Packers to let Randall Cobb test market, focused on signing Bryan Bulaga and...· Page 2

porky88
Veteran Member

9 years ago

Somehow I think this is part of the game of chicken so to speak.. Cobb has to be looking at the QB's around the league and thinking that anyone willing to pay insane money will probably have a QB issue and his production will dip and so will his chances of securing a second (and probably last) big contract. Or he can stay in a system designed to leverage his talents and have confidence that his production will stay up.. maximizing his marketability for that next contract.

Look at what Jennings and Jones have done outside of GB.. walked into a bad QB situation in which they tried to fix in a backwards fashion. There next contract is going to be tough to seek good money, although one could argue Jennings offset that with this contract.

My opinion, if you are in a good position upon a good football team for take slightly less to ensure long term earning viability in a non guaranteed league. Long term thinking.

I am sure that the thinking isn't to just let him walk.. but instead really thinking that the demands at this point are too steep and hoping that it is adjusted in FA. It is a risk to getting blown out of the water by some crazy money.. I just don't think the market is going to be that strong for WR.

Originally Posted by: Pack93z

When is the market never crazy? Given his youth and production, I think a couple of teams will offer him a crazy amount of money.

Does he really want to play with Derek Carr or Teddy Bridgewater instead of Aaron Rodgers? That's got to be the question he's asking himself. He could take a bit less money to remain with the Packers on a four-year deal, and still break the bank four years later at the tender age of 28.

http://www.row12.com/

steveishere
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#12

Cobb isn't your prototypical slot WR. He could absolutely start on half the teams in the leauge, but that'd be a waste of his physical abilities.

No idea why the Packers wouldn't sign him for $9M a year.

Originally Posted by: Porforis

Yes he is. He plays pretty much exclusively from the slot much moreso than any other slot WR. He really doesn't have the length or long speed to excel outside that's why he never plays out there.

lolleren
Member

9 years ago

#13

I maintain that at 9m we should let him walk, i think it is wise to let him test the market, because he might not get that since it is a top heavy year for FA, and he is a slot WR.
Slot receivers should not warrant wr1 money.
If someone is willing to pay him 9-10m a year, let them we will pick up that 3 round draft pick next year.

blank

Pack93z
Select Member

9 years ago

#14

Originally Posted by: porky88

Agreed... I think the question is long term thinking for Cobb.. or should be.

But the money to WR, especially UFA isn't as great as it appears.. that is if the desired contract by Cobb is 12mil/yr.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/rankings/cash/wide-receiver/

Mike Wallace is at the top of that heap and there isn't a person that thinks that contract was good the day it was signed.. the rest.. Greg Jennings money. Hence why I think the Packers are gambling a bit here.. let him find that contract in a year when Demaryius Thomas, Dez Bryant and Torrey Smith may also be on the market. Guessing that the pecking order has Cobb in the company of these three. I expect each of those three to sit in that Greg Jennings type area in terms of a contract. Will three or four get monster deals?

"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"

steveishere
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#15

Also some are assuming Cobb doesn't prefer to hit FA. If you were him wouldn't you? A bunch of you seem to think the market for his services is going to go through the roof then act like he's the one jumping to get a deal done before FA starts. If the first part is the case then what on earth would be his incentive to sign before it starts? LIS if Cobb doesn't end up in GB I really really doubt it will be because GB didn't offer him a fair deal.

dhazer
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#16

Believe it or not but the Packers are rumored into the Percy Harvin hunt along with the Pats. Cobb will collect a huge deal in free agency and he won't think twice about it. I mean everyone sucks that don't play for the Packers right.

Just Imagine this for the next 6-9 years. What a ride it will be 🙂 (PS, Zero should charge for this)

Porforis
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#17

Yes he is. He plays pretty much exclusively from the slot much moreso than any other slot WR. He really doesn't have the length or long speed to excel outside that's why he never plays out there.

Originally Posted by: steveishere

I don't get how the logic of assigning value based on whether you play outside or in the slot works. Should we give Davonte Adams $9M before we give Cobb 9M? Should Adams be getting more than Cobb, period since Adams can play outside and Cobb apparently can't?

Cobb was #12 in the league in yards, tied for #10 in TDs, #4 in 20+ yard receptions, #6 in YAC last year. Sure, pitted against a #1 CB his productivity would drop but still #1 WR numbers.

WRs with contracts in the 8M-10M/year range are:

Brandon Marshall
Jordy Nelson
Andre Johnson
Greg Jennings
Victor Cruz
Pierre Garcon
Antonio Brown
DeSean Jackson

Cobb's productivity is notably better than Jackson's (8M/Year), about on par with Brown (8.4M/year), and a step behind Jordy Nelson (9.7M/year). Nobody else on that list is anywhere close.

I think we can all agree 12M is nuts. 9M is perfectly fair based on how often he's catching balls thrown his way, the YAC and yardage, and the TDs. If you want to pay him less because he plays in the slot (because he makes way more of a mismatch there versus lining up opposite Nelson, AND because they like having him in the backfield and motioning him into the slot), I guess I just don't get it. Pay the guys who bring home the bacon.

sschind
Senior Member

9 years ago

#18

It just seemed to me that this playoff loss was the last straw for Cobb.

He wants to be on a team that's not gonna piss it all away season after season.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann

I'll would wait to see who he signs with before I jumped to that conclusion.

steveishere
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#19

I don't get how the logic of assigning value based on whether you play outside or in the slot works. Should we give Davonte Adams $9M before we give Cobb 9M? Should Adams be getting more than Cobb, period since Adams can play outside and Cobb apparently can't?

Cobb was #12 in the league in yards, tied for #10 in TDs, #4 in 20+ yard receptions, #6 in YAC last year. Sure, pitted against a #1 CB his productivity would drop but still #1 WR numbers.

WRs with contracts in the 8M-10M/year range are:

Brandon Marshall
Jordy Nelson
Andre Johnson
Greg Jennings
Victor Cruz
Pierre Garcon
Antonio Brown
DeSean Jackson

Cobb's productivity is notably better than Jackson's (8M/Year), about on par with Brown (8.4M/year), and a step behind Jordy Nelson (9.7M/year). Nobody else on that list is anywhere close.

I think we can all agree 12M is nuts. 9M is perfectly fair based on how often he's catching balls thrown his way, the YAC and yardage, and the TDs. If you want to pay him less because he plays in the slot (because he makes way more of a mismatch there versus lining up opposite Nelson, AND because they like having him in the backfield and motioning him into the slot), I guess I just don't get it. Pay the guys who bring home the bacon.

Originally Posted by: Porforis

because they don't play the same positions they have different roles and face diffirent coverages. Outside WRs get paid more because they face tougher coverages and typically better players. Cobb spends a significant amount of his time being covered by LBs or Ss which is an easier task than getting open vs the other teams #1 corner or a corner + safety. It's not as simple as a wr = a wr and that's that. There is a premium on #1 outside WRs for a reason. If Cobb was as good as Jordy Nelson as an outside WR he wouldn't be playing in the slot he'd be outside and Adams would be in the slot because it's simply more valuable and harder to find those players. Maybe you don't agree with how the NFL values these guys but from what I can tell that's pretty much how it works.

My personal opinion on 9m/year is I would be ok with it but that's in the range where I let him hit FA and see what other teams think. If his market isn't what he thought it would be and you get him for 9m or less then great if someone overpays him more than that then see ya later. Though I'm not one of the people treating that 9m story like it's gospel either, I think Cobb WANTS to test FA and it's not as simple as if we offer him 9m he'll immediately sign.

sschind
Senior Member

9 years ago

#20

The problem with letting players test the market is sometimes they don't give you the chance to match the offers they get.

In a perfect world Cobb would go out and get offers and then come back to the Packers and say what can you do with this. If he gets an offer he likes he might just say screw it, I like Oakland and the Packers didn't want to give me a chance so as long as I'm here I might as well sign.

Actually in a perfect world the Packers would say you want 9 million we will give you 9 million and Cobb would be a Packer for 4 more years.

I do think Bulaga is probably a higher priority but I consider them both high priorities and I do think they could afford them both if they really wanted them.

Truth be told I'm getting a little tired of the "ted is drafting them and Aaron is throwing to them so anyone will be fine" attitude.

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

Martha Careful (19h) : thank you Mucky for sticking up for me

Martha Careful (19h) : some of those people are smarter than you zero. However Pete Carroll is not

Mucky Tundra (23h) : Rude!

beast (23h) : Martha? 😋

Zero2Cool (24-Jan) : Raiders hired someone from the elderly home.

dfosterf (24-Jan) : I'm going with a combination of the two.

beast (24-Jan) : Either the Cowboys have no idea what they're doing, or they're targeting their former OC, currently the Eagles OC

Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Fake news. Cowboys say no

Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Mystery candidate in the Cowboys head coaching search believed to be Packers ST Coordinator Rich Bisaccia.

beast (23-Jan) : Also why do both NYC teams have absolutely horrible OL for over a decade?

beast (23-Jan) : I wonder why the Jets always hire defensive coaches to be head coach

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Still HC positions available out there. I wonder if Hafley pops up for one

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Trent Baalke is out as the Jaguars GM.

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Jeff Hafley would have been a better choice, fortunately they don't know that. Someone will figure that out next off season

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Aaron Glenn Planning To Take Jets HC Job

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Martha- C'est mon boulot! 😁

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you

wpr (22-Jan) : Z, glad you are feeling better.

wpr (22-Jan) : My son and D-I-L work for UM. It's a way to pick on them.

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you. I rarely get sick, and even more rarely sick to the point I can't work.

wpr (22-Jan) : Beast- back to yesterday, I CAN say OSU your have been Michigan IF the odds of making the playoffs were more urgent.

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Glad to hear you are feeling a bit better.

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : I've been near death ill last several days, finally feel less dead and site issues.

Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : It is a big deal. This host is having issues. It's frustrating.

Martha Careful (22-Jan) : just kidding...it was down

Martha Careful (22-Jan) : you were blocked yesterday, due to a a recalcitrant demeanor yesterday in the penalty box for a recalcitrant demeanor

dfosterf (22-Jan) : Was that site shutdown on your end or mine? No big deal, just curious

beast (21-Jan) : That way teams like Indiana and SMU don't make the conference championships by simply avoiding all the other good teams in their own confere

beast (21-Jan) : Also, with these "Super Conferences" instead of a single conference champion, have 4 teams make a Conference playoffs.

beast (21-Jan) : Also in college football, is a bye week a good or bad thing?

Martha Careful (21-Jan) : The tournament format was fine. Seeding could use some work.

beast (21-Jan) : You can't assume Ohio State would of won the Michigan game...

beast (21-Jan) : Rankings were 1) Oregon 2) Georgia 3) Texas 4) Penn State 5) Notre Dame 6) Ohio State, none of the rest mattered

wpr (21-Jan) : Texas, ND and OSU would have been fighting for the final 2 slots.

wpr (21-Jan) : Oregon and Georgia were locks. Without the luxury of extra playoff berths, Ohios St would have been more focused on Michigan game.

wpr (21-Jan) : Zero, no. If there were only 4 teams Ohio State would have been one of them. Boise St and ASU would not have been selected.

Zero2Cool (21-Jan) : So that was 7 vs 8, that means in BCS they never would made it?

Martha Careful (21-Jan) : A great game. Give ND credit for coming back, although I am please with the outcome.

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : FG to make it academic

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : and there's the dagger

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooo 8 point game with 4 minutes to go!

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : ooooooooohhhhhh he missed!

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Ooooo that completion makes things VERY interesting

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Game not over yet

beast (21-Jan) : Oh yeah, Georgia starting quarterback season ending elbow injury

beast (21-Jan) : Sadly something happened to Georgia... they should be playing in this game against Ohio State

beast (21-Jan) : I thought Ohio State and Texas were both better than Notre Dame & Penn State

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Notre Lame getting rolled

Martha Careful (21-Jan) : Ohio State just got punched in the gut. Lets see how they respond

Mucky Tundra (21-Jan) : Notre Lame vs the Luckeyes, bleh

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

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

25 - 27

Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

22 - 24

Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM

Eagles

10 - 22