@Gil_Brandt
Charles Woodson has had a great, great HOF-worthy career. I suspect it will be over after he sees the market for him this offseason.
preface: love CWood and everything he's done for the Packers.
point: I can't see anyone in the league looking at him and thinking "there's our missing piece!"
point: I can't see anyone in the league looking at him and thinking "there's our missing piece!"
quote:Originally posted by lambeausouth:
11 returned for TDs (second all-time to Rod Woodson's 12)
This is why he wants to keep playing IMO. I think he'd love to have that record.
It wasn't just the 10 million. If he's on the sideline from June through October, He gets to play, under the Ray Nitchke rule.
quote:Originally posted by ChilliJon:
@TyDunne
Pay cut wasn't a serious discussion for either party. #Packers, Woodson both moving on. Agent does expect a market for DB.
It doesn't sound like a contract restructure ever came up. Sounds like different directions. While I don't think this has any effect on Jennings, it makes the Revis conversation a bit more interesting.
That is hard to believe.. Only scenario I can see where a restructure wasn't discussed is if the Packers were going to aim so low they didn't want to offend.. We still have a big hole at S next to Morgan.
Most likely scenario I see is TT wanted to avoid the mistake he made with Driver and just move on.
quote:Originally posted by BrainDed: That is hard to believe.. Only scenario I can see where a restructure wasn't discussed is if the Packers were going to aim so low they didn't want to offend.. We still have a big hole at S next to Morgan.
Jason Wilde @jasonjwilde Something #Packers didn't do with Woodson. RT @NFL_ATL: Report: Eagles to ask Nnamdi Asomugha to take pay cut -- or be cut
I wonder why TT doesn't discuss a pay cut? Sure there is a possibility of offending but I have to assume agent/player understand the finances of the NFL. I would think the mistake of letting Jenkins walk without any contact would have possibility changed this line of thinking.
Now maybe they believe Woodson doesn't have much of anything left and truly do not want him. But if they would like him back and are just making the assumption that their offer would be too low doesn't strike me as good route to take.
He's two years removed from being the DPOY. He's due to make 10+M this year. He's been hurt the past two years.
I thought they would try and restructure, but having thought more about it, what kind of deal do you give him? 2M? That's approx. an 80% cut, and more than likely he would take it as a slap in the face.
Do you over pay him? NO! The number that TT would have thrown out, would have been so low, that he knew CWood wouldn't take it, or be Pi$$ed. So, the best situation is to make it amicable, and move on.
I thought they would try and restructure, but having thought more about it, what kind of deal do you give him? 2M? That's approx. an 80% cut, and more than likely he would take it as a slap in the face.
Do you over pay him? NO! The number that TT would have thrown out, would have been so low, that he knew CWood wouldn't take it, or be Pi$$ed. So, the best situation is to make it amicable, and move on.
Exactly. $4M seems like the absolute lowest deal he would take, and I can't honestly say he'd earn that.
Even as rough as the safety spot was last year, I don't know that Woodson was noticeably better than the Jennings/McMillan combo. (Especially after rewatching the Indy game this week.)
He's been in a pretty steady decline since 2010, and it's safe to assume that would have continued. I don't believe Ted looks at this team as having a "window" for another ring, and knows that cap space and continued growth of younger safeties mean as much to 2014 and beyond as Woody could have possibly meant to 2013. Onward.
Even as rough as the safety spot was last year, I don't know that Woodson was noticeably better than the Jennings/McMillan combo. (Especially after rewatching the Indy game this week.)
He's been in a pretty steady decline since 2010, and it's safe to assume that would have continued. I don't believe Ted looks at this team as having a "window" for another ring, and knows that cap space and continued growth of younger safeties mean as much to 2014 and beyond as Woody could have possibly meant to 2013. Onward.
The young guys were playing as well if not better, time for him to go.
He's been a great pro. It's time for him to go and lead a hopefully healthy life. Because he was such an outstanding athlete, he was still effectively at 75% of his peak ability. He's well below 50% now. Just for perspective, do you know who the Packers drafted the year Woodson came out of college? Vonnie Holiday, Mike Wahle (Supplemental), Corey Bradford, and Matt Hasselback.
From the Denver Post, here's the guys besides that were still in the league from that draft class at the start of last season:
1. Peyton Manning. Pick #1 by the Colts.
2. Charlie Batch. Then — Pick No. 60 by Detroit Lions. Now — backup quarterback for Pittsburgh Steelers.
3. Takeo Spikes. Then — No. 13 pick by Cincinnai. Now – Linebacker for the San Diego Chargers.
4. Vonnie Holliday. Then — No. 19 pick by Green Bay. Now — In his second season with the Arizona Cardinals. He played for the Broncos in 2010.
5. Randy Moss. Then — No. 21 pick by Minnesota. Now — Trying to revive his career in San Francisco.
6. Charles Woodson. Then — No. 4 pick by Oakland, as a cornerback. Now — A safety for the Green Bay Packers.
7. Matt Hasselbeck. Then — No. 187 pick by Green Bay, where he backed up Brett Favre. Now — In a competition with second-year player Jake Locker to be the starter in Tennessee.
8. Matt Birk. Then — No. 173 by Minnesota. Now — Center for the Baltimore Ravens.
9. Pat Mannelly. Then — No. 189 pick by Chicago, as a tackle. Now – The Bears’ longsnapper, and the only one of the 10 remaining players from his draft class still with his original team.
10. Keith Brooking. Pick #12 in Round 1.
From the Denver Post, here's the guys besides that were still in the league from that draft class at the start of last season:
1. Peyton Manning. Pick #1 by the Colts.
2. Charlie Batch. Then — Pick No. 60 by Detroit Lions. Now — backup quarterback for Pittsburgh Steelers.
3. Takeo Spikes. Then — No. 13 pick by Cincinnai. Now – Linebacker for the San Diego Chargers.
4. Vonnie Holliday. Then — No. 19 pick by Green Bay. Now — In his second season with the Arizona Cardinals. He played for the Broncos in 2010.
5. Randy Moss. Then — No. 21 pick by Minnesota. Now — Trying to revive his career in San Francisco.
6. Charles Woodson. Then — No. 4 pick by Oakland, as a cornerback. Now — A safety for the Green Bay Packers.
7. Matt Hasselbeck. Then — No. 187 pick by Green Bay, where he backed up Brett Favre. Now — In a competition with second-year player Jake Locker to be the starter in Tennessee.
8. Matt Birk. Then — No. 173 by Minnesota. Now — Center for the Baltimore Ravens.
9. Pat Mannelly. Then — No. 189 pick by Chicago, as a tackle. Now – The Bears’ longsnapper, and the only one of the 10 remaining players from his draft class still with his original team.
10. Keith Brooking. Pick #12 in Round 1.
Better to let a guy go 1 year too soon....
It wasn't a "mistake" to let Cullen Jenkins go. There is a finite amount of cash to go around. It was a business decision. Can't pay everybody or else the Cowboys & Redskins would've bought Super Bowls already.
I think scrabble would be a real nice fit in Green Bay at the proper price.
It wasn't a "mistake" to let Cullen Jenkins go. There is a finite amount of cash to go around. It was a business decision. Can't pay everybody or else the Cowboys & Redskins would've bought Super Bowls already.
I think scrabble would be a real nice fit in Green Bay at the proper price.
@jasonjwilde
Asked Ted Thompson as he departed with @JTWahlers about not asking Woodson to take pay cut. "I would never answer something like that."
Asked Ted Thompson as he departed with @JTWahlers about not asking Woodson to take pay cut. "I would never answer something like that."
Sometimes, "The answer to your riddle lies within the question".
quote:Originally posted by PackerRuss:
Do you over pay him? NO! The number that TT would have thrown out, would have been so low, that he knew CWood wouldn't take it, or be Pi$$ed. So, the best situation is to make it amicable, and move on.
Of course you don't overpay. As far as miffing CWood, I would like to think grown adults would understand the money the Pack is able to offer. All CWood has to say is no and test the market. There is no telling what the market will offer at this juncture. What if CWood accepts an offer that the Pack would have been fine with? Again, maybe the Pack doesn't want him back at all. If that is truly the case, this point is moot.
quote:Originally posted by Boris:
It wasn't a "mistake" to let Cullen Jenkins go. There is a finite amount of cash to go around. It was a business decision.
Couldn't disagree more with the deal Jenkins ended up signing. Not even exploring resigning Jenkins is the biggest blunder in TT's tenure, IMO. That position, which was a strength during the Super Bowl run, has been a weakness since.
How do you know TT didn't ask Woodson to take a pay cut? Has anyone confirmed this, or are you just assuming?
quote:Originally posted by chickenboy:
Couldn't disagree more with the deal Jenkins ended up signing.
You're assuming Jenkins offered GB the same deal he did Philly. As I recall, Jenkins signed pretty late (during Training Camp maybe?). In my opinion, it looks as though GB wouldn't meet his terms in March/April so he got pissed, GB moved on, and Philly represented the best offer he was getting. I don't think he gave that deal to GB, I think he saw the Asomugha signing, the Vick acquisition, etc. and bought into the "Dream Team".
quote:Originally posted by CUPackFan:
How do you know TT didn't ask Woodson to take a pay cut? Has anyone confirmed this, or are you just assuming?
Just responding to Wilde's tweet that I posted above. No, I suppose we don't know for sure. However, not addressing the player in this type of situation seems to be TT's M.O.
quote:Originally posted by Grave Digger:
You're assuming Jenkins offered GB the same deal he did Philly.
It's been documented that Jenkins was upset that TT didn't even contact him to discuss a contract. I can dig up a link if necessary.
Maybe he signed with Philly 'cause he bought into the Dream Team thing but the deal was a team-friendly one and if playing for a winner was priority I would suspect he would have like to play for the Super Bowl Champion.
Why would you offer Woodson a pay cut? You can clearly see his skills diminishing. His mind and instinct may still be great but the body isn't always keeping up.
quote:Originally posted by chickenboy:
It's been documented that Jenkins was upset that TT didn't even contact him to discuss a contract. I can dig up a link if necessary.
Not entirely accurate. He was not upset, he understood how the Packers did things and understood it's a business.
quote:
“Heading into last year, I’ve always been up there and always been a Packer, and I wanted to stay a Packer,” Jenkins said, per Jason Wilde of ESPNMilwaukee.com. “So we approached the team and wanted to get some type of security, some type of longer-term deal before the season so I would know I would be there. It wasn’t about money, it was about security, about trying to see if we could work something out.”
When asked if he would have given the Packers a hometown discount, Jenkins said, “Yeah. That was the thought then. I knew in going to them, I know Green Bay, I know the market, I know how they handle business, and the thought was if we could get something reasonable worked out, I knew I would take less than what I could’ve gotten in free agency. But they never approached me with anything and never got any type of negotiations going. It’s just how the business is. They had a lot of younger guys and felt they could move forward in that direction.”
Thanks for digging that up. Maybe I saw some other report that used the term "upset." Regardless, they never approached him and that was a mistake. I really can't find any logical reason for not even making a call, sending an email, etc.
Maybe because they know what they are doing and you don't.
I find it extremely unlikely that Jenkins agent called the Packers and they said "we don't want him back at all, not at any price." That's really stupid and the Packers management isn't stupid. They probably said, "this is the number we would re-sign him at and we're firm on that" and his agent said no thanks we will try our luck in free agency. So no there was no official offer, but I would be set serious money there were discussions. Same thing with Woodson. I'm sure the Packers said we want to lower his cap number to this and Woodson's agent said nope we will look elsewhere. Again no "official" offer is put forth, but numbers are discussed. Just because you don't hear about those things in the media doesn't mean they don't happen.
It's like that with almost every free agent and trade proposition. Teams say we want a 1st round pick for Player X and nothing less and the discussion ends there.
It's like that with almost every free agent and trade proposition. Teams say we want a 1st round pick for Player X and nothing less and the discussion ends there.
But they never approached me with anything and never got any type of negotiations going.
So the above is not true?
So the above is not true?
It would be true if they approached his agent and didn't talk directly with him.
quote:Originally posted by chickenboy:
Maybe I saw some other report that used the term "upset."
it is this type of wisdom that endears you to so many people.
Being endeared in Elkondescending's X4 kingdom is on my 2014 resolution list. 2013's filled up.
quote:Originally posted by chickenboy:
But they never approached me with anything and never got any type of negotiations going.
So the above is not true?
No, that's what the entire premise of previous post was. No they didn't make an official offer, as in they didn't work out all the details of a contract and present it to his agent. I think they talked with his agent though and they said we are firm that we won't go higher than X amount of dollars and his agent said we can get way more than that in FA. The Packers moved on, drafted accordingly, and Jenkins moved on.
I was at a Chuck E Cheese in Green Bay last night and the security guard there told me the rumor is that Woodson slept with TT's wife.
The Packers have a way of doing things and a philosophy when it comes to their aging players that has been well documented here. While it does suck seeing C-Wood depart, it's true the organization knows more than us slaphappy fans. It's an imperfect world and not every decision they make is going to be dead on. As has been stated before, Id rather see the team stick to their current approach and invest $$ in the younger raw talent than invest it in an aging player who might be one year removed. If you see Chicago signing Urlacher to a multi year deal, you'll see my point.
The Packers have a way of doing things and a philosophy when it comes to their aging players that has been well documented here. While it does suck seeing C-Wood depart, it's true the organization knows more than us slaphappy fans. It's an imperfect world and not every decision they make is going to be dead on. As has been stated before, Id rather see the team stick to their current approach and invest $$ in the younger raw talent than invest it in an aging player who might be one year removed. If you see Chicago signing Urlacher to a multi year deal, you'll see my point.
TT doesn't strike me as a guy that's interested in restructuring. If he decides a guy isn't worth keeping at his current pay, he isn't worth keeping. Just my opinion.
According to what Woodson's agent said no offer of a reduced salary was made and the talk about the team not wanting to hurt his feelings with a low offer is really silly. TT has a pretty good track record of knowing when to cut ties and it's no more complicated than that.
quote:Originally posted by chickenboy:
Being endeared in Elkondescending's X4 kingdom is on my 2014 resolution list. 2013's filled up.
