Defense Wins Championships.

Ace

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
94
Location
Milwaukee
The Packers look to the future enough so that they don't have to get into the situation where they push more cap into future years.

All Dallas does is make the contract different so the cap hit is greater in a future season, just putting off the problem for another year. Eventually, it will catch up and they will be in a cap mess for a few years. TT is smart enough to not put the team in that situation.

You're absolutely right and I'm not suggesting at all that they will have to restructure in the sense that Dallas does. They may have to do some minor shuffling of the big deals though to be able to sign a guy or 2. There's nothing wrong with that and maybe they won't have to.
 

Carl

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 6, 2013
Messages
3,073
Reaction score
272
Location
Madison, Wisconsin
You're absolutely right and I'm not suggesting at all that they will have to restructure in the sense that Dallas does. They may have to do some minor shuffling of the big deals though to be able to sign a guy or 2. There's nothing wrong with that and maybe they won't have to.

Okay. Gotcha. Maybe some minor shuffling. We can be glad Jerry Jones isn't in charge in Green Bay.
 

Ace

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
94
Location
Milwaukee
Just curious why we "have" to re-sign both Nelson and Cobb? Rodgers is a very good QB and very good QBs don't need amazing wide receivers (quick, name two good WRs that Brady had during his Super Bowl runs). A great QB can make an entire offense better. There isn't a comparable position on defense; you have to pay more guys on defense than you do on offense when you have a great QB (eg, on defense you can't get away with one great defensive end and mediocre talent elsewhere while a great QB can do very well with mediocre talent).

You "have" to re-sign them because you don't let players of their ability walk and join other teams thats why. Yes Tom Brady didn't have great weapons during their SB runs, and yes very good QB's don't need amazing WR's, but given the option I'll bet any QB would love to retain their top 2 WR options when they are playmakers like Jordy and Cobb. Ron Wolf always said his biggest regret was not getting Brett more weapons on offense.
 

NOMOFO

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
1,105
Reaction score
76
Just curious why we "have" to re-sign both Nelson and Cobb? Rodgers is a very good QB and very good QBs don't need amazing wide receivers (quick, name two good WRs that Brady had during his Super Bowl runs). A great QB can make an entire offense better. There isn't a comparable position on defense; you have to pay more guys on defense than you do on offense when you have a great QB (eg, on defense you can't get away with one great defensive end and mediocre talent elsewhere while a great QB can do very well with mediocre talent).
I get the point and I don't totally disagree... but Jordy is special. He makes plays most guys in this league don't.
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
5,766
Reaction score
896
I get the point and I don't totally disagree... but Jordy is special. He makes plays most guys in this league don't.

That's why I used Cobb in my example. I think I'd let Cobb walk rather than have two highly paid WRs on the roster and I just think Nelson is the more useful WR. Cobb can do more varied, 'neat' things than Nelson but I think Nelson is the better traditional WR.
 

Sunshinepacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Messages
5,766
Reaction score
896
You "have" to re-sign them because you don't let players of their ability walk and join other teams thats why. Yes Tom Brady didn't have great weapons during their SB runs, and yes very good QB's don't need amazing WR's, but given the option I'll bet any QB would love to retain their top 2 WR options when they are playmakers like Jordy and Cobb. Ron Wolf always said his biggest regret was not getting Brett more weapons on offense.

I think most QBs, if given the choice between two great WRs and a porous defense or one great WR and a solid defense would probably chose the second option since the first formula is great for fantasy but terrible for titles. Keep in mind that keeping one of the two isn't exactly depriving Rodgers of weapons PLUS this team seems like it will focus quite a bit more on the run and that means less emphasis on the passing game.
 

Ace

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 28, 2014
Messages
1,297
Reaction score
94
Location
Milwaukee
I think most QBs, if given the choice between two great WRs and a porous defense or one great WR and a solid defense would probably chose the second option since the first formula is great for fantasy but terrible for titles. Keep in mind that keeping one of the two isn't exactly depriving Rodgers of weapons PLUS this team seems like it will focus quite a bit more on the run and that means less emphasis on the passing game.

No, you're right and this is absolutely true. But this team is in a position to keep both and still fix the D with some maneuvering.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
The Packers look to the future enough so that they don't have to get into the situation where they push more cap into future years.

All Dallas does is make the contract different so the cap hit is greater in a future season, just putting off the problem for another year. Eventually, it will catch up and they will be in a cap mess for a few years. TT is smart enough to not put the team in that situation.

Hmmm, let´s take a look at Aaron´s and Clay´s cap numbers: Rodgers cap number increases from $12 million in 2013 to $21.1 million in 2019, increasing by $5.9 million this season. Matthews had a cap hit of $6.71 million last season, that will increase steadily to $15.2 million in 2017.

That´s just the way contracts are structured in the NFL.
 

Carl

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 6, 2013
Messages
3,073
Reaction score
272
Location
Madison, Wisconsin
Hmmm, let´s take a look at Aaron´s and Clay´s cap numbers: Rodgers cap number increases from $12 million in 2013 to $21.1 million in 2019, increasing by $5.9 million this season. Matthews had a cap hit of $6.71 million last season, that will increase steadily to $15.2 million in 2017.

That´s just the way contracts are structured in the NFL.

Yes, Rodgers contract increases a lot this season, but then only goes up by 3.2 million over the next five years. The Packers can handle that increase no problem.

With Clay, his contract goes back down 3.8 million for the last year of his deal so it ends up a 4.69 million increase over the contract, which is also manageable.

Besides, both players could be worth every penny, especially Rodgers, and the Packers could have little leverage in a restructure.

The cap itself will also increase by then. Just because they increase, doesn't mean a restructure is going to happen.





Enviado desde mi iPhone con Tapatalk
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
Yes, Rodgers contract increases a lot this season, but then only goes up by 3.2 million over the next five years. The Packers can handle that increase no problem.

With Clay, his contract goes back down 3.8 million for the last year of his deal so it ends up a 4.69 million increase over the contract, which is also manageable.

Besides, both players could be worth every penny, especially Rodgers, and the Packers could have little leverage in a restructure.

The cap itself will also increase by then. Just because they increase, doesn't mean a restructure is going to happen.

If both players stay healthy over the course of the contract it won´t be a problem. Matthews hasn´t shown that though so far.

I think it depends on the success the Packers will have over the next few seasons if Rodgers would agree to restructure his contract. If they don´t win another Super Bowl I could see him accepting a pay cut to bring in more talent.
 

Carl

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 6, 2013
Messages
3,073
Reaction score
272
Location
Madison, Wisconsin
If both players stay healthy over the course of the contract it won´t be a problem. Matthews hasn´t shown that though so far.

I think it depends on the success the Packers will have over the next few seasons if Rodgers would agree to restructure his contract. If they don´t win another Super Bowl I could see him accepting a pay cut to bring in more talent.

The bonuses steadily go down too, which could help the Packers if they decide to release one of them near the end of the contracts. There would be no dead money by releasing Rodgers in the final two years or Matthews in the final year.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top