Jump to content

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


coachbuns

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, CWood21 said:

Honestly, that's an extremely weak crutch in a bad argument.  I want football players, plain and simple.  I could care less if they're religious.  But I don't want any bad character players on my roster.  Remember how half this forum lost their minds when the Packers passed on Randy Gregory?  How is he doing now?  For every Tyreek Hill, there's a dozen or more Randy Gregory's.  This is a bad argument.

cool thanks for sharing. 

not sure where you got "good character bad character" out of my dislike for the prior team's culture of "packer people". 

Packer People (which is simply a neat little two word phrase for how I'd describe the GB culture under TT/MM), as I describe it above, has a little to do with that religion thing from TT, but a lot MORE to do with the strategy of finding, retaining and cultivating a CULTURE around "we're in this together, all working together, collaboration, support".  In terms of personnel, that sometimes led to a decision to pick very similar personality types.  Mostly, it was just too weak of a foundation and too simple  of a team identity to handle any adversity or blows to the culture itself.

 

1 hour ago, CWood21 said:

And at the time, Cobb was viewed as giving the Packers a discount.  Stop using hindsight to justify your argument.

what?  I'm using hindsight because that's what you do when you evaluate performance.  I already said Packer People worked, but I don't think it will work going forward.

You look at what you know now to determine if a decision worked out or not.  Was it fair at the time to say this is the right decision, yes!  Under that regimes current thinking, Cobb was an ascending player with many more pro bowl level years.  Now, he's an overpaid player who needs to be off the team.  The prior regimes culture in the front office was that it's OK to have a few overpaid veterans on the team.  My suggestion is that they take a new approach in the FO.  No overpaid guys, even if they are nice good packer people!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, skibrett15 said:

cool thanks for sharing. 

not sure where you got "good character bad character" out of my dislike for the prior team's culture of "packer people". 

Packer People (which is simply a neat little two word phrase for how I'd describe the GB culture under TT/MM), as I describe it above, has a little to do with that religion thing from TT, but a lot MORE to do with the strategy of finding, retaining and cultivating a CULTURE around "we're in this together, all working together, collaboration, support".  In terms of personnel, that sometimes led to a decision to pick very similar personality types.  Mostly, it was just too weak of a foundation and too simple  of a team identity to handle any adversity or blows to the culture itself.

I'm not sure what your advocating here.  You say we we need less "Packer people" and then talk about team-first players.  So if you don't want that, you want me-first players?  That sounds like a recipe for disaster.  I could care less about whether or not they're strong locker room players, although you'd prefer that.  But there isn't a scenario in which I truly believe that the Packers picked an inferior player simply because they were a "Packer person".  If anything, I'd argue the Packers were risk adverse and I'd like to think I'd have the history to back it up.  I don't recall them taking anyone with significant medical concerns or even character concerns.  I think the biggest medical concern the Packers took under TT was Vince Biegel.

1 hour ago, skibrett15 said:

what?  I'm using hindsight because that's what you do when you evaluate performance.  I already said Packer People worked, but I don't think it will work going forward.

You look at what you know now to determine if a decision worked out or not.  Was it fair at the time to say this is the right decision, yes!  Under that regimes current thinking, Cobb was an ascending player with many more pro bowl level years.  Now, he's an overpaid player who needs to be off the team.  The prior regimes culture in the front office was that it's OK to have a few overpaid veterans on the team.  My suggestion is that they take a new approach in the FO.  No overpaid guys, even if they are nice good packer people!

You're upset with them keeping him on as long as they have.  Not with the extension itself.  Your argument should be that the Packers should have moved on from him already, not that they shouldn't have handed out the extension.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2018-12-04 at 9:52 AM, vegas492 said:

GB can scoff all they want.  They are under the cap with a ton of room next year.  This isn't the situation when Wahle had to be cut due to the cap.  Paying a kicker is not a "bad decision".  That money is already available to put to other positions or extension...and it is not being used.

You have more than enough cap space to bring in all the free agents you want and that want to come here...as well as sign a free agent kicker AND draft a kicker to compete with Mason.

There is no money issue.  The issue is production, not money.

If you find someone who can produce at a better level?  Go grab him.  It is that easy.  

Ok your point is well taken on production which I thought was included hence the cut. Either way with the same production at half the price I’ll take the raving sand out it elsewhere no matter how much cap space we show we have next year. It will all be needed in certain. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, skibrett15 said:

No overpaid guys, even if they are nice good packer people!

This seems nonsensical, especially from a guy that has in- depth knowledge of NFL contracts and cap. 

There has never been, nor will there ever be a contract that perfectly fits the performance trajectory of an NFL player.
They are always underpaid or overpaid as they roll through their NFL careers.
The only way to even approach it is to make all contracts 1 year deals tied 100% to performance metrics - and that's not gonna happen in this league for the foreseeable future. The NFL has added Performance Pay that gives the guys on rookie deals a chance to earn a few extra bucks, but that's not the bulk of their pay.

"No overpaid guys" is an impossibility under the current CBA -  with all of the bonuses, prorations, guaranteed monies and byzantine contract structures.
No Dead Cap; or as little dead cap as possible ? That's a worthy goal and a decent way of judging front offices vs their peers.
GB has excelled in that metric over the last decade -  and I suspect it will continue under Gute and Ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I think this next month will say a lot.  If people don't play with heart and anything less then 100% effort needs to go. Not saying it's going to happen but I can see that it could.  I have been through some of our lean years and I will say I would rather see loosing with Players giving 110%. Now logically I am sure we will loose some but this months performance should dictate if we want to even make an effort to try and keep them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crosby's # is too high.  3.6 for a kicker?  He hasn't justified it.  Understand we have the cash not the point.  Either he takes a cut or he's gone.  

Trying to think of other  big time Vets we should let go.  Answer none I'd try to keep them all. 

Matthew keep and shift inside.  Cobb keep we need his experience.  Bulaga keep decent OT's are hard to find.  Wilkerson I'd try to bring back.  Rest of them our JAG's perhaps with the exception of Breeland.  Don't know what kind of deals we could swing for Cobb and Matthews.  Both are UFA's think the market for them will be soft.  Here is the list:

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents/all/green-bay-packers/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Scoremore said:

Crosby's # is too high.  3.6 for a kicker?  He hasn't justified it.  Understand we have the cash not the point.  Either he takes a cut or he's gone.  

Trying to think of other  big time Vets we should let go.  Answer none I'd try to keep them all. 

Matthew keep and shift inside.  Cobb keep we need his experience.  Bulaga keep decent OT's are hard to find.  Wilkerson I'd try to bring back.  Rest of them our JAG's perhaps with the exception of Breeland.  Don't know what kind of deals we could swing for Cobb and Matthews.  Both are UFA's think the market for them will be soft.  Here is the list:

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents/all/green-bay-packers/

 

I think Tramon is probably cut too.

Not interested in Cobb or Matthews really unless they are really cheap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have Tramon in the JAG group.  He may stick for another year at S.  Unless we find a starting quality vet to take on that role.  Cobb is 29 and Matthews 33.  I think they will both be relatively cheap adds if the Pack decided they want to bring them back.  Matthews doesn't bring much at edge anymore but he would be stellar at ILB.  Think he has a few more years left of quality play.  Cobb the same.  A few more years left.  5-7 range for each is what I am thinking.  Gute might just cut bait and go young don't know.  If we didn't have so many holes in the roster I'd be more apt to let them walk.  3 year deals with the ability to get out of after 2.  Think that's all these guys have left 2 more years.  Buys us some time to find replacements.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/5/2018 at 3:56 PM, Shanedorf said:

There has never been, nor will there ever be a contract that perfectly fits the performance trajectory of an NFL player.
They are always underpaid or overpaid as they roll through their NFL careers.

Agree. Thats why I dont consider a players contract / salary when discussing his on field performance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cobb will walk for more money elsewhere, CMIII would be wise to come back cheap and could possibly be a great piece as a pass-rushing ILB; especially when we draft at least two pass rushers in the upcoming draft. Trade Perry if we can get something for him; if not, cut him. Cut Tramon, keep Breeland to essentially replace him as CB4. Keep everyone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/5/2018 at 3:56 PM, Shanedorf said:

This seems nonsensical, especially from a guy that has in- depth knowledge of NFL contracts and cap. 

There has never been, nor will there ever be a contract that perfectly fits the performance trajectory of an NFL player.
They are always underpaid or overpaid as they roll through their NFL careers.
The only way to even approach it is to make all contracts 1 year deals tied 100% to performance metrics - and that's not gonna happen in this league for the foreseeable future. The NFL has added Performance Pay that gives the guys on rookie deals a chance to earn a few extra bucks, but that's not the bulk of their pay.

"No overpaid guys" is an impossibility under the current CBA -  with all of the bonuses, prorations, guaranteed monies and byzantine contract structures.
No Dead Cap; or as little dead cap as possible ? That's a worthy goal and a decent way of judging front offices vs their peers.
GB has excelled in that metric over the last decade -  and I suspect it will continue under Gute and Ball.

No overpaid guys means you cut overpaid guys whenever there is cap room savings from the transaction... simple as that.  I don't have any delusions to think you can re-invent the way to do NFL contracts.

This team has not pulled the trigger on cap saving moves in any kind of an aggressive way.  This team has not followed the philosophy of moving on from guys early rather than late.

Of course there are going to be good contracts and bad, but the FO culture needs to be more cut-throat for lack of a better term.  They are too soft on the "packer people" and keep them around if they are the QB's favored or if they used to be good.  That's basically the entirety of what I'm saying.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, cannondale said:

I think Tramon is still worth his contract in that DB room

Yeah.  I'm not overly motivated to move on from him tbh.   I don't necessarily like him at his price tag, but I don't think it's prohibitive either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

Yeah.  I'm not overly motivated to move on from him tbh.   I don't necessarily like him at his price tag, but I don't think it's prohibitive either.

CB is such a craft and Tramon is the ultimate pro. Still great example for a room where King might be the eldest next year

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...