Zero2Cool
9 years ago

Honestly, the Packers are going to let a 24 year old...a TWENTY FOUR YEAR OLD proven star just walk because of an extra mil or two average per season? Really? Draft, develop, depart?

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 


I think you're making up anger agenda's. I don't believe anyone is implying what you're claiming and when I said "increase Packers offer significantly", that wasn't implying by one or two million. Try $3 million at least per year more.


UserPostedImage
TheKanataThrilla
9 years ago

Comfortable with what they have? That is a very scary thought to me.

I saw enough from Adams to think you may be right but I have no idea what you saw in either Janis or Abbredaris, other than false logic "Ted drafted them so they will be good" to say they are not duds. They may not be duds but I have seen nothing that tells me one way or the other and I don't take Mike McCarthy comments about Janis as any sort of confirmation because he said the same thing about Boykin the year before.

We MAY draft a guy that is better than Jimmy Graham or we MAY sign a FA that turns out to be even better than Cobb or Adams and Janis and Abby MAY step up but I would be much more comfortable with our situation knowing we didn't have to count on one or more of those things happening. It may not be doom and gloom but without a doubt it weakens our WR group and I don't see how anyone can argue that it doesn't (not that you were but some people think it won't make any difference) The argument is is the amount it weakens our WR group offset by continuity we retain in the cap. IMO that will depend on the difference between what we offer that he turned down and what he gets. 3 million a year maybe, 1 million, NO WAY. If he signs somewhere else for 10 million a year I will think it was a big mistake to let him go. If he signs for more than that I'll be fine with the decision to let him go.

Originally Posted by: sschind 



I remember people were uncomfortable in letting Driver go to allow Cobb more reps. As a result we kept Driver 1 year too long in my opinion.

Many WRs can instantly play in this league. We have had the luxury of low expectations from our WRs to make any sort of impact year 1. No doubt losing Cobb would hurt, but I trust that Ted would have a back-up plan and must be given the non-bullshit updates on Janis and Abby. I think Adams is pretty darn good and more reps will help him. Boykin was pretty good at one point. I am not sure why he regressed.

Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
9 years ago
I have to admit that the thought of losing three starter-quality wide receivers in three years (and having had a fourth retire because of declining skills) scares me. Yes, Ted has been well above average at picking up good WRs in the draft. Yes, Adams has shown himself better than I thought he'd be when drafted.

Especially with an offense that is pass-dominant.

I'm not saying that they should pay Cobb whatever he asks. But I do think there's a major gamble here if they let him go.

Because Adams doesn't just have to take the next step. He has to become a threat that makes the 3rd and 4th and 5th options better by taking more of the defense's attention. Nelson, Jennings, Jones, Cobb -- each of these demonstrated abilities that meant DCs had to give them attention that did two things: first it meant that DCs couldn't just strive to shut down one guy; second, and more importantly, it opened up opportunities for those of lesser talent on the team (e.g. Boykin,Quarless) to become more frequent alternatives for the wily and uber-talented Rodgers. If Cobb leaves, though, only one of those four is left.

And that means Adams, and probably another WR/TE/RB must become a substantial threat greater than they have demonstrated to date.
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
nerdmann
9 years ago

I am afraid Randall may be listening to his agent who is going for a big number contract that will be back loaded.
Signing bonus and guaranteed money are the only money's that count for the player.
The agent, on the other hand gets his percentage of the total contract!
Also known as "window dressing " money.

Originally Posted by: buckeyepackfan 



Ted's MO is to back load contracts. They seem like bank busters when they're signed, but two years later the cap has expanded and now they look like bargain deals. That's how Ted rolls.

Still, he won't go above his number.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
uffda udfa
9 years ago
You lose Cobb and you have Jordy as your only proven guy and he's creeping up to the age where he's about to fall off. Why oh why they chose to give Jordy the money over Randall is the issue. I said it then and I'll resay it here. That was foolishness. The talent gap is negligible if not in Randall's favor but you gave the money to Jordy and are going to let a guy who is TWENTY FOUR nowhere near his prime walk because you gave the money to a near 30 year old WR? Tell me how that makes sense. You can't justify it.

Randall is plain and simple the definition of a CORE GUY. One of TT's favorite refrains...core guy. Keep your core together. He's potentially not going to do it and he's being defended? Amazed. Randall is class on the field and class off ... you reward those players. You don't let them walk at TWENTY FOUR. The excuse makers are going to have their own aversion to the truth meters challenged on this deal.



UserPostedImage
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
9 years ago

You lose Cobb and you have Jordy as your only proven guy and he's creeping up to the age where he's about to fall off. Why oh why they chose to give Jordy the money over Randall is the issue. I said it then and I'll resay it here. That was foolishness. The talent gap is negligible if not in Randall's favor but you gave the money to Jordy and are going to let a guy who is TWENTY FOUR nowhere near his prime walk because you gave the money to a near 30 year old WR? Tell me how that makes sense. You can't justify it.

Randall is plain and simple the definition of a CORE GUY. One of TT's favorite refrains...core guy. Keep your core together. He's potentially not going to do it and he's being defended? Amazed. Randall is class on the field and class off ... you reward those players. You don't let them walk at TWENTY FOUR. The excuse makers are going to have their own aversion to the truth meters challenged on this deal.


Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



I have said it before, but the you don't pay WR1 money to a slot receiver. The reason Cobb didnt get paid over Nelson last season was for that precise reason.

If he wants 10m+ a year Ted needs to do what is best for the team in the long run and let him walk and pick up a cut Vet WR and utilize his extra 3rd round pick next year for the future.

blank
uffda udfa
9 years ago

I have said it before, but the you don't pay WR1 money to a slot receiver. The reason Cobb didnt get paid over Nelson last season was for that precise reason.

If he wants 10m+ a year Ted needs to do what is best for the team in the long run and let him walk and pick up a cut Vet WR and utilize his extra 3rd round pick next year for the future.

Originally Posted by: lolleren 



Oh, but Randall IS so much more than just a slot WR. Our WR's play all positions at various times. He's an integral part of what we do on O. To diminish him by simply saying he's nothing but a slot guy is dead wrong. If that is what is required to try justifying him walking then I get it, but it's still inaccurate.

UserPostedImage
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
9 years ago

Oh, but Randall IS so much more than just a slot WR. Our WR's play all positions at various times. He's an integral part of what we do on O. To diminish him by simply saying he's nothing but a slot guy is dead wrong. If that is what is required to try justifying him walking then I get it, but it's still inaccurate.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



He is "just" a slot WR, he lines up in the slot 80-90% of the time, I believe I have seen those numbers somewhere.

http://www.acmepackingcompany.com/2015/3/4/8148311/examining-randall-cobbs-free-agent-value-and-the-slot-receiver-label 

"After his rookie year, though, take a look at his slot usage increasing. He jumped up to 84.4% in 2012, then 94.7%(!) and 87.3% each of the past two seasons."
blank
greengold
9 years ago
There is some distortion of the facts going on here when you imply they gave Jordy a HUGE contract and wont pay Cobb.
Yes, he is 29 this year. The last year or two of Jordy's contract are fake in my opinion.

In cap numbers, last year he cost you $5.9M.
This year it is $4.6M.
Next year when he is 30 it is $8.8M.

If he gets cut after 2016 it is a $4.6M writeoff. So his cost was $7.9M per year for 3 years, not the "$9.7M per year average" that gets advertised.

If you do keep him in 2017 when he is 31, (maybe the cap goes up significantly and he gets better with age?) the cap number is $11.5M with a $2.3M writeoff.

Even then his cost would be $8.3M over 4 years.

My guess is they have offered Cobb slightly more than that, but I could be wrong.

Ted is pretty damn good at managing the cap. If another team wants to be stupid and completely blow too much cap space on a slot receiver I think you have to let them.
DakotaT
9 years ago
I still want that 6'5" receiver that Aaron can throw some garbage up and the guy goes and makes the play. Cobb is good between the 20's, but he's no red zone threat. I still don't consider Cobb our top priority over Bulaga or retaining House. It seems to me, the Packers have been incredible at the "next guy up" in the receiving corps. Have no idea why so many of you get so worked up over this position. Look at what Belichek and Brady do with the scrap heap of receivers they have.

Sign Bulaga, and beef up our defense and we still have more than enough to win on offense, with or without Cobb.
UserPostedImage
Fan Shout
dfosterf (10h) : Maybe
Mucky Tundra (10h) : Yes
Zero2Cool (11h) : No.
Mucky Tundra (13h) : End of a Degu-era
dhazer (14h) : Steelers sign Patterson because of new kickoff rule interesting
Zero2Cool (17h) : Former #Packers TE Josiah Deguara is signing a 1-year deal with the Jaguars, per source.
Zero2Cool (18h) : They do not do it for "content sake".
dfosterf (28-Mar) : For the record, I enjoy Beast and Mucky drafts
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Haha
Mucky Tundra (27-Mar) : No time for talking! Back to work beast!
beast (27-Mar) : You saw only 4,201 of my mocks? 🥺 I think that means you missed more than half of them 😢
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Does anyone know what Lambeau field improvements got put on hold? My guess would be for the 2025 draft
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : It's like listen, you made 4,201 mocks, no shit.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Cuz during the draft "I had them mocked there!" as if it's amazing.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : They're fun to do once in awhile. It's people who think they are "content" that annoy me.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Against tbd
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Answer to your question is yes, it's a Thursday, will be the Chiefs aga
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Luckily for all concerned, I don't post them. I did one, but that was like 25 mocks ago
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : NFL 2024 gonna start Sept 5th isn't it???
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Ugh... kids these days!
dfosterf (27-Mar) : I'm gonna go do some more mock draft hell instead 🤪
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Did we do one of those prediction threads yet for 2024 season?
dfosterf (27-Mar) : In my city, they are playing the nimby game, in order to keep some railroad tracks vs. 2 professional sports teams and a concert venue.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : And/Or a city council, of which I haven't seen a good one in a very long time
dfosterf (27-Mar) : That sounds like a Mayor, not a city.
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers halt scheduled 80mil upgrade of stadium until lease agreement talks are restarted
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : City of Green Bay puts Packers' Lambeau Field lease talks on hold
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers 1 of 3 teams to vote no on new kickoff rule.
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Packers sign another Kicker
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Lengthy explanation at PFF if you click the link
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Kickoff rules officially changed.ngthy explan
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : lol
Cheesey (26-Mar) : 2009? No thanks! One open heart surgery is enough!
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Good for you!
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Yes. That's the one.
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Is that "Lady Dugan" per chance?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Crystal?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Please refresh my memory
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Alan posts. Crystal back in my life. It's 2009 all over again! Lol
Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : BAH GAWD! THAT'S CHEESEYS MUSIC!
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Gutekunst said early stages of Jordan Love contract being discussed.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Shouldn't be penalized cuz official screwed up
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Yeah, challenge until you are incorrect twice.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Fining them is the goal, per the people who made the rule anyway.
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still waiting on the kickoff rule changes. Did hear yesterday that the touchback proposal will now be the 30 yard line, not the 35
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Probably speed of game issues with your proposal
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Hopefully the refs don't get in the habit of throwing flags on this
beast (25-Mar) : I think when it comes to Challenges should get two strikes, so unlimited challenges as long as they keep winning them, but 2 wrong then done
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still subject to the fines etc
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Yes, I should have been more specific. Also, they are now saying it would be a 15 yard penalty. That makes more sense .
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2023 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
Bears
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
LIONS
Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
Raiders
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
RAMS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
CHARGERS
Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
CHIEFS
Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
Giants
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
Panthers
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
Cowboys
Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
49ers
Recent Topics
5h / Around The NFL / beast

10h / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

28-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

28-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

22-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.