Packers Use Franchise Tag on Davante Adams

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.

Moderators: NCF, salmar80, BF004, APB, Packfntk

YoHoChecko
Reactions:
Posts: 9694
Joined: 26 Mar 2020 11:34

Post by YoHoChecko »

paco wrote:
15 Mar 2022 17:58

Not even a little from the sounds of it.
That is precisely what has been reported over and over again. It feels credible. That’s the issue.

Drj820
Reactions:
Posts: 9937
Joined: 26 Mar 2020 12:34

Post by Drj820 »

What does one summize we could get for Adams in a trade? I would think at least a 1, and then probably a lower pick sprinkled in. I would move him now while other FAs are looking for a home and we can improve in the draft. I love Adams. I hope he gets a record deal. But if he wants that much money...i just hope its somewhere else.
I Do Not Hate Matt Lafleur

Realist
Reactions:
Posts: 686
Joined: 12 Sep 2021 17:32

Post by Realist »

Drj820 wrote:
15 Mar 2022 18:56
What does one summize we could get for Adams in a trade? I would think at least a 1, and then probably a lower pick sprinkled in. I would move him now while other FAs are looking for a home and we can improve in the draft. I love Adams. I hope he gets a record deal. But if he wants that much money...i just hope its somewhere else.
No way Aaron would sign off on a trade of Adams.

Drj820
Reactions:
Posts: 9937
Joined: 26 Mar 2020 12:34

Post by Drj820 »

Realist wrote:
15 Mar 2022 19:13
Drj820 wrote:
15 Mar 2022 18:56
What does one summize we could get for Adams in a trade? I would think at least a 1, and then probably a lower pick sprinkled in. I would move him now while other FAs are looking for a home and we can improve in the draft. I love Adams. I hope he gets a record deal. But if he wants that much money...i just hope its somewhere else.
No way Aaron would sign off on a trade of Adams.
he already signed for 150m, he can make cookies with the indegredients we can afford to give him.

I feel if he is really pals with Adams then letting Adams play on a new deal somewhere else instead of the tag would be the very "pal" thing to do.
I Do Not Hate Matt Lafleur

Realist
Reactions:
Posts: 686
Joined: 12 Sep 2021 17:32

Post by Realist »

Drj820 wrote:
15 Mar 2022 19:16
Realist wrote:
15 Mar 2022 19:13
Drj820 wrote:
15 Mar 2022 18:56
What does one summize we could get for Adams in a trade? I would think at least a 1, and then probably a lower pick sprinkled in. I would move him now while other FAs are looking for a home and we can improve in the draft. I love Adams. I hope he gets a record deal. But if he wants that much money...i just hope its somewhere else.
No way Aaron would sign off on a trade of Adams.
he already signed for 150m, he can make cookies with the indegredients we can afford to give him.

I feel if he is really pals with Adams then letting Adams play on a new deal somewhere else instead of the tag would be the very "pal" thing to do.
I am not familiar with that trait in Aaron.

User avatar
Foosball
Reactions:
Posts: 411
Joined: 28 Mar 2020 10:47
Location: 2203 miles from Lambeau Field

Post by Foosball »

Rodgers was upset when Cobb and Kumerow were let go. What do you think would happen if the Packers traded Adams?

Adams is part of the deal.
Love is the answer…

User avatar
texas
Reactions:
Posts: 3374
Joined: 24 Mar 2020 22:03

Post by texas »

Honestly I would be fine with letting him walk if it weren't for the presumption that letting him walk would be unacceptable to Rodgers.

Fact is, he's our best WR by far. But the other fact is that Rodgers has an extreme over-reliance on him which hurts us when it counts. Plus we'd save all that money.

User avatar
paco
Reactions:
Posts: 6718
Joined: 18 Mar 2020 15:29
Location: Janesville, WI

Post by paco »

texas wrote:
15 Mar 2022 22:00
Honestly I would be fine with letting him walk if it weren't for the presumption that letting him walk would be unacceptable to Rodgers.

Fact is, he's our best WR by far. But the other fact is that Rodgers has an extreme over-reliance on him which hurts us when it counts. Plus we'd save all that money.
Basically no point in saving the money now. We committed to Rodgers, Preston, and others. Pay the man and go for it. Deal with the consequences later.
Image
RIP JustJeff

Madcity_matt
Reactions:
Posts: 583
Joined: 27 Mar 2020 22:22

Post by Madcity_matt »

paco wrote:
15 Mar 2022 22:31
texas wrote:
15 Mar 2022 22:00
Honestly I would be fine with letting him walk if it weren't for the presumption that letting him walk would be unacceptable to Rodgers.

Fact is, he's our best WR by far. But the other fact is that Rodgers has an extreme over-reliance on him which hurts us when it counts. Plus we'd save all that money.
Basically no point in saving the money now. We committed to Rodgers, Preston, and others. Pay the man and go for it. Deal with the consequences later.
Yep. We all know this is going to get resolved, and they are gonna pay the man his money. We’d just all prefer to cut through the drama, but drama is our brand lately.

User avatar
Scott4Pack
Reactions:
Posts: 2816
Joined: 26 Mar 2020 03:41
Location: New Mexico

Post by Scott4Pack »

Scott4Pack wrote:
10 Mar 2022 10:23
I wouldn’t think so either.

I would believe that Tae wants as much of everything GUARANTEED as early as possible. I’d think that’s how most WRs that are 30 are thinking. The vast majority of 30 year old WRs are going one year at a time and they just don’t get contracts longer than that, usually.
Now I'm seeing some more of the FA deals out there and wondering if every FA, not only the skill position guys, are wanting to get as much guaranteed as possible. If I were a player, I probably would too. But this can only have a negative impact in the long run on the NFL.

Imagine a QB, even an elite one, being guaranteed over $100,000,000 before he even steps on the field.
Come on down and try some of our delicious green chili! Best in the world!

User avatar
go pak go
Reactions:
Posts: 13131
Joined: 22 Mar 2020 21:30

Post by go pak go »

The new NFL is you throw a sh*t load of signing bonus money at a guy, backload the the crap out of the deal to make the total contract look big, and the result is every contract is effectively a 3 year deal with the face showing 5 years and the player getting cut in Year 4 and the team eating $15 million or more in dead cap.
Yoop wrote:
26 May 2021 11:22
could we get some moderation in here to get rid of conspiracy theory's, some in here are trying to have a adult conversation.
Image

User avatar
Yoop
Reactions:
Posts: 12092
Joined: 24 Mar 2020 09:23

Post by Yoop »

go pak go wrote:
16 Mar 2022 06:31
The new NFL is you throw a sh*t load of signing bonus money at a guy, backload the the crap out of the deal to make the total contract look big, and the result is every contract is effectively a 3 year deal with the face showing 5 years and the player getting cut in Year 4 and the team eating $15 million or more in dead cap.
why wouldn't the teams do this, in the next 5 years the cap will increase as much as 40%, at least thats the predictions I've read, so while we'll be on the books for 50 mil. dead money with Rodgers, those cap increases should lesson the blow, same for other teams that want to retain there best players.

YoHoChecko
Reactions:
Posts: 9694
Joined: 26 Mar 2020 11:34

Post by YoHoChecko »

go pak go wrote:
16 Mar 2022 06:31
The new NFL is you throw a sh*t load of signing bonus money at a guy, backload the the crap out of the deal to make the total contract look big, and the result is every contract is effectively a 3 year deal with the face showing 5 years and the player getting cut in Year 4 and the team eating $15 million or more in dead cap.
That's been the NFL for a long long time; the Packers just didn't operate the way the rest of the league did under TT.

Gutey has made the shift and our cap health will pay the price. But he needs that ring that TT got in year 4 or 5

User avatar
BF004
Reactions:
Posts: 13632
Joined: 17 Mar 2020 16:05
Location: Suamico
Contact:

Post by BF004 »

I wouldn't be surprised if a deal comes together today and Davante is the one that backs down a bit.


Davante had lots of leverage like a week ago yet with our cap issues, but it appears we will likely be able to sneak in under the cap now even with Davante on franchise tag and not a lot of hurt.

I think he loses a lot of leverage after the new league year as the Packers don't have to make the hard time-sensitive decisions and the option to trade him does become real. At least until we get closer to July 15th or whenever that deadline is for franchise extensions.

Using a rough base of $20 million tag in 2022 and $24 tag in 2023, I'll wager he gets 4 for 96.
Image

Image

German_Panzer
Reactions:
Posts: 749
Joined: 14 Jul 2020 06:20

Post by German_Panzer »

texas wrote:
15 Mar 2022 22:00
Honestly I would be fine with letting him walk if it weren't for the presumption that letting him walk would be unacceptable to Rodgers.

Fact is, he's our best WR by far. But the other fact is that Rodgers has an extreme over-reliance on him which hurts us when it counts. Plus we'd save all that money.
Just reminding everyone about the elephant in the room.

User avatar
Scott4Pack
Reactions:
Posts: 2816
Joined: 26 Mar 2020 03:41
Location: New Mexico

Post by Scott4Pack »

If you want to talk about Rodgers having an “over-reliance” on Tae, then you have to go to the HC too. Even MLF specifically has said that the playbook goes through 17. I don’t see fault in that with this squad. Unless GB gets better than MVS, Cobb, Lazard, and company, you are going to do this. Much as I love those guys, we do need to get better at WR/TE.
Come on down and try some of our delicious green chili! Best in the world!

User avatar
Scott4Pack
Reactions:
Posts: 2816
Joined: 26 Mar 2020 03:41
Location: New Mexico

Post by Scott4Pack »

As of Thursday morning, I’m thinking that no news on Tae is good news. We still need to cut some funds before we can sign Tae. I’m looking today for the extensions that’ll open the door for Tae’s massive contract.

:-)
Come on down and try some of our delicious green chili! Best in the world!

User avatar
paco
Reactions:
Posts: 6718
Joined: 18 Mar 2020 15:29
Location: Janesville, WI

Post by paco »

Scott4Pack wrote:
16 Mar 2022 23:09
As of Thursday morning, I’m thinking that no news on Tae is good news. We still need to cut some funds before we can sign Tae. I’m looking today for the extensions that’ll open the door for Tae’s massive contract.

:-)
We save money this year if we give Tae a new contract. So we can do this any day. But there is also no hurry. I don't expect movement on this any time soon.
Image
RIP JustJeff

User avatar
Scott4Pack
Reactions:
Posts: 2816
Joined: 26 Mar 2020 03:41
Location: New Mexico

Post by Scott4Pack »

Just so I understand, is the tag value for Tae included in our current cap limit? Like, the $ that he would play for this year on the tag is already accounted for?

Or, do we still need to clear space for him?

As we've already extended Cobb and Amos and signed our new punter, who else is left to extend? Jaire?
Come on down and try some of our delicious green chili! Best in the world!

YoHoChecko
Reactions:
Posts: 9694
Joined: 26 Mar 2020 11:34

Post by YoHoChecko »

Scott4Pack wrote:
17 Mar 2022 09:50
Just so I understand, is the tag value for Tae included in our current cap limit? Like, the $ that he would play for this year on the tag is already accounted for?

Or, do we still need to clear space for him?

As we've already extended Cobb and Amos and signed our new punter, who else is left to extend? Jaire?
Yep. As soon as you tag a player, the tag number counts against your cap, even if he hasn't signed it. So we're carrying a $20-21M charge for Adams right now, and even a megadeal extension would probably reduce that number by a few million

Post Reply