Jermichael Finley staying with the Packers at $8.25M· Page 3

play2win
Senior Member

11 years ago

So, apparently we drafted, but didn't "develop" Quarless, Williams and Taylor. We just have no one to play TE if we don't give Jermichael Finley $9,000,000.

I would have rather paid that to Dumervil, or Matthews/Raji, etc in a new deal.

DoddPower
Veteran Member

11 years ago

#22

Originally Posted by: play2win

For 2013, Finely >>> than the other options on this team. I was high on Williams, but he hasn't developed as I expected (although I still think he can). Quarless could be serviceable, but his health is the main question with him. Perhaps if the team was confident he could return to his pre-injury form, the situation with Finley would have been different. Taylor definitely isn't in the same league in terms of a receiving tight-end and is more of a H-back/special teams/bottom of the roster guy.

As for resigning Mathews/Raji, I really don't think the few million difference will have any significant consequence on any of that.

texaspackerbacker
Veteran Member

11 years ago

#23

As I understand, if we had cut him, there would have been a $3 million + cap hit. I wish he could have been restructured for a lower cap number and longer term, but what's done is done. All we can do is hope for Finley to snap out of the dropping thing. The good news, of course, is a lot of players really come through big in their contract season. The bad news is if that does happen, it will be extremely difficult to keep him beyond this season.

Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.

Gaycandybacon
Member

11 years ago

#24

The contract was signed last year and was a two year deal, therefore this isn't a new signing or a new move or anything.

I don't understand why so many are bitching about this, yet where are the complaints about the Packers paying the #1 QB a salary that's probably not even top 10! OH wait, said QB doesn't speak his mind freely via Twitter and the media doesn't twist his words around making him look more foolish than he is.

Bashing Finley doesn't make you cool. It shows you're short sighted.

Sometimes I think Packers fans dislike their own players more than the rest of the NFL. Crazy.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

Lol I think Bears fans despise their players more than us in ours.

But anyways I agree.. Finley hasn't had off the field problems.. All he does is talk. Who gives 2 shits. Sure he's dropped a couple balls, but he is a monster receiver and attracts attention throughout games. He's still young 25?26? Let him develop as a player and as a man. I think he's on his way.

I'm fine with them keeping him, we lost Crabtree to FA and we don't know what we have in Quarless or Williams. We can focus on this Defense and Oline now that we don't have to worrie about getting a Top TE in the draft.

play2win
Senior Member

11 years ago

#25

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker

It was my understanding we would have only eaten $0.5M, and realized $8.25 off of our cap. That is a lot of money with those 3 re-signings looming.

I realize it is just one year, but, wouldn't you have rather signed Elvis Dumervil to be opposite Matthews, like the Ravens now have opposite Suggs, and just draft another TE? How about front loading a Raji Re-signing? Or Matthews?

How many years has Finley had to prove himself?

I like Ted Thompson, and I'm grateful to have him as our GM, but the guy does make his mistakes like any other GM will. Calling any of those out is blasphemy. Oh well. I guess now he will be more committed, more dedicated to knowing his routes, and he won't drop as many passes.

🙄

porky88
Veteran Member

11 years ago

#26

Originally Posted by: play2win

And we still have the money to pay Matthews, Raji, Shields, Rodgers, and so on. The Packers are very good at budgeting.

Finley is on a one-year contract. It's not a big deal. He'll make a lot of money this year and then his contract is off the books. This has no long-term implications to the Green Bay Packers. That's why they're sticking with him.

In addition, Finley was a vital part of the team after the bye. He caught the ball well, blocked well, and shut his mouth. His blocking is actually an underrated asset. He’s improved leaps and bounds as a blocker.

He also caught 32 passes in his last seven regular-season games. Over that same span, Randall Cobb caught 35 passes (in six games) and James Jones caught 24 passes. If Finley plays as he did in the second half of 2012, then he could catch 70 passes next season. I know it’s a big if, but a one-year contract limits the risks.

http://www.row12.com/

Gaycandybacon
Member

11 years ago

#27

Originally Posted by: play2win

Why would we do that when we have Perry who only went on IR with a broken hand and is coming off his rookie year?

We are also due for another backup passrusher in the draft anyways.

DoddPower
Veteran Member

11 years ago

#28

It was my understanding we would have only eaten $0.5M, and realized $8.25 off of our cap. That is a lot of money with those 3 re-signings looming.

Originally Posted by: play2win

And as I've already mentioned, the Packers would have likely tried to replace Finley with another tight end that cost a minimum of $4-5 million a season, making the net gain only ~$3 million. Of course there's no guarantee any street free agent that was a suitable replacement would have signed with the Packers and/or quickly learn the system. I guess the Packers could have stuck with the other tight ends that are the roster and HOPE to get a solid player in the draft, but that is far from a guarantee either, and could mean passing on a stud defensive player in the top two rounds to do so (and of course, who knows how a rookie would pan out in the first few seasons). I'd rather roll with Finley for another season, who is a solid player, and focus on other areas. The $3 or so million in savings from cutting him wouldn't make the difference in signing any big-time free agent or Rodgers, CM3, Raji, etc. I really don't get that argument at all. It's of little consequence in the big scheme of things. It certainly wasn't mutually exclusive, e.g. Finley or a player like Dumervil. Even if Ted cut Finley, he wasn't going to sign any big-time free agent, imo. It's just how he rolls.

Off subject and I know it won't happen, but in the back of my mind I'm still hoping for a signing like James Harrison on a reasonable deal. He sure would make a nice insurance policy/pass-rusher should Perry struggle for another season.

MintBaconDrivel
Senior Member Topic Starter

11 years ago

#29

Jermichael Finley said on Twitter Monday afternoon that he'll remain with the Packers this season, and a source confirmed that the Packers tight end didn't take a pay cut or have his contract changed in any way by the 3 p.m. deadline.

PackersNews wrote:

Delivering the latest and most important updates on the Green Bay Packers for your convenience.

Rockmolder
Honored Member

11 years ago

#30

Remember how the Packers stood behind Mason Crosby last year? He earned that loyalty.

Sure, he'll be tested this year in TC, but he earned the right to have the team stand behind him. How? Because when they were F'ing with his holder for that entire year (2009?) he shut his pie hole and took the responsibility on himself. Didn't blame the coaches, didn't blame the holder, didn't act like a punk-ass little bitch.

Donald Driver? Same thing. Respect.

Ryan Grant, on the other hand, used the Favre fiasco to leverage a contract. We see how the team let him hang until he was the only option in the league last year. If we wouldn't have had multiple injuries, he wouldn't even have been back.

Thus far, Jerkmike falls into the latter category. He's got the team (somewhat) over a barrel right now. That won't last forever.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann

If this makes any kind of difference in your decision making, you're doing a bad job.

There's no place for loyalty in the NFL. If you can get someone better (and cheaper), you go for that. That Driver stuck around last year still baffles me.

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Mucky Tundra (2m) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (2m) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (23m) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (1h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (1h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (2h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (2h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (2h) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (2h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (2h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (2h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (2h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (2h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (2h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (2h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (2h) : 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

Zero2Cool (2h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (2h) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (2h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (3h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Zero2Cool (3h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.

packerfanoutwest (3h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what

Zero2Cool (3h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.

packerfanoutwest (3h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in

packerfanoutwest (3h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker

packerfanoutwest (3h) : if bucs win out they win their division

beast (3h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us

packerfanoutwest (3h) : falcons are already ahead of us

beast (3h) : Packers will get in

beast (3h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen

packerfanoutwest (3h) : they still are in the playoffs

packerfanoutwest (3h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7

Zero2Cool (5h) : We can say it. We don't play.

Mucky Tundra (6h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints

Mucky Tundra (6h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games

Mucky Tundra (6h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.

buckeyepackfan (7h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.

Mucky Tundra (16h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan

beast (16h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings

bboystyle (16h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in

Mucky Tundra (20h) : Or ties, but let's be real here

Mucky Tundra (20h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses

Mucky Tundra (20h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch

buckeyepackfan (20h) : Am I wring in saying if Tge Vikings beat The Seahawks, The Packers clinch?

Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : Agreed; you stinks

Zero2Cool (21-Dec) : I'm not beating anyone. I stinks.

Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : rough injury for tank dell. guy can't catch abreak

beast (21-Dec) : So far the college playoffs have sucked... One team absolutely dominates the other

beast (21-Dec) : Well even if you weren't positive towards a guy, you wouldn't nessarily want to tell the media that (if they don't know about it)

Martha Careful (21-Dec) : I think MLF want Love to look past the end half issues, and feel good about his play. Our coaches generally keep a very positive tone.

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 12:00 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS