Norm Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 19 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: You're becoming real over dramatic. I can't deal with 2 of you. Okay, let's be honest, you downplayed the ramifications pretty hard. I'm not saying Mack for 20 isn't the better option, hell I probably agree. But that doesn't mean we won't lose anyone we want to retain because other teams have kept guys after big deals, etc etc. Someone has to pay the Piper? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 Just to be clear..I would trade the two firsts and give him 20~ per. I just don't actually think that's going to fetch him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 Just now, Norm said: Okay, let's be honest, you downplayed the ramifications pretty hard. I'm not saying Mack for 20 isn't the better option, hell I probably agree. But that doesn't mean we won't lose anyone we want to retain because other teams have kept guys after big deals, etc etc. Someone has to pay the Piper? I specifically stated it would come at the cost of 30+ year old vets like Matthews, Cobb, Bulaga, maybe Daniels when he comes up, etc... However it's been our model not to pay those guys anyway really. I mean look at Morgan, got a very reasonable contract offer, he was a good player, we had no interest. Are we going to re-sign them with or without Mack in the fold? Who knows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norm Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 1 minute ago, Packerraymond said: I specifically stated it would come at the cost of 30+ year old vets like Matthews, Cobb, Bulaga, maybe Daniels when he comes up, etc... However it's been our model not to pay those guys anyway really. I mean look at Morgan, got a very reasonable contract offer, he was a good player, we had no interest. Are we going to re-sign them with or without Mack in the fold? Who knows? But then if we don't, without him, we have money to explore all avenues to replace them. Even if those guys are old and overpaid aren't we then going Ted style again but with Mack and relying on all young cheap guys to replace? More or less. I'm just saying there will be ramifications to the rest of the roster. That's all. I think that's fair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 1 minute ago, Norm said: But then if we don't, without him, we have money to explore all avenues to replace them. Even if those guys are old and overpaid aren't we then going Ted style again but with Mack and relying on all young cheap guys to replace? More or less. I'm just saying there will be ramifications to the rest of the roster. That's all. I think that's fair It definitely puts more stress to draft well, like early Ted drafts with a move like that would produce a killer team. 2013-2015 Ted drafts we'd probably be hurting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cannondale Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 26 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: I specifically stated it would come at the cost of 30+ year old vets like Matthews, Cobb, Bulaga, maybe Daniels when he comes up, etc... However it's been our model not to pay those guys anyway really. I mean look at Morgan, got a very reasonable contract offer, he was a good player, we had no interest. Are we going to re-sign them with or without Mack in the fold? Who knows? It's skewed because we have drafted like poop, but you will have to sacrifice some second contract guys as well. Like Clark and anyone else, should we ever draft anyone worth it. The second contracts are the expensive ones. It also limits you in future FA acquisitions. And to be perfectly clear, my main point from day one on this topic is that Mack at 22+ per doesn't offer enough. We still have concerns at S, don't know how the CB situation will shake out, our WR situation is suspect, and let's hope our Oline issues shake out. Those are some legit concerns to paint yourself in a corner via salary cap and with 2 first round picks traded away. Mack is good, but not that good. I guess it just boils down to me believing non QB's aren't worth QB money with respect to building a legit SB threat unless you have a QB on a rookie deal. If Gute proves me wrong, I'll be the first to admit it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanedorf Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 What's the deal with the Cobb chatter ? Are they asking him to re-structure/ pay cut ? Would you guarantee some of the salary in exchange for cap relief ? Would you add another year and keep him for 2 seasons if its a "reasonable" deal ? He can get more on the open market, just like Jordy. But if GB needs some space, his salary is one you'd look at Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packer_ESP Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 2 hours ago, chucknorris101 said: I think hes referring to the team rebuilding getting Clark, thats how I read it anyway. I think everyone can see oakland isnt winning a title this year. Ah OK. Good post from @RaiderRaymond then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 4 minutes ago, Shanedorf said: What's the deal with the Cobb chatter ? Are they asking him to re-structure/ pay cut ? Would you guarantee some of the salary in exchange for cap relief ? Would you add another year and keep him for 2 seasons if its a "reasonable" deal ? He can get more on the open market, just like Jordy. But if GB needs some space, his salary is one you'd look at Cobb + 2018 4th to the NY Jets for a 2019 2nd. Lessens the competition for Mack and limits their draft capital. Frees up some cap space. Gives them a slot WR for the rookie QB. Win all around Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBURGE Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 5 minutes ago, Shanedorf said: What's the deal with the Cobb chatter ? Are they asking him to re-structure/ pay cut ? Would you guarantee some of the salary in exchange for cap relief ? Would you add another year and keep him for 2 seasons if its a "reasonable" deal ? He can get more on the open market, just like Jordy. But if GB needs some space, his salary is one you'd look at I don't really see a way Cobb is on the roster in 2019, so I don't think I touch his deal. Can you turn any into bonus money and lower the cap if you are not extending? I didn't think so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 1 minute ago, squire12 said: Cobb + 2018 4th to the NY Jets for a 2019 2nd. Lessens the competition for Mack and limits their draft capital. Frees up some cap space. Gives them a slot WR for the rookie QB. Win all around That only makes sense if they work out a muliyear deal with Cobb. For one year, I don't think it works like Cobb's current contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 9 minutes ago, MrBobGray said: I wouldn't accept that deal period, almost regardless of the team. Clark's 23 with two more cheap years + his 5th year option. A top 10 DT with a cap hit < $3 million + a 1st round pick in a loaded EDGE draft? There's 0 chance I do that even for the best EDGE rusher, given Mack will make nearly 10 times what Clark does for the next two years. Mack's a monster, but that's just not a winning move IMO. Yeah I'm not sure I even trade Clark straight up for Mack much less with a first.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squire12 Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 Just now, Beast said: That only makes sense if they work out a muliyear deal with Cobb. For one year, I don't think it works like Cobb's current contract. That's for the NY Jets to work on. They would likely not trade for him if a longer deal would not be worked out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanedorf Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 IF in fact they are trying to create some cap space I think the Packers want Cobb to take a haircut. Cobb can either work it out at a lower number or take the Jordy route and make more cash elsewhere. But GB has to be willing to cut Randall if he declines. GB also asked Bulaga to give some cap relief too - he demurred and is still a valued member of the OL. GB would probably prefer Cobb at about a $ 5 million salary vs the $ 8.6M in salary he counts for now. You could just fully guarantee the $5M , (none of which is guaranteed right now) They went wayyyyy low with Jordy, I don't think they'll do the same with the younger Cobb. He'd find work elsewhere pretty quick, but maybe he'd like another season with AR and surely that's the Packers preference too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfman Posted August 30, 2018 Share Posted August 30, 2018 42 minutes ago, Shanedorf said: IF in fact they are trying to create some cap space I think the Packers want Cobb to take a haircut. Cobb can either work it out at a lower number or take the Jordy route and make more cash elsewhere. But GB has to be willing to cut Randall if he declines. GB also asked Bulaga to give some cap relief too - he demurred and is still a valued member of the OL. GB would probably prefer Cobb at about a $ 5 million salary vs the $ 8.6M in salary he counts for now. You could just fully guarantee the $5M , (none of which is guaranteed right now) They went wayyyyy low with Jordy, I don't think they'll do the same with the younger Cobb. He'd find work elsewhere pretty quick, but maybe he'd like another season with AR and surely that's the Packers preference too. It all is if he's on the roster week 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.