Mike Daniels released

[Norm]

3 minutes ago, boratt said:

Let’s see how Clark, Adams, Lowry, Lancaster, Z and Gary play on the DL before we judge this move. And let’s see how Daniels plays too. All of it goes in. Too early to throw any fits or have any celebrations. 

It's irrelevant how he plays anywhere else, for the most part. Not every situation is identical. He could go crazy and could have sucked here, or vise versa

And we'll never now how much he might have raised the play or hurt the development. 

My issue is I'm pretty sure 90% of people would have voted no don't do this the day before, (yes I know some of you wanted to do it) but it's done and a week later and it's like it was a no brainer. That **** bothers me lol

Edited July 30, 2019 by Norm

[boratt]

1 minute ago, Norm said:

It's irrelevant how he plays anywhere else, for the most part. Not every situation is identical. He could go crazy and could have sucked here, or vise versa

I add it in. If he has a bad year and our guys have good years, the money was worth saving. That’s my view. 

[squire12]

1 hour ago, Norm said:

It's irrelevant how he plays anywhere else, for the most part. Not every situation is identical. He could go crazy and could have sucked here, or vise versa

And we'll never now how much he might have raised the play or hurt the development. 

My issue is I'm pretty sure 90% of people would have voted no don't do this the day before, (yes I know some of you wanted to do it) but it's done and a week later and it's like it was a no brainer. That **** bothers me lol

And the flip side is some were doing mocks in the spring with Daniels being released.  It happens now and it's like GB must be tanking the season.  That bothers others as well.

Daniels was something like the 13th most important or best player in those polls done a while back.  I just don't see "the sky is falling " catastrophe some are viewing this as.

[Norm]

9 minutes ago, squire12 said:

And the flip side is some were doing mocks in the spring with Daniels being released.  It happens now and it's like GB must be tanking the season.  That bothers others as well.

Daniels was something like the 13th most important or best player in those polls done a while back.  I just don't see "the sky is falling " catastrophe some are viewing this as.

I totally clarified that there were some people that suggested it, but it was a pretty clear minority, especially at this juncture. 

The sky isn't falling. I've never said anything other than I don't like this very much and I'm annoyed that if this happened pre Gute the attitudes would be VERY different overall. 

It's not some season ender but everyone's just going "yeah but other guys will step up" which is what everyone bitched about for ages. Relying on you unproven players.

Edited July 31, 2019 by Norm

[AlexGreen#20]

19 minutes ago, squire12 said:

And the flip side is some were doing mocks in the spring with Daniels being released.  It happens now and it's like GB must be tanking the season.  That bothers others as well.

Daniels was something like the 13th most important or best player in those polls done a while back.  I just don't see "the sky is falling " catastrophe some are viewing this as.

Generally speaking the money from Daniels was used to sign another player in those offseason mocks.

We're sitting with 14.5m in unused cap space at the moment per OTC. I'd feel a lot better if we were adding guys to the 90 man roster who might contribute a little rather than some Home Depot dudes. 

[incognito_man]

5 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Generally speaking the money from Daniels was used to sign another player in those offseason mocks.

We're sitting with 14.5m in unused cap space at the moment per OTC. I'd feel a lot better if we were adding guys to the 90 man roster who might contribute a little rather than some Home Depot dudes. 

If we had cut Daniels before FA everyone would have been fine using "his" money to sign the Smith's. Then everyone would have been fine spending the "leftover" cap space on extending Clark (or likely whoever we extend).

The feigned outrage is dependent completely on the timing. Which was, in turn, ironically dependent on Daniels' health.

[squire12]

11 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Generally speaking the money from Daniels was used to sign another player in those offseason mocks.

We're sitting with 14.5m in unused cap space at the moment per OTC. I'd feel a lot better if we were adding guys to the 90 man roster who might contribute a little rather than some Home Depot dudes. 

The money rolls over.  It does not evaporate and disappear.

There will be upcoming player cuts.  Will be nice to have an option to sign from this group.  Trade options will exist with some added cap space, it would be easier to swing said trade.

[AlexGreen#20]

Just now, incognito_man said:

If we had cut Daniels before FA everyone would have been fine using "his" money to sign the Smith's. Then everyone would have been fine spending the "leftover" cap space on extending Clark (or likely whoever we extend).

The feigned outrage is dependent completely on the timing. Which was, in turn, ironically dependent on Daniels' health.

Resigning Clark after his third year, giving up a cheap year of his rookie deal, and a relatively cheap year of 5th round option would be pretty awful.

Who are we resigning next year that we're worried about shorting our odds this year? Fackrell? Martinez? Bulaga?

Bryan Bulaga

Tramon Williams

Mason Crosby

Geronimo Allison

Marcedes Lewis

Jason Spriggs

Kyler Fackrell

Dan Vitale

Malcolm Johnson

Justin McCray

Deon Simon

Lucas Patrick

Trevor Davis

Blake Martinez

Michael Tyson

Adam Pankey

Chandon Sullivan

Robert Tonyan

Fadol Brown

Jake Kumerow

Reggie Gilbert

Will Redmond

Tony Brown

Tyler Lancaster

James Looney

Kendall Donnerson

Tra Carson

Jawill Davis

Tray Matthews

Teo Redding

Sam Ficken

Gerhard De Beer

Anthony Coyle

Brady Sheldon

Evan Baylis

Malik Taylor

Allen Lazard

+++

We decided to play the long game with this signing. We lowered our odds this year so that we can be players in Free Agency next year. That's fine, but we need to call a spade a spade. 

We also need to have some damn honesty with ourselves. Everybody was always on about, "TT needs to make the moves to win right the hell now with Rodgers getting older." Then a new guy comes in and apparently that initiative went out the window.

I feel like I'm living in opposite world. As of two/three years ago, I was all about staying the course and playing the long game and a bunch of people wanted to go for it now. The world has flip flopped and I don't know why. Rodgers didn't get younger in that time frame. 

[AlexGreen#20]

2 minutes ago, squire12 said:

The money rolls over.  It does not evaporate and disappear.

There will be upcoming player cuts.  Will be nice to have an option to sign from this group.  Trade options will exist with some added cap space, it would be easier to swing said trade.

The money rolls over into next year. Why are we playing for next year with the 5th highest super bowl odds?

There will be upcoming player cuts, and we may have trades lined up, but as of now, this move has us worse for this year. If we sign a Malik Jackson or whoever, this move looks different.

At the moment, it looks like we shorted our chances this year to make a play next year. 

[incognito_man]

50 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

We lowered our odds this year

This is the fundamental point of disagreement.

I disagree with this. And I have for months.

[AlexGreen#20]

8 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

This is the fundamental point of disagreement.

I disagree with this. And I have for months.

I guess I'm stumped by this point. We replaced Mike Daniels with Olive Sagapolu in camp. We replaced Mike Daniels with the winner of the Keke/Looney TC battle on the active roster.

The question isn't IF we lowered our odds, it's how substantially we lowered our odds.

[VonKarman]

9 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

This is the fundamental point of disagreement.

I disagree with this. And I have for months.

Unless we do something with the 8.3 million we cleared your statement means that the production given by Keke/Looney is the same or higher than the one that Daniels wpuld have given us.

[incognito_man]

3 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

I guess I'm stumped by this point. We replaced Mike Daniels with Olive Sagapolu in camp. We replaced Mike Daniels with the winner of the Keke/Looney TC battle on the active roster.

The question isn't IF we lowered our odds, it's how substantially we lowered our odds.

Like I said, this viewpoint only exists because of the timing. 

Your assertion is also false. We didn't replace Daniels snaps with Olive, we replaced them with Adams, Gary, Lowry and Lancaster. By cutting Daniels, THEIR snaps increased. THEIR in-season growth increased.

The bottom line is the money isn't static. I don't think there's a good argument that Daniels was worth his salary here. There are better places to use it. Any in-season moves from here on count on the other side of the ledger. And, truly, all the moves before this cut this league season count too.

[AlexGreen#20]

1 minute ago, incognito_man said:

Like I said, this viewpoint only exists because of the timing. 

Your assertion is also false. We didn't replace Daniels snaps with Olive, we replaced them with Adams, Gary, Lowry and Lancaster. By cutting Daniels, THEIR snaps increased. THEIR in-season growth increased.

The bottom line is the money isn't static. I don't think there's a good argument that Daniels was worth his salary here. There are better places to use it. Any in-season moves from here on count on the other side of the ledger. And, truly, all the moves before this cut this league season count too.

Let's say we do it your way. Daniels signs his sheet saying he's healthy in January. We cut him in January. We make all the same signings, and we roll into the season having left 14.5 million dollars on the table to be rolled into next year that could have been used to make the team better this year. You think people would be happy with that? Probably, because they don't understand the cap implications and are just thrilled to have signed anybody. But if you follow the cap on this team, you know it's really weird to be leaving a contract worth more than the highest paid safety in the league on the bench when we're an injury away from starting Raven Greene, and Aaron Rodgers will turn 36 during the season.

Additionally, it's not like we cut the dude to start the 3T version of Kenny Clark. We cut him to start Dean "7 Career Sacks-Can't afford to let the man play in a contract year" Lowry.

They could have had the same snaps. It just would have required the coaching staff to think, if that was the direction that needed to be taken. 

+++

This feels like a knee jerk reaction to failing to do this with Clay Matthews last year. 

[squire12]

1 hour ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

We decided to play the long game with this signing. We lowered our odds this year so that we can be players in Free Agency next year. That's fine, but we need to call a spade a spade. 

@AlexGreen#20  Do you have some supporting basis for this statement, or is this your opinion on the GB odds

1 hour ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

We also need to have some damn honesty with ourselves. Everybody was always on about, "TT needs to make the moves to win right the hell now with Rodgers getting older." Then a new guy comes in and apparently that initiative went out the window.

I feel like I'm living in opposite world. As of two/three years ago, I was all about staying the course and playing the long game and a bunch of people wanted to go for it now. The world has flip flopped and I don't know why. Rodgers didn't get younger in that time frame. 

Rodgers is on the hook for the next 3-4 seasons before he becomes able to be moved on from without getting into a cap penalty issue.  I would have been more in favor of going all in when Rodgers contract was a lower set up vs now.