OP
OP
Deleted member 6794
Guest
With the Romo move coming and other options available, again, they'll be fine.
Interestingly either releasing or trading Romo only results in cap savings of $5.1 million for the Cowboys.
With the Romo move coming and other options available, again, they'll be fine.
Cowboys are one of the better teams at playing the shell game with the Cap, moving money around, I think they even got fined for it one year?
Interestingly either releasing or trading Romo only results in cap savings of $5.1 million for the Cowboys.
This got me to thinking that if the Cowboys are fine with $3 mil in cap space why are the Packers not okay with about $40 mil in cap space? This according to those posters who want several players to be released or to have players' pay cut significantly for cap considerations. This is not a question directed specifically at you, just a random thought that popped-up when I read your post.With the Romo move coming and other options available, again, they'll be fine.
This got me to thinking that if the Cowboys are fine with $3 mil in cap space why are the Packers not okay with about $40 mil in cap space? This according to those posters who want several players to be released or to have players' pay cut significantly for cap considerations. This is not a question directed specifically at you, just a random thought that popped-up when I read your post..
per here: http://overthecap.com/salary-cap-space the Packers are 13th in space available with an OL team dinner short of $40m.
How frustrated would we be to be brownie fans with over $100m available and perennially one of the worst teams in the league.
Merged the two cap threads
[/moderation]
The Cowboys will either have to restructure additional contracts or release players to make moves this offseason therefore they would for sure to have additional cap space. With the Packers having several positions of need to address $40 million in cap space isn't as much as it might seem.
Look at the past few years cap space in the link I gave before shows the Packers around 10th the past few seasons. That seems to be the rollover amounts. Not much above median. Same teams near the top year after year. Interesting most of them just suck.Each year the Packers are the king's of the salary cap rollover, but seem to have the same needs year after year after year.
I see this argument used each year and I hate it. I keep hearing "with the Packers several positions of need to address, $40M in cap space isn't as much as it might seem". First, a team that was 60 minutes from the Super Bowl shouldn't have "several positions of need". Second, the Packers could some of the cap space to address some of their needs. It's apparent that the needs aren't being addressed through the draft. I also like to always point out the following: What young talent do the Packers have on the roster right now that is going to warrant big contract extensions? The Packers don't have an Antonio Brown, Le'Veon Bell, or JJ Watt type player that is going to break the bank. Each year the Packers are the king's of the salary cap rollover, but seem to have the same needs year after year after year.
Unfortunately there's no doubt the Packers have several positions in need of an upgrade, mainly cornerback and outside linebacker. I agree the team should spend part of the available cap space to address those in free agency but they have to re-sign some of their own players as well and save some of it for draft picks, the practice squad and injured reserve replacements. While Thompson likes to roll over some money into next season that number isn't that much above the league average to overreact to it.
Pretty much this whole board over the past 6 weeks has turned into Groundhog's Day - the movie. Almost every thread devolves into the same posters rehashing the same subjects.Reading the bolded section makes me feel like Bill Murray in Groundhog's Day
Reading the bolded section makes me feel like Bill Murray in Groundhog's Day
With an approx. rookie pool of $5Mil & TT's "usual" desire to hold $10Mil for in-season moves and/or extensions (rollover to next year) using your $25Mil that would leave $10Mil "available" in FA, yet.After signing Perry, Barclay, Bennett, Kendricks, and Elliott, and making a small restructure to Guion's deal, the Packers should be around $25M under the cap.
http://nypost.com/2017/03/01/behind-the-scenes-with-darrelle-revis-at-his-best-and-most-broken/I want Revis. Despite the armchair gms saying he is done... he would bring some much needed confidence and respected veteran presence to our cb corps. I also personally believe he was sand bagging last year, because the jets season was a joke in 16'. And that he has plenty of tread left on his tires...