Unused cap space doesn't go to the fans, it goes to the general manager. Just ask TT. Pretty sure I saw him flying on his private jet to his private island a few weeks ago.......
PackLandVA posted:ChilliJon posted:That his drafts got better in years 3 and 4 were certainly helped by picking in the top 5 both years.
Ted doesn't think picking in the Top 5 is all that great or helpful.
At least it's not the bank buster it used to be.
CUPackFan posted:Unused cap space doesn't go to the fans, it goes to the general manager. Just ask TT. Pretty sure I saw him flying on his private jet to his private island a few weeks ago.......
Please tell me Epstein and Bubba Clinton weren't with him.
DH13 posted:The browns have $20M to carry over? They should give it back to their fans. Or by them all some paxil.
How about the Jags with $32M carryover? 
Surely they and the Browns cannot be reaching the floor with extreme amounts like that.....
There seems to be no rhyme or reason to it also. My initial thought was that the crappier teams aren't spending, but teams like Chitcago and Detroit blow that theory. The same applies to what we generally regard as the best/better franchises in the league; the Packers typically carryover $5M to $10M, yet New England had just a little over $1M.
I'll also never understand how the teams that consistently spend wildly in FA manage to have several million available for carryover...accounting magic?
Outside of Joe Thomas and Joe Haden, who have the Browns actually kept? Guys like Rubin, Sheard and Ward have all just left before their second contract. They also don't have a franchise QB.
The Jaguars have also jettisoned a pretty fair amount of salary, and have a QB on his rookie deal.
Chicago has the Cutler contract, Detroit has Stafford's. Chicago also did a nice free agency move by getting Pernell McPhee.
TT & MM...shock and awe...
The key there is FAs released by other teams. Ted won't mess with the comp picks formula. He wants more swings...
Again I don't think Ted is averse to free agents, but the numbers have to line up. He won't overpay and guys already on the roster and draft picks seem to get first dibs at cap money (i.e. money earmarked for impending FA's, 5 million or so for draft class, etc.). That's the right way to do it. If he has extra money and there's a player whose demands are in line with the Packers demands, then he will sign them.
Well maybe TT's numbers aren't right. Like a stock trader who insists the market is overvalued and never buys in, you miss out on all the gains. Yeah you might avoid those losses too but to quote the legend Mike McDermott, "....you can't lose what you don't put in the middle. But you can't win much either." This team has been to 1 NFC championship game in 5 years with the best QB in the game. I personally think we can do better if we had dipped into free agency a little more, specifically for a starting TE, starting ILB and backup OT.
And we can come up with all the excuses/rationale we want but fact is TT does avoids free agency. He just does. The number of Packers FA signings in the last 5 years compared to the rest of the league are so incredibly skewed to bottom of the NFL by such a large margin that trying to rationalize it by any other reason is pointless.
The value is there, we've seen it on the last 3 Super Bowl winners. This team as had massive holes at ILB and TE and backup OT for years. Free agency can fill those holes. Hope we see it happen this offseason.
Lots of talk about Comp picks, and I know the running joke, but I think next year, comp picks can be traded. So, those picks, could be considered even more valuable, than TT thinks now.
As for FA, like most say, TT will bite, if the price is right and it's a good fit. Look at Peppers, price was right, and the fit worked. He's not, nor should he, get into a bidding war over players like Cook or Trevathian.
Yesterday the Queens were crowing about a $2 million carryover. It would pay for only half the repairs needed on the new stadium's leaky roof.
PackerRuss posted:Lots of talk about Comp picks, and I know the running joke, but I think next year, comp picks can be traded. So, those picks, could be considered even more valuable, than TT thinks now.
As for FA, like most say, TT will bite, if the price is right and it's a good fit. Look at Peppers, price was right, and the fit worked. He's not, nor should he, get into a bidding war over players like Cook or Trevathian.
What kind of bidding war do you think Cook will garner?
Trevathan is the kind of guy they should target if they want to make a "big" free agent signing. He's young (25), no real luggage or character questions, etc. AND fills a huge need. That said, I doubt TT gives him a second glance,
Ravens franchised PK Justin Tucker (about $4.5M). Crosby is older and not as good, so he figures to make between $3.5M and $4M per year.
packerboi posted:Ravens franchised PK Justin Tucker (about $4.5M). Crosby is older and not as good, so he figures to make between $3.5M and $4M per year.
Not as good as Tucker? I wouldn't say Crosby is better, but I also wouldn't say Tucker is better.
The dollars don't lie, TT doesn't carry over much more cap space than anyone else. Maybe slightly more, but not by a large margin. He uses his cap dollars for his own guys first and foremost, which isn't a bad thing honestly. He's signing FA's those guys just happen to be RE-signings rather than NEW signings. Heck he signed the best WR and best RT in the free agent class last year, why doesn't that count? He signed a player during the season who arguably would have been the 1st or 2nd best DT in this FA class (Mike Daniels). He's made some bad contracts by keeping his own guys vs spending that money on outside guys, but what GM hasn't done that.
Mike Daniels was also originally a comp pick, in part from not signing free agents.
For every super bowl winner there's also a swath of teams that wasted money on free agents and everything went south. It's easy to marvel at Denver and completely ignore New Orleans, the Dolphins, and the Eagles.
We can analyze what GB has done wrong with valid arguments.
The fact is GB has had 2 losing records in the last 23 years. I haven't looked it up but I'm guessing no team has been better.
I'm sorry but in the free agent era a team that's been viewed as free agent averse. It's incredibly impressive what Ron and Ted have accomplished.
GB has indeed had but 2 losing seasons in 23 years, but to include the Ron Wolf era with the Ted Thompson era and claim GB has always been viewed as free agent averse during those 23 years is to ignore indisputable evidence to the contrary.
The Ron Wolf era included perhaps the most celebrated & impactful free agent signing ever in Reggie White. The front 4 on the back-to-back Super Bowl teams were all free agents. The MVP of the 96' Super Bowl win was a 1-year free agent signee. The WR who scored the first TD in the Super Bowl win was a last season free agent pickup, and so on.
Ron Wolf, and indeed Sherman, were also more apt to trade for a player. Brett Favre is the most obvious example, but contributors like Keith Jackson, Ahman, Green, and Al Harris were all acquired via trade.
TT does it differently. He has made the fewest, by far and away, forays into free agency of any NFL GM over the past decade (though the Woodson signing 10 years ago was one of the best free agent acquisitions by any GM ever). He also rarely, very rarely, trades for players.
For whatever reason, TT's practice has been to not acquire veteran players who have played for other teams, especially since 2007.
Those who focus upon the fact the Pack have had just 1 losing season, numerous NFC North Titles, 3 NFC Championship game appearances, and a Super Bowl victory during TT's tenure, generally maintain that TT's way is the right way.
Others, who see GB as the only team to have had Hall of Fame caliber QBs every year during the 11 years TT has been in GB other than NE, question whether TT's reluctance to acquire veteran talent is part of the reason the Packers have been to just a single Super Bowl during his tenure.
Will be interesting to see if TT sticks to his guns or deviates from the norm this offseason when it comes to adding veteran talent.
Naive to only focus on Thompson's dabbles into free agency strictly with Green Bay.
I think that Thompson's main goal is to make the Packers a playoff caliber team for the future. He has been great at that, and indeed, he was great at building this team.
Where he isn't as great is in getting championships. He's more interested in making sure we're a very good team for the next 5-10 years than in making the gambles that are necessary to get a Super Bowl trophy. The draft and develop philosophy only works if you hit some home runs every year (if your goal is to win a Super Bowl).
Personally, I see nothing wrong with a philosophy that says to draft and develop to build the team, but then use whatever it takes to kick us over the top when we get close.
The question is, are we satisfied being a very, very good team that is always going to be in contention, or will we only be satisfied with a championship once in a while?
I suggest that a Superb Owl win about 5 years ago qualifies as a championship once in a while. And they are still routinely competitive.
Instead of referring to "Free Agency" in general terms as a cure, can we start naming names we would have preferred in hindsight, along with the comparable Packer contract(s) it should have replaced?
Example: "Boy, this team would have won the Super Bowl had we signed Julius Thomas to fix the TE position. Mike Daniels $42M should have gone toward the $46 he would have required."
Another utterly ignorant strawman. Who is saying "sign the highest-priced guy on the market and not extend any of their own players"?
Apologies. An internet message board is no place for hyperbole. I'd like the overall point to stand that I think we could have much better discussion if we were talking real players with real price tags rather than "Free Agency" in its entirety.
I think the Peppers and Guion signings were big for this team. I'd welcome more contributions via Free Agency, but to say "we need more free agents" as a blanket statement does nobody any good.
Agree Herschel and it's getting tough to have a real conversation about free agency. Just because a few of us want to TT to sign a starting ILB and TE does not mean we expect him to sign set the new bar for highest contract ever. No one is clamoring for him to sign Von MIller, Muhammed Wilkerson, Alshon Jeffry, etc. Is allocating $8m this year to bringing in those two positions so outlandish? We haven't employed the league average at either position since Bishop got hurt in 2011 (5 years ago....), and Finley got hurt in 2013 (2 1/2 years ago.....). Why is this so much to ask for some people??
As a reminder, this week begins March madness, NFL style. Important dates to remember this week:
March 1
Prior to 4:00 p.m., EST, deadline for clubs to designate Franchise or Transition Players.
March 5
NFL Regional Combines, Minnesota Vikings Training Facility Max Winter Park, Eden Prairie, Minnesota.
March 7-9
Beginning at 12:00 p.m. EST, clubs are permitted to contact, and enter into contract negotiations with the certified agents of players who will become Unrestricted Free Agents upon the expiration of their 2015 player contracts at 4:00 p.m., EST, on March 9. However, a contract cannot be executed with a new club until 4:00 p.m., EST, on March 9.
March 9
Prior to 4:00 p.m., EST, clubs must exercise options for 2016 on all players who have option clauses in their 2015 contracts.
March 9
Prior to 4:00 p.m., EST, clubs must submit qualifying offers to their Restricted Free Agents with expiring contracts and to whom they desire to retain a Right of First Refusal/Compensation.
March 9
Prior to 4:00 p.m., EST, clubs must submit a Minimum Salary Tender to retain exclusive negotiating rights to their players with expiring 2015 contracts and who have fewer than three accrued seasons of free agency credit.
March 9
Top-51 Begins. All clubs must be under the 2016 salary cap prior to 4:00 p.m., EST.
March 9
All 2015 player contracts expire at 4:00 p.m., EST
March 9
The 2016 league year and free agency period begins at 4:00 p.m., EST.
The first day of the 2016 league year will end at 11:59:59 p.m., EST, on March 9. Clubs will receive a personnel notice that will include all transactions submitted to the league office during the period between 4:00 p.m., EST, and 11:59:59 p.m., EST, on March 9.
March 9
Trading period for 2016 begins at 4:00 p.m., EST, after expiration of all 2015 contracts.
CUPackFan posted:Is allocating $8m this year to bringing in those two positions so outlandish?
Not at all. But I think expecting you will significantly upgrade from Dick Rodgers and Jake Ryan for a combined $8M is a bit outlandish. I'm sure you just pulled a number out of the air, but I think that's part of the problem here when we talk about "Free Agency" as a concept rather than realistically looking at potential players and their estimated costs.
Also, it's not just the $8mm ( or whatever $$) this season. Even with the cap going up, Thompson and Ball have to manage the future.
That's every player ever, not just free agents.
Report: Broncos to use exclusive tag on Von Miller
Posted by Mike Florio on February 29, 2016, 1:01 PM ESTESPN has reported that the Broncos will apply the franchise tag to linebacker Von Miller. But ESPN didn’t specify the type of the tag.
Troy Renck of the Denver Post now reports that the Broncos “are expected” to apply the exclusive version of the tag.
It’s not a surprise. With a non-exclusive tender for linebackers at $14.129 million and with the calculation of the exclusive tag currently expected to be $14.01 million, there’s no reason not to use the exclusive tag, since by rule it also would be $14.129 million. By using the exclusive tag, the Broncos risk an uptick in linebacker contracts with high 2016 cap numbers, which would drive up the exclusive tender beyond $14.129 million.
The risk of not using the exclusive tag is more clear. The Broncos would potentially lose Miller to a team picking low in round one that is willing and able to put together an offer sheet that the Broncos couldn’t or wouldn’t match, and that is in in turn willing to give up this year’s first-round pick along with next year’s to get him.
Wow I underestimated Packer fan's aversion to free agency. I think we could improve this team if we used free agency more but sounds like I'm in the minority.
Not opposed at all. The team doesn't have it's last two Lombardis without FA. I'm opposed to the notion that "this team needs more free agents." Who? And what cost?
I'm positive Trevathan makes this team better. What do we think he would cost, and how does that impact the rest of the roster? Jerrell Freeman probably comes cheaper - is that a better target?
My whole point is that I'd rather see concrete names thrown out there and debated rather than free agency vs no free agency.
"I think GB can improve their team through free agency"
or....
"I think a contract for Danny Trevathan averaging $6 million/ 4 years upgrades the defense immediately and gives TT enough flexibility to resign his upcoming 2016/2017 FA's especially given the cap jump to $155 million this year"
GB fans don't have an aversion to GB. It's frustrating reading "I think GB should sign some veteran free agents" repeatedly. It's impossible to agree or disagree with blanket statements like that.
Details make it easier to move the conversation along.
So, who are the starting ILB and TE's that TT should sign? And what is the contract value? I mentioned earlier, about Cook and Trevathian. I don't know what Cook's value is, probably something TT could stomach, Trevathian on the other hand, will command top dollar, IMO.
Personally, there isn't a FA TE I would sign. I'd roll the dice with Dick Rodgers and see if one of the top 5 TE's in the draft happens to fall into Ted's lap.
Trevathan could easily end up in Chicago as well. He's got history with Fox.
Trevathan is likely a no-go because he's a true, UFA, though at 25, if you're going to grab a guy and pay him on the top end, he's the kind of guy you go after. He'll make less than a pass rusher in a similar situation, for example, though I don't think a team will come close under $9 m/year and very large signing bonus.
Cook, on the other hand, was cut and wouldn't count against compensatory picks. He won't command top-dollar, probably around $3 million/year.
At ILB James Lauranitis and Stephen Tulloch could be short-term guys, probably around the same price.
If TT drafts a guy high who can play right away at one of those positions, it obviously changes things.
$9 million / year is Navorrow Bowman money. Trevathan is good, but he's the third best LB on his team right now.
I'm not disagreeing that there's a GM that'll give Trevathan that kind of money. I think it's well established the NFL isn't short of idiot GM's. I think Trevathan is worth $6 million per.
It's all part of the discussion though when discussing GB and Free Agency.
I'd agree Trevathan isn't "worth" $9 million/year as a non-pass rusher, I just have a feeling that's what he'll get.
Trevathian will get big time money, young, athletic, and a SB champ. I'm not sure about Tulloch, but as been said before, there is a reason the Rams cut JL, and it's not because of his salary. But those are FA's that could come in at TT's price.