You can't just let Kampman walk away injured or not injured. He might not be that useful for a 3-4 defense but he might a very important piece in a 4-3 defense.

---

You have to. (See above post). How can you justify spending most our money (around $9 million GUARANTEED) on an player who:

1. Seriously injured.
2. We have a younger, cheaper replacement for in Brad Jones. He not as good as Kampman yet, but might be after an offseason of weight lifting.
3. A bad fit for our scheme.
4. Getting up there in years.


We need that money for our other guys.

It sucks to let a valuable asset like Kampman go for nothing, but after how he handled himself in GB all these years, I think letting him walk with no restrictions is the right thing to do. He hasn't been happy this year and won't help much in the locker room anyways.

The trading of Kampman boat sailed at the trade deadline this season... the Packers have a tough decision on Kampman ahead.. but my guess early with the reinking of Chillar and Matthews and Jones coming on outside that Kampman has played his last down in GB.

I don't know that I am sold on Inking Chillar to this contract unless they have some plans with Barnett or Hawk inside.. why you ask.

Pickett is expiring up front.. we are either going to have to commit sizeable dollars there as well.. or find another "man" that can play alot inside.. we are thin on the defensive rotation now.. Pickett and Jolly are up... So under contract for next season we have Jenks, Raji and Wynn... if the CBA stays as it is currently Jolly will be a cheap contract.. Pickett is free regardless.

BTW.. all you counting on no new CBA are dreaming.. they are working hard on it.. we just don't hear about it per the gag order.. there will be a new deal in place. Almost a lock.. best interest on both sides.

---

We need what money?

It is critically important to differentiate between that 15million in cap room for this year and real money in getting our players signed. That 15million is only important to us if we want to get the deal(s) done yet this year. A Chiller signing does not restrict us from signing every single one of our players if we choose to do so after the season ends.

Spending most of our money? You mean, most of the cap room, the LEAST important factor as regards the re-signings.

Forget the cap. Look to our finances and revenue streams.

If that was market for Chiller, plan on a nice, big fat raise in ticket and concession prices, although the elimination of SRS to teams like the Vikes and and small increase in the TV contract revenues (2%) will help a little. We CAN sign everyone (at market prices) but would probably be dipping into the franchise preservation fund, which MIGHT just be a cash flow thing, dependent upon what they do about things like ticket prices.

Uncapped means uncapped.

There is a reason little to no deals are being inked right now.. because clubs are cautious of what is happening with the CBA..

They just met for the 7th or 8th time this past week.. with the gag order in place.. news isn't getting out to the public.

I would bet a high figure that the CBA will be reworked.. and not planning on having such a restriction in place will hurt clubs next season.

Just because it appears to be uncapped that it will be.. the CBA will be in place.. or a work stoppage there will be.

---

You bring up a good point.

But, the uncapped year has to have ramifications right? What if a new cap is lined up in 2011? Will all the teams that spent big this upcoming offseason be screwed if there is a new cap?

I just don't see Ted Thompson spending more than the Packers can financially afford.

I'm not a finance expert, but I believe that the Packers have been among the leaders in the league in unused cap space the last few years.

So if they were never willing to spend up to the max allowed under the old salary cap, why would they be willing to splurge all when there is no cap?

I don't get your point about "least important". I think that the Packers will still try to keep player pay role where it has always been because that is the only way for the Packers to make a profit as a buisness.

I think I need to put it in perspective.

The uncapped year begins in 19 days.

A new CBA and new salary cap by then? You think so?

We can sign every one of those guys to whatever we want to on January 3rd.

There is no provision to nix the deals if we so choose to do so. It would "count" towards the 2010 season, not the 2009 season.

In order to "cap" it after we signed players, they would have to try and do so retroactively, to all owners. You think we would vote for that if we did sign them?

There are a million and one reasons for uncertainty...If I'm betting on any one thing, I'll go ahead and bet that no new CBA and cap is in place before then.

My point is what they CAN do, not what they WILL do. Too many assumptions that they CANNOT do it-- Those assumptions are wrong...that is my only point.

The new league season doesn't start until after the season and playoffs are over.. the uncapped season doesn't begin until the 2010 season begins.. which is not in 19 days.

---

Not for pay purposes.

The 2009 cap ends on January 2nd. Anybody signed on or before the 2nd will be under the auspices of the 2009 salary cap. Anyone signed on the 3rd or later is assigned to the 2010 season.

When do we need to spend the 2009 cap by?

---