Jeff Hafley Packers new DC

[lupedafiasco]

Two things can be true at once. Aaron Jones can be a great player but still overpaid. Aaron Jones cap hit next season is more than CMC by almost $3.5M. Only 5 RBs in the league make more than $10M.

[YoHoChecko]

Two things can be true at once. Aaron Jones can be a great player but still overpaid. Aaron Jones cap hit next season is more than CMC by almost $3.5M. Only 5 RBs in the league make more than $10M.

His cap hit is the result of the renegotiations, not how much he is paid. I don't think he's overpaid, but I do think his contract will be altered/extended this offseason to change his cap number while continuing to compensate him well.

But his cashflow is not/has not been "too much." The "last year of a frequently-adjusted deal" cap hit is artificially high and I suspect that will be addressed.

[BF004]

Yeah, cap hit isn’t a good way to determine if someone is over paid. Lot can go into a one year snapshot.

[Cdragon]

Win the Lombardi and nobody cares how much you got paid.

But I'm more interested in Hafley going to a 4-3 and getting more heavies on the field. Are we going to off load any OLBs or dump Campbell and maybe give Preston some shots in the middle slot?

[Pckfn23]

We aren't adding bigs. 4-2 is the base and was the base. Nothing changes other than going to 4-3 when we go "heavy" adding a 3rd LBer.

[lupedafiasco]

Yeah, cap hit isn’t a good way to determine if someone is over paid. Lot can go into a one year snapshot.

Maybe I’m crazy. I think cap hit is the only thing that matters.

[Pckfn23]

Yeah, cap hit isn’t a good way to determine if someone is over paid. Lot can go into a one year snapshot.

Maybe I’m crazy. I think cap hit is the only thing that matters.

In any given year for a team, yes, but for comparing players it doesn't make sense.

[bud fox]

New money is all that matters when comparing players from a market perspective.

[BF004]

Yeah, cap hit isn’t a good way to determine if someone is over paid. Lot can go into a one year snapshot.

Maybe I’m crazy. I think cap hit is the only thing that matters.

Yes, that is crazy.

Say we resign Nixon for 2 years 8 million. First year 1M cap hit, 2nd year 7M cap hit. Does that mean he is not overpaid just first year and is his 2nd year. Can that be true while on on the same contract?

We are paying him 8M over two years, that is the better picture. And it wouldn’t be like we are paying him $7m in year two and can save $7m by not keeping him.

[lupedafiasco]

I would say the year we have him for 1M is great value and the 7M is awful. That’s just bad structuring, as is what o feel the case is with Jones deal.

[Yoop]

It was so much simpler when teams where not allowed to push contract money into future seasons, and where forced to work with cap cash per season.

I blame Carmen Policy, I think he's the first one to do this with Steve Young when they had both Young and Montana, back early to mid 90's, he found a loop hole, exploited it, and that started this snow ball affect of using what amounts to a credit card approach to team building.

now to not do it, well impossible to compete, teams are forced to pro rate contracts or lose players to teams that will.
I think the league allows it so to increase parity, balance.

[Pckfn23]

I would say the year we have him for 1M is great value and the 7M is awful. That’s just bad structuring, as is what o feel the case is with Jones deal.

All teams backload contracts and with cap hit is isn't just about the 1 player. It's about multiple years and multiple contract and the plan to structure them all to fit under the cap. It doesn't make any of it good or bad. When comparing player to player, Average and guaranteed money are about all that really matter for that comparison.

[Pckfn23]

New money is all that matters when comparing players from a market perspective.

Years matters as well as does guarantees.

[go pak go]

I would say the year we have him for 1M is great value and the 7M is awful. That’s just bad structuring, as is what o feel the case is with Jones deal.

It's the price to pay of going all in on the salary cap from 2020 to 2022. We are now paying the price of a lot of players with ugly contracts.

Bak
Clark
Campbell (he is an easier decision)
Preston
Jones

My bet is Jones is extended. Bak is reworked completely. Campbell is cut. Clark and Preston are bit tougher to do things. Maybe extend Clark and ride Preston's contract as is.

[TheSkeptic]

Win the Lombardi and nobody cares how much you got paid.

But I'm more interested in Hafley going to a 4-3 and getting more heavies on the field. Are we going to off load any OLBs or dump Campbell and maybe give Preston some shots in the middle slot?

Yes, dumping Campbell is probable.

The Packers base is going to be a 4-2-5 with 2 DT's and 2 DE's and 2 ILB's. In the past we often saw a 3-4 with 3 down linemen, 2 OLB's and 2 ILB's - all the same players as in the 4-2-5 but lined up a little differently. Actually Hafley's 4-2-5 is likely to be a lighter lineup than the former 3-4-4 base.

Smith cannot play conventional MLB as he never had sideline to sideline speed or quickness. He is too big and therefore will be a DE.

[go pak go]

It was so much simpler when teams where not allowed to push contract money into future seasons, and where forced to work with cap cash per season.

I blame Carmen Policy, I think he's the first one to do this with Steve Young when they had both Young and Montana, back early to mid 90's, he found a loop hole, exploited it, and that started this snow ball affect of using what amounts to a credit card approach to team building.

now to not do it, well impossible to compete, teams are forced to pro rate contracts or lose players to teams that will.
I think the league allows it so to increase parity, balance.

No the change really happened with the new CBA in 2011. You used to be able to push some cap forward pre 2010 but it was limited severely. Like you could only push forward like 10% of the overall cap or something.

Now there is unlimited cap rollover so there is really no incentive on using current year cap space. You then remove the "pay as you play" and incentive to front load contracts like we used to do. It is actually numerically stupid to cap front-load a contract now unless you were in a Bears team situation.

With the rapid rise in overall cap year over year and ability to rollover unlimited cap...teams are incentivized to push dollars into the future. I would like to see it back to pre 2011 CBA rules but this would result in lower signing bonus contracts and less money to players immediately which they obviously wouldnt' like.

But it would also end the awkward last two years on a deal where a player is just too expensive on the cap and the team has to cut the player as a result prematurely.

[TheSkeptic]

I would say the year we have him for 1M is great value and the 7M is awful. That’s just bad structuring, as is what o feel the case is with Jones deal.

It's the price to pay of going all in on the salary cap from 2020 to 2022. We are now paying the price of a lot of players with ugly contracts.

Bak
Clark
Campbell (he is an easier decision)
Preston
Jones

My bet is Jones is extended. Bak is reworked completely. Campbell is cut. Clark and Preston are bit tougher to do things. Maybe extend Clark and ride Preston's contract as is.

Yeah, Campbell is cut after June 1.

I do not expect any changes to Clark or Preston. There is only a small chance that Preston could be traded for a starting safety or ILB.
IMO Jones is going to be a Packer for 2 more seasons with no or insignificant changes to his 2 year cap total.

There are no good solutions for Bakh or the Packers as the Packers don't need him and he would be very difficult to trade. Odds are they have to swallow the entire 40 million this season. Maybe he is on IR until December and can contribute in December and January if someone gets hurt.

[Pckfn23]

I have my doubts that we cut Campbell, as much as he has sucked the last several years. First, we RARELY post June 1 cut a guy, most teams do not. That would mean the cap savings on this year would be a mere $2.6 million. If he can improve even a bit, we aren't finding a capable LB for $2.6 million against the cap in 2024. Second, and related, with going to a 4-3, we are going to need 3 capable off the ball linebackers. Right now we have 3 in Walker, McDuffie, and Campbell. There are no others on the roster. We are likely to draft one, but coupled with only a $2.6 million cap savings, I don't think this is the year we send Campbell packing.

[Yoop]

It was so much simpler when teams where not allowed to push contract money into future seasons, and where forced to work with cap cash per season.

I blame Carmen Policy, I think he's the first one to do this with Steve Young when they had both Young and Montana, back early to mid 90's, he found a loop hole, exploited it, and that started this snow ball affect of using what amounts to a credit card approach to team building.

now to not do it, well impossible to compete, teams are forced to pro rate contracts or lose players to teams that will.
I think the league allows it so to increase parity, balance.

No the change really happened with the new CBA in 2011. You used to be able to push some cap forward pre 2010 but it was limited severely. Like you could only push forward like 10% of the overall cap or something.

Now there is unlimited cap rollover so there is really no incentive on using current year cap space. You then remove the "pay as you play" and incentive to front load contracts like we used to do. It is actually numerically stupid to cap front-load a contract now unless you were in a Bears team situation.

With the rapid rise in overall cap year over year and ability to rollover unlimited cap...teams are incentivized to push dollars into the future. I would like to see it back to pre 2011 CBA rules but this would result in lower signing bonus contracts and less money to players immediately which they obviously wouldnt' like.

But it would also end the awkward last two years on a deal where a player is just too expensive on the cap and the team has to cut the player as a result prematurely.

thanks for clarity, Basically my memories are a season in the 90's when we lost to the Niners, and we found out they where over the cap, the explanation was that they pushed money in to future seasons, thats about all I remember, we felt it was unfair advantage.

to me whats going on now is like using a credit card, the only penalty is the shelf live of the player

[go pak go]

It was so much simpler when teams where not allowed to push contract money into future seasons, and where forced to work with cap cash per season.

I blame Carmen Policy, I think he's the first one to do this with Steve Young when they had both Young and Montana, back early to mid 90's, he found a loop hole, exploited it, and that started this snow ball affect of using what amounts to a credit card approach to team building.

now to not do it, well impossible to compete, teams are forced to pro rate contracts or lose players to teams that will.
I think the league allows it so to increase parity, balance.

No the change really happened with the new CBA in 2011. You used to be able to push some cap forward pre 2010 but it was limited severely. Like you could only push forward like 10% of the overall cap or something.

Now there is unlimited cap rollover so there is really no incentive on using current year cap space. You then remove the "pay as you play" and incentive to front load contracts like we used to do. It is actually numerically stupid to cap front-load a contract now unless you were in a Bears team situation.

With the rapid rise in overall cap year over year and ability to rollover unlimited cap...teams are incentivized to push dollars into the future. I would like to see it back to pre 2011 CBA rules but this would result in lower signing bonus contracts and less money to players immediately which they obviously wouldnt' like.

But it would also end the awkward last two years on a deal where a player is just too expensive on the cap and the team has to cut the player as a result prematurely.

thanks for clarity, Basically my memories are a season in the 90's when we lost to the Niners, and we found out they where over the cap, the explanation was that they pushed money in to future seasons, thats about all I remember, we felt it was unfair advantage.

to me whats going on now is like using a credit card, the only penalty is the shelf live of the player

You could absolutely do that in the 90's and 2000's but the ability was incredibly limited. Nothing like we are seeing now.