GB free agency 2022

[Old Guy]

I'm for neither of the Seattle receivers. Let's see what happens after June 1st. Also, remember there is a fire sale on players around the trade deadline. 
 

We are going to get a good WR in the draft. I don't think there is any question about that. I also see us getting a 4th or 5th round developmental type of guy.

[CWood21]

6 hours ago, PossibleCabbage said:

The Packers get a pass for tagging and trading Adams because they worked for like a year and a half to extend him, reached an impasse, tagged him for leverage, and reached another impasse.  No one can say the Packers did not make an effort to retain Davante Adams.

If you won't even make an effort to pay Metcalf the going rate for top WRs (which is IMO too much) I think there's a reasonable chance that you tag him and he sits out, or if you try to trade him the NFL will rescind the tag.  The NFL wants to protect the franchise tag in future labor talks (no other sports leagues have something like this) so will be keen to curtail uses of it that appear abusive.

Now you could certainly attempt to sign Metcalf at like $25m/year but do you really want to run the risk that he says yes?

The NFL (which acts on behalf of all 32 teams) isn't going to nix a trade because the player might get more on the open market.  I believe in the last 2 CBA negotiations, the franchise tag was a non-negotiable on behalf of the league.  And what defines a "good faith effort" is ridiculously ambiguous, and intentionally to prevent any issues with it.

The NFLPA is the one who is going to throw a stink about the tag 'n trade because it suppresses the FA market.  But at the end of the day, as long as their player gets paid they won't care.

[CWood21]

3 hours ago, R T said:

There is smoke with Metcalf so there is probably fire, just don't believe the Packers are competing players if the Jets are going for a silly PR move.   

I don't think Green Bay is as desperate to land DK Metcalf as the Jets are.

[NFLGURU]

14 minutes ago, coachbuns said:

Follow the dollars ... that's what counts.  Love Green Bay, my son lives there but trying to make GB attractive to young quality football players is often times a losing proposition without HUGE dollars to go with it.  Good business options are certainly nice for a team to have but dollars rule.

Dollars are huge, but if you don't treat players right, Green Bay can be very easy place to leave.  The Packers do a good job at making players comfortable in Green Bay.

[NFLGURU]

22 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

Getting 8yrs of production and then an extra 1st and 2nd round pick is a problem I'd love to have every off-season.

Agree from the Packers perspective.  

[squire12]

18 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

The NFL (which acts on behalf of all 32 teams) isn't going to nix a trade because the player might get more on the open market.  I believe in the last 2 CBA negotiations, the franchise tag was a non-negotiable on behalf of the league.  And what defines a "good faith effort" is ridiculously ambiguous, and intentionally to prevent any issues with it.

The NFLPA is the one who is going to throw a stink about the tag 'n trade because it suppresses the FA market.  But at the end of the day, as long as their player gets paid they won't care.

Franchise tag affects like 1-2% of the NFLPA.  as ideal as it would be to remove that, what would the bulk of the NFLPA members be willing to give up for those 1-2% ?

[packfanfb]

47 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

I don't think Green Bay is as desperate to land DK Metcalf as the Jets are.

This is probably true, which is actually funny, as it should be the opposite. A team like the Jets that has zero chance to make a SB run shouldn't be trading premium picks for a high priced WR. The Bears made a similar mistake trading for Mack without a playoff caliber QB.  Conversely, a team desperately trying to get over the NFC playoff hump and reach a SB with a 38 year QB should probably be looking to make that type of move. 

[Norm]

Someone introduce DK to DefenseWinsChamionships and he'll refuse a trade to the Jets after that

[Mr Bad Example]

On 3/29/2022 at 9:30 PM, wgbeethree said:

I swear we have this conversation every year during free agency.

GB is a quarter the size of the next smallest NFL city, the weather in winter sucks, and there's no culture/diversity. It's clearly low on the totem pole for desirability as far as destinations go for most NFL players. 

They almost all tend to love it once they get there but very few are excited by the idea of it.

 

Isn't the quote something like "players don't want to go to Green Bay and if they do, they don't want to leave"

[VonKarman]

11 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Why would they want to jettison him if he's under contract long term?

There were some rumblings a few weeks ago about him being on the market. They save cap space this year if the do it as a June 1st trade. It seems like they are cleaning house, so trading a 30 year old WR fits in that description.

[Mr Bad Example]

On 3/30/2022 at 10:19 AM, coachbuns said:

LOL ... sensitive are we?  It's not they have to live in Wisconsin full time .. most don't and no problem.  Planes are great;  come play for GB and their departure is a 1st class seat away. 

Having just flown out of Appleton, I can assure you that none of the regional jets leaving GB or ATW have anything approximating "first class." 

However a quick zip in a limo to MKE or relatively longer zip to O'Hare will get you some nice flying accomodations. 

[Mr Bad Example]

On 3/31/2022 at 1:38 PM, incognito_man said:

Everyone knows that Green Bay is less attractive to NFL player demographics. 

Similarly, most everyone else knows that Wisconsin is more than farmland.

These things are true at the same time. Using hyperbole to try and make a point is silly.

Anyone who wants to go clubbing and get freaky with the local probably doesn't care if the surrounding countryside is lakefront, farmland, desert, or active volcanos so long as the Courvoisier flows and the women are hot/easy. 

[Mr Bad Example]

On 3/31/2022 at 4:32 PM, skibrett15 said:

It's not even proximal to anything remarkable.  There is no Machu Picchu of the midwest.

 

GB isn't proximal to it, but the Midwest does have the Cahokia mounds, which is pretty interesting: 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cahokia

[Old Guy]

15 hours ago, VonKarman said:

I feel like it's much smarter to go after Lockett than after Metcalf. You can probably have him for a 3rd+5th rounder or something similar, has a 2022 3M cap hit if we trade for him and he has a contract up until 2025 that we can cut with no dead money whenever we feel like it. We get a pretty good receiver and we don't get to spend too much capital doing it.

Like all players in those situations, he's going to want new money on any trade. You're not getting him for that contract. Plus, Seattle has to eat 18 million in a post June 1st trade. I don't see it happening. 

[incognito_man]

3 hours ago, Mr Bad Example said:

Anyone who wants to go clubbing and get freaky with the local probably doesn't care if the surrounding countryside is lakefront, farmland, desert, or active volcanos so long as the Courvoisier flows and the women are hot/easy. 

Is the "/" an "and" or an "or"?