HiAndTight

Peyton Manning was completely washed at that point. Brock Osweiler was the better QB that year. He threw 17 picks and just 9 TD's and literally got benched in the middle of the season in favor of Brock Osweiler. Big Ben...the Steelers were stuck with him. He didn't take a pay cut to help the team out, he took one because it was the only way he'd be back with the Steelers this year. Brees last year? I don't recall him taking pay cuts. He was an aging QB who took more bonus money so that his cap hit would only be 25 million. That's not really taking a pay cut for the team. And that's also more similar to what Brady has done. They give him a signing bonus regularly and he tacks on a couple years to spread it out, but the actual cash is more important than the hit when giving these guys credit for how much they're giving up for the team. As for McNabb, I don't recall him taking Pay-Cuts. I know he signed the richest contract in NFL history at the time. A 12 year deal. So for the most part, these are all guys who signed at the end of their career, still got paid a lot. Not the best comp for Rodgers who just threw 48 TD's last season and was the runaway MVP. Manning was playing his age 39 season. Rodgers is entering his age 38 season. They are apt comparisons. No, you lay it out there. You tell him "Aaron, we can get you talent, but we need you to accept $20 million instead of $30 million." Aaron Rodgers has made hundreds of millions in his career between salary and endorsements. If he wants to go out on top, he should want the team to get the best talent to help him do that. Not be stubborn and refuse to work with the team out of spite. Aaron Rodgers is a great player. I hope he continues to perform at a high level for several years. But if and when he loses it, they cannot be afraid to move on. And at his age, that fall is likely to happen fast, and it could happen at any time. They're not great comparisons. Manning was playing out a contract that he signed after suffering a career threatening neck injury. He had a cap charge of 21.5 and he dropped it to 19.5...but the Broncos were able to because very little of his salary was guaranteed...again, due to the career threatening neck injury he suffered just a couple years before that. But that's a 19 million dollar cap hit with a 143 million dollar cap and Manning didn't actually make any less that season, they just turned it into incentives...that even as poorly as he was playing, he met. Team based incentives. So his cap hit dropped less than the Packers could have done without even asking Rodgers and he still collected all the money. I'm also quite sure Manning did pretty well with salaries and endorsements during his NFL career. In fact...even with the inflated contracts, Manning made more in his NFL career than Rodgers has in his. Yes. Absolutely. Because why not? I don't know what other team in the NFL other than one owned by Mike Brown perhaps, would not be willing to exchange a SB run for having some dead cap space when Rodgers is retired or leaves. Just as the Saints are eating dead cap space from Brees this year. The difference is they kept going all in. They even tried to trade for Clowney before last year by asking a 3rd team to sign him, pay his signing bonus and trade a high draft pick to that team. But the idea of the Packers possibly having dead cap space at some point after Rodgers is done is really not worth the potential pay-off to some people? I guess it's just a fundamental difference of opinion. It seems more likely than not to me the Packers will probably struggle and have at LEAST one bad season after Rodgers leaves. Even after Favre left, we went 6-10. That one year. You clear the cap then. That's one risk. The other is going 30+ years with 2 HOF QB's and 2 SB wins as we fall short year after year to teams who were far more willing to be aggressive to add talent than the Packers.

I'm probably as high on Love as anyone. But I think the BEST you can hope for is that he puts it together and he becomes a franchise QB. When you have an MVP caliber QB still playing at that level and you can reasonably predict he will still play at a high level for 4-6 more years, then I'm just not a fan of hedging your bets like that. 4-6 more years? 2021 will be Rodgers age 38 season. I think you are looking at this through some serious Rodgers-tinted green-and-gold glasses if you think Rodgers is still going to be slinging it at an MVP level in his age 42-44 years. That just doesn't happen. I know .... but, but Tom brady! Tom Brady is the outlier of outliers. Please don't think that just because Brady played well as a 43-year-old (after having some down years that led many to believe he was near done) that Rodgers is going to do the same thing. It simply hasn't worked that way. Tom Brady is a robot. The Packers are going to have to make the decision to move on from Rodgers at some point. Hopefully it is before he becomes a shell of the great player he was, and still is. He's already defying science and history. The chances of him continuing to do that get longer with each passing year. It just doesn't happen? Except that it is. You might have noticed we're playing in the era where literally tapping a QB on the helmet with your hand is a penalty. They've literally changed the rules because of Tom Brady and Aaron Rodgers past injuries on top of a long list of rules changes that predate that. But it just doesn't happen...as we're coming off a season that saw two QB's play who were both in their 40's. So what athletic ability does Tom Brady possess that would make it unlikely Rodgers would be able to play through the same age? Does Brady have a stronger arm? Does that make Rodgers a more likely candidate to age poorly like Drew Brees for example, who just finished his age 41 season and there were questions going back to College about his arm strength. There's absolutely no Rodgers tinted glasses, it's just common sense. QB's are able to play longer with the very limited hits they take. Man...talk about condescending though. I think everyone understands that because Tom Brady did something, that in and of itself without any other outside factors does not also mean other QB's will be able to do that same thing. Yes. Good note. What I'm talking about is more about the extraordinary changes that have taken place in the rules over the last 20 years specifically designed to limit the number of hits a QB takes. There is a very obvious reason players are not aiming to play into their mid 40's. It's not because Tom Brady did it. It's because they're not getting hit helmet to helmet by the likes of Greg Lloyd. It's because they're not finishing their careers with 5 or 6 vicious concussions at age 37 as Steve Young did. So, again, it has nothing to do with Rodgers. Had Steve Young played with the same rules, I have no doubt he or a very long list of other QB's could have as well.

Average for CB at the 2020 combine was 7.01 seconds. At the 2019 combine it was 6.93 seconds. I'd say Wildgoose's number was pretty much average for the position. Got a link? NFL Savant has the average 3-code drill for CBs at 6.88s. 7.01 is right around average for a safety. A 7-second cone drill isn't great for a CB or WR, whose game is predicated on cutting on moving. I think Kahlil Mack had a 7-second cone drill. That's just amazing. The difference between elite and too slow is almost imperceptible to the human eye. It gives you an idea of how quickly the game actually moves. I'm guessing...and I don't want to speak for anyone, but that 7.01 number was the average for all DB's, not necessarily CB's. Kevin King...just for a point of reference, ran a 6.56. Obviously, that number in and of itself doesn't tell the whole story, but that guy has a ton of ability. It's be great if he could come back on a very team friendly deal, have his big breakout and then move on. We're going to be thrilled if we get a long CB with his athletic ability in this draft.

As they should be. Not saying your statement is 100% accurate but it is the case, I am glad the FO is doing just that. The Packers will be around a lot longer than #12. It's great that the FO is always forward thinking. It's also probably true that one of the reasons we keep coming up short in our goal of getting back to the Super Bowl is that our team building style often sacrifices short term gains and the teams that we're coming up against in January are usually the most talented ones on the field. Sure. I just don't understand what the big risk is here. That if you extend to restructure Rodgers to create room to add players now, then you're ruining your chances to really take advantage of Jordan Love's play while he's still on a rookie contract? Does anyone really believe we stand a better chance by playing it safe now, thereby giving Jordan Love's teams another 20 or so million dollars to work with? That Love's play+ whoever they may sign for 20 million dollars, and that's, of course, assuming they spend the difference between Rodgers salary and Love's on players instead of rolling those cap savings over year to year as they did with much of Rodgers career, but will that be enough to get the Packers to the SB in the near future? It's the NFL, not the NBA. I know I've said it already, but one year and you can clear your cap hits. You're not locked in for 6 years if you go all-in for a season or two. Remember this fan base when we moved on from Favre before he was ready? We were lucky to have Aaron Rodgers who actually became better and won a SB early on in his career. Now imagine the fan bases reaction if or when Rodgers is traded so we can add a few first round picks and throw Love out there. He's going to have to be great and we're going to have to win a SB or most of us are going to wonder, "what if." What if we'd had just gone for it. 4 heartbreaking NFCCG losses, losses to the Giants, Cardinals....a 20-17 Playoff Loss to the 49'ers. Just about every team that beats us, as you pointed out, put more resources into the team. And it's still possible the Packers are working on doing just that right now. But I don't think it's better at this point for the Packers to prioritize future stability over doing EVERYTHING they can to build a SB winning team right now.

Peyton Manning was completely washed at that point. Brock Osweiler was the better QB that year. He threw 17 picks and just 9 TD's and literally got benched in the middle of the season in favor of Brock Osweiler. Big Ben...the Steelers were stuck with him. He didn't take a pay cut to help the team out, he took one because it was the only way he'd be back with the Steelers this year. Brees last year? I don't recall him taking pay cuts. He was an aging QB who took more bonus money so that his cap hit would only be 25 million. That's not really taking a pay cut for the team. And that's also more similar to what Brady has done. They give him a signing bonus regularly and he tacks on a couple years to spread it out, but the actual cash is more important than the hit when giving these guys credit for how much they're giving up for the team. As for McNabb, I don't recall him taking Pay-Cuts. I know he signed the richest contract in NFL history at the time. A 12 year deal. So for the most part, these are all guys who signed at the end of their career, still got paid a lot. Not the best comp for Rodgers who just threw 48 TD's last season and was the runaway MVP.

The problem is, they basically pushed a cap woe from 2021 to 2022 at this point. Say what you will about the cap in 2022, but it's undeniable that there's uncertainty about what it will be. Will it go up? Yes. But how much? The Packers are at $202 million, I believe, without their best defensive player and arguably best offensive player under contract as of yet. If that cap number only goes up to, say, $215 or $220, they've again got to finagle a mess of contracts. As such, I'm sure the option of going the 'Seattle' route to extending the window is on the table- surround a young, cheap QB with a solid overall team and hope to win a title that way. You use the $23 million you save on Rodgers to avoid a cap disaster, and you use whatever capital you get as a result from moving him as an additional way to solidify the team. It's a viable, potential way to keep their window of contention open. If the cap number goes up more significantly, then they can truly choose between that and keeping Rodgers. But it keeps your hand from being somewhat forced if it doesn't. That number is pretty artificially inflated though. The Smith's combine for about 50 million in cap hits next year. We know there's no way they're going to eat a 20+ million dollar cap hit on Preston Smith. Even if he's the DOPY, they'd likely get that number down or trade him. Same with Za'Darius who's at ~30 million. So it's at 213 with Alexander 5th year option. That's 51 players who are already accounting for 213 million. It's not great and I would guess due to the money they pushed off this year, you're 215-220 is as accurate as any guess at this point, but those are giants chunks they can save. Dean Lowry's another 8. So while they obviously did push some of their cap issues down the road, they should be in MUCH better shape next year. There are two flaws in my opinion with the "Seattle plan." First, Seattle got good quickly because they had incredible drafts. Wagner, Sherman, Kam, I believe they were all 5th round picks or later. Wilson was a 3rd. They traded a mid-round pick for Lynch. Earl Thomas was the only really high pick that I can recall from those teams, but I'm sure there will be more. Those players were almost directly responsible for 5 straight years they finished 1st in the NFL in defense(or 4 years and one 2nd, I can't recall exactly). THEN you add a very good young QB, likely a better QB than we've got in Love and it starts to seem far less likely that they'll be able to make that move. The other is we're all expecting extensions for Adams and probably Za'Darius Smith. in 2023, Smith will be 32 and Adams will be 31. Bahk will also be in his 30's. So you're not really giving Love the opportunity to grow with his core that Wilson had. You're more likely hoping lightning will strike and Love will be good enough to win while those players are still playing at a high level. Again, I like Love...but I think even keeping that option open and NOT making a move right now is a bigger risk than restructuring Rodgers and not trying to sign a player like Schwartz or any number of players who could help us out because you want to keep your options open. Teams can escape Salary Cap Hell in ONE year(and retain their young core talent). It can take a Century to find a QB of Rodgers Caliber....ask our Friends to the South.

I'm probably as high on Love as anyone. But I think the BEST you can hope for is that he puts it together and he becomes a franchise QB. When you have an MVP caliber QB still playing at that level and you can reasonably predict he will still play at a high level for 4-6 more years, then I'm just not a fan of hedging your bets like that. There are a lot of talented QB's available all the time if you're smart. Sam Darnold is likely available this year and there are 4 QB's in this class who have at least as much upside as Love. There were 3 last year. When Gutekunst said the Packers think it's smart to draft and develop QB's and it probably wouldn't be the last time they did it while they had Rodgers, I'd hoped that was a sign that they were going to be more aggressive this year. And maybe they still will, we'll see. But watching the Saints, a team that was 100 million over the cap be more aggressive than us in the opening week of Free Agency, it's a bit discouraging. Watching real impact players like Shelby Harris or Dalvin Tomlinson sign relatively modest FA contracts at positions of need when we're constantly so close...I'd just like once, the Packers to go all in like the Saints. They're not the only example, just the most recent and most obvious.

Why though? The window SHOULD be open as long as he is playing at a high level. The contracts of some of the Packers like Jones, Rodgers himself...and I can't think any others at the moment, but those seem like the team is viewing this as a two-year window, not him. He's been pretty steadfast in his desire to stay in GB. What he might not be willing to do is add on those bogus years at the end for some guaranteed money now. Maybe he wants to force the Packers hand so he's not in limbo. Force them to give him a 3/100 million dollar extension or something of the like and then guarantee his base salary down the road in 2023, 2024, and that is what he's not willing to do. Or maybe he's willing and they're working on it. I guess who knows. It just doesn't seem great for this team for that to be hanging out there. The possibility that Rodgers could be gone after next season or the following.

I really can't imagine why the Mets would consider trading him after they've invested so heavily on this season. A guy who has a ~.320/.380/555/ slash line and plays 3rd/2nd/OF and has 4 more years of service time is likely going to cost a LOT. Maybe Hiura, Hader would be a good starting point, but I'd rather just give Keston another year to see if he can develop into the same type of hitter(which I think he can). Though obviously not the same type of defensive versatility). I doubt they'd be interested in someone like Turang with Lindor already in place...which is great, because he's the one guy I don't want to see traded. Yeah, he'd be a nearly perfect addition, I just can't think of any reason the Mets would want to move on from him.

They didn't need his permission. Could be one of those things they have a discussion with him about. Rodgers may want to move on after this season. There is not much to suggest it's Rodgers who wants to move on. He called retiring in Green Bay "the Dream" just after the season ended and pointed out that his statement about his future being uncertain simply meant HE doesn't have control over his future(or complete control may have been his exact words).

Yeah, but the roster bonus would have helped just that much more. The Packers have been aggressive this off-season. I like it. More than we may have expected by keeping Jones. But what teams like the Saints and others would do to really push the proverbial chips to the center would be to extend Rodgers and add a consequential FA. To shore up one more spot. Even someone like Dalvin Tomlinson would have been a pretty big upgrade. BOTH KC Tackles are still available and both should have quite a bit of football left. CB's coming off the board. All areas restructuring Rodgers could help. I don't really get the logic of keeping the option of moving on from him. If you're going to even think about moving on from him, then you know you're probably going to be in a rebuilding year or at least a re-loading year, so you can take that cap hit anyway.

Yeah, I'm not in love with King or anything. I just don't think he's AS bad as his performance in the NFCCG would suggest. He was pretty good in '19. If he has to sign a one year contract, maybe he has a breakout year and meanwhile we've drafted Samuel or whoever in the 2nd round(or Newsome in the first) and we can move on from him. As for AB...I certainly get it, but he went to Tampa, was very good and was so quiet, people kinda overlooked the fact that he became Brady's go-to guy. I don't like him...but I would like to win more than I dislike him. Not that we need him to win, I'm actually very happy with the offense outside of one OT.

I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing. Take away the Tampa game and we'd be thrilled to be able to bring him back cheap. That Tampa game he was hurt...he was put in a very difficult situation, and he played poorly. But if you draft a CB you can bring along, plus you should be expecting Keke, Savage and Gary to take another step. I can live with King being a weak spot on our defense. He's capable of playing better and he's not capable of playing much worse than we saw him play in the NFCCG.

Really does make you wonder what a guy like Golden Tate (I know, I know) would get. It would seem like a guy like him would do well with Rodgers getting him the ball. Remember when I posted the little from PFF projecting Will Fuller to the Packers for 5 years and just shy of 90 million? Now...that always sounded crazy, but it shows you how bad the FA market is. I wonder if we might consider AB for a discount? I doubt he'll get more than 2-3 million guaranteed. You'd have to really be secure in your leadership, but that's a chance to bring in a guy who still looks like a #1 WR'er for very little money.

So the Giants just gave #1 money to a #2 receiver. I'm fine with this. I don't think so. I think he's a legit #1. That is a discount in a year with a healthy cap.

As a rule, I don't form opinions on ANY accusations until the details come out... But I will say I'm pretty skeptical on this one. The fact that the lawyer is soliciting clients, says it's not about the money after they demanded a settlement and then he was caught lying saying HPD was investigating when they were not and had no knowledge of the incidents. This definitely isn't the weirdest accusation right now*cough*Arnie*cough*Hammer*cough...but just the way this has unfolded and the lawyer handling the case...I don't know.

The game didn't... the power blue did. So a whole season of losses with me watching is finally paid back with a big win! I hesitated watching, but this was the first game they won with me watching. This was the first game of the year I watched in it's entirety....normally I watch most, this year, I was busier and just didn't get a chance. Makes me wonder what all this talk about the Badgers not being able to shoot comes from!

Or they're trying to work out an extension maybe? Give him 20 million to take on a couple of those voidable years. I have heard that he wasn't that receptive to the Packers initial overtures of a possible extension, but if he wants to win a SB...he's gonna have to help out in some way with regard to the cap. Him signing the type of extension that Brady and Romo did several times could mean they'd have the ability to add Fuller+ this off-season. I ralso hate the idea of moving on from him after next year. Even if it's just the Packers retaining that choice. It gives a sense they're kinda hedging to me. That's probably not fair, but...it does feel like they're looking at this as a two-year window. Rodgers contract would save money being moved next year, but it's the year after when it becomes much more likely in my opinion. That would line up with a Jones deal and a lot of the other contracts also.

I do wonder if Jones got a bit of a raw deal since he was drafted for Capers' scheme then ended up as a bad fit in Pettine's. I suppose it's similarly possible to wonder if Jackson will get a better chance under Barry's scheme as well.... I don't think so. They said he didn't know his responsibilities...and wasn't in position to make plays and wasn't instinctual. Maybe that's due in part to Pettine and his scheme, but I'm skeptical. I think Pettine really would have wanted to use someone like Jones. We tried with Raven Greene, he just couldn't stay on the field. And we tried with Burks, but...well, I don't know what happened there, but the safety/LB who was supposed to be our 3rd safety/nickel LB ended up moving to OLB'er he was so unreliable there(though apparently good on ST's, not that I saw anyone who was that impressive on that unit). We'll have to wait and see with Jackson, but I don't think he was given a fair shot. Just yesterday when someone posted Wildgoose's 3 cone time, I went back and looked up Alexanders(6.7-6.8 incidentally which was exceptional while Wildgood was not very good at 7.0...which is crazy and puts in perspective how impossible it is to comprehend the speed of the game). Anyway, I saw an old scouting report with the CB's from that draft class ranked. #1-Denzel Ward #2-Josh Jackson #3-Jaire Alexander And Jackson was pretty good in man in College. I think it's just as possible that Pettine was not a very good DC as it is that Jackson couldn't handle the role. So even if Berry does play a lot of man, which based on what he said about implementing the Rams scheme, he will, I still think Jackson could be a guy who can contribute.

Well, right now Jrue's playing a little over 30 a game and he's missed about a third of the season. I'm guessing the Bucks are going to b be looking real hard and trying to pick up another PG

I was thinking he'd get a deal closer to what Hill got in Cleveland, but the deeper into FA we go, the fewer teams have money or as big of a need. Packers have to be interested and hopefully this can be one of those rare times we sign someone another team from the division cut. Xavier Rhodes is still a FA as well, right? He bounced back last year. Don't think he's as good of a fit as Fuller as he better suited to a zone heavy scheme, but could be a short term solution.

I dunno. Jones was a home run and Williams a serviceable RB. King as much as I've bemoaned him did some nice things at times over his tenure. Adams is an OK contributor against the run. Biegel was starting to become a solid NFL contributor before getting hurt last year, albeit not with us. I guess the thing that hurts the most about this draft is that it was the "we passed on TJ Watt" draft, but pound for pound I would guess it's a similar hit to miss ratio to most drafts. I agree. It's really not that bad...until you factor in Watt. I remember making a thread at the time asking what people thought about it. Watt, King and a couple other prospects where at positions of need for the Packers(though CB was easily the biggest need) and most people were happy to pick up the extra 1st. But man...just imagine where we'd be if we had him. Forgetting the trickle-down effect and just assume we don't sign Preston. You have a MUCH better shot at getting JJ, you Z and maybe the best Edge in the game with Gary on his way up. You're also going to have to pay him 30 million a year in the near future, but I guess that's part of the game. I knew I wanted the Packers to draft JJ Watt. I was not nearly so certain with TJ Watt. I didn't think he was THAT good. I thought he was a little built up because of his name. Turns out, that couldn't have been further from the truth. I remember him making a pick his rookie year. He dropped in the flat, the QB threw a deep out and Watt jumped up and picked it off like someone was using him in Madden.

[sarcasm]What if they threw in a first?[/sarcasm] This is supposed to be in blue. I'm not sure why it's not showing up that way, but...it was meant that way.

Yeah, this would elevate them into Browns type territory in terms of dysfunction. Right now it's just a really bad few years, this could take it to the next level. Even if this just goes away, this is just bad for the Texans. A friend of the McNairs and a Texans Superfan(he had billboards put up all over Texas begging the Texans to draft Manziel back in 2014) and he's not representing women suing the face of the franchise...who has said he will never play another game for them. The theories on Twitter are going nuts. They're actually kinda funny. The theories that the McNair family is behind this to teach him a lesson or so he'll stop demanding a trade. I don't know, I guess it's possible...but people generally don't get rich by devaluing an asset like Watson.

I'm not really going to count them as 3 until I hear something new. So far it sounds like it's one REAL big dirtbag lawyer and one massage parlor where this is all originating from. Not saying he's guilty or innocent...but I find it a bit suspicious. He did these things to 6 different women after he was given a massage, each time at the same place, this clown of a lawyer tries to get a big settlement out of him, then he speaks out and within 3 days there are 5 more women who are all claiming the same thing happened? Just the claim that he did it 6 times...and they kept welcoming him back? The story just sounds weird. And the lawyer being friends with the McNair family is fueling speculation that they're somehow involved...which doesn't make any sense to my mind, but none of this does so far. He has to be looking at a lengthy suspension at minimum no matter what happens with this right? No team is going to be trading for him anytime soon and he's said he'll never play for the Texans again. I mean...obviously nobody really knows, but I kinda doubt he's facing a suspension based on the information known right now. Watson could have made this go away for a relatively small settlement for him. The Lawyer that's behind it is pretty shady and the fact that it started as a civil matter and the Cops weren't involved...it obviously doesn't mean he can't be guilty, but it's just unfoled really strangely and I think it'd set an real bad precedent to suspend him at this point.