invested heavily in Moehrig’s ability to handle multiple assignments near the formation, while Indianapolis prioritized Bynum’s recognition and coverage communication. Chicago paid for Bryant’s versatility, and Washington acquired Cross through a shorter agreement that addressed its need for stronger run defense.
Those decisions reflect different approaches to the same problem. General managers must determine which defensive responsibilities deserve a premium and how much risk they can afford to accept when signing a player from another system.
Large commitments also affect spending elsewhere. A franchise that invests heavily at safety has fewer resources available for cornerbacks, edge rushers and defensive-line depth, particularly when guaranteed salaries create future cap obligations.
However, the right safety can improve those teammates’ performance. Reliable deep coverage gives pass rushers another moment to reach the quarterback, while a hybrid defender can eliminate the need for frequent substitutions against changing offensive formations.
The opposite can happen when a player struggles with unfamiliar responsibilities. A safety who thrived in one coverage structure may lose effectiveness if his new coordinator repeatedly asks him to handle different routes, angles or run fits.
That possibility makes film evaluation particularly important. Front offices cannot simply identify productive free agents and assume their performance will transfer into another system.
The most expensive mistake isn’t necessarily overpaying for talent. It’s paying for responsibilities that the new defense rarely asks a player to perform.
Why the most valuable safety plays rarely appear in traditional statistics
Interceptions remain the easiest way to recognize an outstanding defensive back. A safety jumps a route, catches the ball and sends the stadium into a roar, leaving a highlight that circulates long after the game ends.
Some of the position’s most valuable work, however, produces no statistical reward.
Consider a quarterback facing third-and-eight against disguised coverage. Before the snap, the defense presents two high safeties, suggesting the quarterback may find room underneath if his receivers occupy the deeper zones.
After the ball moves, one safety rotates toward the middle into a robber position beneath a crossing route. His partner protects the deep post while the outside cornerback maintains leverage against a vertical threat.
The quarterback expects an opening, but the rotation closes it before he can release the pass. He holds the football for another beat, allowing the pass rush to force a hurried checkdown short of the first-down marker.
The safety who made the correct adjustment may finish without a tackle, interception or pass defended. His coverage responsibility still helped force the punt, even though traditional statistics offer little evidence of the contribution.
That distinction complicates scouting. One defender might collect interceptions because quarterbacks repeatedly challenge his zone, while another discourages throws through consistently sound positioning.
The same problem appears in run defense. A box safety operating behind dominant defensive tackles may enjoy cleaner paths to the ball, while another spends the afternoon fighting through pulling guards and tight ends before reaching the runner.
Film study must separate individual decisions from the opportunities created by teammates. A strong pass rush can make coverage look better by forcing early throws, while weak cornerback play can leave a safety managing difficult assignments throughout the game.
Those differences matter when projecting production into another system. McKinney’s range suited Green Bay’s coverage needs, while Bynum’s recognition appealed to Indianapolis. Moehrig supplied Carolina with physical versatility, Bryant brought Chicago championship experience and Cross offered Washington proven disruption against the run.
Each franchise paid for a particular projection rather than a universal measure of safety talent.
The next NFL safety market will reward fit over reputation
Defensive scheme changes have created a more complicated financial market, but they haven’t eliminated traditional safety responsibilities.
Players still need speed, tackling ability and the toughness to challenge receivers over the middle. A defender who repeatedly misses assignments or struggles in open-field tackling can undermine even the most creative coverage design.
However, versatility now carries greater weight because coordinators have more ways to use it. Split-safety systems demand communication and disciplined route recognition, while aggressive defenses increasingly require safeties who can blitz, cover the slot and support the run.
The contracts examined here reveal how those priorities influence valuations. Green Bay and Indianapolis invested heavily in coverage intelligence, while Carolina prioritized Moehrig’s ability to disrupt offenses from multiple alignments.
Seattle’s championship defense helped Bryant convert a position change into a substantial second contract. Chicago subsequently accepted the financial risk of acquiring those skills, even though his knee injury delayed their availability.
Cross demonstrated the market’s other side. A defender can produce impressive numbers against the run without securing the same financial commitment as a player whose coverage responsibilities attract stronger demand.
These weren’t isolated personnel decisions. Together, they reveal a league trying to assign dollar values to assignments that differ dramatically between defensive systems.
The next free-agent class will force front offices to make similar choices. Some general managers will pursue interchangeable defensive backs who can handle nearly every responsibility, while others will prefer specialists who execute narrower roles exceptionally well.
Neither approach guarantees success. The strongest teams will identify what their coordinators actually need and resist paying premium money for abilities they rarely intend to use.
That’s why defensive scheme changes will continue influencing free agent safety valuations without necessarily pushing every contract higher.
The next expensive signing might arrive with an impressive interception highlight reel. Another defender could justify his contract by repeatedly preventing quarterbacks from finding an open receiver.
On a crucial third down, the difference becomes visible. A safety recognizes the formation, adjusts his leverage and closes a passing lane before the quarterback can exploit it.
The throw never comes, and the offense punts. His name barely appears in the game summary, but the defensive coordinator knows exactly what happened.
For the general manager watching from above the field, the financial question remains: Is the franchise paying for the plays a safety makes, or for the mistakes his presence prevents?
READ MORE: Why veteran running backs struggle to secure multi-year free agent deals
FAQs
Why are defensive scheme changes affecting NFL safety contracts?
Teams value safeties who can disguise coverage, communicate adjustments and handle multiple assignments. Those skills give defensive coordinators more freedom without exposing weaknesses.
What is split-safety coverage in the NFL?
Split-safety coverage places two defenders in deep coverage roles. Teams use it to limit big passing plays and make quarterbacks work harder to identify coverage.
Why did the Packers invest heavily in Xavier McKinney?
Green Bay valued McKinney’s range, coverage intelligence and versatility. His eight interceptions in 2024 reinforced the value of that investment.
Why are versatile NFL safeties valuable in free agency?
Versatile safeties can cover deep, defend the slot and support the run. They help coordinators change assignments without constantly substituting players.
Do interceptions determine how much an NFL safety earns?
No. Teams also evaluate coverage discipline, communication, tackling and scheme fit. A safety can prevent big plays without recording an interception.
