Cap to rise to $130 million

  • Thread starter Deleted member 6794
  • Start date

ivo610

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
16,588
Reaction score
2,250
Location
Madison
If everyone is getting an increase then we really see no benefit. Jerry jones must be happy tho.
 

Stevie DK

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 1, 2012
Messages
82
Reaction score
1
My biggest offseason wish is, you must resign Shield and Jolly, sign Chris Clemons and my favorit, CUT Brad Jones please!!
 
OP
OP
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
My biggest offseason wish is, you must resign Shield and Jolly, sign Chris Clemons and my favorit, CUT Brad Jones please!!

Wouldn't mind cutting Jones, but the Packers better replace him first with an impact player at ILB, right now there's none on the roster.
 

Stevie DK

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 1, 2012
Messages
82
Reaction score
1
Wouldn't mind cutting Jones, but the Packers better replace him first with an impact player at ILB, right now there's none on the roster.
Lattimore (if resigned) or Barrington would and could make the same plays Brad Jones does, the guy is horrible in coverage and midiocre run support at best, the guy don't have a turnover in 5 seasons, That's.. Terrible!!

But I agree, we need someone that's flying around, it's easy to see how big a difference a good ILB makes on a D.
 
OP
OP
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Lattimore (if resigned) or Barrington would and could make the same plays Brad Jones does, the guy is horrible in coverage and midiocre run support at best, the guy don't have a turnover in 5 seasons, That's.. Terrible!!

But I agree, we need someone that's flying around, it's easy to see how big a difference a good ILB makes on a D.

Well, Jones has three turnover plays in his career (two forced fumbles and one fumble recovery), but I agree he's not good enough to be a starter.

Don't want to have Lattimore or Barrington start at ILB either though.
 

Stevie DK

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 1, 2012
Messages
82
Reaction score
1
My bad on the turnovers, was trying to make him look awful :) Which he also is.
 

weeds

Fiber deprived old guy.
Joined
Dec 10, 2004
Messages
5,692
Reaction score
1,791
Location
Oshkosh, WI
The new cap is $133M, $9+M more than last year. I just saw a report that it's supposed to rise another $10+M next year. With the rising cap, that just means the Packers have more and more money available. It should make re-signing our core players easier and, potentially, means TT has some money to play with for signing free agents.

The one downside to this is that I would imagine the signings also rise with the cap. So a $7M deal might now be an $8M deal. I would imagine agents are using this extra cap space to their advantage like this.

It'll be interesting to see if this plays a factor during free agency.

The way it keeps rising...it may hit $140 million yet this year. :rolleyes:

You know, fans kick around unused 'cap' space in such a way, that it just becomes a number. Sort of like when I go into the vault at the bank and verify very large packs of "paper" (that's what they become after 30 years) that are actually very large packs of currency. After a while, numbers just become numbers and cold, hard cash just becomes pieces of paper.

The 'cap' is just a ceiling (and a false ceiling at that with the way contracts are manipulated) ... at one point or another, that number has to translate into the Packers actually handing over cash to guys. The Packers have limited cash reserves in relation to the Snyders and the Jones' of the NFL...and a good portion of those cash reserves can't even be used for player acquisition. I'm just one of those guys who doesn't see a fattening 'cap' as a good thing for the Packers as an organization.

Honest to god, border, I'm not singling out your post for ridicule... it's just that as I read this entire thread, I cringed a little at the notion of giving so much money to guys who can barely speak english. Hahahahaha.... ok, I'm going to go and settle back in to 1990 now. :)
 
OP
OP
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
The 'cap' is just a ceiling (and a false ceiling at that with the way contracts are manipulated) ... at one point or another, that number has to translate into the Packers actually handing over cash to guys. The Packers have limited cash reserves in relation to the Snyders and the Jones' of the NFL...and a good portion of those cash reserves can't even be used for player acquisition. I'm just one of those guys who doesn't see a fattening 'cap' as a good thing for the Packers as an organization.

While the Packers don't have limited cash reserves compared to other teams they are in pretty good financial shape, making a total profit of nearly $85 million over the last two financial years (the next report will be interesting though after they handed out $62 million to Rodgers and Matthews in 2013).

The only reserves that the Packers can't use for player acquisitions are the ones they got out of the stock sale and they already used the money for the south end zone expansion.

In addition it seems the Packers cap hit (currently around $108 million for 2014) could be way higher than the amount of cash they actually have to pay for next season (currently $81 million).
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
Here’s a Press Gazette article detailing the Packers cap situation going into next season (which is only 10 days away). It says the cap is $133M, the Packers have about $108M on the books for salaries (including $2.67M in dead money), and they are carrying over $9.81M from this season. Having about $35M available is pretty impressive considering Rodgers and Matthews will count about $28M on the cap.
http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com...ughly-35-million-2014-cap-room?nclick_check=1
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top