Pack93z
11 years ago
How I truly view this.. this is a bridge type contract.

If Finley plays well this season or not.. I think he will out price himself in Green Bay. Either performance result with probably have him out stretching his long term value for the Packers. He will only be 27... and will be seeking his career payday.

So... the Packers will hope one of the guys on the roster pan out or will inject another player via the draft or UDFA that will bolster the numbers at TE. Williams and Quarless are in the must prove it sector of their career in GB.. or the Packers will force it.

But if the draft falls right.. the Packers land a impact player at Tight end.. I could see the Packers moving Finley in a trade. They have already absorbed his roster bonus.. and he would have a very manageable contract for someone to undertake. I could see someone giving up some value to obtain Finley's potential and talents.. might not be a high round pick but mid round potential for sure.

Either way.. there is little doubt that Finley value ratio favors him currently.. but as Porky noted.. it has no long term impact.
"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
DakotaT
11 years ago

First, you have a heavy bias against Jermichael Finley over gloves, so your take is quite tainted.
Second, yes, $8.5 is too much for Jermichael Finley, as who said several times, oh, that was me.
Finally, what I am also saying is he's not a pile of garbage like some are insinuating and that he's a complete waste of money and Ted Thompson failed in this regard.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



Boy do I miss Tyrone Davis, what a consumate professional he was at tight end. I mean Finley makes Tyrone look like Jerry Rice. 🙄 [sarcasm]

When Finley starts catching everything again, and smoking linebackers and safeties we'll be wondering how to get him under the cap.
UserPostedImage
Dulak
11 years ago

Finley has a issue with a PR filter from his mouth to the mic... but beyond that he is a fine football player for the Packers.

Overpaid.. probably slightly.. but lets compare some names on the market.

Zach Miller.. 11m cap number this season.
Veron Davis 8.739
Heath Miller 7.958
Antonio Gates 6.862
Marcedes Lewis 8.25 (however he converted some of the bonus to reduce the cap number this season to 5.75)


By standard of some of these names.. he isn't that far out of whack on the top end of the market.. even though his production in near the top.

Originally Posted by: Pack93z 



vernon davis makes finley look like a preschooler ... geez that guy has some skills ...
Id say 7 mil is fine for finley - I dont get why packers overpays with some people and others that just dont worry about.

DoddPower
11 years ago

Fair enough. Keller didn't perform admirably last year, but he has been a more reliable receiver than Finley in the years before that.

I think that, if you sign someone in free agency, there's more than enough time to get familiar with a system. Players change teams in FA all the time and just contnue producing the next year. If a guy can join the Patriots offense as a WR and completely grasp what Josh McDaniels wants to do in one off-season, I reckon a TE could get our offense figured out and produce.

Maybe you can't build up a chemistry between the QB and receiver that fast, but that's not something I've seen progressing that well between Finley and Rodgers, either.

As for the potential part... The man has been with our team since 2008. He can't get over his problems with drops, maturity and consistency. I was a huge fan of his when he joined us and, for a reasonable price, I'd still give him a chance, but at $8 million, I just don't like the investment.

Right now, I'd rather have a reliable option who doesn't have that much potential. A guy like Martellus Bennett would've been a nice, all-round TE, who's averaging $5 million a year. Not a difference maker, but a good, solid player. But maybe that's more of a personel preference than one you can blame Finley for.

That saves you "just" $3 million, but that is money you could've invested in a player like Adrian Wilson, Bernard Pollard, Antwan Barnes, Kenny Phillips, Leon Washington, Chris Canty etc.

Yes, that's easy to say in hindsight, but the combined contribution of a more afforable TE, who can't be that big of a drop-off from Finley, with one of those players would've helped us more than just Finley alone.

Of course, we still have some money free under our cap, so cutting Finley isn't something we have to do, but even if we just saved up that $3 million, I feel like rolling that over to next year or using it to restructure Matthews and front-load his contract some more would've helped us more than holding on to Jermike.

Lastly, I'll leave you with this. Blegh.

Most overvalued tight ends in 2012: 

Originally Posted by: Rockmolder 



I would argue that over the 2nd half of last season, Finley DID become more consistent, and Mike McCarthy praised him on this multiple times. If he maintained that level of play for an entire season, he would earn his salary, imo.

As for those other players you listed that we hypothetically "could" have signed with the $3 million saved by cutting Finley and replacing him with a cheaper option, I don't really buy that either. Based on Ted Thompson comments about teams spending "stupid money," etc., I don't believe Ted would have signed any of those guys regardless of anything to do with Finley. I can't prove that, but it's just the feeling I get from reading his comments. It's definitely not as simple as "If Finley was gone, the Packers could have signed X, Y, or Z." Even with Finley staying, if Ted really wanted one of those guys, I'm sure he would have made it work.

Otherwise, I think Finley is better than Keller and Bennett at this point, but as I said that's subjective. I don't mind keeping Finley as a one-year insurance policy that allows other players to develop as I don't see Finley being a Packer beyond the 2013 season. Worst case scenario, at least the Packers have a good/solid (and potentially better) tight-end for the upcoming season that is perhaps getting paid a couple million too much (but that still depends on his performance, which obviously the Packers think he can live up to). After this season, Finley is off the books and has no affect on any of the Packers decisions moving forward. Another contract year may be just what Finley needs.
PackerTraxx
11 years ago
I could see Finley having a very good year, because as mentioned it's his contract year. If he wants to see those big checks keep coming he's going to have to earn it. If he does, we will have gotten our moneys worth. If he doesn't, we over spent for a year, not 3-5 years. I can see this decision.
Why is Jerry Kramer not in the Hall of Fame?
MintBaconDrivel
11 years ago

Press-Gazette sports editor Mike Vandermause offers his take on the Packers opting to keep tight end Jermichael Finley and his $8.25 million price tag for the 2013 season.

PackersNews  wrote:


PackFanWithTwins
11 years ago
Even at what we consider a down year for him compared to 2011. He was still top 10 in the league for TE. Considering that they were never really able to get things going the way they planned. They went basically the entire season, not having all of the weapons on the field, leaving finley dealing with more coverage. One of the things that make TE like Finley dangerous, is getting them behind the LBers. We haven't been able to do that with him because the LBers play deeper because we had no run threat.

If we can add a reasonable run threat, keep Jones, Nelson and Cobb on the field. that alone should open the lanes for Finley.

And if we are really lucky, Quarless makes it back. He is a good blocker, and a much bigger receiving threat than Crabby was.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
PackFanWithTwins
11 years ago
LOL, at the ending.

You have to ask yourself. Are the packers better with or without finley.

the answer is a resounding yes


Hey dipwad. It wasn't a yes or no question.
The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
nerdmann
11 years ago

Even at what we consider a down year for him compared to 2011. He was still top 10 in the league for TE. Considering that they were never really able to get things going the way they planned. They went basically the entire season, not having all of the weapons on the field, leaving finley dealing with more coverage. One of the things that make TE like Finley dangerous, is getting them behind the LBers. We haven't been able to do that with him because the LBers play deeper because we had no run threat.

If we can add a reasonable run threat, keep Jones, Nelson and Cobb on the field. that alone should open the lanes for Finley.

And if we are really lucky, Quarless makes it back. He is a good blocker, and a much bigger receiving threat than Crabby was.

Originally Posted by: PackFanWithTwins 



Three things hold Finley back.

1: Finley not knowing the offense. Fortunately Arodge has decided to go over the plays with him every Saturday night before games.

2: Drops. Fortunately he started hanging on a little better this year.

3: Aaron trying to force it deep, even when teams are dropping their safeties back to prevent the long pass.

We have plenty of offensive weapons around him. Having this talent around him actually helps him, imo. He'd suck with Tyler Palco or Christian Ponder trying to get him the ball.
“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.”
blueleopard
11 years ago


In most of these highlights, Finley was the first read.

It's probably because defenses never accounted for him early on, but as anybody would tell you, at the beginning of the 2010 season -- the guy was unstoppable before the injury.

McCarthy adapted and went with the offense that didn't rely much on the tight end. With both Finley and Williams progressing and probably Quarless coming back, along with a deep TE draft, I really wouldn't mind McCarthy going with something similar to NE's offense.
Danreb Victorio A Believer of Greg Jennings
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (29m) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (29m) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (29m) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (37m) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (37m) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (58m) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (2h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (2h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (3h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (3h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (3h) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (3h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (3h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (3h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (3h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (3h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (3h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (3h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (3h) : 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 (3h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
Zero2Cool (3h) : I literally just said it.
packerfanoutwest (3h) : 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 (4h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us
packerfanoutwest (4h) : falcons are already ahead of us
beast (4h) : Packers will get in
beast (4h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen
packerfanoutwest (4h) : they still are in the playoffs
packerfanoutwest (4h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7
Zero2Cool (6h) : We can say it. We don't play.
Mucky Tundra (7h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints
Mucky Tundra (7h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games
Mucky Tundra (7h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.
buckeyepackfan (8h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.
Mucky Tundra (17h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan
beast (17h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings
bboystyle (17h) : 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 (21h) : 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
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
1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

2h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

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

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Mucky Tundra

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

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