From Lambeau to Lombardi, Holmgren, McCarthy and LaFleur and from Starr to Favre, Rodgers and now Jordan Love we’re talking Super Bowl Champion Green Bay Packers football. This Packers Forum is the place to talk NFL football and everything Packers. So, pull up a keyboard, make yourself at home and let’s talk some Packers football.
I see many posts seeing a contract and then thinking about the nearest potential out. It is understandable because many organizations do operate like this. But have the Packers, outside of guys who were locker room problems or just contributed absolutely nothing like a few OLBs we have signed to decent deals?
I just ask because I wonder if it something the team tries not to do. Maybe they like to operate in better faith than some teams. I could be completely wrong, I am just thinking of the talk to push out Rodgers and then cut him, the talk to be off the hook from Jones deal in two years and then potentially cut him, etc...when the team had a chance to cut Preston and no one would blame them, as well as they could easily cut Dean Lowry, but they seem content to let him play out his deal too.
I guess I am just wondering if I am missing major precedent of the Packers giving guys deals, just to cut them when its convenient for cap purposes. I cant recall them playing that game very often. I think if a guy signs, there is a good chance he is here to stay.
I don't think we have a lot of precedent because it's something that TT didn't do, but Gutey might.
Gutey's contracts have definitely been more backloaded, more risky in free agency, and shown more willingness to take on dead money. I don't love that aspect generally speaking, which is why I prefer a cautious approach to free agency (more than TT but maybe a hair less than Gutey?), but I think it's definitely something worth considering. I appreciate you chiming in with that, because I had quickly fallen into the habit, also. It's MUCH better for your long-term cap (not to mention comp picks) to sign players to deals that are likely to be seen through than deals that are likely to require termination at a given point, and the Packers historically have been pretty big on doing so. Still much to be seen about the current regime, though.
That's well and fine. I'm. happy with that. But it also speaks to another thingy.
If Guty wants to sign a decent FA, there are only so many contracts that he can continue to restructure; namely Aaron Rogers. So, does that mean there's no way that Guty goes shopping for a top tier player? Or, does it mean that he invokes his inner Ted?
:-)
Per Overthecap.com's calculator, looking at possible moves, GB could free up:
Aaron Rodgers: 14.5M restructure OR 17.4M extension
Z Smith: 7.8M restructure OR 12.4M extension
Davante Adams: 9.3M extension
Adrian Amos: 2.2 restructure OR 3.5M extension
Dean Lowry: 1.7M restructure OR 3.3 cut
That's from 35.5M to 46M we could theoretically free up, but DISCLAIMER: Those numbers are extreme, and I'd say 15-20M freed up would be the most likely case. Which means we could realistically finagle enough cap space for a targeted value UFA or two.
While Gutey has shown himself to be more amenable to signing UFAs than TT, he's wise enough to avoid the tippy top tier of UFAs who get overpaid after bidding wars (not even the Smiths were top market deals). Especially in a cap year like this one. But could be a fine year to pick your spots after the teams who need big name signings to fill their stadiums have spent their silly money...
Yeah. Great points. The exception is Amos who is already in the bag.
Come on down and try some of our delicious green chili! Best in the world!
That's well and fine. I'm. happy with that. But it also speaks to another thingy.
If Guty wants to sign a decent FA, there are only so many contracts that he can continue to restructure; namely Aaron Rogers. So, does that mean there's no way that Guty goes shopping for a top tier player? Or, does it mean that he invokes his inner Ted?
:-)
I mean this is your big FA signing in a sense. Extending Z gets you Jones. I would imagine they still extend Adams. I’m willing to bet this team does everything it can not to restructure Rodgers. Sadly it is very clear they want out in another 2 years and don’t want to mess much with that if they don’t have to.
Well, in two years, Aaron Rogers will be going into his "age 40" season. Even if you are Aaron Rogers, you are on borrowed time. You just keep him as long as you can, unless you have a legit star QB on deck. As much as a team that always wants to keep their star QB for one more year, you can't hold on to a stud would-be starter indefinitely. And I think that Guty has the balls to release Aaron at age 40 if he believes in Love. (I believe in love too, but that's entirely another story. Moving on...)
Come on down and try some of our delicious green chili! Best in the world!
That's well and fine. I'm. happy with that. But it also speaks to another thingy.
If Guty wants to sign a decent FA, there are only so many contracts that he can continue to restructure; namely Aaron Rogers. So, does that mean there's no way that Guty goes shopping for a top tier player? Or, does it mean that he invokes his inner Ted?
:-)
I mean this is your big FA signing in a sense. Extending Z gets you Jones. I would imagine they still extend Adams. I’m willing to bet this team does everything it can not to restructure Rodgers. Sadly it is very clear they want out in another 2 years and don’t want to mess much with that if they don’t have to.
Well, in two years, Aaron Rogers will be going into his "age 40" season. Even if you are Aaron Rogers, you are on borrowed time. You just keep him as long as you can, unless you have a legit star QB on deck. As much as a team that always wants to keep their star QB for one more year, you can't hold on to a stud would-be starter indefinitely. And I think that Guty has the balls to release Aaron at age 40 if he believes in Love. (I believe in love too, but that's entirely another story. Moving on...)
I think the dream situation for the Green Bay Packers (and also a nightmare) is to win a ring or two in 21 and 22 and have Rodgers perform at a high level, but also have the coaches see that Jordan Love is ready and is going to be really good.
Then the Packers can be most hated team again by trading Rodgers at a high price point while getting rebuild for the next run.
That's an important point for all the ERFAs and RFAs... not being tendered doesn't mean you won't stick around. It just means you're probably a minimum-salary player, not a tender-value player. Happens a lot, at least with our team.
That's an important point for all the ERFAs and RFAs... not being tendered doesn't mean you won't stick around. It just means you're probably a minimum-salary player, not a tender-value player. Happens a lot, at least with our team.
Lancaster falls into this group for me. Love to have him back, but not worth the tender value.
That's an important point for all the ERFAs and RFAs... not being tendered doesn't mean you won't stick around. It just means you're probably a minimum-salary player, not a tender-value player. Happens a lot, at least with our team.
I think the only two players who have a chance at being tendered are Tonyan and maybe Sullivan. But even Sullivan I would be surprised.
