TE Jared Cook in Green Bay, set to sign 1yr deal· Page 3

Dulak
Veteran Member

8 years ago

To anyone who says he could flop, or was a douche on the sidelines with a previous QB - you could be right.

....but I'm still doing my happy dance. I wish this was for more than 1 year because next year is already a nightmare for F.A. with the OL, Lacy, and Datone, but whatever, this guy has the potential to be pretty darn impactful

Originally Posted by: musccy

Personally I dont care about if he could flop. What did we spend then? ... a few years ago we payed brad freaking jones 8 mil for what? ... now there was the flop and he was a flop since he started (I know he had some stats and could cover but come on) ... anyways this is about Cook.

A+ from me for Ted ... finally got me to smile since we lost to the cards ...

Hope he turns out good; last 6'5 TE we had was finley ... Cook looks pretty good and his stats might have dipped but IMO they will go up if he's on the field because we will have many people to throw too and they will be him loose coverage.

I Agree with you musccy; would of loved a 2 year deal - I hate to have just a 1 year deal and then get stuck with paying $$$ if he does well or having him leave.

musccy
Veteran Member

8 years ago

#22

I Agree with you musccy; would of loved a 2 year deal - I hate to have just a 1 year deal and then get stuck with paying $$$ if he does well or having him leave.

Originally Posted by: Dulak

Seems like the whole damn team is in a contract year or "prove it" deals. The Packers should kick ass this year but will lead to some deceptive price tags in 11 months.

OlHoss1884
Member

8 years ago

#23

I like to think this is a good signing, but since the league seems to have figured out our offense, it won't make any difference. If the playcalling isn't switched up and some new wrinkles put in, we're looking at third place.

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits" --Albert Einstein

musccy
Veteran Member

8 years ago

#24

Originally Posted by: OlHoss1884

Call the "run around like a chicken with your head cut off" play, it doesn't matter. If Cook is faster than the LB covering him, or catches it when it hits him in the paws, we're fine.

macbob
Veteran Member

8 years ago

#25

I hate to have just a 1 year deal and then get stuck with paying $$$ if he does well or having him leave.

Originally Posted by: Dulak

I would expect if he shows anything during the season that Ted Thompson would probably work a longer term deal toward the end of the season, before he hit free agency next year. With the lack of interest this year (since he couldn't get a better deal) he'd might jump at the chance for a longer term contract rather than try free agency again.

TheKanataThrilla
Veteran Member

8 years ago

#26

Originally Posted by: macbob

It is an interesting situation. If he plays well does he realize that playing with a top QB matters? Also, other teams may just think he had great stats because of Aaron and not offer him a big contract either. You have to wonder if FAs like Jennings and JJ has scared off teams offering Packer FAs receivers big bucks.

DakotaT
Select Member

8 years ago

#27

Good signing, now how about ILB and backup tackles?

DoddPower
Veteran Member

8 years ago

#28

I heard Ted Thompson wanted to sign Cook to a two year deal, but Cook wanted a one year deal and a chance at a more lucrative contract next year. I also read that he wanted to go to the best possible team with the best possible QB. Apparently there was interest from at least three other teams. I love these low risk moves. It probably doesn't "solve" the tight end position for the long run, but it's a nice band aid until something else can be figured out, hopefully through the draft. I think that's how free agency should work, especially when it doesn't cost compensatory draft picks. Use free agency as a band aid on obviously weak positions and then draft the best players available in the draft and develop them. That's the winning formula, imo.

Smokey
Veteran Member

8 years ago

#29

🤣 🤣 🤣

TheKanataThrilla
Veteran Member

8 years ago

#30

Originally Posted by: DoddPower

I totally agree with your post, but do you think we draft a TE now based on what we currently have on the roster? If we draft a TE do we cut Perillo or Backman? Don't know if we can PS either or both of them.

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

beast (2h) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁

beast (11h) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game

packerfanoutwest (15h) : both games Watson missed, Packers won

Martha Careful (17h) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!

Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol

buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier

buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol

Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Jacobs gonna be OK???

Zero2Cool (24-Dec) : Watson gonna be OK???

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.

packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (23-Dec) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (23-Dec) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th

beast (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (23-Dec) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (23-Dec) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (23-Dec) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (23-Dec) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (23-Dec) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (23-Dec) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (23-Dec) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I literally just said it.

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

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS