Packer Vets - Keep or get rid of for 2019 salary cap reasons

[PACKRULE]

12 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

I will breathe once you start making sense. 

1. WE DO NOT NEED 3 MILLION DOLLARS AT ANY POINT IN THIS OFFSEASON.
2. You do not cut Crosby until you are certain the other option is the better option. 

Cutting Crosby shouldn't be a move we make until September 1st at the earliest.  After our replacement has shown what he's capable of in exhibition football at the least. 

Any other argument is presuming you're getting better, and presuming you're getting better is not a good idea. 

For the same reason, you don't cut Nick Perry until you're confident in his replacement.  It makes even less sense to cut Perry early since he's a cheaper cut after June 1st. 

3 million could be used allot of ways.....is Crosby the best value currently for that money = nope. That 3 mil could be put towards FA Edge, DT or S.

I think you move one when you move on,  if Crosby had made a boat load of winning kicks in his career here great. But the truth is he's been offered a great offense a number of years which has made him somewhat irrelivant. AR has been our saving grace.

if we keep him until Sept 1st that's not that fair to him either to cut after every other team has signed a new kicker. I think you move on from him at any point after the season and that lets him find a new home if we're worried about Mason. If not about his feelings then heck keep him until the first and dump him if the newcomer can hit anything.

 

[MacReady]

Just now, PACKRULE said:

3 million could be used allot of ways.....is Crosby the best value currently for that money = nope. That 3 mil could be put towards FA Edge, DT or S.

WE.  HAVE.  47.  MILLION.  DOLLARS.  IN.  FREE.  AGENCY.  AND.  WE.  ARE.  NOT.  POSSIBLY.  USING.  THAT.  47.  MILLION.  DOLLARS.

 

[thrILL!]

Can’t we just try to restructure Crosby’s contract before we get rid of him?  His miss yday was actually pretty clutch considering it helped us with MM. 

[gopackgo972]

5 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

WE.  HAVE.  47.  MILLION.  DOLLARS.  IN.  FREE.  AGENCY.  AND.  WE.  ARE.  NOT.  POSSIBLY.  USING.  THAT.  47.  MILLION.  DOLLARS.

 

Yeah but cutting Mason would add more to that. So it’s a win win for us imho. Kickers are replaceable. 

[CWood21]

27 minutes ago, PACKRULE said:

3 million could be used allot of ways.....is Crosby the best value currently for that money = nope. That 3 mil could be put towards FA Edge, DT or S.

Find me a starting-caliber player whose making $3M or less that isn't on a rookie contract.

[vegas492]

22 minutes ago, PACKRULE said:

3 million could be used allot of ways.

 

I apologize for cherry picking your post.

GB is 5.8M or so under the cap, today.

They go into next year a shade under $42M under the cap.

$3M will not make a difference either way.  

I've never understood this facination for how much a guy makes...it's like they are cashing checks that fans are personally writing.  It's a system of rules, salary cap being a rule.  Stay under it is the rule.  GB is under it now, they will be under it next year.  $3M is really chump change in the grand scheme of the salary cap.

The question as to whether or not to move on from Crosby is not financial, it is production.

It is foolish to think you can automatically sign a kicker to the GB roster and get Crosby's historical production.  

It is foolish going into next year simply hoping for Crosby to rebound.

No one is saying he won't be cut.  Are saying GB only cuts him if they find something better, first.

[blankman0021]

4 hours ago, TheBitzMan said:

Yesterday did it for me with him. He is paid as the 2nd highest paid kicker in the league, that money is better suited for depth at other parts of the roster. 

He has directed affected the outcomes of 3 losses and a tie this year. You can't have your high priced kicker missing kicks that end up costing you 2 wins and 2 others that would've been in OT if he had done his job. 

No blame on the poor snap/hold? ST is much like OLINE - there’s a direct benefit to longevity of a unit. 

Id give em all another season together. 

[TheBitzMan]

1 minute ago, blankman0021 said:

No blame on the poor snap/hold? ST is much like OLINE - there’s a direct benefit to longevity of a unit. 

Id give em all another season together. 

There is definitely blame to go around. This isn't just about that kick though. I can see the argument for getting some competition in and if he wins giving him another year. I sort of think that this how it plays out any ways. 

[squire12]

1 hour ago, CWood21 said:

Find me a starting-caliber player whose making $3M or less that isn't on a rookie contract.

It's not that the $3M allows you to go from league minimum to league min +$3M

It allows you to go from $5M to $8M on a player at a more valuable position.  Now I can find you a lot of players that move the needle on teams that are $3M more costly than others at their position.

[Gopackgonerd]

I'm on the fence with Crosby. I don't think I would be too mad if we went either way. He could turn it around, and a rookie Kicker could be worse.

I think the definite ones that need to go is Clay and Cobb, they just don't make enough plays a game any more. Clay can run around with his hair on fire, but that's about it. I don't even think a move to inside linebacker permanently would turn his career around. Unless we get a really really really team friendly deal, he has to go. Cobb has been injured and he just isn't the slot guy he once was. Tramon should probably go, but I have a feeling they will keep him one more year for depth. Not a big fan of Perry atm, if he's a situational pass rusher and cutting him won't make a big difference cap wise, fine keep him. Best case is it was just his injuries that really set him back this year, but  then again that's just been the theme with his career. I wouldn't be mad either way like Crosby though.  The rest of the guys can be kept.

[pacman5252]

I get wanting to replace Crosby (and I'm totally for them bringing in competition, maybe burning a late pick on one), but the grass isn't always greener on kickers. I think one thing that is being ignored is that Crosby has been good within 40 this year (12/13).  He's hitting the FGs he should make, it is the over 40 where he's struggling ( 10/16). 

 

[AlexGreen#20]

37 minutes ago, pacman5252 said:

I get wanting to replace Crosby (and I'm totally for them bringing in competition, maybe burning a late pick on one), but the grass isn't always greener on kickers. I think one thing that is being ignored is that Crosby has been good within 40 this year (12/13).  He's hitting the FGs he should make, it is the over 40 where he's struggling ( 10/16). 

 

12/13 on kicks inside 40 yards is significantly worse than the NFL average. 

There have only been 12 kicks missed inside of 40 yards missed all year by the entire league.

He's tied for most in the leauge for misses from 40-49 (Daniel Carlson and Chris Boswell being the other two.

He's tied for third most in the league for most misses from 50+ (in fairness he's tied with about a quarter of the league)

[CWood21]

1 hour ago, squire12 said:

It's not that the $3M allows you to go from league minimum to league min +$3M

It allows you to go from $5M to $8M on a player at a more valuable position.  Now I can find you a lot of players that move the needle on teams that are $3M more costly than others at their position.

We're sitting on $40M in cap space right now, we can make those offers with or without Crosby.  If we were closer to the salary cap, you'd probably have a point.

[TransientTexan]

1 hour ago, vegas492 said:

I apologize for cherry picking your post.

GB is 5.8M or so under the cap, today.

They go into next year a shade under $42M under the cap.

$3M will not make a difference either way.  

I've never understood this facination for how much a guy makes...it's like they are cashing checks that fans are personally writing.  It's a system of rules, salary cap being a rule.  Stay under it is the rule.  GB is under it now, they will be under it next year.  $3M is really chump change in the grand scheme of the salary cap.

The question as to whether or not to move on from Crosby is not financial, it is production.

It is foolish to think you can automatically sign a kicker to the GB roster and get Crosby's historical production.  

It is foolish going into next year simply hoping for Crosby to rebound.

No one is saying he won't be cut.  Are saying GB only cuts him if they find something better, first.

well if you add up a handful of things that are individually insignificant, the total can be significant. You can't just make a practice of dismissing everything individually as if it's in a vacuum. That's a recipe for wasting alot of cap space that could be used to make your team better. It doesn't matter that the fans aren't writing the check. In a league with a hard cap, success often goes to the teams that are able to more efficiently use their cap space. 

Next year, Crosby will be making about 270% of what the average starting kicker makes. 

 

 

[jleisher]

I would cut or release Perry, Bulaga, Crosby, Murphy and Morrison, that saves $15,365,000.  2019, Packers should be about $41,000,000.  This would give the Packers $56,365,00 in cap space.  I have them signing Landon Collins FS for $10m for 4yrs, Kenny Vaccaro  SS  for $4m for 3yrs, Shaquil Barrett Edge for $9m for 4 yrs, Chris Hogan WR  $6m for 2yrs and Malcom Brown NT for $2m for 2yrs, that totals $31,000,000.  So, that would leave the Packers some $25,365,000 in cap space for their own free agents and rookies.  Sorry, I am not Russ Ball, so my numbers might be off some.