OnTheBlack

If I'm Stearns and I've decided that Kimbrel (at his price) isn't what the team needs, and Mark A comes in and says "pay it/do it/get it done", and then Kimbrel flops, and there isn't any money left to do my job at the deadline because we spent money on the big FA reliever that the owner wanted, I'd be extremely pissed. Stearns has a vision for how he wants to build this team. Mark A hired him because he trusted Stearns' vision. Stepping on his toes in this manner disrupts the entire process and the vision. I'm just not seeing the same logic. Yes, Stearns has a vision. He's a visionary. However, it's not as if he has this idea of the type of pitcher he wants and Mark Attansio is coming in and forcing a pitcher on him. What he'd be doing is simply paying more money for the a pitcher that Stearns OBVIOUSLY wants and who fits his vision. Whether Kimbrel flops shouldn't play any role into how Stearns views the transaction whatsoever. Of course Kimbrel has never "flopped" in his career as he's been at his best a elite HOF'er and at worst a very good pitcher, but what he does after the signing, according to the logic you're using shouldn't really matter. It's about Stearns vision. Again, his vision includes Kimbrel, just at his price. Now for some reason we're assuming that after everything Mark Attanasio has done, and in this scenario we're assuming that he's going to come in and spend MORE money on a pitcher since we've had two arguably catastrophic injuries to two of our three best relievers, that the very same owner who has spent this extra money is going to go to Stearns at the deadline and say, "nope, we're not gonna spend any more money?" And if Stearns is one to really get upset because his boss and the owner comes in and overrules him by spending more money on a pitcher he wants anyway just because that pitcher didn't sign for what Stearns deemed to be the right price, then Stearns is a bit of a diva. I don't believe that's the case. Finally, why are we just assuming that our GM and Owner are pulling in opposite directions? We're lucky enough to have the TYPE of owner that we could envision spending the extra money in order to put his team over the top(or frankly just to get them back to where we thought we were just a few weeks ago). I'd assume that Stearns would be thrilled that he'd have an owner that'd have his back, be willing to say, "I was the one who insisted we sign Kimbrel and pay an exorbitant price for him." There seems to be a symbiotic relationship between the two and it's being presented on here as being a contentious one. I'm just saying, even if it's the later, I'm not sure how the GM gets upset for getting what he wants and all it costs is the owner a little more money. It's not like we're talking about Attanasio forcing Stearns to trade Ray for Will Smith or anything. We're JUST talking about a guy the GM already wants getting signed, but for more than the GM wants to pay.

I think players are changing their minds about going into the free agency waters. 5 years ago this would have been an 8 year deal for 210. Now it's a pretty smart, reasonable deal where his last year he'll probably not be nearly as good, but still an effective, high OBP 1st basemen.

No, I don't think so. This has happened before in baseball. You have 6 months and 162 games. And if they both sit out a year, they're not going to come back next year and see a stronger FA market for them. Le'Veon himself was an outlier, now take that it's much more common for this to happen in baseball than football and I don't think there's any chance, barring injury, both are't pitching in the big leagues this year and sooner rather than later.

And the last time he pitched he was throwing 84 and came out due to an issue with his shoulder. Which is all the more reason to back up what everyone else has said that it makes zero sense to lock up a reliever like Jeffress, especially to the OP's suggested price. That said, I think bringing up the "drug problems" which IIRC were for smoking pot(which is absurd) is a low blow, particularly given what we've learned about his health issues that led to him to self medicate. He's proven to be a impeccable role model for the Brewers as of late. The reason IMO should have ended at his age and that he's a reliever(And that the original contract is just crazy).

Again, c'mon. If Mark A overspends to get the best and most talented team the Brewers have seen arguably since 1982(when an injured reliever cost them a world series title incidentally) and pays more than Stearns analytics department deems that play is worth, then your opinion of Stearns goes down and he's not the GM you thought he was? That SINGLE move, a move that Mark A has pulled before would erase(or at the very least diminish) the Yelich trade, the Cain signing, the dozens of other moves that Mark A obviously had nothing to do with that turned the Brewers around with one top 10 draft pick and without the benefit of 4-5 years of top 5 picks like the Cubs, Astros or other teams? I think that's sad. It doesn't kinda speak to our culture though, how much we love to judge people from afar and then if they don't live up to what we've created in our own minds for their standards, take away from what they've accomplished.

Yeah, but it's not Stearns team, it's the OWNERS team. It's right there in the title. And it's not an arbitrary move. Now if my billionaire boss wants to improve the team HE owns and HE is responsible for and is willing to spend even more money to do so, then we've got zero problems. What you're describing would be just pure pettiness. Obviously Stearns wants Kimbrel. So the issue is the money. If the guy who is responsible for that money wants to go and say, "screw it, we'll pay the extra money," I can't fathom why someone would be upset with that, ESPECIALLY if it's because that GM drew an arbitrary line in the sand and said he wanted this player, but only for a certain price.

Seriously? I'm not quibbling with any other point right now, but this one is really going the extra step. What exactly is "discomfort" in your throwing elbow when you're a pitcher if not pain? It's not comparable to you having sore feet.

Ok, after the signings, we seem to have pretty adequate players at most positions. IF you believe Josh Allen is really a generational OLB'er who can not only rush the passer and get you double digit sacks, but can also make a play on the ball 40 yards downfield when in coverage, would you then consider trading...lets say both of our 1sts, a 4th this year and a 2nd next year(maybe get Daron Lee back as well, a talented MLB'er with 4.4 speed who has been up and down as a MLB'er). In THAT scenario, would you make that type of trade? I've only seen glimpses of Allen and didn't watch the SEC Network much and especially Kentucky, but there are no questions about competition, and even with Preston and Za'Darius Smith(the later of whom moves inside and rushes over the guard often on 3rd down)...there are no longer any glaring holes. Just curious. I can see either way. One scenario you could get a really good CB or DL and then a weapon for Rodgers, in the other the hope that you get a game changing pass rusher. I'd like to see how people compare Allen to past pass rushers like Myles Garret and Bradley Chubb first though.

Really weird results, his 3 cone and short shuttle are terrible, but everything else was pretty good. Even his 10 split on his 40's were not bad. He's sort of stiff on film, but not that bad. I think Albers could grunt out a better 3 cone. Those are usually pretty vital drills for pass rushers. That and his vertical and long jump give you an idea of his get off. Heck, as much as I've speculated, maybe he drops to the 3rd round and we snag him there and he becomes one of these guys everyone talks about their terrible testing while dominating the NFL.

The combine and pro day is a tool. ONE tool. Antonio Brown ran a 4.56-second 40, he had only a 33.5-inch vertical and a 6.98-second 3-cone. His 8-foot, 9-inch broad was dead LAST among WR'ers that year. T-Sizzle was AWFUL at the combine, Kam, Joe Haden ran like a 4.6 and was an elite CB for several years with the Browns. I've seen NFL scouts say the one stat that translates the most from college production to NFL production is sacks. If you can get to the QB in College, you are likely to be a good pass rusher at the next level. But now maybe he's available for us at 44. That wouldn't be so bad. BAP at 12...maybe it allows you to take a guy like Hockenson who is moving up board or the previously discussed Jonah Williams. Maybe Sweat falls to you and you grab a guy like Fant at 30. Maybe you end up with Greedy Williams, Noah Fant and Jaylon Ferguson? Would anyone be too disappointing with a 4.4 TE threat, a big, long, physical sub 4.4 40 CB to play opposite King and then the NCAA's all time sack leaders to come in as a rotational pass rusher? Although, I gotta say, the most I see the tapes on Kentucky's Allen, the more I'd be perfectly, 100 pct happy to trade both 1sts, and our 2nd to move up and grab him at #4 if he's available. The guy just killed SEC tackles, and you see video of him running 40 yards downfield making a play on the ball. If you think he's the next superstar.....that's the type of move you've gotta make.

I don't quite agree with that. I mean, I have confidence that Nelson will come back this year, but comparing a starting pitcher with reconstructive shoulder surgery and an OL with now a year away from a torn ACL? He came back the last time he tore his ACL and according to PFF was the best pass blocking RT in the NFL for a stretch. And as much as anything, I look at this RIDICULOUS deals given out to average or historically below average tackles(Turner) and a healthy Bulaga is a steal at 6.6 this year. Bulaga is just 30 years old, he's elite when healthy and his injury history is primarily bad luck, two torn ACL's on each leg. Of course the Packers know a lot more about these things than we do. Maybe they're more concerned about something he's currently dealing with and that's why they so grossly overpaid for a journeyman....who in all fairness is young and does have athletic ability. But certainly has not proven to be worth almost 30 million over 4 years.

Bulaga carries the largest cap savings that the Packers could/would realistically free up by releasing a guy at $6.67 million. For all of the discussion about Graham, TWil, etc., it's Bulaga that is probably the most in trouble if the Packers want to free up more space. That doesn't mean they will, of course. Bulaga may still have productive days ahead of him, and that's for the Packers to decide. Just because it's the highest doesn't mean it's not manageable or makes any sense to do so. He's still been a very, very good RT and you don't find guys like that for 6.7 million dollars. When we have both tackles healthy, we have two bookends. The Packers are still 24 million under the cap(roughly, 23 and change). And that numbers looks infinitely better when compared to Billy Turner's cap number. If Bulaga comes into TC healthy and makes it through TC healthy, there's absolutely no reason to cut him. Even if they do draft a guy like Jonah Williams 12th. Again, when healthy, Bulaga is among the best pass blocking RT's in the NFL...and not to be a broken record, but he's the guy facing Mack and most other premier pass rushers.

Again, this team has been better than the sum of it's parts IMO this year because of two things, Coach Bud and their chemistry(which may be one thing). Mirotic has to be back a few weeks before the playoffs IMO as he never really totally fit in yet, and I think Brogdon is smart enough that if he can just get on the floor for a few minutes at the end of the 1st round series, we'll be alright....but that's two pretty important guys going down at the wrong time. Mirotic missed a bit of time last year as well and was still an elite player for the Pelicans during the post-season. We're gonna need both those guys at their best in order to get through the east. Especially since DJ Wilson's looked so bad shooting the ball as of late. His shot which looked alright earlier this year has just looked ugly. He shot one vs the Lakers that I don't think ever went higher than 10 feet, 6 inches. I do like them sitting Giannis. He shouldn't be playing more than 25 minutes a game the rest of the year IMO. Unless of course Toronto wins out and they need to win a couple games to clinch the top seed.

It's hard to think of sign-and-trades that work. For one thing, the NBA has gotten a lot stricter about sign-and-trades. Teams were abusing Bird Rights in sign-and-trades, and they put a stop to that. Then you have the fact that the Bucks would be looking for immediate "win now" help, but any team trading for Khris is doing the same so your interests are in conflict. It would typically be easier to sign and trade Khris to a wannabe contender for an expiring contract and a draft pick, which doesn't make sense when your contention window is wide open... and wannabe contenders don't like giving up the type of players who can help a team win now, which is what the Bucks would want. It was damn near impossible. I went through and looked at the teams that have reported to have interest in Middleton, Dallas, the Lakers, the Nets, the Pacers, all these teams...and most of them have cap room and any of the players who have contracts that you could use, guys like Myles Turner for example, why the hell are the Pacers signing Middleton to trade Turner? As for trading for an expiring contract and a draft pick, both are assets. They're clearly not assets equal to Middleton, but they are assets. I'm not breaking news to you here, but that's better than just losing him outright. They're probably gonna need to get lucky and find a player like a D'Aneglo Russel TYPE who has a lot of talent and upside, but does something stupid making him available. The Nets have done a respectable job adding some assets after putting themselves in a Bucks-like situation by trading away their draft picks for the foreseeable future. I have a lot more respect for Horst after this season in dumping Henson, Delladova, turning Maker into Mirotic, so maybe I'm just being a pessimist, but I COULD see this Bucks team ending up in a Cleveland with LeBron type situation. A team that's just so hemmed in without anywhere to really go. Without any assets to trade that aren't vital to winning and over the luxury tax. If we win a title while doing so, I'll get over it, but we need to get REALLY lucky with our 1st this year and then hopefully find a way to move Snell and Ersan...both of which have SOME value, right? Erasn should at least with an expiring contract next year. Of course if Giannis can end up hitting 35-38 pct of his 3's, he's gonna be so damn good, we'll be fine with the types of options available to us to add.

?? Turner is being pegged as the starter at RG. If they draft Williams and he's starting, it's likely because Bulaga is gone. Turner was signed to play, not be a reserve. I don't see them cutting Bulaga who has a very manageable cap number this year and instead trusting a totally unproven journeyman OL. This is a guy who was decent last year for the Broncos, but before that spent all of a week with the Ravens before being cut, was cut not long after being a 3rd round pick for Miami. I'd see no reason to Cut Bulaga just because Williams dropped to you at 12. If Turner starts for a full season and is good, it'll be the first time in his career whereas Bulaga has been a good to elite tackle in the NFL when he's played. The ONE scenario I could see Bulaga not opening the season with the Packers would be if they decided to trade him. Given the stupid money given out to tackles, and given how much MORE valuable RT's are now than they've ever been(just slightly less important than LT's since pass rushers are lining up over the RT's) he'd be able to start on probably 20+ teams. Turner was more the result of the fact that Spriggs has been a bust and they don't have anyone athletic enough to play both tackle spots in a pinch if one of our two starters go down. He'll get the first crap at the starting job obviously and if he doesn't hold onto it(Which I don't think is a given)...that's gonna look REALLY bad. If he was just signed to play guard, they could have signed a better player for cheaper. He was signed because of his ability to play tackle...which he only started 4 games last year out of the 11 he started total in his "breakout," year. The Packers to me signed 3 good players and then just took a total flier on a OL and paid FAR more than anyone else was willing to making it appear to be a very bad signing at this point. Of course I'll wait until guys actually play before declaring it good or bad.

To put this in perspective, Kenny Clark (23) is exactly 11 months older than Sweat (22) yet Clark will be entering his 4th year in the NFL. I really hope the Packers lock up Clark soon. It's a given that they'll at least pick up his 5th year option for the 2020 season, but if he hits FA he'll be entering his age 26 season in 2021. Not many premier talents hit the open market at that age. He's not Aaron Donald, but he's still a top 5 DT. Yeah, I was surprised that Sweat was a former MSU transfer after getting kicked off the team when he and former Badger recruit(who didn't qualify for UW) Craig Evans got into some trouble. Evans didn't get booted, but Sweat did. But I absolutely agree. That was one of the things they talked about with Clark when they drafted him. He was so young. I'd really look to roll in his 5th year option into a extension or even this year as well to minimize the cap hit. I think he's just teetering on the verge of breaking out in a big way. A 8+ sack season if you have consistent outside pass rushers with Daniels and maybe Mo Wilkerson on either side of him, and we know he can stuff the run. Clark, Alexander and Amos look like the 3 most likely candidates to become all pro type players from this D in the near future with Kevin King being the dark horse as we haven't seen what he can do over 16+ games yet. Also, locking up Clark now allows you to minimize the cap hit significantly. And since Rodgers is 35, start making some Cowboy type signings where they sign guys to 7-8 years so they can get the guaranteed money and mitigate the cap hit knowing that eventually they'll have to eat some of that dead cap room.

Bledsoe can be frustrating at times. He can look like a superstar at times, taking the ball to the rim with that explosive first step and then finishing some really tough, contested layup's..and then he can kinda disappear for a while. Don't get me wrong, he's been a revelation for the Bucks this season, finally having a consistent role in a good system so he can fulfill his potential, and his 7 second defense of Buddy Hield at the end of that Sac game was about as impressive man D as I've seen this year. Still, as good as he looks, how does he go 1-6 from the line in any game? Chalk that up to a fluke.

All true at this point. I was sincerely hoping he would embrace more of an off-ball role in Bud's offense, but that doesn't appear to be in his muscle memory bank or something. He's not the 2nd-best player on the team anymore. Bledsoe has been much better pretty much all year, because elite pg defense is extremely valuable in today's NBA (even if all-star berths don't recognize it). I think Brogdon has finally passed him at this point as Khris continues to put up mediocre efficiency. Lopez is more of a unique x-factor, though we saw against Philly how his lack of mobility is going to be an issue in the playoffs. That said, it's just not like other sports because of some unusual features of the NBA collective bargaining agreement. Khris would have to play even worse on a consistent basis before it's in the Bucks' best financial and personnel interests to let him walk, because you're not allowed to spend the money on someone else. I think Middleton has struggled a bit as of late making him look even worse, but you're pretty much right about everything. He's not a great fit in this system with this team...but he's not an awful fit. He's not a true #2 scorer, but he's a better option than anyone else we're likely to get. To me he almost reminds me of a modern day Glenn Robinson offensively with better handles. He likes that 18 footer a bit too much, but as you keep saying, it's not like it's another sport where if you let Middleton walk you can sign someone else even for 15 million. It's all or nothing and with Giannis becoming eligible to sign his extension next summer, it has to be all. When he's playing well, he can be a really, really good player. He was the X-factor that pushed the Boston series to 7 games last year despite being pretty sick toward the end of it scoring 25 on 60 pct shooting and taking it to everyone they put on him. IF they do have to move on from Middleton, I at least hope they can do a sign and trade and get at least something useful back. I can't really find anyone who seems to be interested in signing a guy like Middleton save for MAYBE Chicago who could send us something back in a sign and trade and the only guy who's salary would be close would be Otto Porter...and I don't know why Chicago would want to give up Porter except that they could sign Middleton and then go after a Max player still the following year as long as Porter turns down his 28 million dollar team option. Of course I'd probably rather have Porter than Middleton, so the Bulls would be better off just keeping Porter and waiting to see if they can even sign that Max FA before doing anything.... Zach Lavine is also a higher paid guy the Bulls have that they'd likely prefer to dump...just not sure them dumping him on us does us any good. Any sign and trade scenario's that you could see working? It'd have to be a team that doesn't have the cap room to give him what he wants and we almost certainly wouldn't get much back in return. The Thunder are another team I've read that loves Middleton, but Steven Adams is the only guy who's salary would match up and...again, they're not going to send Adams to Milwaukee to take back a lesser version of Paul George.

I thought I'd heard that there were incentives in there that he could earn more. I'm definitely surprised he signed that deal. Also, I get the Rams have a QB on a rookie deal, but they ALWAYS seem to have money to spend. Anyway, I agree. You saw that burst out of Clay from time to time last year where he just absolutely blew up a play or got to the QB well under that 2.5 second threshold. In fact, last year he won(beating his guy in 2.5 seconds) more than I think people on here would guess. He was 27th out of 91 qualified pass rushers. Of course Dante Fowler was 1st on that list when the Rams traded for him. Another thing that's surprising is that it doesn't sound like they're going to use him primarily as a pass rusher. They'll obviously use him there, but they're talking about him stepping in for Mark Barron. That makes almost no sense to me, a former safety who moved to LB to play the pass being replaced by a former All Pro 3-4 OLB'er. We all know he can play inside, I'd just think he'd insist on playing outside primarily.

It was absolutely more than a couple of flash plays. I'm not wishing they brought him back because he had a pick 6 last year. He was a competent Corner. Sure, he wasn't a stud, but studs make 15+ million in free agency. He was depth for 3.5 million on a team that has King and Alexander who played about 4 snaps together last year and then Josh Jackson, probably exclusively an outside bump and run corner for a few years before he moves over to FS and what else? I guess Tramon is competent. But after several years of seeing less than competent corners, I'd like the depth. And you're 100 pct right, they can add someone in the draft, they can pick someone up after the draft when someone inevitably gets cut, they can sign someone who is cut when the rosters cut down, but he was just a steady, reliable guy who was a minor injury last year away from signing a 3 year 27 million dollar deal before failing his physical. Really getting on board with the Packers drafting the BPA at pass rusher, Oliver, Sweat, one of the Clemson guys, or if Williams drops. Take a position that's solid and really stock up on it and make it dominant.

That's absolutely true. But the point was they were slot WR'ers who hadn't really established themselves and had injuries and got paid like #2 WR'ers. Cobb did end up getting less than I thought, but he got 5 million with the chance to earn more with incentives. I suspect he's going to get a lot of targets in Dallas, though I would NOT expect his YPC to be very impressive with Dak.

Right, it's hardly a given that the Bucks even make it out of the East. I disagree that the West is that much better. Denver is tied as the top team in the West. Houston is better than them most likely, and I think our best chance is if somehow Houston or OKC upsets GS in the WCF. Remember, the Rockets were just a pulled leg muscle away from possibly ending the Warriors in 6. And I do like the Bucks shot vs the Rockets. Snell defends Harden as well as anyone in the league the past 4 years other than Tony Allen(just a mostly useless stat I read somewhere). But getting past potentially the Celtics in the 2nd round and then a much deeper Raptors team OR a Sixers team that boasts the 2nd best top 5 in the NBA IMO could be pretty damn tough. I agree the West is definitely a better conference top to bottom, but I don't know that the difference 1-5 is really that big. I just really have no clue what to expect from the Brewers. I've been a Brewers optimist in the past, but they're just not built like a normal contender. They have no Max Scherzer, Jon Lester, Nolla, pitcher you can count on. But last year I thought the Brewers top end was 88-90 wins and a WC spot and their downside was 75 wins.....so I'll stop pretending to be able to predict what Stearns talent and CC's coaching can accomplish. Side note, how great is it to see Jimmy Nelson not just throwing a couple innings, but hitting 95 and throwing some absolutely filthy sliders or cutters. Whatever they were. The biggest X-factor in the NL IMO.

Is it really though? With the money that's carried over from year to year and all the ways around it, it's more like a firm cap. But that actually benefits the Packers. There are rumors that the reason why the Raiders didn't re-sign Mack was they simply could not afford to put 100 million dollars into an escrow account for his signing bonus. That'll never be a problem with the Packers. There are a few teams that are gonna spend more than them, but if they want they can spend with anyone. Anyway, I agree with everything else. The Bucks are close, but they just took a huuge hit with Brogdon, though Giannis just keeps getting better. I can't even imagine what he could do if he would shoot a few more 3's, but shoot them without thinking about it and shoot in rhythm instead of dribbling twice and then shooting like it's practice almost. I could see the Brewers finishing 4th in the division this year. I don't think they will, but baseball is so much luck and momentum. And of course healthy pitching. The Packers, well, Rodgers probably missed more throws last year, throws that could have changed games, overthrowing guys on deep balls by just a yard or two than probably every other year combined. I doubt that happens again. He was still a top 3-4 QB last year in what I believe was his worst year and the Packers have done so much to address the D, they are in a great spot with draft picks, and I still think you see a couple veteran signings either after the draft, or after roster cuts. I think Gute is gonna keep being aggressive. And given how quickly you can turn things around in the NFL, teams seem to go from first to worst every year and then worst to first(Jags last year for one example). It's easy to imagine things going wrong, but lets just imagine a few things go right. 1-Rodgers is re-invigorated with the new offense, the Packers add a TE like Hockenson, Brown, Fant in the draft, the two freakishly big, athletic WR'ers make a big jump next year, Bulaga stays healthy and Turner is an improvement at guard, Adams is Adams, and the running game is as effective, just used more. 2-Defense, King stays healthy and you have a combo of Alexander and Kevin King together finally. A stud in Amos at safety. The two OLB'ers we signed continue their development. Preston Smith who has 60 QB hurries last year, an elite number and Za'Darius Smith also takes his next step. Clark, Daniels, Wilkerson, Adams and Lowry are the type of DL we expected going into last year. Just have to hope that a few other guys emerge from the draft or be it Josh Jackson, Josh Jones, or whoever it may be. None of those things are exactly long shots. And with Pettine's history, it'd be a bigger shock to me if they're NOT top 10 than if they are. And it's always possible with the 12th, 30th, 44th pick and 2 4th rounders, it's hardly a reach to think that we draft some real impact rookies. I just think Rodgers is too good to not win another SB and I think we have a number of guys who are ready to make big jumps this year. I love the Bucks, I think Giannis is going to be the NBA's best player for a long stretch, maybe 5-6 years, but it's real tough to see them getting past the Warriors and while I think he's going to sign at least one more deal with the Bucks that takes him through age 30...it's not a given. The Brewers pitching worries me. Nelson looks good, but Jeffress is a huge concern and even though they were a game away from the WS last year, they were way more than a game away from WINNING the WS last year. Houston, NYY, Boston are all so loaded. Then add in that the Cubs under-performed last year and we still had to go on a historic run last year to win the division and I would personally put the Bucks odds on winning a title at about 10 pct, the Brewers shot at making the playoffs at about 33 pct and the Packers could easily win the NFC which looks pretty up for grabs to me. The Saints and Rams look like the two best teams, but Philly sure didn't look like the best team two years ago. Like you said, a 3-4 game hot stretch could give you another big shinny trophy. It would be nice to see a Boston like run though and get a few titles from our teams in the same year. If all 3 won in the same year, I think I could die happy!

We wouldn't know because he hasn't been given the chance yet. And as I just said, you can very easily manipulate the cap, especially if you have long term franchise type talent that you know are going to stick around for a long time. You can extend them and add years so as to spread the signing bonus over an additional 3 years. The Cowboys would clear like 20 million in cap room just by doing this with Romo. He's obviously arrogant IMO. Just watching him talk and watching him on Hard Knocks, but the guy has the Cleveland Browns as the favorites to win the AFC North and absolutely LOADED with talent less than a year after they broke like a 30 game losing streak. That's tough to do, even with all the early 1st round picks they've had. Plus, they lost a franchise, and AP LT during that time span while he was still playing at an elite level. He obviously is more tolerant of guys with character issues(Ty Hill, Peters for example). We'll have to see what happens when Myles Garrett, Baker, Ward and the rest of that young talent needs to be extended, but right now, he's got a QB on a rookie deal and he's been aggressive. He's got all the playmakers you need offensively with the best (arguably) WR'er talent in the NFL, and another legit #1 in Landry, a TE who runs like a WR'er who can stretch the field, a good group of RB's, a very solid OL. Defensively, he's got edge rushers, play making DB's and...just everything you want. I'm happy with what Gute has done with the Packers, but I'd take Dorsey over him for a 4-5 year window like we've got with Rodgers. Even if he wrecks the cap for the future, who cares if it gets you another couple trips to the SB, or at least puts you in position.

https://packerswire.usatoday.com/2019/03/12/packers-getting-third-down-difference-maker-in-zadarius-smith/?utm_source=spotim&utm_medium=spotim_recirculation&spotim_referrer=recirculation This is certainly nice to read. The best 3rd down pass rusher in the NFL last year. And he lines up inside? Given what has been said about Clay and his desire to return on a 1 year deal as well as what Gute has said makes me think that they might still be looking for a discount, low risk signing on the outside. Anyone think Clay takes 1 year at 5 million? I'd like to see that, and then 1 year and 3.5 million with a couple million in incentives for Wilkerson as well. At that point, you can draft a guy like Sweat, use him almost exclusively as a 3rd down speed rusher the first half of next year if we're lucky enough to see him fall to us and he won't hit a wall next year. Man, this off-season has been the most exciting Packers fans have seen in years. I really hope it's not a Washington like off-season, but we've filled most of our major holes, UNLIKE years past when we didn't fill any holes and hoped to fill them with 1 late first and then mainly with mid round picks.