Jump to content

2021 GB Roster & Free Agents


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, Mr. Fussnputz said:

Anybody think the Packers should use the franchise tag on Aaron Jones? I have no opinion either way, but am open to arguments on either side.

They want him back, so it's a possibility.  Word on the street is that he's been given multiple offers, so it's clear they want him to be a part of the future.  I think they will find common ground at some point and won't need the tag. 

Who has received no offers ... Linsley and Jamaal Williams.  Jones is the guy they want back. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Mr. Fussnputz said:

Anybody think the Packers should use the franchise tag on Aaron Jones? I have no opinion either way, but am open to arguments on either side.

no.   Money is tight and committing that much to a RB is not the best use of cap space

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

No to franchise tag. That's estimated to be a bit over 11M for a RB in 2021. They'll want to do an extension with a low cap hit for 2021. Agreeing on guaranteed money is likely the sticking point. Linsley is gone. Might have some interest in Williams if deal with Jones can't be worked out. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mr. Fussnputz said:

Two "no's" and one possible. I think I read read his tag price would be around $8 million. Not sure if that's accurate. They seem to want him back. 

 

2021 Projected Franchise and Transition Tenders

Position Franchise Tag Transition Tag
QB $24,112,000 $21,749,000
DE $17,752,000 $14,811,000
WR $16,430,000 $14,269,000
LB $15,657,000 $13,406,000
CB $15,266,000 $13,202,000
OL $14,507,000 $13,156,000
DT $14,178,000 $11,405,000
S $11,196,000 $9,550,000
RB $11,112,000 $8,942,000
TE $10,156,000 $8,570,000
ST $4,792,000 $4,382,000

 

I don't see GB having the cap space to do a Franchise tag of $11.1M

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Mr. Fussnputz said:

Anybody think the Packers should use the franchise tag on Aaron Jones? I have no opinion either way, but am open to arguments on either side.

No thanks, in a year where there’s salary cap issues league wide, I just don’t think you spend that kind of money to retain Jones service for one more year when you just draft Dillon in the 2nd, trust your scouting department ride Dillon for the next 4 years and draft his replacement in the next 3 jmho

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, vegas492 said:

Not that it means much, but PFF had an article I read about free agents.  They had King listed in like the 100's for available free agents.  They projected him to Seattle for 3.5M. 1 year deal.

Whatcha say?  I think for 3.5M, he can stay here.  Should stay here.

3.5 for 1?  Yeah, absolutely.  That is top end #2 CB money (tied for 36th).  If that is his going rate, I am fine with it.  I would even try to get him at like 12 for 3 or something.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, {Family Ghost} said:

They want him back, so it's a possibility.  Word on the street is that he's been given multiple offers, so it's clear they want him to be a part of the future.  I think they will find common ground at some point and won't need the tag. 

Who has received no offers ... Linsley and Jamaal Williams.  Jones is the guy they want back. 

They also want him back at a price.  And reportedly it's with low guarantees.  And you don't re-sign guys like Jamaal Williams prior to FA.  If you're re-signing them prior to FA, you likely overpaid.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

They also want him back at a price.  And reportedly it's with low guarantees.  And you don't re-sign guys like Jamaal Williams prior to FA.  If you're re-signing them prior to FA, you likely overpaid.

Neither Williams or Linsley have heard a peep from the Packers. That usually means bye bye. Of course, this is a weird year, but ......

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, CWood21 said:

They also want him back at a price.  And reportedly it's with low guarantees.  And you don't re-sign guys like Jamaal Williams prior to FA.  If you're re-signing them prior to FA, you likely overpaid.

Is it possible they put a franchise tag on Jones and then use that as leverage to negotiate a long term deal with cap friendly number for 2021 when the cap will be low? I'm not a capologist, but a curious fan. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Joe said:

Agreed. Runyan more than proved he's ready to start, stick him at LG, move Jenkins to RT, and kick Billy Turner back into RG.

Just to toss it out there, but how to people feel about bringing Lane Taylor back. I know we commonly joke about guys taking "vet min" deals, but he feels like the kind of guy who actually fits that criteria. 

Is there a way to fit him in the lineup in a way that can free up some money by releasing either Wagner or Turner?

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Mr. Fussnputz said:

Is it possible they put a franchise tag on Jones and then use that as leverage to negotiate a long term deal with cap friendly number for 2021 when the cap will be low? I'm not a capologist, but a curious fan. 

It is a possibility, but it could also backfire and Jones plays on the tagged contract and GB is hit with a bigger cap hit than they wanted.  

The leverage is interesting to consider, from the players view, applying the tag implies that GB would value Jones at $11M per year (or whatever the tagged value is), so why would he accept a contract that does not align with that value?

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, pgwingman said:

Just to toss it out there, but how to people feel about bringing Lane Taylor back. I know we commonly joke about guys taking "vet min" deals, but he feels like the kind of guy who actually fits that criteria. 

Is there a way to fit him in the lineup in a way that can free up some money by releasing either Wagner or Turner?

I’m sorry but why would you release either Wagner or Turner to sign Taylor to a vet min contract? Are we trying to get worse on the OL? 

Edited by Nick_gb
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Nick_gb said:

I’m sorry but why would you release either Wagner or Turner to sign Taylor to a bet mom contract? Are we trying to get worse on the OL? 

I think pick #29 is going to be an OT .. we'll see how it all shakes out, but it seems like there could be some worthy prospects in our vicinity come draft day.

Edited by {Family Ghost}
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, {Family Ghost} said:

I think pick #29 is going to be an OT .. we'll see how it all shakes out, but it seems like there could be some worthy prospects in our vicinity come draft day.

I could see that being the play as well, definitely tends to make sense with Bakh being out. I just don’t think you force that pick by releasing either one of those two guys. Jmho

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...