Jump to content
JBURGE

Green Bay Packers Salary Cap Thread

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Shanedorf said:

The Mighty Green Bay Packers have an emergency fund that they've built up over many years
This fund is currently sitting at $387 Million and its purpose is to give the publicly- owned team a financial buffer similar to what a deep-pocketed owner might have for other teams. It seems likely that revenue will be greatly reduced on the local side and that's where this fund can help. Its been suggested that some teams will be looking to cut costs for 2020 to close the gap, including dumping high priced vets for teams that really aren't in contention this year

We'll see what happens-  but I don't mind leaning on that "rainy day" fund...its definitely raining this year.
 

Perhaps we should be creating a thread for speculating which players would get the ax...

What source are you quoting btw?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Joe said:

Perhaps we should be creating a thread for speculating which players would get the ax...

What source are you quoting btw?

we already have one and it can be found here

 

nailed it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GB and Aaron Jones agent are engaging in initial conversations...to see if there's a middle ground
What's a fair number for Jones and the Packers ?
Assume a 2- 3 year extension on top of 2020 so Jones gets another bite at the apple while still an under -30 RB

And no, we don't need you to barf out your " don't pay RBs mantra"  yet again. All good on that front

Is there a fair number that both sides can live with ? I think it's possible -  so what is that number ?
Current RB contracts linked below,  maybe in the $ 6-7 M range ?

https://overthecap.com/contracts/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Shanedorf said:

GB and Aaron Jones agent are engaging in initial conversations...to see if there's a middle ground
What's a fair number for Jones and the Packers ?
Assume a 2- 3 year extension on top of 2020 so Jones gets another bite at the apple while still an under -30 RB

And no, we don't need you to barf out your " don't pay RBs mantra"  yet again. All good on that front

Is there a fair number that both sides can live with ? I think it's possible -  so what is that number ?
Current RB contracts linked below,  maybe in the $ 6-7 M range ?

https://overthecap.com/contracts/

ew. I can't imagine he takes less than $8m. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/28/2020 at 11:55 AM, Shanedorf said:

GB and Aaron Jones agent are engaging in initial conversations...to see if there's a middle ground
What's a fair number for Jones and the Packers ?
Assume a 2- 3 year extension on top of 2020 so Jones gets another bite at the apple while still an under -30 RB

And no, we don't need you to barf out your " don't pay RBs mantra"  yet again. All good on that front

Is there a fair number that both sides can live with ? I think it's possible -  so what is that number ?
Current RB contracts linked below,  maybe in the $ 6-7 M range ?

https://overthecap.com/contracts/

 

On 5/28/2020 at 11:57 AM, JBURGE said:

ew. I can't imagine he takes less than $8m. 

I want a 6-7M/average.  

But I rarely get what I want.  Add 30% to that number and I'm guessing 9M average over 3 years.  

I can even live and be pretty happy with a 3 year, $30M extension.

I don't want to pay a running back, but Jones is a true weapon and doesn't have a lot of mileage on him.

Pairing him with Dillon is pretty exciting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, vegas492 said:

I want a 6-7M/average.  

But I rarely get what I want.  Add 30% to that number and I'm guessing 9M average over 3 years.  

I can even live and be pretty happy with a 3 year, $30M extension.

I don't want to pay a running back, but Jones is a true weapon and doesn't have a lot of mileage on him.

Pairing him with Dillon is pretty exciting.

To me, RB should be a position we are able to have effective starters on rookie contracts and spend the money elsewhere. By drafting Dillon it seemed that was the case. If we then pay Jones and run the ball more than we should, big yikes for me. Why draft a RB in the 2nd if you are going to pay one $9m a year? You might say the Ravens are doing this with Ingram... not comparable as Lamar is on his rookie deal. We don't have that luxury. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JBURGE said:

To me, RB should be a position we are able to have effective starters on rookie contracts and spend the money elsewhere. By drafting Dillon it seemed that was the case. If we then pay Jones and run the ball more than we should, big yikes for me. Why draft a RB in the 2nd if you are going to pay one $9m a year? You might say the Ravens are doing this with Ingram... not comparable as Lamar is on his rookie deal. We don't have that luxury. 

Unless Dillon bombs....possible, but unlikely IMO.....or AJ decides to stick around for a ridiculously low offer.....I think we're looking at Dillon and Jamaal as the 1-2 RBs of the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Leader said:

Unless Dillon bombs....possible, but unlikely IMO.....or AJ decides to stick around for a ridiculously low offer.....I think we're looking at Dillon and Jamaal as the 1-2 RBs of the future.

I really like Dillon a lot, but neither he nor Williams are starter material. They're RB2's; you need a legit starter and I wouldn't be surprised if we drafted another one early in next year's draft in the event Jones isn't extended or re-signed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, Joe said:

I really like Dillon a lot, but neither he nor Williams are starter material. They're RB2's; you need a legit starter and I wouldn't be surprised if we drafted another one early in next year's draft in the event Jones isn't extended or re-signed.

a guy who hasn't yet played in the NFL, drafted in the 2nd round, and is the most athletic RB drafted since saquon barkley isn't starter material.  

k.

You have a very predefined set of skills you are looking for if Dillon isn't starter material.

Edited by skibrett15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, skibrett15 said:

a guy who hasn't yet played in the NFL, drafted in the 2nd round, and is the most athletic RB drafted since saquon barkley isn't starter material.  

k.

You have a very predefined set of skills you are looking for if Dillon isn't starter material.

That's why I don't think he's starter material.

Plus the fact that he's got a ton of mileage as is. I would say he's athletic, but I wouldn't say he's as athletic as Saquon...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Joe said:

That's why I don't think he's starter material.

because he's a rookie? like, what am I missing here?

Why can't a rookie be starter material, especially since you are talking "long term" with Dillon/Williams as the options for next year.  If you said he isn't the starter over jones, then sure we all agree.  But you're saying Dillon isn't starter quality player for next year!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JBURGE said:

To me, RB should be a position we are able to have effective starters on rookie contracts and spend the money elsewhere. By drafting Dillon it seemed that was the case. If we then pay Jones and run the ball more than we should, big yikes for me. Why draft a RB in the 2nd if you are going to pay one $9m a year? You might say the Ravens are doing this with Ingram... not comparable as Lamar is on his rookie deal. We don't have that luxury. 

I look at it differently, and that is because I do have a soft spot for Jones.

We lack playmakers on offense.  Jones is one of them.  Dillon is an unknown right now.  MLF wants to run the ball.  We will need 2 backs, and maybe even 3.  Thunder and Lightning make sense to me, especially if our WR corp remains the same.

I'd pay to keep Jones on the team, but I wouldn't go nuts to do it.

If we had Prime Rodgers and were airing it out, I'd totally agree with you.  But we don't.  And won't.  So...might as well have a very strong running game.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Joe said:

I really like Dillon a lot, but neither he nor Williams are starter material. They're RB2's; you need a legit starter and I wouldn't be surprised if we drafted another one early in next year's draft in the event Jones isn't extended or re-signed.

I view Dillon, right now, as starter material.  You can do worse than him in the league.  I view Williams as a low end #2 RB, but high end #3.  I like the kid, but his game is very replaceable (Williams).

But, let's be very clear, he's not the same kind of back as Barkley.  Few are. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, vegas492 said:
3 hours ago, JBURGE said:

To me, RB should be a position we are able to have effective starters on rookie contracts and spend the money elsewhere. By drafting Dillon it seemed that was the case. If we then pay Jones and run the ball more than we should, big yikes for me. Why draft a RB in the 2nd if you are going to pay one $9m a year? You might say the Ravens are doing this with Ingram... not comparable as Lamar is on his rookie deal. We don't have that luxury. 

I look at it differently, and that is because I do have a soft spot for Jones.

We lack playmakers on offense.  Jones is one of them.  Dillon is an unknown right now.  MLF wants to run the ball.  We will need 2 backs, and maybe even 3.  Thunder and Lightning make sense to me, especially if our WR corp remains the same.

I'd pay to keep Jones on the team, but I wouldn't go nuts to do it.

If we had Prime Rodgers and were airing it out, I'd totally agree with you.  But we don't.  And won't.  So...might as well have a very strong running game.  

You can defend it with the bolded, however the bolded is also part of my problem. Running is inefficient and I hate the idea the offense will start with the run game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, JBURGE said:

You can defend it with the bolded, however the bolded is also part of my problem. Running is inefficient and I hate the idea the offense will start with the run game

I don't like it either, but it is a reality.

And really, maybe we should embrace it a little.  We aren't stacked in the WR room.  Our QB isn't Prime anymore.  Might as well try the Bronco/Elway approach for a couple of years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×