Breaking Bishop extended

BrainDedMember

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/112894484.html

The Packers now have all four of their inside linebackers signed through at least 2012.

quote:
Veteran Nick Barnett has two years left on his deal at salaries of $6.05 million in '11 and $6.55 million in '12. Brandon Chillar has three years left at $2.6 million in '11, $3.3 million in '12 and $3.6 million in '13. A.J. Hawk has one year left at $10 million in '11.

If any of the other 3 can be moved, you do it. If not, you have to look at cutting ties with Hawk at the minimum. He has had a good year, but even at a reduced price tag, its not worth it IMO.

quote:
They could sign Hawk to a long-term deal and trade or cut Barnett, but you have to assume the salary cap will be back next season and they'd have to eat $1.7 million of cap space by releasing Barnett. If they let Hawk go, they aren't charged with anything.

1/4/114:37 PM

radmanMember

TT would pay that 1.7 against the cap if he could get an extra draft pick in the seventh round without even thinking about it , it automatic for Tedster.

I guess there could be a chance that GB "burned the bridge" sitting out Hawk to start the season. Many folks who hold a grudge dont bring it to light till the right time.

I would think that GB would want to keep Hawk as he is THE Leader of this defense.TT should be able to satisfy Hawks financial needs with a extension. Hawk is more valuble than Barnett IMHO.Maybe Bishop took less money knowing that GB has the intention of keeping all four and Hawk has been discussing this also.

I just have a hard time believing Hawk , Bishop or Barnett are OK with coming off the bench. Maybe Capers is envisioning the 2-5-4 as his base defense

Money talks but these guys have fragile ego's and none of the three are suited to OLB.

Maybe Hawk has told TT pay me the 10 mil or let me go already.Who knows?

1/4/115:02 PM

SmedleyMember

I'd like to see them keep Hawk. As some others have pointed out, the defense seemed play better while he was making the calls, despite continuing to lose players. I thought he played solidly this year and wonder if he's one of those guys who flourishes when he's put in a position to lead. Hopefully they can restructure him and keep them all.

1/4/116:27 PM

BlueshoundMember

Maybe its possible that with either Hawk or Barnett, the defense would have played equally as well since its collectively the 2nd year of the install. Regardless, from my distant vantage point, my gut tells me "don't mess with what's working". If I had to decide, I'd be keeping Hawk at this point. A reasonable restructure would go a long way towards making that decision a whole lot easier.

1/4/117:43 PM

artisMember

The defense is much more disciplined in year 2 of Capers, and alot of that has to do with Hawk being steady in the middle. I think he's shown himself to be a smarter player than people gave him credit for, he has worked on coverage skills and improved somewhat, and seems to be at home making the calls on defense. Bishop is a good signing, and I think Ted should probably reward AJ for his play this year, and his commitment to being a team player, provided that Hawk is willing to restructure.

I think you do what you can to keep this group together, considering the LB corps was seen as a depleted unit coming into this season.

1/4/118:05 PM

Shoeless JoeMember

I think Hawk was just holding back earlier in the season to flex his authoritative muscles and to prove a point to MM.

1/4/118:08 PM

chickenboyTic Toc

quote:
Originally posted by artis:
The defense is much more disciplined in year 2 of Capers...

Agreed. They haven't had any meltdowns like they had last year. Now, maybe that is due to who they played when they played them but in all reality maybe their worst performance was week four vs. the Lions...and that didn't even come close to the several bad performances they had last year...even while having the number 1 ranked defense. Really a remarkable job by the defensive staff and the players.

1/4/118:22 PM

NJWISMember

i think the pros and cons to hawk and barnett pretty much even themselves out.

The kicker will be who does a better job making the defensive calls. And I am sure that will be an easy decision for capers/MM to make.

IMO barnett is a goner. Sad because my authentic barnett won't be worn anymore.

1/4/118:44 PM

ammoCheese Master

It's all about chemistry:

Hawk + Bishop > Barnett + Bishop > Hawk + Barnett

1/4/118:55 PM

Timmy!TIMMAAAAYYY!!

Great news on Bishop! In Ted we trust.
I hope we're able to re-sign Jenx. Neal more than likely will be a key on the DL with Raji going forward, but he had a rough 1st year with injuries. He must be available if there's any thought of dealing/cutting Jenkins. I also think the last 2 years have shown the importance of having sufficient DL depth.
Same thing with Hawk and/or Barnett. Although this has been an unusual year for injury at LB, there's no substitute for veteran experience. Jones is still a question mark, and Poppi may be the odd man out.

1/4/1110:18 PM

CUPackFanMember

I would love to see Jenkins come back but I understand if TT lets him go. Here is what the depth chart would look like next year (assuming Jolly comes back):
LE: Jolly, Pickett
NT: Raji, Green
RE: Neal, Wilson

If they keep 7, you can include Wynn. That's still a pretty solid rotation without Jenkins (barring injuries). Obviously better with Jenkins, but you can't pay everyone.

1/4/1110:59 PM

Grave DiggerMember

Playing Hawk the 10 million would essentially be the same as him being our franchise player (the LB franchise number is like 9.6), which wouldn't be ideal for the team as he isn't worth that money and it isn't ideal for Hawk because if he gets benched again or plays poorly or gets hurt then his FA value next offseason drops substantially. It's in the best interest of both sides to get a long term deal done.

However, he isn't going to come cheap, Hawk is going to want to cash in. Regardless of how average you think he has been, the production is on par with guys like DeMeco Ryans who just inked a 6 year, 48 million deal with 22 guaranteed last March. You have to believe Hawk is going to be asking for something in that neighborhood. My guess is either 5 year, 35 million with 15 guaranteed or 6 year, 42 million with 20 guaranteed. Is he going to get it? I don't know, but my guess is that if we want AJ Hawk to be our LB next season, we're going to have to pay him around 10 million anyway.

1/4/1111:19 PM

TravisLLMember

I would personally cut Hawk and Barnett. I would then resign Jenkins. Hawk has been good this year, but this is a contract (for him) seeing how he makes 10 million next season. I would prefer to keep Hawk, but I don't think it's a realistic option for him or the Packers long term.

Having someone like Jenkins that can rush the passer and stop the run is critical. Perhaps Jolly could provide that again, but I wouldn't count on it. Neal is still a wildcard.

LE Jolly, Pickett
NT Raji, Green
RE Jenkins, Neal

OLB Matthews, Zombo, Jones, ?
ILB Bishop, Chillar, ?, ?

CB Williams
CB Woodson
CB Shields
CB ?

S Collins, Burnett, Peprah, ?

I'd grab an ILB in rounds 1-3 2012 draft. Then sign a low level free agent before or after draft that can make this team. Certainly keeping Barnett or Hawk around one more year wouldn't hurt short term, but long term does nothing for us.

1/5/112:38 AM

TschmackMember

Good to see them extend Bishop. He's proven himself this year, and he deserved the contract extension. On paper it doesn't look totally ridiculous either.

Lots of questions marks in the offseason what they do- especially with Barnett and Hawk. Bishop has shown us that he's a better fit inside than Barnett because he's more physical and stronger against the run. There is no way Hawk returns with that $10MM cap figure.

I still think they will either deal or release Barnett/Hawk and keep Chillar and Bishop and then look to draft another OLB opposite Matthews. Maybe then they'd look to move Jones or Zombo inside?

1/5/115:00 AM

PakrzFREEZE!

quote:
Originally posted by TravisLL:
I would personally cut Hawk and Barnett. I would then resign Jenkins. Hawk has been good this year, but this is a contract (for him) seeing how he makes 10 million next season. I would prefer to keep Hawk, but I don't think it's a realistic option for him or the Packers long term.

Having someone like Jenkins that can rush the passer and stop the run is critical. Perhaps Jolly could provide that again, but I wouldn't count on it. Neal is still a wildcard.

LE Jolly, Pickett
NT Raji, Green
RE Jenkins, Neal

OLB Matthews, Zombo, Jones, ?
ILB Bishop, Chillar, ?, ?

CB Williams
CB Woodson
CB Shields
CB ?

S Collins, Burnett, Peprah, ?

I'd grab an ILB in rounds 1-3 2012 draft. Then sign a low level free agent before or after draft that can make this team. Certainly keeping Barnett or Hawk around one more year wouldn't hurt short term, but long term does nothing for us.

Disagree.

1/5/118:08 AM

KuttencheezeMember

quote:
Originally posted by Grave Digger:
Playing Hawk the 10 million would essentially be the same as him being our franchise player .

Good point, and I think it also helps to look at the big picture.

Mason Crosby, Charlie Peprah, Atari Bigby, Brandon Jackson, Jason Spitz, Daryn Colledge, Cullen Jenkins and James Jones are all unrestricted free agents, assuming the old rules are reinstated.

I think you let Bigby (injury prone), Spitz (hasn't shown much), Colledge (more mouth than production), Jones (can't catch) and Jenkins (will ask for too much and injury prone)go. Then you're left paying for Crosby, Peprah, and Jackson. No blockbuster deals to ink there. You might have the money then to lose the $1.7 in cap space by dealing Barnett (which I think they should do), and have the money to pay AJ Hawk what it's going to take to keep him. Now, there's a chance AJ will ask for too much but although his play has improved this year, it's not like he's lit the NFL on fire. I think we should do what we can to keep him within reason, of course.

1/5/1111:00 AM

danhandyMember

The reason Hawks play has improved this year is that he was playing out of postion because of the money given to Barnett. Once Hawk was put into his role of calling the defense he has florished and is now getting the ink he deserves. I still think we can get a third for Barnett. I have also thought that Barnett was very overrated from the get go. Remember he was the guilty party (along with Sharper)on the 4th and 26. He actually bit on the play action that left him to shallow to break up the pass. Hawk needs to stay and get paid.

1/5/1111:39 AM

BrainDedMember

I have a feeling they may try to move Barnett outside and keep all four. If Green and Capers think its a viable option, it probably is.

Although they were wrong about Kapman as OLB. If you but into him giving 100%.

1/5/1112:26 PM

4 FavreMember

I like the idea of moving Barnett to the outside, of course I have no idea if it could actually work. I'd prefer to keep both Hawk and Barnett, they're good players. If one absolutely has to go, I'd try to keep Hawk at a discount and let Nick walk.

1/5/1112:43 PM

johnnie grayMember

it is indisputable that the defense got better after bishop replaced barnett. why mess around with success? i have a strong feeling barnett won't be back.

1/5/1112:54 PM

CUPackFanMember

Barnett isn't a 3-4 OLB. I'm no football expert, but 3-4 OLB's tend to be around 250-260 lbs, can rush the passer and also seal the edge on running plays. I don't think Barnett fits that description.

1/5/111:10 PM

PackdogMember

Glad things have worked out for Bishop. The guy seemingly didn't have a chance and the coaches weren't giving him a sniff of playing time. If Barnett doesn't go down, Des and his agent are probably working OT to get him out of here. Funny how things work out ....dude looks better than Barnett or Hawk.

Glad to have a snot-knocker as one of our starting ILB !!!

1/5/111:35 PM

HerschelMember

IIRC his salary could be very "cheap" if it's front-loaded because deals signed this season count towards the uncapped year. That makes keeping all of them much easier (depending on Hawk).

As for moving one of them outside, I'd guess Bishop would be the best candidate of the group. He's got the biggest frame to hold the size and is a decent blitzer.

1/5/112:07 PM

BrainDedMember

quote:
Originally posted by CUPackFan:
Barnett isn't a 3-4 OLB. I'm no football expert, but 3-4 OLB's tend to be around 250-260 lbs, can rush the passer and also seal the edge on running plays. I don't think Barnett fits that description.

He would need to add a little weight to be better suited to defend the run from there, but I think he has pretty good pas rush skills.

I'm not advocating it, just tossing it out there as a possibility. They guy has talent, knows the D, and is going to be dead cap money if we send him packing.

1/5/112:10 PM

GBFanForLifeLarge Member

http://blogs.greenbaypressgaze...m/blogs/gpg/insider/

quote:
The contract extension that Desmond Bishop signed contained a $4 million bonus for this season and a $1 million roster bonus next year, according to a source with access to NFL Players Association salary information.

The deal was complicated because of the 30 percent rule, which says players currently under contract cannot have their 2010 base salary increased by more than 30 percent of the 2009 pay. So the bonus was in lieu of a base pay increase this season. The deal also included what the source called a “bogus special teams likely to be earned incentive of $11 million,” which was a way around the 30 percent rule, but he can’t reach that incentive.

The $1 million bonus for 2011 will be paid on the 30th day of the league year.

Bishop’s base salaries total $11 million are broken down like this: $1.188 million in 2011, $2.826 million in 2012, $3.464 million in 2013 and $3.522 million in 2014.

The next four years also include up to $300,000 in roster bonuses each year and a $200,000 workout bonus each year. The roster bonuses are tied to the number of games for which Bishop is active.

If there’s a salary cap next season, Bishop’s cap number will be $5.782 million.

1/5/115:38 PM