Retaining Randall Cobb, Bryan Bulaga help Packers get top offseason grade· Page 2

uffda udfa
Veteran Member

9 years ago

I call bullshit. Cobb wanted NOTHING to do with a lowball extension coming off an injury shortened 2013. Yet you continue to pretend he wanted to extend early for peanuts when he had missed 10 games the year before.

Provide some proof that Randall WANTED to sign a long term contract for $5M a year prior to the 2014 season AND the Packers were unwilling to offer such a contract or STFU.

You making something up then repeating it over and over and over and over does not make it true.

Originally Posted by: greengold

You are absolutely right...he did not. What was the number he was offered? Do you know? I could say the same of your premise. We know Randall was offered something and he didn't want any part of it. I will promise you it was nowhere near 10 mil a season. What was it then? It was a low ball offer, of course, it was... our org was trying to be smart proactive and save a lot of money. It offered far too low just as it did in the Moss, Gonzales and Lynch deals that didn't happen. Do you really think if the deal for Randall would've been 5 or 6 million he wouldn't have taken that as a slot guy? I'm going to guess we offered far less than 5 or 6 and he scoffed at it as he should've. There is no way on this earth you will ever be able to make the point that Randall was only going to sign early for something right next to 10 mil per. So, even had we paid 7...that's 30% less. You don't think RC18 would've taken 7 and would've considered that a lowball? No freaking way. We offered squat ORG's FAULT...has nothing to do with Randall. If org gave him a good offer he takes it and it ain't anywhere near 10 million.

Slice, dice, spin, repeat...we overpaid by not signing him early and there is nothing you can say counter to that. Ditto on Bulaga. Get upset, type STFU, type insults...it's simply the truth. There is no reason to celebrate paying 10 mil to a guy you could've paid a lot less a year prior and there was no reason to pay Bulaga 7 million with his injury history. Very against the Bulaga signing. Very pro Randall's signing just that it cost us way more than it should've and that's the orgs fault and it deserves no praise for doling out 10 million.

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 Topic Starter

9 years ago

#12

I'm going to guess we offered far less than 5 or 6 and he scoffed at it as he should've.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

You're going to guess, then you are going to repeat it over and over and over and over as a fact; but you have no clue what was offered. But if you keep saying it, (and you will, because it makes Ted Thompson sound stupid) maybe someone will believe you.

uffda udfa
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#13

Originally Posted by: greengold

You want me to produce numbers you know I can't produce and hide behind that knowing full well we wouldn't have paid 10 million to extend him prior to his contract year.

Do you dispute this? Do you?

It is not a guess that it wasn't going to take 10 million to extend him prior to his contract year. Again, you really wish to argue this point? It's a reality and you know that it is but you can hide behind the fact I don't have the actual numbers.

I am 100% correct...you know it, and don't like it.

EDIT: Randall was supposedly asking for around 9 million:

According to Tom Silverstein of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, agent Jimmy Sexton let team executives know at the combine that Cobb's asking price was to be in the range of $12 million per year. Earlier indications, as reported by Rob Demovsky of ESPN, had Cobb in the area of $9 million.

---So, Randall asked for around 9 million AFTER posting better numbers than Victor Cruz. He was still asking less than 10 million AFTER his breakout season. So, YES, there is YOUR PROOF we overpaid this guy or are you going to insist he was going to ask for 10 million or even anywhere near 9 BEFORE his breakout season? Irrefutable. My issue is not to make anyone look stupid. The issue is and remains it is plain STUPID to praise our org for retaining him like we did something good. Yeah, we way overpaid by not signing him a year prior.

2nd edit: Here's a report about what we offered him PRIOR to FA:

The Packers have reportedly offered Cobb a five-year deal worth somewhere between $8 and $9 million annually—an offer that has been rejected by Cobb’s agent Jimmy Sexton.

--- Again, you think we offered anything near between 8 and 9 PRIOR to last season? NOPE. Lowballed, him just like you said. You seem to know that is true, why don't you know the rest is? We absolutely overpaid by waiting until he had his huge season. There is nothing to argue so why are you?

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."

voiceofreason
Member

9 years ago

#14

We absolutely did not overpay for Cobb. I would love to see any proof suggesting we did. If anything we got a great deal on Cobb.

blank

greengold
Member Topic Starter

9 years ago

#15

You want me to produce numbers you know I can't produce

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

No, I want you to use the second option, stop claiming the Packers are incompetent based on a fairy tale fabricated entirely by you.

I.E. "After the 2013 season when he missed 10 games, Randall Cobb asked for a long term extension for only $5M per year. The Packers were not willing to pay that much and now it cost them double." <- That total fabrication, in case you were wondering which one.

uffda udfa
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#16

Originally Posted by: greengold

I have never said the org was stupid...if you actually read my posts, I called their practice with Cobb and Bulaga smart and cautious. HOWEVER, that does not mean that in hindsight it wasn't the complete wrong move. It was, in hindsight.

You seem to miss my point often. You want to argue things I'm not even arguing. I'm saying, AGAIN, that it is just ridiculous to praise our org for extending Cobb and Bulaga for the money we extended them at. I see some interesting posts. There is no short supply of posts praising our org for not getting involved in FA. It's very odd that it is now claimed we do, in fact, use FA, and then we praise our org for overpaying it's own. If you don't see the contradiction...
We have overspent on Shields, Burnett, Hawk, Jones, Bulaga, Matthews and Cobb. It is no wonder we don't use real FA, we can't afford to as we've wasted so much money on our own. Our org dig make a mistake with Cobb. It simply did. What is debatable is Bulaga... I think it was a really really risky move giving him the money he got. I don't like it at all. Would've been worried at the reduced rate we could've gotten him at prior to his contract year as well.

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 Topic Starter

9 years ago

#17

We have overspent on Shields, Burnett, Hawk, Jones, Bulaga, Matthews and Cobb.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

That is your opinion.

I agree we overspent on Jones and Hawk.

Cobb and Bulaga got market value, not above market value. And the Packers had no choice on either one. Jimmy Sexton was not going to let Cobb sign a below market extension coming off a season where he only played 6 games. That would be crazy for Cobb to consider. Cobb's cap hit this year is only $5.3M which is a bargain. Next year the cap goes up and you can look at his production versus his cap hit versus next years salary cap to decide again. Ted Thompson contracts usually look like a bargain after a year or two.

Bulaga, as you said, was not going to be offered an extension early due to his injury history. His average cap hit going forward makes him the 18th highest paid OT, I thought he graded higher than 18th overall. It makes him the second highest paid RT, I think he graded as the best right tackle last year. Anyway, his cap hit this year is only $3.5M which I would not call overspending on an above average right tackle. Again, subject to revisit as the cap goes up and OT salaries go up.

Shields, $9.1M this year. I dunno, find me somebody better for less money and we can talk.

Burnett and Matthews were both extended before they hit free agency. That's how you get bargains, right? I would not say they are grossly under-performing on their existing contracts. I can't agree the Packers overspent here.

Ok, so Ted Thompson swung and missed on Jones and Hawk. Everybody knows that. Both players are gone. We are ready to move on. Are you with us or against us?

uffda udfa
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#18

Originally Posted by: greengold

I'm not for or against anyone. I like the truth. The truth, again, is we lost a lot of cap charge by not signing Cobb and Bulaga the year before they hit FA. There isn't a single doubt in my mind that if the Packers had offered an extremely good deal to an ascending player, he wouldn't be playing on a 10 mil per deal. It was a gamble the org made and it paid handsomely for being wrong.

Back to the for or against... I would like for you to acknowledge that we, in fact, did pay millions upon millions more for the pair by not extending them early. Further, it's absolute insanity to praise the org for retaining both players at the prices we retained them at. That's all.

Our org has a habit of overvaluing it's own while completely dismissing stud players from the outside because they're "too costly". The irony is incredible...on one hand it's okay, completely, to use FA for your own guys and overpay them but not someone else's? Inconsistent. Burning cap space is burning cap space whether you overpay your own or overpay an outsider. I just tire of the typical homer who likes praising the org for being so smart about staying out of FA but then turns around and celebrates what a great job we did in FA by overpaying our own. It's just mindboggling.

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 Topic Starter

9 years ago

#19

Back to the for or against... I would like for you to acknowledge that we, in fact, did pay millions upon millions more for the pair by not extending them early. Further, it's absolute insanity to praise the org for retaining both players at the prices we retained them at. That's all.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa

No, it is YOUR fantasy story. I would like YOU to explain HOW they would convince Randall Cobb and Jimmy Sexton to take millions upon millions BELOW market value by extending right after missing 10 games in 2013. And WHY Randall Cobb would agree to take millions upon millions BELOW market value by extending right after missing 10 games in 2013. Or you could just stop. 😢 That's all.

uffda udfa
Veteran Member

9 years ago

#20

Originally Posted by: greengold

No fantasy whatsoever. Have you ever taken an economics class? Supply and demand? You realize that due to Randall's injury his demand was very down? That is why he wasn't worried about an extension because he knew he couldn't command what he hoped to command somewhere down the road. That is where our org failed. It should've jumped into that gap BEFORE Randall put up the monster season last year which sent his demand soaring. Our org failed to recognize that he would put up the monster season, watched it happen, and then had to pay handsomely for it because it did all because they weren't forward thinking enough to give him a great deal BEFORE he made it to where he knew he could walk and sign a brinks truck deal elsewhere. Randall had next zero bargaining power prior to last season. Our org didn't give him a good enough offer much like it failed to give good enough offers in the failed Moss, Gonzales and Lynch situations. It just took a little bit more for an EXTREME return for such a little investment. Org gambled Cobb wouldn't blow it out last season but he did and they paid MILLIONS for not being more proactive. That's a stone cold fact.

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."

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

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

packerfanoutwest (1m) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker

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

beast (12m) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us

packerfanoutwest (18m) : falcons are already ahead of us

beast (21m) : Packers will get in

beast (21m) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen

packerfanoutwest (27m) : they still are in the playoffs

packerfanoutwest (28m) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7

Zero2Cool (2h) : We can say it. We don't play.

Mucky Tundra (3h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints

Mucky Tundra (3h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games

Mucky Tundra (3h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.

buckeyepackfan (4h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.

Mucky Tundra (13h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan

beast (13h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings

bboystyle (13h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in

Mucky Tundra (16h) : Or ties, but let's be real here

Mucky Tundra (16h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses

Mucky Tundra (16h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch

buckeyepackfan (17h) : 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.

beast (21-Dec) : I think a great running game will do that for most QBs

packerfanoutwest (21-Dec) : Coach Matt LaFleur has said quarterback Jordan Love is playing the best football of his career.

beast (21-Dec) : Oh, that's how you keep beating buckeye, with cheating

Zero2Cool (20-Dec) : There is a rule that if your name starts with 'b' you lose 15 points. Hey, I don't make the rules, I just enforce them!

wpr (20-Dec) : and then there is Beast. Running away with it all.

beast (20-Dec) : As of tonight, 3 way tie for 2nd in Pick'em, that battle is interesting!

beast (20-Dec) : Lions vs Vikings could be the main last game as it could determine division winners or #1 vs #2 seed

Mucky Tundra (20-Dec) : Or if KC needs to win for the #1 seed

Mucky Tundra (20-Dec) : Right now it looks like the only prime worthy games are Det-Minny and KC-Denver (if Denver can clinch a wild card spot)

Mucky Tundra (20-Dec) : The entirety of week 18 being listed as flex is weird

Zero2Cool (19-Dec) : Matt LaFleur today says unequivocally "Ted Thompson had nothing to do with the drafting of Jordan Love."

Zero2Cool (19-Dec) : Apparently, the editing is what pieces comments together. That Ted thing ... fake news.

Zero2Cool (19-Dec) : LaFleur "opportunity that Ted Thompson thought was too good to pass up"

Zero2Cool (19-Dec) : Jordan Love pick was Ted Thompson's idea.

Mucky Tundra (19-Dec) : Kyle Shanahan on signing De'Vondre Campbell as a FA last offseason: “We obviously made a mistake.”

packerfanoutwest (19-Dec) : Alexander’s last season with GB

Martha Careful (18-Dec) : if I were a professional athlete, I would probably look to see who the agent is for Kirk Cousins and then use him

beast (18-Dec) : $100 million fully guaranteed Kirk Cousins gets benched for rookie

Mucky Tundra (18-Dec) : a lower case b

Mucky Tundra (18-Dec) : The real lie is how beast capitalized his name in his message while it's normally spelled with

packerfanoutwest (18-Dec) : haha that's a lie

beast (17-Dec) : Despite what lies other might tell, Beast didn't hate the Winter Warnings, it felt refreshing to Beast for some reason.

Zero2Cool (17-Dec) : whiteout uniforms in general are pretty lame and weak. NFL greed at it's worst

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