Why the Packers might let Cobb leave· Page 5

uffda udfa
Veteran Member

10 years ago

If we don't sign Randall, it's because some other team paid him more than he is worth; plain and simple.

You can say its because the Packers don't want to win, or that it's because Ted Thompson is an idiot all you want. It doesn't make it true.

Originally Posted by: greengold

I have heard of a bad contract. Get the concept completely. You don't understand the concept that to some GM the player's worth IS what they pay him. That is a truism. A player can't be paid by a GM more than a GM thinks is worth it. It is the essence of your argument as to why Ted Thompson may not retain Randall...just not worth it to Ted Thompson due to price.

Yes, I clearly laid out HOW we could keep Jordy and Randall last off season... all the ingredients necessary haven't taken place...yet. If Randall walks do you not see that, indeed, a choice was made?

It is not a win for Randall to go and there's no reason to be political when it comes to TT. He makes plenty of mistakes and does good things as well. Losing Randall is a MAJOR error on his part. It didn't have to come to this. He may have gambled and lost this time.

Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."

uffda udfa
Veteran Member

10 years ago

#42

Think about this... 8 million for Finley a few years ago. Nowhere near Randall's production. Not even close. A few years later, more cap space, and we're no longer paying Finley but we don't think it's wise to go above 9 mil for Randall?

There is a reason Finley got that money minus his production. Think about it and you'll realize why we have to pay Randall.

Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."

greengold
Member

10 years ago

#43

I would rather pay more than $9M for Julius Thomas before I would pay more than $9M for Randall Cobb. But it is not up to me or up to you.

It is not about having the best slot receiver in football. It is about having the best TEAM and managing your OWN salary cap. And NOT allowing the Jaguars or Raiders to manage it for you.

uffda udfa
Veteran Member

10 years ago

#44

Originally Posted by: greengold

To the person who said it would be 3 million more per that we would have to fork over...

From ESPNWISCONSIN.com:

If Randall Cobb returns to the Green Bay Packers – and there’s no guarantee that the veteran wide receiver will do that – it will be for $1 million to $2 million less than he could get elsewhere, an NFL source confirmed Saturday afternoon.

---So, we're really going to save 1-2 million a year and forage ahead minus Randall. Yup, sounds like prudent business to me.

Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."

dhazer
Veteran Member

10 years ago

#45

Originally Posted by: greengold

I have to disagree Cobb is not the best slot receiver are you forgetting about Edleman he by far is more effective than Cobb. But I like the Thomas reference but I think it would only take a 4 yr 32 million contract to get him.

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

mi_keys
Senior Member

10 years ago

#46

Originally Posted by: dhazer

By far more effective? Cobb had 300 more yards and 8 more touchdowns this past season. Cobb's 12 touchdowns this past year are only 2 less than Edelman's 14 career. Edelman has been a very good receiver for the Pats these past two years but far more effective than Cobb is ludicrous.

Born and bred a cheesehead

uffda udfa
Veteran Member

10 years ago

#47

TT shouldn't have waited this long on RC18...he should've been extended long ago. He wasn't. Now, the risk of losing him is real.

Julius Thomas is not Jimmy Graham...not even close. I like Orange Julius and would love to see him as a Packer but he, alone, isn't going to fill the Cobb void.

All the pro Ted Thompson crowd is going to look really ridiculous defending him if Randall departs. Again, I don't think that is going to happen.

Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."

uffda udfa
Veteran Member

10 years ago

#48

Chargers and Texans in hot pursuit of Randall Cobb. Two warm weather cities and more money. SD is competitive and Texans have a budding D to back them.

Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."

lolleren
Member

10 years ago

#49

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

I believe Thomas would add more to the offense than we miss by loosing Cobb, I would rather pay him 9m a year than Cobb, just like the previous poster said.

I an neither pro not anti Ted, I have an opinon on each of his decisions being a fan of the team, and signing Cobb to a 12m a year contract would in my opinion be a huge mistake and limit the team in future years.

blank

dhazer
Veteran Member

10 years ago

#50

I have always been a Ted Thompson backer 🤫 and if we lose Cobb I don't think it would be that big of a loss if we sign a free agent wr and add in Thomas. We do need to add a vet WR if we let him walk.

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

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

Zero2Cool (11m) : Packers were not selected for the 2025 Hall of Fame game.

dfosterf (2h) : PFOW Out of our division would be a good thing imo

Zero2Cool (4h) : Jameson Williams is done at 24 years old? What? He's a WR, not QB. I'm missing something here haha

wpr (4h) : Tomorrow is almost here.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : would you want him if Pack needed a back up qb?

packerfanoutwest (4h) : JW is done......stick a fork in him

Zero2Cool (6h) : You should. He goes to AFC that helps Packers.

packerfanoutwest (17h) : don't care

Zero2Cool (22h) : Lions shopping Jameson Williams?

packerfanoutwest (22-Apr) : Packers General Manager Brian Gutekunst says Green Bay’s roster can win, even without adding anyone in the draft.

Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : It's a poor design. New site has SignalR like our gameday chat

wpr (22-Apr) : Ah today's Shout was very quick to post.

wpr (22-Apr) : now 3

Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Who? What?

beast (22-Apr) : What is he supposed to say? He doesn't want players currently on the team?

Martha Careful (21-Apr) : meh

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Sounds like Walker and Wyatt will be with Packers for beyond 2026

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : It's so awesome.

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : new site fan shout post fast

wpr (21-Apr) : Slow posting in Fan shout.

wpr (21-Apr) : Only 4

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : If only we had a topic to read about and discuss it. That's something new website must have!!!

dfosterf (21-Apr) : Justice Musqueda over at Acme Packing put up an excellent synopsis of the Packers 1st round options this am

wpr (19-Apr) : 5 days

beast (18-Apr) : 6 days

wpr (17-Apr) : 7 days

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Trade, cut or keep

dfosterf (16-Apr) : that from Jaire

dfosterf (16-Apr) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : That someone ... likely the agent.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaire’s line of thinking at that moment.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that

dfosterf (16-Apr) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Jalen Ramsey wants to be traded. He's never happy is he?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : two 1sts in 2022 and two 2nd's in 2023 and 2024

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers had fortunate last three drafts.

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