You are currently viewing the old forums. We have upgraded to a new NFL Forum.
This old forum is being left as a read-only archive.
Please update your bookmarks to our new forum at forums.footballsfuture.com.


 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Greg Jennings discusses contract
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
jmoney


Joined: 18 Oct 2006
Posts: 1751
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 10:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If the have roughly 11 million in cap this upcoming offseason, and that doesn't include Donald Driver, who is very likely in his final year with the Pack.

I see only one way that everyone can be kept. Jennings is given a new deal, frontloaded in year one. He also has to give a slight hometown discount, but he will still be making very good money.

2013 expirees- finley, raji, matthews

2014 expirees- Rodgers, Bulaga, williams, Newhouse, Saturday, pickett, burnett

Now, if Jennings is front loaded, and Driver is not resigned, the team could still have around 10 million in cap space for the 2013 guys.

The first thing I would do is go to Aaron Rodgers, and try to work out a hometown discount with him that will pay him handsomely, but not quite what he's worth.

After that, go to AJ Hawk, Charles Woodson, and Ryan Pickett. Ask all three about taking pay cuts that will help keep the core of the franchise together to lengthen out their run.

Give Raji and Matthews their new deals, again hopefully with a slight hometown discount.

The key is, there has to be enough money left to franchise Finley. Once they tag him, they can either try to work out a trade or a long term deal, but if he wants to be paid like the top TE in all of football, then he's probably gonna get dealt/walk after a season.

If the team can draft good replacements for Williams, Pickett and Saturday, then those three will likely be gone. IMO. Burnett, Bulaga, and Newhouse will be given extensions. If Sherrod emerges, then Newhouse is probably gone as well, since he can start at LT in this league.

Is cutting AJ Hawk a good money saving option at any point in the next two years of his deal?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MNPackfan32


Joined: 22 Sep 2010
Posts: 10197
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 11:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

jmoney wrote:

If the team can draft good replacements for Williams, Pickett and Saturday, then those three will likely be gone. IMO. Burnett, Bulaga, and Newhouse will be given extensions. If Sherrod emerges, then Newhouse is probably gone as well, since he can start at LT in this league.

Is cutting AJ Hawk a good money saving option at any point in the next two years of his deal?
Tramon? We have an option for the 2015 season on his contract IIRC. Seems a lot farther down the road than I am looking. If Sherrod takes over at LT, that meens that Newhouse blew his oppertunity, I doubt anybody would shell out big cash for a guy who failed in GB, but he would be a nice bench option. And I am not in favor of cutting Hawk anytime soon.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
HokieHigh


Joined: 18 Aug 2009
Posts: 2114
Location: Blacksburg
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 11:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

In the end we aren't going to be able to keep everyone absent a lot of hometown discounts. A-rod is the only person that I think should give one, but I wouldn't be upset if he took us to the cleaners like Brees did. Gotta get paid!

At the end of the day TT overdrafted red and blue chip players and you just can't afford to have this many of them on your team. Some are going to walk.

To me, Jennings is the most replaceable. I believe him replacement is already on our roster. J. Boykin.


I agree with you that Pickett and Woodson will have to restructure. I don't think it is fair to ask hawk to give back some of the money we agreed to with him, as he could have easily made that much money going elsewhere. It isn't good business to take away promised money to a player in his prime.

After that (2013 off-season) you are left with Rodgers, Mathews, Raji, Finley, Bulaga and Burnett who are all due to get paid.

I think you try and lock up Raji or Mathews, whichever will give you a better deal with 1 year remaining on their contract. One of them needs to stay though, it would set our defense back too far to lose both of them. I think you get the Finley contract done as an extension after GJ leaves for approximately what GJ's number is right now if he earns it. If not you let him walk too. Ideally you get Bulaga done here too. At the end of the day A-rod will make our offensive unit productive, so we need to invest in our D.

I think you are going to have to let the market set for Clay and just pay him what he costs. OLB is an extremely tough position to draft, and while TT's track record after Clay and Nick Perry is good, it took 2 first round picks to acquire those players.

That leaves Burnett to take a fair money deal with a year remaining on his.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
rbens06


Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 1012
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 11:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

blankman0021 wrote:
A little math with the cap floor...

This year the cap is roughly $120M, 95% of that would $114M. Currently according to PFT, the Packers are $11.6M under the cap. So we've spent $108.4M so far this year.

In order for us (in future years) to comply with the cap floor, we'd need to spend $5.6M. Or essentially 1 or 2 extensions this season.

The Packers have the 9th most cap space as of Sept 3. So 23 other teams have to spend less than that to comply with the floor.

So unless the salary cap gets hiked up significantly in the upcoming years (even when the TV money comes in I'll be shocked if it skyrockets...I think the owners are waiting to cash in, and are not going to re-invest as much as the players organization was anticipating).

So really, looking at the list by PFT, I can only see 3-6 teams that have more cap room than they can shell out without overpaying. I don't think this cap floor will effect teams they way you think it will. Most teams are still going to be fighting to stay under the cap.

On a separate note...it really gives you a good feeling about how GB is operating the salary cap when we have the 9th most in cap space coming off of a 15-1 season. And it really makes you wonder what crazy contracts are being given out to these other teams that have far less talent but far less cap space as well.

Just an interesting take on it...


That $11.6 million does not mean we are $11.6 million below the $120 million cap. We have rollovers calculated into our cap, which is calculated in the $11.6 million. I believe our adjusted cap is about $128 so, if you deduct $11.6 million from that you get $116.4 putting us right in line with the floor.

Since a lot of teams contracts and everything are built on players salaries rising each year and when the new CBA was struck the cap actually shrunk teams were allowed to do a couple of things to accommodate for this. First, they were allowed to roll over unused cap space from the the previous year, I believe the Packers rolled over roughly $5-6 million the year the new CBA took affect. Also, teams could elect to borrow $2 million from next years cap to give more flexibility now while they adjusted to the new system.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
blankman0021


Joined: 02 May 2007
Posts: 2755
Location: MKE
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 11:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

rbens06 wrote:
blankman0021 wrote:
A little math with the cap floor...

This year the cap is roughly $120M, 95% of that would $114M. Currently according to PFT, the Packers are $11.6M under the cap. So we've spent $108.4M so far this year.

In order for us (in future years) to comply with the cap floor, we'd need to spend $5.6M. Or essentially 1 or 2 extensions this season.

The Packers have the 9th most cap space as of Sept 3. So 23 other teams have to spend less than that to comply with the floor.

So unless the salary cap gets hiked up significantly in the upcoming years (even when the TV money comes in I'll be shocked if it skyrockets...I think the owners are waiting to cash in, and are not going to re-invest as much as the players organization was anticipating).

So really, looking at the list by PFT, I can only see 3-6 teams that have more cap room than they can shell out without overpaying. I don't think this cap floor will effect teams they way you think it will. Most teams are still going to be fighting to stay under the cap.

On a separate note...it really gives you a good feeling about how GB is operating the salary cap when we have the 9th most in cap space coming off of a 15-1 season. And it really makes you wonder what crazy contracts are being given out to these other teams that have far less talent but far less cap space as well.

Just an interesting take on it...


That $11.6 million does not mean we are $11.6 million below the $120 million cap. We have rollovers calculated into our cap, which is calculated in the $11.6 million. I believe our adjusted cap is about $128 so, if you deduct $11.6 million from that you get $116.4 putting us right in line with the floor.

Since a lot of teams contracts and everything are built on players salaries rising each year and when the new CBA was struck the cap actually shrunk teams were allowed to do a couple of things to accommodate for this. First, they were allowed to roll over unused cap space from the the previous year, I believe the Packers rolled over roughly $5-6 million the year the new CBA took affect. Also, teams could elect to borrow $2 million from next years cap to give more flexibility now while they adjusted to the new system.


Nice memory. The only reason I don't see us giving GJ his deal and front-loading this year...is that he wants to roll over that 11.6M into next years cap to give Rodgers his $$.
_________________
The Doctor wrote:
ALLONS-Y, ALONSO!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
blankman0021


Joined: 02 May 2007
Posts: 2755
Location: MKE
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 11:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

spilltray wrote:
blankman0021 wrote:
A little math with the cap floor...

This year the cap is roughly $120M, 95% of that would $114M. Currently according to PFT, the Packers are $11.6M under the cap. So we've spent $108.4M so far this year.

In order for us (in future years) to comply with the cap floor, we'd need to spend $5.6M. Or essentially 1 or 2 extensions this season.

The Packers have the 9th most cap space as of Sept 3. So 23 other teams have to spend less than that to comply with the floor.

So unless the salary cap gets hiked up significantly in the upcoming years (even when the TV money comes in I'll be shocked if it skyrockets...I think the owners are waiting to cash in, and are not going to re-invest as much as the players organization was anticipating).

So really, looking at the list by PFT, I can only see 3-6 teams that have more cap room than they can shell out without overpaying. I don't think this cap floor will effect teams they way you think it will. Most teams are still going to be fighting to stay under the cap.

On a separate note...it really gives you a good feeling about how GB is operating the salary cap when we have the 9th most in cap space coming off of a 15-1 season. And it really makes you wonder what crazy contracts are being given out to these other teams that have far less talent but far less cap space as well.

Just an interesting take on it...


The floor and cap aren't calculated the same way. The Salary cap prorates bonuses and is looking at long term spending. The Floor looks at actual cash spent this year.


And actual cash consists of...? Is it just salary without bonus money, incentives, etc? I do remember reading all that now, they definitely did make it a little more tricky in this CBA...
_________________
The Doctor wrote:
ALLONS-Y, ALONSO!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
spilltray


Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 12051
Location: Green Bay, WI
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

blankman0021 wrote:
spilltray wrote:
blankman0021 wrote:
A little math with the cap floor...

This year the cap is roughly $120M, 95% of that would $114M. Currently according to PFT, the Packers are $11.6M under the cap. So we've spent $108.4M so far this year.

In order for us (in future years) to comply with the cap floor, we'd need to spend $5.6M. Or essentially 1 or 2 extensions this season.

The Packers have the 9th most cap space as of Sept 3. So 23 other teams have to spend less than that to comply with the floor.

So unless the salary cap gets hiked up significantly in the upcoming years (even when the TV money comes in I'll be shocked if it skyrockets...I think the owners are waiting to cash in, and are not going to re-invest as much as the players organization was anticipating).

So really, looking at the list by PFT, I can only see 3-6 teams that have more cap room than they can shell out without overpaying. I don't think this cap floor will effect teams they way you think it will. Most teams are still going to be fighting to stay under the cap.

On a separate note...it really gives you a good feeling about how GB is operating the salary cap when we have the 9th most in cap space coming off of a 15-1 season. And it really makes you wonder what crazy contracts are being given out to these other teams that have far less talent but far less cap space as well.

Just an interesting take on it...


The floor and cap aren't calculated the same way. The Salary cap prorates bonuses and is looking at long term spending. The Floor looks at actual cash spent this year.


And actual cash consists of...? Is it just salary without bonus money, incentives, etc? I do remember reading all that now, they definitely did make it a little more tricky in this CBA...


Actual cash spent this year. Meaning say last year we gave player X a 10 mil signing bonus over 3 years. That signing bonus counts 3.3 mil all 3 years vs the salary cap, but only 10 mil vs last year's salary floor.
_________________
Wilfred wrote:
Memory is like the Packers when they are behind by two touchdowns in the 4th quarter... It comes back.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
rbens06


Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 1012
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

blankman0021 wrote:
rbens06 wrote:
I personally am not one for cutting Finley outright, even if he has a down year. He still draws coverage from the receivers to give them more space and at the very least is a very good decoy, albeit a very expensive one. Also, if you put it in perspective he is a good 3/4 option to have, again potentially very expensive. I just don't see a lot of value in cutting him, there is no return there. If it came to that I would prefer letting him play out the remaining year and letting him walk, which would most likely net us a compensatory pick. We could still use his money on Jennings, it would just be a year latter meaning we franchise Jennings for next year than work a long term deal out. The franchise tag for Jennings would be a cheap band aid for the situation, I think the increase from his current cap to the franchise amount would only be $1-2 million more tops.


Or we could give him a longterm deal for 3-4 million more per year...


I think that is easier said than done. Giving him 3-4 million more could very well be "stealing" from other players that we need to extend too. Now, I do see that we potentially could have a lot of cap space opening up with Woodson either retiring in the next couple of years, eliminating his 10 plus million cap, or at the very least renegotiating to lower the amount. In my opinion same goes for Pickett. However, until those two situations and a few others, i.e. Finley, become more clear it might be smarter to take the smaller and more manageable approach and franchise Jennings. This way we can still lock up Raji, Matthews and Rodgers when the time comes. After that we will have a better grasp on what we can do with Jennings and make the decision then.

Personally, I would love to front load Jennings and then be able to still work out the deals with the other guys, which is entirely possible, but that option might not be in the cards.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rbens06


Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 1012
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

blankman0021 wrote:
rbens06 wrote:
blankman0021 wrote:
A little math with the cap floor...

This year the cap is roughly $120M, 95% of that would $114M. Currently according to PFT, the Packers are $11.6M under the cap. So we've spent $108.4M so far this year.

In order for us (in future years) to comply with the cap floor, we'd need to spend $5.6M. Or essentially 1 or 2 extensions this season.

The Packers have the 9th most cap space as of Sept 3. So 23 other teams have to spend less than that to comply with the floor.

So unless the salary cap gets hiked up significantly in the upcoming years (even when the TV money comes in I'll be shocked if it skyrockets...I think the owners are waiting to cash in, and are not going to re-invest as much as the players organization was anticipating).

So really, looking at the list by PFT, I can only see 3-6 teams that have more cap room than they can shell out without overpaying. I don't think this cap floor will effect teams they way you think it will. Most teams are still going to be fighting to stay under the cap.

On a separate note...it really gives you a good feeling about how GB is operating the salary cap when we have the 9th most in cap space coming off of a 15-1 season. And it really makes you wonder what crazy contracts are being given out to these other teams that have far less talent but far less cap space as well.

Just an interesting take on it...


That $11.6 million does not mean we are $11.6 million below the $120 million cap. We have rollovers calculated into our cap, which is calculated in the $11.6 million. I believe our adjusted cap is about $128 so, if you deduct $11.6 million from that you get $116.4 putting us right in line with the floor.

Since a lot of teams contracts and everything are built on players salaries rising each year and when the new CBA was struck the cap actually shrunk teams were allowed to do a couple of things to accommodate for this. First, they were allowed to roll over unused cap space from the the previous year, I believe the Packers rolled over roughly $5-6 million the year the new CBA took affect. Also, teams could elect to borrow $2 million from next years cap to give more flexibility now while they adjusted to the new system.


Nice memory. The only reason I don't see us giving GJ his deal and front-loading this year...is that he wants to roll over that 11.6M into next years cap to give Rodgers his $$.


That is what makes the most sense to me, if he can get some of the "discount" deals done now, like he did with Lang, then we can keep rolling over cap and use it when we have a big amount to commit, like on Rodgers. Plus we can buy some time with guys like Jennings by franchising him until we get the increases in the cap and high paid guys either come off the books or restructure (Woodson and Pickett).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TheGreatZepp


Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Posts: 2894
Location: Brookfield, WI
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I remember hearing this when Finley signed his current two year deal but with the way it is structured there's little chance he gets tagged. His tag number would be about $12.5 million.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/54030/franchise-tag-unlikely-for-finley-in-2014
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ugLymayNe


Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 14691
Location: Wisconsin
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

...............Would our base defense be worse if Pickett moved back to NT after Raji's deal is up? Honestly if he continues getting blown off the ball when 2-gapping at NT and doesn't collapse the pocket as he did in 2011 I don't think he is going to get a top contract as people are expecting.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vikingsrule


Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 52626
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 1:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Skeet wrote:
So if Greg walks, whats the odds of him going to Minny?


I wouldnt complain. Jennings probably has a good 3-4 years left before he starts to decline. Harvin and Jennings together would certainly be interesting.

What kind of deal would most expect Jennings to get? I guess it largely depends on if he hits the open market. We saw last year what a top 10 WR in there late 20s can make on the open market (Vincent Jackson to TB for 5 yrs, $55M, and $25M guaranteed). Jennings would probably be smart to hit the open market and try and get a deal like that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wgbeethree


Joined: 15 Dec 2009
Posts: 3945
Location: Denver, CO via Racine, Wisconsin
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

rbens06 wrote:
Sandybaby716 wrote:
wgbeethree wrote:
I'm afraid the cap floor is going to completely ruin the game. If you have to spend 95% of the cap there will be no room for play. You HAVE to give players deals they aren't worth one year to hit the 95% and then you are going to HAVE to cut them in order to fit the people you really want to resign the next year if you have a couple blue chip free agents. It's gonna be one giant clusterphuck of salary cap casualties each year and hurt the midlevel veterans that this CBA was supposed to be looking out for. It's stupid and I'd almost guarantee it was D. Smith's idea although I have no idea really whose it was in reality.


I think you're going to see smart teams use it to extend players sooner. If you have ten million in space and your biggest upcoming free agent still has two years left, it would still be the smartest thing to re-sign him.

I agree it's a stupid idea though.


Definitely agree with that, but I can see why the NFLPA pushed for a floor, because it should put more money in the players pockets, basically it rids the NFL of having situations like the Bucs were in where they had $30 million plus in cap space. Ultimately, I don't think you will see it evenly spread out at all, rather you will just see the rich players get richer. I think a lot of teams will apply the extra cap they have to use to their top players. I look at a situation like Rodgers, he deserves to be a top, if not the top, paid quarterback. Say for example that amounts to $20 million per year, if we have to use more cap it is easier to make him $22 million than say throwing it at a mid level guy. I do not think many would question the little extra money he gets, but the floor really only helped a guy that was already getting paid well, not the mid level guys.


That's pretty much my point. The "cheap" rookie contracts and cap floor were apparently designed to help the midteir guys get their "fair share". I think it's going to have the exact opposite effect. When those cheap rookies get their second contracts they are going to see substantial raises. Teams aren't going to let their superstars walk so the only way they will be able to really make capspace when 95% of it HAS to be spent the year before is to let midteir veterans, the guys this CBA was "meant to benifit", go and replace them with cheap options. Rinse and repeat.
_________________

TytybearsFan21 wrote:
Justo knows nothing about sportz

justo wrote:
I would be a terrible coach/anything.


Last edited by wgbeethree on Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:07 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ugLymayNe


Joined: 31 Oct 2006
Posts: 14691
Location: Wisconsin
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

vikingsrule wrote:
Skeet wrote:
So if Greg walks, whats the odds of him going to Minny?


I wouldnt complain. Jennings probably has a good 3-4 years left before he starts to decline. Harvin and Jennings together would certainly be interesting.

What kind of deal would most expect Jennings to get? I guess it largely depends on if he hits the open market. We saw last year what a top 10 WR in there late 20s can make on the open market (Vincent Jackson to TB for 5 yrs, $55M, and $25M guaranteed). Jennings would probably be smart to hit the open market and try and get a deal like that.


I don't see why we couldn't afford a deal like that or even a bit more expensive, considering his extension was basically a three year contract with $26.35 Million(16 guaranteed iirc?). We have 11 million extra, three more to Greg per year or a front loaded contract ala the one Rodgers signed in 2008 just before the deadline.

Personally I think Finley and Raji are out after their contracts unless they don't expect ridiculous money, to me they are a tier below the rest of our players we need to resign. Not to mention I think TE's are replaceable(especially in MM's offense) and the fact Pickett can shift to NT in our base defense.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vikingsrule


Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 52626
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The benefit of having Aaron Rodgers and Jordy Nelson currently under contract is you dont have to feel obligated to pay Jennings that kind of money. I think it will really come down to Finley or Jennings, it might be hard to keep both unless Finley has another "down" year. Might be a situation where GB just plugs in another WR on the cheap to replace Jennings and end up getting similar results.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 4 of 7

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group