Zero2Cool
11 years ago
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.

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.

Bob McGinn wrote:


UserPostedImage
play2win
11 years ago
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.
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
11 years ago



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

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



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 bitch 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)
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
11 years ago

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.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



GB is a better team with him than without him.
UserPostedImage
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
11 years ago

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 bitch 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.




Originally Posted by: Wade 



Mrs Colledge hates you.
UserPostedImage
nerdmann
11 years ago
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.”
TheKanataThrilla
11 years ago
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.
RajiRoar
11 years ago

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.

Originally Posted by: TheKanataThrilla 



:-k

diddn't someone mention this in another post?

MintBaconDrivel
Dec, 11, 2012 - FOREVER!
Zero2Cool
11 years ago

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.

Originally Posted by: TheKanataThrilla 



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
Rockmolder
11 years ago
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.
Fan Shout
packerfanoutwest (2h) : Feliz Navidad!
Zero2Cool (7h) : Merry Christmas!
beast (15h) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁
beast (23h) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : both games Watson missed, Packers won
Martha Careful (24-Dec) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!
Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol
buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier
buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol
Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Jacobs gonna be OK???
Zero2Cool (24-Dec) : Watson gonna be OK???
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?
bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.
bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?
bboystyle (23-Dec) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network
beast (23-Dec) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th
beast (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
bboystyle (23-Dec) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
beast (23-Dec) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?
packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (23-Dec) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (23-Dec) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (23-Dec) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (23-Dec) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (23-Dec) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (23-Dec) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
4h / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

15h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

19h / GameDay Threads / bboystyle

24-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Dec / Random Babble / beast

24-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

23-Dec / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.