Jump to content

2023 Rookie Minicamp / OTAs / Training Camp


Leader

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, craig said:

This is somewhat misleading.  Half of the $40 was borrowed from the 2024 cap to lower previous cap.  That's already a sunk cost, there is no decision regarding that $19; that is getting cap-counted whether we pay him or not. 

What's actually worth considering is the $21/1 that's NOT a sunk cost.  Given the market for good tackles, I'm not sure $21/1 for Bak is a bad deal?  I think it's close enough to market where the Packers might offer to use that as a starting point in discussion of a restructured extension.  

I'm not saying they'll choose to do that, or that he'll accept.  Just that $21/1 for a high-end LT is not so ridiculous that it's a no-brainer.  

Name another OT with a big contact that doesn't have a ton of that years cap money already paid out in bonuses. Name another OT that has a 40-million-dollar cap hit this year and is still on that team playing. 21 million is not chump change. Bak would not help the Packers be restructuring and pushing money down the road this year. I don't believe he has any intention of signing an extension with the Packers. I also believe he knows the Packers want to lower his 40 million dollar hit to the cap. 

I really don't see anyway he works with the Packers unless Jordan Love looks like a guy who can get them to the Super Bowl next year and the Jets don't look like a team getting there. 

Why would we want to extent a guy who' has hardly played since he got his extension a few weeks prior to the ACL? He still can't practice and we don't know if he's making it through 17 games. IMO it's highly unlikely he does. 

Edited by Old Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't even think it matters if ol Dave is back next year or not, I see it as a near lock the Packers go OT/DT/Snickel with their 2 first rounders and 2nd next year. If Bakh comes back that just means the rookie will get spot time when Dave's out. But in 2 years, gonna need a guy. Nijman is clearly a guy this staff will always want to upgrade. Great guy to have as your backup swing tackle as long as the cost stays down. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Old Guy said:

.... 21 million is not chump change. .... I don't believe he has any intention of signing an extension with the Packers....

I really don't see anyway he works with the Packers unless Jordan Love looks like a guy who can get them to the Super Bowl next year and the Jets don't look like a team getting there....

Thanks.  You are speaking to the pros-cons and plausibility-or-not of either $21/1 or a restructure.  That's what the discussion should be about.  

Referencing $40/1 instead of $21/1 that misrepresents the decision-making analysis the Packers will actually apply.  

I'm just belaboring that if he gets discussed again, we should discuss it using $21/1 and not $40/1.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, NFLGURU said:

Are the Packers really going into the season with Carlson as their kicker?

That's going to cost us.  

They're going with a rookie kicker because they perceive a lot of potential. He will have rookie moments. They may lose a game when he misses a 40 yard field goal. They may win a game when he makes a 55 yarder. It's likely to be that kind of year both for the kicking game and the offense. Ton of potential, but consistency may not be their strong point.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NFLGURU said:

Are the Packers really going into the season with Carlson as their kicker?

That's going to cost us.  

If we're in a position where that actually WILL cost us, then we're sitting in a pretty favorable position long-term.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Zycho32 said:

If we're in a position where that actually WILL cost us, then we're sitting in a pretty favorable position long-term.

I think he's saying it could cost us a game where he misses at the end of it. Not sure that ties into long-term position. 

I'm hopeful he will only have one guy holding for him going forward and that may help. The guy was a stud before the ACL. He's got an NFL leg; hope he can find NFL accuracy. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, MantyWrestler said:

So… why do you think we should be all about an OT in next years draft?

Because we should always be looking for tackles (premiums)?

Yosh could be gone.  Bakh could be gone.  As much as we like Tom right now, he's an unknown at tackle at this point and time.

Moving forward, it could very well be that the three rostered tackles are a 7'th round pick, UDFA and 4'th round pick.

I'd also be looking at IDL, corner and safety with our first(s).

Maybe safety would be a 2nd round or later pick, but if there's a coverage kid there in the first, Lord knows that is a huge need.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Old Guy said:

I think he's saying it could cost us a game where he misses at the end of it. Not sure that ties into long-term position. 

I'm hopeful he will only have one guy holding for him going forward and that may help. The guy was a stud before the ACL. He's got an NFL leg; hope he can find NFL accuracy. 

I was thinking more of a "Costs us the Playoffs" kind of stake.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anders seems like a good, calm guy and I hope he does well.  I like having a big leg.  I don't mind inconsistency this year, **IF** it's hypothetically on the path to being reasonably accurate next year and beyond.  We're not winning the Super Bowl this year anyway, he's not going to be choking any field goals that cost us a win deep in the playoffs.  

*IF* we hypothetically don't even make the playoffs, *IF* he hypothetically misses a field goal and costs us a regular-season win, who cares?  It just elevates our draft picks.  And if MLF gets a little more creative and aggressive with 2-point conversion-attempts or going for it on some 4th downs, that might be fun.    

Link to comment
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...