Welcome to your Green Bay Packers Online Community!

Since 2006, PackersHome has been providing a unique experience for fans.
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
4 Pages123>»
Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline Zero2Cool  
#1 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 6:47:09 AM(UTC)
Zero2Cool

Rank: Legend

Yahoo! Fantasy Football - Gold: 2009FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2011ESPN NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI

Applause Given: 1,891
Applause Received: 2,088

Donald Driver was paid $2.3 million for the 2012 season. The Packers will not be paying Driver that amount in 2013, therefore they can re-allocate that money to another WR, Greg Jennings, who earned $7.3 million for the 2012 season. You add that $2.3 to what Jennings received during 2012 and you get $9.6 million.

The WR franchise tender is going to be around $10.357 million for 2013.



I feel this way because I can't remember a single Ted Thompson drafted "star" that he has let go elsewhere. I think Jennings is a Green Bay Packer for the 2013 season and if he shows he's over this injury bug that got him a little bit in 2011 and a good portion of 2012, I see him getting a 3 or 4 deal during the season.



Here's my source for the 2013 franchise numbers - link.


This says about ~$500k lower, but not sure ...
UserPostedImage




Edit, forgot to add that the Packers are carrying about $7 million from 2012 to 2013's salary cap.

Bob McGinn wrote:
The salary cap will increase minutely next year to about $121.3M. Green Bay will roll over what's left under the present cap, or $7.1M, into 2013 because all of their moves are designed to facilitate contract extensions for Clay Matthews, B.J. Raji and [Aaron] Rodgers in the next six to nine months.

Edited by user Thursday, January 17, 2013 6:57:39 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

UserPostedImage
Sponsor
Offline play2win  
#2 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 6:57:49 AM(UTC)
play2win

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 3/29/2012(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee

Applause Given: 1,076
Applause Received: 725

I like it. This has been a tough year for him with the groin injury and surgery, missing a ton of games, but he came back and played at a high level. Even if he might have been a half step slower, which it seemed.

Not sure he will command the giant $ in FA, but he may.

If he gets the tag, will he be disgruntled? That's my main concern. Sometimes, I wish that Ted were a better communicator with his players. Then I remember this is business.
Offline Wade  
#3 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 8:20:28 AM(UTC)
Wade

Rank: All Pro

Joined: 8/1/2009(UTC)
Location: nowhere of importance

Applause Given: 668
Applause Received: 672

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool Go to Quoted Post


I feel this way because I can't remember a single Ted Thompson drafted "star" that he has let go elsewhere.



I agree with this. I don't worry about what Thompson does or does not do with "stars".

Thompson's weakness is what he does with talent at the one or two tiers below "star". (Especially, IMO, with OL talent.) That is the talent he lets get away (Wahle, Wells). That is the talent he most frequently errs with in free agency (Klemm, O'Dwyer, Saturday, Hutchinson). And that is the talent he errs with over and over again in the draft (Colledge, Spitz, Moll, various starters on various other teams).

Thompson insists on not overpaying in free agency. As a general matter, that is what we should want from a general manager. And we especially want it with respect to tier 1 stars -- since overpaying a tier 1 player can restrict other opportunities for years. But overpaying is sometimes necessary.

And because he's good at assessing talent in general, and has a lot of data on his own star players that he doesn't have with other team's star players, he knows when overpaying that star really isn't overpaying at all. What might look like a risk to us, really isn't. He's not going to let Rodgers go, and he's not going to let Matthews go. And, if he believes Jennings is truly a tier 1 star, he's not going to let him go just because he is going to cost mega-gazillions.

I personally think Jennings is gone because I don't think Thompson thinks of him as a tier 1 star in the way he thinks about Rodgers and Matthews. (I disagree and I'll b*tch if he goes, but when thinking rationally, on this I'll go with Thompson's track record over mine. He doesn't get the stars wrong.) But if Ted Thompson believes Jennings is tier 1, he won't be going anywhere.

I'm not as confident that Ted Thompson will do the right thing regarding the tier 2 talent that the team needs to go back to the Super Bowl. But I am confident he'll get the tier 1 talent decisions correct more than often enough.




And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Online wpr  
#4 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 8:42:44 AM(UTC)
wpr

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2012PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2013FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,892
Applause Received: 1,400

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool Go to Quoted Post
Donald Driver was paid $2.3 million for the 2012 season. The Packers will not be paying Driver that amount in 2013, therefore they can re-allocate that money to another WR, Greg Jennings, who earned $7.3 million for the 2012 season. You add that $2.3 to what Jennings received during 2012 and you get $9.6 million.

The WR franchise tender is going to be around $10.357 million for 2013.



I feel this way because I can't remember a single Ted Thompson drafted "star" that he has let go elsewhere. I think Jennings is a Green Bay Packer for the 2013 season and if he shows he's over this injury bug that got him a little bit in 2011 and a good portion of 2012, I see him getting a 3 or 4 deal during the season.



Here's my source for the 2013 franchise numbers - link.


This says about ~$500k lower, but not sure ...
UserPostedImage




Edit, forgot to add that the Packers are carrying about $7 million from 2012 to 2013's salary cap.



GB is a better team with him than without him.
"You don't hurt 'em if you don't hit 'em." Chesty Puller



UserPostedImage

Online wpr  
#5 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 8:43:36 AM(UTC)
wpr

Rank: Hall of Famer

PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2012PackersHome NFL Pick'em - Gold: 2013FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,892
Applause Received: 1,400

Originally Posted by: Wade Go to Quoted Post
I agree with this. I don't worry about what Thompson does or does not do with "stars".

Thompson's weakness is what he does with talent at the one or two tiers below "star". (Especially, IMO, with OL talent.) That is the talent he lets get away (Wahle, Wells). That is the talent he most frequently errs with in free agency (Klemm, O'Dwyer, Saturday, Hutchinson). And that is the talent he errs with over and over again in the draft (Colledge, Spitz, Moll, various starters on various other teams).

Thompson insists on not overpaying in free agency. As a general matter, that is what we should want from a general manager. And we especially want it with respect to tier 1 stars -- since overpaying a tier 1 player can restrict other opportunities for years. But overpaying is sometimes necessary.

And because he's good at assessing talent in general, and has a lot of data on his own star players that he doesn't have with other team's star players, he knows when overpaying that star really isn't overpaying at all. What might look like a risk to us, really isn't. He's not going to let Rodgers go, and he's not going to let Matthews go. And, if he believes Jennings is truly a tier 1 star, he's not going to let him go just because he is going to cost mega-gazillions.

I personally think Jennings is gone because I don't think Thompson thinks of him as a tier 1 star in the way he thinks about Rodgers and Matthews. (I disagree and I'll b*tch if he goes, but when thinking rationally, on this I'll go with Thompson's track record over mine. He doesn't get the stars wrong.) But if Ted Thompson believes Jennings is tier 1, he won't be going anywhere.

I'm not as confident that Ted Thompson will do the right thing regarding the tier 2 talent that the team needs to go back to the Super Bowl. But I am confident he'll get the tier 1 talent decisions correct more than often enough.






Mrs Colledge hates you.
"You don't hurt 'em if you don't hit 'em." Chesty Puller



UserPostedImage

Offline nerdmann  
#6 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 12:16:16 PM(UTC)
nerdmann

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 2,491
Applause Received: 624

Jennings has another year or two before the down side.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
Offline TheKanataThrilla  
#7 Posted : Thursday, January 17, 2013 11:51:43 PM(UTC)
TheKanataThrilla

Rank: 5th Round Draft Pick

Canada
Joined: 9/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 131
Applause Received: 102

Jennings has had Favre and Rodgers. I don't want to disrespect the guy, but both of those guys can make WRs look better than they are. I really don't think we need to break the bank on the guy and I would rather use the money filling other needs and draft somebody at WR to work his way up the depth chart. Cobb, Nelson and Jones have carried the load quite well. I also like the idea of increasing TE focus and having a 2 TE attack as part of the offensive scheme like NE is employing.
"Stumbling from one disaster to another" Lost Together (Blue Rodeo)
thanks Post received 1 applause.
DakotaT on 1/18/2013(UTC)
Offline RajiRoar  
#8 Posted : Friday, January 18, 2013 3:53:39 AM(UTC)
Laser Gunns

Rank: 3rd Round Draft Pick

United States
Joined: 9/30/2009(UTC)

Applause Given: 39
Applause Received: 234

Originally Posted by: TheKanataThrilla Go to Quoted Post
Jennings has had Favre and Rodgers. I don't want to disrespect the guy, but both of those guys can make WRs look better than they are. I really don't think we need to break the bank on the guy and I would rather use the money filling other needs and draft somebody at WR to work his way up the depth chart. Cobb, Nelson and Jones have carried the load quite well. I also like the idea of increasing TE focus and having a 2 TE attack as part of the offensive scheme like NE is employing.


Think

diddn't someone mention this in another post?


MintBaconDrivel

Dec, 11, 2012 - FOREVER!
Offline Zero2Cool  
#9 Posted : Friday, January 18, 2013 5:52:29 AM(UTC)
Zero2Cool

Rank: Legend

Yahoo! Fantasy Football - Gold: 2009FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2011ESPN NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI

Applause Given: 1,891
Applause Received: 2,088

Originally Posted by: TheKanataThrilla Go to Quoted Post
Jennings has had Favre and Rodgers. I don't want to disrespect the guy, but both of those guys can make WRs look better than they are. I really don't think we need to break the bank on the guy and I would rather use the money filling other needs and draft somebody at WR to work his way up the depth chart. Cobb, Nelson and Jones have carried the load quite well. I also like the idea of increasing TE focus and having a 2 TE attack as part of the offensive scheme like NE is employing.


Very true, however, Greg Jennings is open an awful lot. He has a hip move that is duplicated by no one that gets him some really good separation. That's why he's so dangerous in the slot.
UserPostedImage
Online Rockmolder  
#10 Posted : Friday, January 18, 2013 8:58:12 AM(UTC)
Rockmolder

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2010

Netherlands
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 147
Applause Received: 248

I don't see a single way this'd happen.

The closest thing would be a franchise tag and trade kind of thing. Something we've all called for with Flynn and Jenkins in 2012 and 2011, respectively.

Not Ted's style.

There's a couple of ways people would fit this under the cap and justify spending 10 million dollars on Greg.

One calls for us to cut Tramon. I've gone into that one in the Jennings vs Williams thread, so I won't do it again here.

The other one's to re-allocate Driver's money, like Kevin suggested. Not a big fan of this one, either.

You're going to be operating awfully close to the cap, while we have very capable players at the position and could sign a 3rd, 4th WR a lot cheaper/draft one in april. Doesn't seem like it benefits us a whole lot for the risk we're taking, when we have a couple of must-sign players in line to get a contract extension.

Jennings is expendable at this point, while guys like Raji, Matthews, Williams etc leave you awfully thin at a certain position.

Next to that, Jennings is just not as talented as people tend to give him credit for. He's good, no doubt about it, but he's going towards 30, has some injury problems and has always been one tier below the elite.

He's not coming back.
UserPostedImage
Offline TheKanataThrilla  
#11 Posted : Friday, January 18, 2013 8:59:58 AM(UTC)
TheKanataThrilla

Rank: 5th Round Draft Pick

Canada
Joined: 9/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 131
Applause Received: 102

Originally Posted by: RajiRoar Go to Quoted Post
Think

diddn't someone mention this in another post?


It is a league of copy-cats. The back shoulder throw is employed by most offenses now. The 2 TE attack with a WR who can stretch the field will take some drafting to implement, but should be do-able. I like the idea of a 2 TE attack as it is hard to defend and it has the ability to chew up clock. It also means our adequate but not spectacular running game is all we really need.
"Stumbling from one disaster to another" Lost Together (Blue Rodeo)
Offline Wade  
#12 Posted : Friday, January 18, 2013 10:22:04 AM(UTC)
Wade

Rank: All Pro

Joined: 8/1/2009(UTC)
Location: nowhere of importance

Applause Given: 668
Applause Received: 672

Originally Posted by: Rockmolder Go to Quoted Post
I don't see a single way this'd happen.

The closest thing would be a franchise tag and trade kind of thing. Something we've all called for with Flynn and Jenkins in 2012 and 2011, respectively.

Not Ted's style.

There's a couple of ways people would fit this under the cap and justify spending 10 million dollars on Greg.

One calls for us to cut Tramon. I've gone into that one in the Jennings vs Williams thread, so I won't do it again here.

The other one's to re-allocate Driver's money, like Kevin suggested. Not a big fan of this one, either.

You're going to be operating awfully close to the cap, while we have very capable players at the position and could sign a 3rd, 4th WR a lot cheaper/draft one in april. Doesn't seem like it benefits us a whole lot for the risk we're taking, when we have a couple of must-sign players in line to get a contract extension.

Jennings is expendable at this point, while guys like Raji, Matthews, Williams etc leave you awfully thin at a certain position.

Next to that, Jennings is just not as talented as people tend to give him credit for. He's good, no doubt about it, but he's going towards 30, has some injury problems and has always been one tier below the elite.

He's not coming back.


I don't understand why everyone is still so keen on Raji. He's had two part years (end of 2010 and end of regular season in 2012) where he's been good. The rest of the time, he's disappeared. And if you look closely, it's not the usual "disappears because he's doing a thankless job of nose tackle who occupies two players but has low tackle numbers). It's "disappears because he can regularly be tied up with one blocker". That's what makes Pickett a superior DT to me. Unless he's hurt, or gassed in the 4th quarter because he's had to play too many snaps, he virtually always takes two blockers out of the equation. Raji doesn't.

He's had two 5-6 game streaks of dominance and one cool discount-double-check commercial. If it came down to "Raji or Jennings", I'd take the consistent high level of performance of Jennings every time. And go back to the draft/free agent drawing board in search of another starting NT.

Matthews v. Jennings. Matthews in a no brainer.

Williams v Jennings -- I don't know anymore. Before this year I would have said Williams in a heartbeat, because I thought him our best cover guy. Now, I just don't know.

And lets not forget, of the teams who would be substantially improved by signing Jennings, three of them reside in the NFC North. Cutler with Marshall AND Jennings, Stafford with Johnson AND Jennings, those would be particularly scary IMO.

And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Offline Jlapp  
#13 Posted : Friday, January 18, 2013 10:29:13 AM(UTC)
Jlapp

Rank: Fresh Cheesehead

United States
Joined: 1/17/2013(UTC)
Location: IA

Applause Given: 1
Applause Received: 1

Originally Posted by: Wade Go to Quoted Post
And lets not forget, of the teams who would be substantially improved by signing Jennings, three of them reside in the NFC North. Cutler with Marshall AND Jennings, Stafford with Johnson AND Jennings, those would be particularly scary IMO.


If the packers can't afford to keep Jennings, there is no way in hell the Lions would be able to sign him. They'd have like 50% of their cap in those 3 players. Bears are similar position as Packers. Could make it work for 2013 but both of their corners scheduled to hit free agency in 2014.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
Zero2Cool on 1/18/2013(UTC)
Offline DakotaT  
#14 Posted : Monday, January 21, 2013 3:49:01 PM(UTC)
DakotaT

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Joined: 8/18/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 650
Applause Received: 1,338

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool Go to Quoted Post
I gave my reason why the Packers will franchise Greg Jennings. It's sound and reasonable. No one has proven the theory impossible or unlikely. Bring it!

Jordy Nelson, Greg Jennings, James Jones and Randall Cobb are very talented. Of the group, only Jennings would be more successful in another offense.

Nelson, Jones and Cobb are products of the offense.

Jennings #1.
Nelson #2.
Jones #3.
Cobb #3.

Packers have two 3's, one 2 and one 1.


All your theory is about is conjecture. The reason Jennings won't be franchised is because he isn't worth that much money just like Uncle Ted didn't think Wells was worthy of the franchise tag last year. If Jennings is franchised, I would be surprised if he wasn't traded for picks prior to the draft.
UserPostedImage
Offline Zero2Cool  
#15 Posted : Monday, January 21, 2013 5:01:56 PM(UTC)
Zero2Cool

Rank: Legend

Yahoo! Fantasy Football - Gold: 2009FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2011ESPN NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI

Applause Given: 1,891
Applause Received: 2,088

Originally Posted by: DakotaT Go to Quoted Post
All your theory is about is conjecture. The reason Jennings won't be franchised is because he isn't worth that much money just like Uncle Ted didn't think Wells was worthy of the franchise tag last year. If Jennings is franchised, I would be surprised if he wasn't traded for picks prior to the draft.


You have no theory and you are solely basing your response on conjecture where mine had facts in it. You can look them up yourself. Also, Scott Wells didn't want to return to the Packers and admitted as much. and Wells wasn't franchise tag worthy. That brings up a question, is Greg Jennings worth the $10 million for 2013 season?

Greg Jennings is clearly the best WR the Packers have. I'd rather Jennings on the roster and let Jermichael Finley go and see Andrew Quarless earn the starting TE position.

There are some consequences to tagging someone an hoping for a trade. It happened once, with Corey Williams. The CBA and some rules have changed since then, which makes me doubt we'll see that move again for the Ted Thompson Packers. The moment that player signs the tender, it becomes guaranteed cash and that is exactly why the Packers didn't franchise tag Matt Flynn. He would have been entitled to something like $15 million to sit on the bench.

UserPostedImage
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest (3)
4 Pages123>»
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error

Tweeter

Recent Topics
1m / Random Babble / musccy

2m / Random Babble / PackFanWithTwins

22m / Random Babble / wpr

30m / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

44m / Random Babble / wpr

46m / Green Bay Packers Talk / millertime

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

10h / Super Bowl Talk / Smokey

10h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

10h / Welcome to our Community! / wpr

11h / Around The NFL / wpr

11h / Fantasy Sports Talk / wpr

13h / Welcome to our Community! / Smokey

14h / Random Babble / Smokey

15h / Random Babble / wpr


Copyright © 2006-2014 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.