Skip to main content

Much as love to get Cooper, if he doesn't resign with the Cowboys they are going to tag him (franchise if Prescott gets a deal) or transition if Prescott doesn't sign (Prescott then gets the franchise). 

Cooper is going to cost somewhere close to $20 million per year, and however you game out our salary cap space, doesn't seem doable.

BrainDed posted:

 

There really isn't a ton of space.   Maybe they do cut Linsley.   I'm pretty sure we can get close to his production for much less than 10 million.   It would save 8.

 

 

 

 

 

It isn't out of the realm of possibility that Linsley is a cap casualty if there is somebody they really want to go after in free agency.  Lucas Patrick filled in well for him in the Dallas game and the end of the Detroit game, and Linsley had been battling a back injury all season that he called a "chronic condition."

slowmo posted  isn't out of the realm of possibility that Linsley is a cap casualty if there is somebody they really want to go after in free agency.  Lucas Patrick filled in well for him in the Dallas game and the end of the Detroit game, and Linsley had been battling a back injury all season that he called a "chronic condition."
 

Moving Jenkins to Center could also be a possibility, he played some center in college

Grave Digger posted:

Hoping they look at ILB, OT, CB, or DT in R1 and then WR only in R2. So many WRs it’s hard to accept that there won’t be a good one available in R2. 

We will likely are more UFA additions, so the list of needs will shift.

I think they really need to take a long look at a guy who can play DE as well.  I think we can get by with a serviceable Lowry but I don't think you can keep putting Lancaster out there you need to upgrade.

This is supposed to be one of the best ever WR deep drafts so I would bet they go playmakers early and often in the draft and in free agency. Much like Gute attacked the defense in the offseason last year.

As much as I don't want to think about it I do think it is time for them to start looking at the Qb to replace #12.  

FLPACKER posted:
slowmo posted  isn't out of the realm of possibility that Linsley is a cap casualty if there is somebody they really want to go after in free agency.  Lucas Patrick filled in well for him in the Dallas game and the end of the Detroit game, and Linsley had been battling a back injury all season that he called a "chronic condition."
 

Moving Jenkins to Center could also be a possibility, he played some center in college

Yeah, Michael Wadney posited that idea about a month back, and it's a solid one.

I wouldn't mess with the consistency on the left side.  Go sign yourself a Jeff Saturday and call it a day. 

I think both Linsley and Turner need assessment and I don't think they play off each other very well.  The investment in Turner has been made so the logical choice for an upgrade is at C.  If they move Block-It Man to C does that mean they keep Taylor?  Interesting thought.

Last edited by Henry
FLPACKER posted:
slowmo posted  isn't out of the realm of possibility that Linsley is a cap casualty if there is somebody they really want to go after in free agency.  Lucas Patrick filled in well for him in the Dallas game and the end of the Detroit game, and Linsley had been battling a back injury all season that he called a "chronic condition."
 

Moving Jenkins to Center could also be a possibility, he played some center in college

If Bulaga isn't reasonable in his contract requests, I think he will be, you could also consider Jenkins at RT.    He's basically the same build as Bulaga but much more athletic.  

Then you retain Taylor to play guard?     

Obviously not ideal, but we have options if "IOWA" asks for 15 per or something. 

For me the ideal situation would be Bulaga giving a home town discount of 10 per.   You cut Linsley and replace him with Patrick to save 7 or so.   You cut Taylor to save 4.5.     This leaves us with only Madison and Nijman as reserves.   You add a veteran swing tackle and pickup another reserve in the draft. 

Last edited by BrainDed

Bulaga isn't going to give some mythical "home town discount" either.  I like the idea of Jenkins at RT but you've got a pretty soft middle of the oline at that point.  Block-It Man could probaby stone the hell out of some DTs at C.  I know they like the athletic zone scheme guys so guys like Taylor and Linsley may be on the outs regardless of what Bulaga does.  I think a Buluga/Veldheer investment would be worthwhile.  Technically Turner can and has played outside but I think that's kind of a crapshoot banking on him outside.

Last edited by Henry
The Heckler posted:
Grave Digger posted:

Hoping they look at ILB, OT, CB, or DT in R1 and then WR only in R2. So many WRs it’s hard to accept that there won’t be a good one available in R2. 

We will likely are more UFA additions, so the list of needs will shift.

I think they really need to take a long look at a guy who can play DE as well.  I think we can get by with a serviceable Lowry but I don't think you can keep putting Lancaster out there you need to upgrade.

Just out of curiosity, and asking not arguing the point, why do you and other folks believe Lowry is "serviceable"?

~$10M per year is actually pretty realistic for Bulaga. If I had to guess what it would take it probably would take 3 years, $30M, probably fully guaranteed. That puts him in the top 5 of RTs, which is deserved considering his production. That's pretty affordable as well considering GB will have $26M+ in cap space + $12.5M in cap space by cutting Graham/Lane Taylor alone. Cut Linsley as well and there's an additional $8.5M. $46M+ in cap space is about average in the league and would allow us to make a couple moves like resiging Bulaga, KC, and maybe 1 or 2 UFA's. 

I see Lowry a lot like Lancaster.  They're there because there's only chumps or rookies behind them.  "Serviceable" is a pretty damn subjective term at this point.  Serviceable for guys of their caliber?  Yeah.  I didn't think the Lowry contract was that big of deal simply because he IS a serviceable backup/rotation guy but in no way should we be seeing Lowry or Lancasters face on a regular basis.

Last edited by Henry
SteveLuke posted:

Just out of curiosity, and asking not arguing the point, why do you and other folks believe Lowry is "serviceable"?

"Serviceable", to me, means that they're good enough to start in a pinch, but they're not someone you want starting long term. I think that's an appropriate description for Lowry. He has enough juice to hold it together in a pinch, but he's not a full time starter. I like him and Lancaster as depth, neither guy should be playing a full game though. Both CAN be effective in spurts and play hard. 

Lowry and Lancaster are ok guys to have on your roster, but you need better next to Kenny Clark. Having a good D-line is as much about quality as it is about rotation - bust ass and keep em' fresh. When the Packers cut Mike Mike Daniels, for me it wasn't so much that Daniels would be missed as it meant someone like Montravious Adams would need to step up or we would see too much Lowry and Lancaster. If Montravious steps up we probably aren't having this conversation. Loved him out of Auburn but he has been fucking awful. 

While Bulaga won't take a hometown discount, there is his injury history which teams will consider and which might set his salary number lower than other free agent tackles in past years.  Maybe the Packers give a large signing bonus, which gets pro-rated over the contract (say four years) and a smaller salary with some incentives. 

One incentive could be based on total number of snaps or games played in a season.  In his 9 year career, he has only played in all 16 games three times, so I think the NFL would allow a "not likely to be exceeded" incentive of playing 16 games to be included in his salary.  A large incentive, but under cap rules where "not likely to be exceeded" gets accounted for in the next year's salary cap, could help make his hit on the salary cap next year more manageable.

 

Last edited by slowmo

I can possibly see Gute trading down from 30 in the first for a high second and 3rd or high 4th. Some team may want the remaining top ranked QB or some other player left at that point. An extra pick or two high in the draft helps us. Not sure there is that much difference between pick 30 and 34-37, plus the added pick gets another player in the top 100.

 

DurangoDoug posted:

I can possibly see Gute trading down from 30 in the first for a high second and 3rd or high 4th. Some team may want the remaining top ranked QB or some other player left at that point. An extra pick or two high in the draft helps us. Not sure there is that much difference between pick 30 and 34-37, plus the added pick gets another player in the top 100.

 

The difference is a cost controlled extra year of service.  

Packdog posted:

Lowry and Lancaster are ok guys to have on your roster, but you need better next to Kenny Clark. Having a good D-line is as much about quality as it is about rotation - bust ass and keep em' fresh. When the Packers cut Mike Mike Daniels, for me it wasn't so much that Daniels would be missed as it meant someone like Montravious Adams would need to step up or we would see too much Lowry and Lancaster. If Montravious steps up we probably aren't having this conversation. Loved him out of Auburn but he has been fucking awful. 

You're spot on about Adams. Where has he been? He's never mentioned, at all. I know he missed his first season, but I expected a lot more from him this year.

Jalen Reagor is a faster Duvernay that runs much better routes with an insane vertical. He’ll be on the board well after 30 though because this draft is so deep at WR and OT. Reagor is a tougher faster version of Cobb. 

A lot of what GB elects to do at WR in the draft depends on year end thoughts on Lazard. And to a lesser extent EQ. My opinion is GB needs a 4.3 40 cheat code in the slot they can move around AND runs sound routes. 

Last edited by ChilliJon

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×