All true, however, your last statement says it all. The final numbers have not been determined until after final decisions on players . The very obvious candidates for cuts/renegotiation are Clay, Cobb, and Jordy.

If all three were to be cut it would add back about $25 mil to the cap. That probably won't happen.
I believe Jordy and Clay understand at this stage of their careers adjustments are due and justified as well.
I can certainly see where Cobb might well be headed out. He would be the easiest to replace with Montgomery and others.
The other player that is interesting is Ha Ha. There is 0 cap hit on his $6 mil salary. I mention this because he is really the only other player where significant cap numbers can be adjusted. Hey, they cut an All Pro guard out of the blue last year so who's to know?

What I'm saying is at least the Packers have options and flexibility depending on how all this shakes out so I'm not in judgement regarding the cap until it it does. I love me some Jordy and Clay. True Packer warriors but Father Time holds no prisoners.

Originally Posted by: warhawk 

If it's true that GB only has $19 mil or so and they are 23rd out of 32 teams then I don't believe you can say that they have acted responsibly. Especially when that number drops to around $12 mil after the new rookies are signed. That doesn't leave much room for the veterans that they need to re-sign. I am not an expert but they are a very short step from being in Cap Hell.

It appears they will have to cut and or restructure the contracts of some pretty big names in order to move forward.

Originally Posted by: wpr 

NO! Taking one number out of context and drawing hysterical conclusions from it is irresponsible; its actually very Fox News-like. Cap availability numbers must be put in context or they're MEANINGLESS.

GB has already signed their top 2 FAs [Extending Adams/Linsley], who else has done that?

And cap hell: OH MY GOD, I cant take this, I’m gonna have to be a Browns fan! You surely looked into 2019 and saw that we have no space in ‘19…oh wait, no, I guess you didn’t. Actually, GB had 80M in cap space for ’19 before Adams/Linsley extensions, now we got 62M. That’s much closer to Cap heaven than hell! The 80M was #10 and above GB only Tenn, SF and Cincy have serviceable QBs signed.

9 straight PO appearances [but for a QB playing cowboy and getting hurt and choking during the '17 run]. All his being done while managing the contracts of the highest and 8th highest [CM3] paid contracts in the league!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! God dammit, this is pure cap genius! Here we are nearing the end of the 2 contracts and NO ONE must be cut for non football reasons. This has NEVER been done before; it's magical, its impossible and some bitch bitch bitch.

GB is head and shoulders cap/roster wise ahead of any team paying big $$$ to a QB. And Brady even gave NE a huge discount. Of course, for Brady it’s all about winning not becoming the highest paid or stat-whoring or gratifying himself while watching his own highlights with a hot angry fast-driving accident prone sociopath lying naked with him on the couch.

See, the angriest loudest-mouthed Packer fan is angry and loud because they are simply ignorant. They indulge in a refusal to reason beyond a tweet, thus losing the ability to think beyond the tip of their tiny little schlorks. EG, they tweet-bitch about Ted using youngsters for depth, but remain steadfastly OBLIVIOUS to the consequences of the indulgence of their ignorance. Now we have an example: The signing in ’17 of 5 Vet fringe starter/solid BU types [House 2.8M, Brooks 3.5M, Dial .775M, Evans 2.425M, RJF 2.0M] ate up 9M in cap space in 2017 that could have been rolled over in ’18 if RFAs and draft picks were relied upon. Hence, GB has 9M less to spend in ’18. Applauding the singing of low cost fringe vet players and then bitching about a lack of cap space the next year is the type of logic and reason humans should abandon as they approach puberty.

Fans should control the rampant emotion until ALL the numbers are understood and here they are: The top 53 contracts per Spotrac [we’re not gonna play with 51 in season, so ignore that "51"#] leaves us with $18.3M in cap space. WPR opines that Spotrac’s listing of 7 draft picks knocks 6.6M off the 18.3; NO, again! First, we don’t have 7 picks, we have 11, so the pool will be over $9M, not 6.6M. But you gotta subtract about .5M for each pick that makes the 53. Assuming GB gets one 3rd; two 4th; and one 6th round comp picks and if all the rookies make the 53 it’ll reduce the available cap by about 4M.

Then banking 7M for 2018 injury singings, extensions, etc; we have about 7.3M to spend on FAs in 2018 as the roster stands today.

Now let’s look at the 4 teams in the middle of this list; [who would you rather be?]:

NO: has $15M more to spend; but don’t have a QB or 2 other starters signed
Buff: has $13M more to spend; but are paying Taylor at QB1 with 5 other starters unsigned
Den: has $10M more to spend; but are paying only Lynch at QB with 3 other starters unsigned
NYG: has $8M more to spend; but are paying Eli at QB1 with 8 other starters unsigned.

And did you see what QBs Smith and Garropolo signed for?????

Before opinionatedly ranting about 1265 being irresponsible, please take the responsibility to understand what the hell you're talking about.

If Gutey would be irresponsible if he screws this up and he will if his behavior mirrors the thinking of the loud-mouth opinionated Packer fan.

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 

Does anybody have thoughts/observations on AJ McCarron (fmr ALA) as a possible #2? there are quite a few expensive options out there at QB who will likely go to teams with an immediate need. He might be an excellent choice for the Packers....what do you think?

Originally Posted by: KRK 

Aj will make big money and will be signed as someone's starter. He won't go somewhere as a backup

Originally Posted by: gbguy20