Packers Free Agency Thread

[BrewerFan]

Just now, patrickgpe said:

Yeah I meant Jacobs and Dillon are similar backs. Obviously jones and Dillon are not. I agree I think they will draft a guy like corum to complement Jacobs 

Ok...well, that make sense. 

I hope they do go after a smaller, quicker back rather than a Braelon Allen type. It's just not a great fit in our offense. Those types of backs need time to get going and when your scheme is all about running to an area and then trying to find a hole, it's not a great fit with bigger power backs usually. 

Jacobs is a nice mix of both. Big and physical...and also an exceptional receiver who has good feet. 

[patrickgpe]

6 minutes ago, BrewerFan said:

Ok...well, that make sense. 

I hope they do go after a smaller, quicker back rather than a Braelon Allen type. It's just not a great fit in our offense. Those types of backs need time to get going and when your scheme is all about running to an area and then trying to find a hole, it's not a great fit with bigger power backs usually. 

Jacobs is a nice mix of both. Big and physical...and also an exceptional receiver who has good feet. 

Yeah I agree, they will get a change of pace back rather than a Allen 

[CheezWizHed]

I was really hoping they would extend Jones - reduce this year and add another year... And now there is Viking rumors circulating.  That would hurt. 

[BrewerFan]

42 minutes ago, CheezWizHed said:

I was really hoping they would extend Jones - reduce this year and add another year... And now there is Viking rumors circulating.  That would hurt. 

Jones and Jacobs would have been...nearly ideal. Wilson as the #3 and then you don't need to do anything in the draft, but you can. As it stands, I like Wilson, I know the Packers do as well, but I'd be surprised if they're confident with those two and a late rd pick. 

I still like Antonio Gibson. He got 3/11.5. That's an exceptional deal for a very good 3rd back. 

Perhaps there is still a scenario in which Jones tests the open market and the Packers bring him back. Jacobs the primary ball carrier, Jones stays fresh, Wilson fills in and plays STs. 

(I know it's highly unlikely, but...if ever there was a potential for a reconciliation, it'd be Jones and the Packers).

[CheezWizHed]

8 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

Jones and Jacobs would have been...nearly ideal. Wilson as the #3 and then you don't need to do anything in the draft, but you can. As it stands, I like Wilson, I know the Packers do as well, but I'd be surprised if they're confident with those two and a late rd pick. 

I still like Antonio Gibson. He got 3/11.5. That's an exceptional deal for a very good 3rd back. 

Perhaps there is still a scenario in which Jones tests the open market and the Packers bring him back. Jacobs the primary ball carrier, Jones stays fresh, Wilson fills in and plays STs. 

(I know it's highly unlikely, but...if ever there was a potential for a reconciliation, it'd be Jones and the Packers).

Yeah, I was kind of hoping that might happen... the market isn't as lucrative as Jones hopes and he comes back.  

For the draft, I still think we see a Jones/Williams-like draft; two mid-round RBs picked up. Jacobs, Wilson, 2 draft picks, Taylor (still a solid ST/backup/floor player) and UDFAs... Not a terrible plan. 

[SeaBass]

Interesting. Not sure this is going to be popular.

[OldHeidelberg]

2 minutes ago, SeaBass said:

Interesting. Not sure this is going to be popular.

Not when they let Jones walk for $7 million it's not.

[Outlander]

Kind of depends on how it is structured, saying it is 3 for 18 doesn't mean much.

[BrewerFan]

8 hours ago, CheezWizHed said:

Yeah, I was kind of hoping that might happen... the market isn't as lucrative as Jones hopes and he comes back.  

For the draft, I still think we see a Jones/Williams-like draft; two mid-round RBs picked up. Jacobs, Wilson, 2 draft picks, Taylor (still a solid ST/backup/floor player) and UDFAs... Not a terrible plan. 

Not at all. Especially given Jacobs deal. I wouldn't be surprised if they use a 2nd on Brooks from Texas. They can move on from Jacobs pretty easily(assuming it is true all he was GTD was 12.5). 

Brooks gets to heal, get some snaps this year and then he looks like he could be a #1 back. 

I wonder if the Packers would have offered Jones 6M and 2M in incentives if he would have come back? 

 

OR...maybe Jones felt like he was owed my by the Packers. He turned down a bigger deal from Miami to stay in GB, he took a pay cut last year due to their cap situation. Maybe he just felt like he'd sacrificed enough, the window to make money as a RB in short and he wasn't going to take another pay cut? I'd understand that side of it. 

I'll also be curious to see if the Packers even considered bringing Bakh back with a massive restructure and most of the base pushed to incentives. 

[LouisEly]

2 hours ago, OldHeidelberg said:

Not when they let Jones walk for $7 million it's not.

How do you know that Rosenhaus counter-offered $7M to the Packers and wasn't playing hardball?

Just because Jones signed with the Viqueens for $6M+$1M incentives doesn't mean that offer was on the table for the Packers. 

[OldHeidelberg]

8 minutes ago, LouisEly said:

How do you know that Rosenhaus counter-offered $7M to the Packers and wasn't playing hardball?

Just because Jones signed with the Viqueens for $6M+$1M incentives doesn't mean that offer was on the table for the Packers. 

I don’t know that and I actually don’t think Jones was willing to come back once they signed Jacobs. But we do know their offer was less than what he got as a FA.

[BrewerFan]

15 minutes ago, OldHeidelberg said:

I don’t know that and I actually don’t think Jones was willing to come back once they signed Jacobs. But we do know their offer was less than what he got as a FA.

If I'm Jones...I'm pretty pissed to be honest.

We should try and look at this subjectively.

1-Jones takes less from Packers to stay here.
2-The Packers, in a year they're up against the cap and rebuilding, he takes a significant pay cut.
3-Following a 6 game stretch that had them arguably the hottest team in the NFL...led in large part by his play and coming into an off-season in which the Packers DO have cap space, they ask him to take another 6M pay cut? And then they sign a player who didn't perform as well as he did last year?

 

None of this is to suggest that the Packers didn't make the right decision...that they shouldn't have signed Jacobs and moved on from Jones(I'm a little torn). Just that it's not hard to see Jones side of it. If I'm there when he comes back to have his # honored, I'll be there cheering. This doesn't diminish what he did(not the case for all those who donned the Vikings Purple). 

[SeaBass]

2 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

We should try and look at this subjectively.

Challenge accepted.

We all know he missed 6 games due to injury.

He also played 5 games where he had fewer than 10 carries.

That's 11 games out of 17 where he might as well not have been there.

In fairness, 1 of those games was actually a good one for him, he had 9 carries for 41 yards, 2 catches for 86 yards and 2 TDs, one rushing, one receiving. The other 4 were as unremarkable as one would expect. We'll replace the one good game with a 13 carry game in a loss to the Steelers where he was equally unremarkable.

Another thing that sticks out to me is the lack of rushing touchdowns the last 3 years. 4 in '21 and just 2 each of the last two years. I'm seeing the word "elite" being tossed around but that ain't it in my book. He's damn good and yeah before this season Dillon was getting a lot of the goal line work (only 2 TDs from him in '23 as well). A low number of TDs doesn't necessarily mean a  player has a low value but I'd like to see more than 2 TDs from my primary rusher. In '21 & '22 he was able to add some TD catches to help the overall number look better but that rushing total should still be better in my mind regardless of receptions.

I think we're really caught up in the glow of his late season heroics, if he'd just been able to play that way earlier and more often he would probably still be a Packer right now. He literally only ever put up back to back 100 yard rushing games once before in his career and that was two games back in 2019. And he had never rushed for 100 yards in the playoffs before this last season (he did have 99 yds vs the Rams in 2020). It was an epic stretch to end his Green Bay tenure but let's not pretend he's that guy all of a sudden.

As it is I can understand why the team didn't want to commit a lot of dollars to him. It was really all about the cap number anyway, they had to bring down the number from $17 million and that meant going pretty low with his base salary. Just didn't work out.

[BrewerFan]

1 hour ago, SeaBass said:

Challenge accepted.

We all know he missed 6 games due to injury.

He also played 5 games where he had fewer than 10 carries.

That's 11 games out of 17 where he might as well not have been there.

This feels like the opposite of objective concerning Jones.

1-Saying he might as well not have been there in the games he didn't get 10 carries is ignoring quite a bit(though you mention the 86 yards receiving vs. Chicago, including the game-breaking 52-yard TD reception, you still count that as a game that he "might as well not have been there."

2-I was talking about the contract and hard feelings on Jones side being offered...a slightly insulting pay cut and going to the Vikings. After all

3-His Cap hit of 17M is almost irrelevant. ~1/3rd of that is from restructures, voids, and SB. He wasn't being paid 17M next year. The only thing relevant here is money saved vs dead money. Asking him to go from 11M to 4M and why Jones would have turned that down given ALL he did for the Packers. 

4-If you're going to go after his season and performance, or perceived lack thereof last year, then...being objective would be doing the same with Jacobs. 

You said 11 of 17 games early on. It's not. It's 11 of 19 games(and I reject the idea he might as well not have been there for the other 5). 

BUT, just going on his 2023 performance. He was 8th in expected yards per carry added among all NFL backs. Jacobs was near the bottom(6th worst). That accounts for a poor passing game, OL, etc...and that's per Next Gen stats. 

Then there are the intangibles. Jones loyalty to the Packers. What did Jordan Love say the key to beating the Cowboys was? Aaron Jones going off-script, helping chip on Parsons to give Love time to throw. Jayden Reed talking about how the receivers block harder for #33. 

 

Also, in this down year for Jones where he may as well have not been there 11 of the 17(but really 19) games, he still out-paced Jacobs in yards and he averaged 4.9 YPC. That's what Jacobs averaged in his HUGE breakout season in 2022.

Finally, Jones is 7th all-time in yards per carry at just over 5 yards per carry....that's in the HISTORY of the NFL.

 

I like Josh Jacobs...and the fact that they can go year to year with Jacobs, but the way you're downplaying Aaron Jones career in Green Bay? It's a bit insulting. His lack of back-to-back 100-yard games? How many times have we complained the Jones running well and not getting the ball? Also...Jacobs has done it 3 times for a total of 8 games. Jones did it 6 straight last year, including two of the best defenses in the league in the playoffs in what SHOULD have been at least an NFCCG run. 

As for him not having a 100-yard game in the playoffs. 99 as you said, 170 yards vs the 49ers when they lost 13-10. In total, in 5 of the last 6 playoff games, he's had 100 yards from scrimmage. That's pretty productive.

 

This is what Jacobs did last year. So objectively they are giving up more money for a worse back for the 2024 season. When you factor in age, it's probably a risk worth taking, but if I'm Aaron Jones, I've done more than enough to be expected to get my Base cut by nearly 66%.

I trust the Packers...but while you talk about Jones worst year of his career, this was Jacobs last year. Worse than Jones in every regard. So objectively speaking...it's pretty easy to see things from Jones perspective and why he felt like he was worth yet another pay cut. Jones also had a success rate on 62% of his carries despite what was a VERY poor OL early on. Jacobs 57.4...in his best year, just under 46% last year.

 

 I

[Fear The Chorizo]

8 hours ago, SeaBass said:

Challenge accepted.

We all know he missed 6 games due to injury.

He also played 5 games where he had fewer than 10 carries.

That's 11 games out of 17 where he might as well not have been there.

In fairness, 1 of those games was actually a good one for him, he had 9 carries for 41 yards, 2 catches for 86 yards and 2 TDs, one rushing, one receiving. The other 4 were as unremarkable as one would expect. We'll replace the one good game with a 13 carry game in a loss to the Steelers where he was equally unremarkable.

Another thing that sticks out to me is the lack of rushing touchdowns the last 3 years. 4 in '21 and just 2 each of the last two years. I'm seeing the word "elite" being tossed around but that ain't it in my book. He's damn good and yeah before this season Dillon was getting a lot of the goal line work (only 2 TDs from him in '23 as well). A low number of TDs doesn't necessarily mean a  player has a low value but I'd like to see more than 2 TDs from my primary rusher. In '21 & '22 he was able to add some TD catches to help the overall number look better but that rushing total should still be better in my mind regardless of receptions.

I think we're really caught up in the glow of his late season heroics, if he'd just been able to play that way earlier and more often he would probably still be a Packer right now. He literally only ever put up back to back 100 yard rushing games once before in his career and that was two games back in 2019. And he had never rushed for 100 yards in the playoffs before this last season (he did have 99 yds vs the Rams in 2020). It was an epic stretch to end his Green Bay tenure but let's not pretend he's that guy all of a sudden.

As it is I can understand why the team didn't want to commit a lot of dollars to him. It was really all about the cap number anyway, they had to bring down the number from $17 million and that meant going pretty low with his base salary. Just didn't work out.

I agree with all of this - doesn't mean I'm glad to see Jones go, but entering his age 30 season he's coming off a year where he basically wasn't healthy and productive until the last month of the regular season + playoffs.  He had a great game in Week 1, tweaked a hammy, and wasn't a difference maker until December last season.  His resurgence coincided with the Packers turning things around offensively, sure, but replace him with a different established NFL RB and that field full of young receivers/TEs and a young quarterback figuring it out and I think the Packers still play pretty well.

I think the lack of 100 yard games to Jones' resume has more to do with the Packers trying to limit wear and tear on a slight running back based on his injury history - Jones isn't a big guy, he can be a difference maker in the NFL when he's healthy...but if a team feeds him close to 20 carries a game he's gong to get hurt.

When Jones 1st signed that contract, people viewed it as a 1-2 year deal where he'd become a cap casualty after the 2021 or 2022 seasons...the Packers found a way to play cap gymnastics and get one more season out of him before opting to let him walk into the sunset of his career this offseason based on the hard reality of the NFL as a business.  

[SeaBass]

6 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

This feels like the opposite of objective concerning Jones.

I will allow that my post was more objective when you stated you were being subjective in the original post. I stated facts. I love Aaron Jones just as much as the next fan, my point is I understand why the Packers made the choice they did. It was a bad year for him (until the very end), he has an injury history and his age were factors in the decision they made. They tried to come to an agreement to keep him, it didn't work out. It happens.

6 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

1-Saying he might as well not have been there in the games he didn't get 10 carries is ignoring quite a bit(though you mention the 86 yards receiving vs. Chicago, including the game-breaking 52-yard TD reception, you still count that as a game that he "might as well not have been there."

Players are judged on performance. I feel it's relevant when making a decision on a player's worth regarding salary. And I was trying to be fair to Jones, he had 11 touches, 120 yards and 2 touchdowns in one of those games. He clearly made an impact despite the low usage in that game.

If you reread that bit of my post I didn't count that game, I cited another game with 13 carries against the Steelers where he didn't have much impact to replace it.

6 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

2-I was talking about the contract and hard feelings on Jones side being offered...a slightly insulting pay cut and going to the Vikings. After all

I don't think we've heard what Jones himself has had to say about this yet but I think it's reasonable to say he's probably not happy. It's understandable. Insulting? I suppose but is it meant that way? Players feel this every time a team does what it needs to do that's in its own best interest. Price of doing business. Raw feelings come with hard decisions. Brett Favre, Aaron Rodgers, David Bakhtiari (I think he's got some feelings towards the Packers but he has been subtle about it. Maybe I'm wrong). The list goes on. Aaron Jones is not any more (or less) special than those guys. He's certainly as beloved by Packers fans as any of those guys and in all likelihood will continue to be.

7 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

3-His Cap hit of 17M is almost irrelevant.

If something is almost irrelevant, doesn't that make it relevant? I get what you're saying but they saved $5 million when they released him, they were clearly trying to shave a little bit off the existing number. To them the $5 million in savings was attractive enough to use as a decision marker when determining how much they felt he'd be worth to keep around.

7 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

4-If you're going to go after his season and performance, or perceived lack thereof last year, then...being objective would be doing the same with Jacobs. 

Your post was about Jones, why the heck would I start talking about Jacobs? Different subject and it's been hashed and rehashed since the decision to add him came down. I'm sure there will be more hashing as the off season progresses. If it wasn't Jacobs it would be someone else.

7 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

but the way you're downplaying Aaron Jones career in Green Bay? It's a bit insulting. His lack of back-to-back 100-yard games?

How was I downplaying his career? I talked about this season and made a reference to his touchdown total the last 3 seasons.

The streak of 100 yard rushing games was used to counter all the fuzzy good feelings about how he just ripped off 5 straight 100 yard games over the final 3 games of the regular season and the 2 playoff games. Yes, that was epic! But the point was that stretch of games was unprecedented in Jones' career and is not something that should be used as an argument to hold up as "this is what Aaron Jones does". The whole season should be taken into account along with recent history. Which is what the team (Gutekunst) did.

[SeaBass]

1 hour ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

I think the lack of 100 yard games to Jones' resume has more to do with the Packers trying to limit wear and tear on a slight running back based on his injury history - Jones isn't a big guy, he can be a difference maker in the NFL when he's healthy...but if a team feeds him close to 20 carries a game he's gong to get hurt.

Absolutely. Again, I was only referencing a streak of games to counter his final 5 games all being 100 yard games. Epic performance but Jones hasn't really ever been that guy. And those 5 games? He averaged 20 carries. I think it's pretty safe to say he's never had a stretch of games like that ever before. They were going for broke with him and it worked. They know they can't do that over a full season.

Josh Jacobs IS that 20 carries per game guy. Jacobs has been in the NFL 2 seasons fewer than Jones and has more career carries. People are bagging on his 3.5 yards per carry last season but the guy was being fed the ball. He had close to 100 more carries than Jones last season. Of course teams are going to be focused on stopping him. Jones and Jacobs are two very different guys.

[CheezWizHed]

Nixon's signing (and amounts) surprises me like most (all?) here.  Perhaps it is structured in a way that it is far less guaranteed so it will amount to a 1 or 2 year deal...

But regardless he is on the team, so I'm wondering... do you think Nixon might play more of a safety role instead of nickel DB? Sounds like there is some overlap in those roles for Hafley's defense.  Nixon did seem to be much better when playing zone and moving forward towards the LOS than he did in 1on1 situations and chasing WRs.  He is 5'10" and 200 lbs, so maybe a touch short but not bad otherwise. 

If he does play more safety - or even start at safety... that might make more sense of the $$ investment here.  Though some of the changes to the KO rules might also make him more impactful as a KR too. 

[SeaBass]

MJS is reporting Nixon will count $3 million against the cap this season.

"Jacobs will count just over $5 million, McKinney should be around $7 million and kick returner/slot corner Keisean Nixon, who re-signed Tuesday, will be around $3 million when contracts are officially counted at 3 p.m. Wednesday."

Not sure what that equals in guaranteed money. Maybe a $6 million signing bonus and low base this season? Maybe less?

[Joseph Zarr]

16 hours ago, LouisEly said:

How do you know that Rosenhaus counter-offered $7M to the Packers and wasn't playing hardball?

Just because Jones signed with the Viqueens for $6M+$1M incentives doesn't mean that offer was on the table for the Packers. 

 

[LouisEly]

1 hour ago, Joseph Zarr said:

 

https://brewerfanatic.com/forums/topic/41879-packers-2024-off-season-thread/?do=findComment&comment=1567967

[BrewerFan]

On 3/13/2024 at 7:42 AM, Fear The Chorizo said:

I agree with all of this - doesn't mean I'm glad to see Jones go, but entering his age 30 season he's coming off a year where he basically wasn't healthy and productive until the last month of the regular season + playoffs.  He had a great game in Week 1, tweaked a hammy, and wasn't a difference maker until December last season.  His resurgence coincided with the Packers turning things around offensively, sure, but replace him with a different established NFL RB and that field full of young receivers/TEs and a young quarterback figuring it out and I think the Packers still play pretty well.

I think the lack of 100 yard games to Jones' resume has more to do with the Packers trying to limit wear and tear on a slight running back based on his injury history - Jones isn't a big guy, he can be a difference maker in the NFL when he's healthy...but if a team feeds him close to 20 carries a game he's gong to get hurt.

When Jones 1st signed that contract, people viewed it as a 1-2 year deal where he'd become a cap casualty after the 2021 or 2022 seasons...the Packers found a way to play cap gymnastics and get one more season out of him before opting to let him walk into the sunset of his career this offseason based on the hard reality of the NFL as a business.  

If you want to argue that it made sense for the Packers to go with the younger back...ok. That makes sense.

But just two things, again, Jones injury history is widely exaggerated. Played in more games than Dillon or Jacobs(using eithers 1st year in the league). He had some injuries last year, but had one other year in which he missed more than 2 games.

I'd also disagree that his lack of carries is because he's "slight." 5'9 210 is pretty thick. 

He's had limited carries because the Packers have prioritized having a 2nd back and frankly, they haven't used him as much as they should have. One of the big complaints with McCarthy was that Jones wasn't given the ball enough when he was running well. He had a lot of 10-14 carry 60-90-yard games. Plus, Rodgers was pretty open about getting them out of run plays...for better or worse.

 

The larger point I'm trying to make...I don't like how the Packers handled this. It reminds me of Nelson. Not Brett Goode or the whole whiny list of players Rodgers had, but there are some players you do have a bit more reverence for. The guys who have given up 10M once, then 5M another time to stay and play in the small town of GB. I think when you say he's "absolutely going to come back," and that you want to "do right by him," both quotes by Gutekunst,  I think they fell short of that in cutting him immediately upon agreeing with Jacobs and after he refused to take an 8M pay cut. 

That is what I mean by being objective about it. Jones is getting crushed for playing for the Vikings. Well, the Packers kinda gave him a nice kick in the ass on the way out the door...and it's not like he wasn't at his best at least we saw. 

[LouisEly]

15 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

But just two things, again, Jones injury history is widely exaggerated. Played in more games than Dillon or Jacobs(using eithers 1st year in the league).

It wasn't just games missed.  They had to limit his carries in most of the games that he played the first 13 weeks of the season last year.  Prior to week 14 he only had two games with 10 or more carries.  That also counts towards "injury history".

[BrewerFan]

1 hour ago, LouisEly said:

It wasn't just games missed.  They had to limit his carries in most of the games that he played the first 13 weeks of the season last year.  Prior to week 14 he only had two games with 10 or more carries.  That also counts towards "injury history".

Ok, then when talking about injury history, the type of injuries also matter. He's never suffered any serious, long-term injuries. 

The point is, people want to talk about Jones going to the Vikings as though he was somehow...disloyal when I can't remember a Packer who's showed the "loyalty," that Jones has.

It's also head-scratching that the Packers front office effectively guaranteed that Jones would be back this year saying "absolutely he'll be back," after saying he's the "heartbeat of this team," among other things...and then cut him immediately upon agreeing to terms with Jacobs. 

[Sixtolezcano]

I guess MLF and Gutey see something in selecting Jacobs over Jones that you don’t see.