25 hours to go...

H

HardRightEdge

Guest
...before free agency begins, with no report of Thompson having signed a single one of his own to date.

We await the flurry of last minute activity. Otherwise, they all test the free market.
 

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
15,893
Reaction score
3,797
I'm guessing at this point, they're all far enough apart and are going to test the market anyway. They aren't going to break the bank on any of them. I don't think the contract offered to Cobb would preclude them from bringing back Bulaga as well. So whether one signs before or after they can start negotiating, I don't think it's going to change the Packer's position.

and I think GB wants them back. It's not like they will offer Cobb 9 million a year now and he says no and finds out other teams are only offering 9.5 and decides to stay in GB they're going to take their offer back. Likewise, I don't think Bulaga or Cobb are going to find that all the offers are less than GB is willing to pay. They're wanted for a reason, and I think the offers will reflect that. So the odds that GB is offering 9M Cobb isn't going to see a market that is only offering him 7 and the Packers pull their back to match. I don't see that happening.

So at this point, I think the chances of us having any signed before things start on Saturday are pretty much zero. I"m sure GB has made their offers and I don't think there's much incentive for them to sign them before they can at least see what other teams are offering.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
...before free agency begins, with no report of Thompson having signed a single one of his own to date.

We await the flurry of last minute activity. Otherwise, they all test the free market.

I'm surprised the Packers haven't re-signed a single one of their impending free agents.

I'm guessing at this point, they're all far enough apart and are going to test the market anyway. They aren't going to break the bank on any of them. I don't think the contract offered to Cobb would preclude them from bringing back Bulaga as well. So whether one signs before or after they can start negotiating, I don't think it's going to change the Packer's position.

and I think GB wants them back. It's not like they will offer Cobb 9 million a year now and he says no and finds out other teams are only offering 9.5 and decides to stay in GB they're going to take their offer back. Likewise, I don't think Bulaga or Cobb are going to find that all the offers are less than GB is willing to pay. They're wanted for a reason, and I think the offers will reflect that. So the odds that GB is offering 9M Cobb isn't going to see a market that is only offering him 7 and the Packers pull their back to match. I don't see that happening.

So at this point, I think the chances of us having any signed before things start on Saturday are pretty much zero. I"m sure GB has made their offers and I don't think there's much incentive for them to sign them before they can at least see what other teams are offering.

It was exactly on this day a year ago when the Packers signed Shields to a four-year contract after all rumors indicated he would test the market. So while it's not a given something will get done today it's not impossible either.
 
OP
OP
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
I'm surprised the Packers haven't re-signed a single one of their impending free agents.

It was exactly on this day a year ago when the Packers signed Shields to a four-year contract after all rumors indicated he would test the market. So while it's not a given something will get done today it's not impossible either.
Here's the FA timeline from last season:

http://espn.go.com/blog/green-bay-p...st-year-for-the-packers?ex_cid=espnapi_public

Shields was the only guy one would consider a core player. This year, there's Cobb, Bulaga and the House/Williams choice. If Barclay is not tendered tomorrow, he'll be a FA also while Bulaga is testing the market.

After FA began, the key signings were Peppers, Guion and Flynn from the outside.
 

sschind

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
5,053
Reaction score
1,307
Saturday is not as much of a big deal as it used to be. It is important to the teams regarding their own players because players can negotiate with other teams and field offers but they can't sign with other teams until Tuesday. They can still sign with their old teams. I think this works in the Packers favor in general because of TTs approach to free agency. It gives his players a chance to see what they can get and let the Packers match it (if they choose to let them match it) but it does give them a few days to think it over and perhaps decide that for the extra million or two it isn't worth leaving Green Bay. In other words it prevents players from making rash decisions and going with the first big number that is thrown their way. Since Ted does not get involved in the first few days of furious activity and the big numbers he doesn't have to worry about wowing a player right off the bat and not letting them come to their senses.

I think this new rule makes it easier for teams to retain their own players. I'm not sure how long it has been in effect. I think last year was the same but that may have been the first year of it. Might have been part f the last CBA but I like it. It's kind of like a soft opening for a new business.
 
OP
OP
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
Saturday is not as much of a big deal as it used to be. It is important to the teams regarding their own players because players can negotiate with other teams and field offers but they can't sign with other teams until Tuesday. They can still sign with their old teams.
First of all, if the player is not signed by that date he's already rejected the Packers best offer. Once the door is opened to fielding any and all offers, the player can come back asking Thompson to match the best deal, something he might be disinclined to do.

That is a big deal when you're talking about core players.

While deadbeats like Raji, or second-line players like Neal or Starks, might not draw much attention and end up back in the fold for being known quantities in the system, core players will draw interest above Thompson's last offer.

Why do you think Thompson shelled out $9.75 mil per year to Shields on a projection that he could move from covering #2 WRs to #1's? Perhaps in retrospect he believes he overpaid for that projection. We'll see tomorrow evening.
 

NelsonsLongCatch

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 7, 2008
Messages
2,808
Reaction score
270
Location
Chi-Town
I don't understand the Cobb situation. I thought the entire idea behind not spending on free-agents and acquiring numerous draft picks each year was to be able to sign your homegrown players. Teams are salivating over Cobb. The Chicago media is starting "sign Randall Cobb" campaigns here in Chicago. If he hits the open market, the price is only going to increase.
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
If Barclay is not tendered tomorrow, he'll be a FA also while Bulaga is testing the market.

I don't expect Barclay to be tendered, he tore his ACL in August and probably won't be able to practice for another several months.
 

Mondio

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 20, 2014
Messages
15,893
Reaction score
3,797
I'm surprised the Packers haven't re-signed a single one of their impending free agents.



It was exactly on this day a year ago when the Packers signed Shields to a four-year contract after all rumors indicated he would test the market. So while it's not a given something will get done today it's not impossible either.
I see, I knew it was right before FA started, but wasn't sure if it was like this year and they had the negotiation period, but a few days before they could actually sign, or if he signed before that started. Heck, i can't even remember if they had the negotiation period last year :)
 
OP
OP
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
I see, I knew it was right before FA started, but wasn't sure if it was like this year and they had the negotiation period, but a few days before they could actually sign, or if he signed before that started. Heck, i can't even remember if they had the negotiation period last year :)
Yes, they had the negotiation period last year. And while Shields' signing was announced the day after negotiations opened up, you can bet that deal was agreed to in principle the day before...it might take a day or so to dot i's, cross t's, get the signatures, and prepare a press release.
 
OP
OP
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
I don't expect Barclay to be tendered, he tore his ACL in August and probably won't be able to practice for another several months.
Maybe.

The Packers are in a position to know the extent of the injury and Barclay's rehab progress. We are not so informed.

OTA's are not what they once were...short, non-contact, mostly classroom and meeting work. They're a lot less critical for vets than rookies and FAs from the outside. If he's projected to be back by the preseason, that's not a preparation issue.

I wouldn't even mention him except in the context of Bulaga's potential departure. There isn't a bench player behind Barclay who's shown even serviceable ability.

Marshall Newhouse is a FA. Does anybody really think it's OK to take a big step back to that kind of player?
 

adambr2

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 8, 2012
Messages
4,013
Reaction score
609
I don't understand the Cobb situation. I thought the entire idea behind not spending on free-agents and acquiring numerous draft picks each year was to be able to sign your homegrown players. Teams are salivating over Cobb. The Chicago media is starting "sign Randall Cobb" campaigns here in Chicago. If he hits the open market, the price is only going to increase.

I'd feel bad for Cobb that he has to waste away the prime years of his career away with Jay Cutler, but I wouldn't fear the Bears any more than now. They are a lot more than a Randall Cobb away from contending again.
 

sschind

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
5,053
Reaction score
1,307
First of all, if the player is not signed by that date he's already rejected the Packers best offer. Once the door is opened to fielding any and all offers, the player can come back asking Thompson to match the best deal, something he might be disinclined to do.

That is a big deal when you're talking about core players.

While deadbeats like Raji, or second-line players like Neal or Starks, might not draw much attention and end up back in the fold for being known quantities in the system, core players will draw interest above Thompson's last offer.

Why do you think Thompson shelled out $9.75 mil per year to Shields on a projection that he could move from covering #2 WRs to #1's? Perhaps in retrospect he believes he overpaid for that projection. We'll see tomorrow evening.


Everything is a big deal in free agency I just think the negotiating period makes it easier to sign your own guys or at least gives you second chance you might not get otherwise. It's true that not having the negotiating period might panic a GM into offering more on the chance that a player will jump at the first big offer but having the cooling off period allows the player to rethink offers he may have gotten from his team. If he has rejected their highest offer he may likely just go with the highest bidder if he can sign right away but if he has a couple of days to think about it he may realize the offer wasn't so bad or the market for his services was not as strong as he though or the GM might realize that the market for the player is stronger than he had thought and bump up his own offer. Either way teams are likely to get second chances to sign their own guys that they wouldn't have gotten if they players could sign anywhere right off the bat.

I would say that if a player tests the market, and does not resign with his team by the signing date most likely he is gone. That means he has gotten offers, has gone back to his original team and they said they wouldn't match or couldn't or wouldn't come close enough to make the player want to stay. To that end I would say Monday is a more important date than Saturday or Sunday. If you have a top FA and he isn't resigned by Monday he is likely as good as gone.
 
Last edited:

sschind

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
5,053
Reaction score
1,307
Yes, they had the negotiation period last year. And while Shields' signing was announced the day after negotiations opened up, you can bet that deal was agreed to in principle the day before...it might take a day or so to dot i's, cross t's, get the signatures, and prepare a press release.


If he signed after the negotiation period opened up he may have gotten the Packers offer and realized that no one was going to give him more after contacting several other teams and decided to go with the Packers offer.
 

NelsonsLongCatch

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 7, 2008
Messages
2,808
Reaction score
270
Location
Chi-Town
I'd feel bad for Cobb that he has to waste away the prime years of his career away with Jay Cutler, but I wouldn't fear the Bears any more than now. They are a lot more than a Randall Cobb away from contending again.

What you're saying is completely true. The addition of Randall Cobb does not make the Bears a Super Bowl contender. However, not only do I not want to see Cobb leave, it would hurt more to play against him twice a year for the next 4-5 years. Cobb doesn't turn 25 until August. He's one of the premier slot receivers in the game. He's a home-grown player. He's the type of player the Packers should be resigning.
 

easyk83

Cheesehead
Joined
Apr 20, 2013
Messages
2,783
Reaction score
280
...before free agency begins, with no report of Thompson having signed a single one of his own to date.

We await the flurry of last minute activity. Otherwise, they all test the free market.

I have mixed feelings on Cobb, he's a dynamic play maker with remarkable versatility. But he's somewhat limited as a receiver, his play on the sidelines can be hard to watch at times. He's more of an outstanding slot specialist.
 

7thFloorRA

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
2,573
Reaction score
331
Location
Grafton, WI
After thinking about it, weighing it back and forth and looking at some footage of guys in the draft I would rather have Phillip Dorsett at 4 years for a total of around 4-4.5 mil over Cobb for 4 more years at 45+ mil.
 

AKCheese

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2014
Messages
2,357
Reaction score
747
Raji's a deadbeat because he had season ending surgery? Wow, the bar stool GM/coaching/ trainer crowd is getting pretty harsh.
 
OP
OP
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
Raji's a deadbeat because he had season ending surgery? Wow, the bar stool GM/coaching/ trainer crowd is getting pretty harsh.
No, he's a deadbeat because if you put together an all-time top 10 list of lack-of-effort seasons, Raji's 2013 year would be on it.
 

AKCheese

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2014
Messages
2,357
Reaction score
747
Appa
No, he's a deadbeat because if you put together an all-time top 10 list of lack-of-effort seasons, Raji's 2013 year would be on it.
What an absolutely absurd statement. (And obviously the Packers did not agree). I just do not understand couch potatoes who sit around somehow feeling qualified to judge the effort of athletes who have reached the very pinnacle of their sport .... Wierd
 
D

Deleted member 6794

Guest
After thinking about it, weighing it back and forth and looking at some footage of guys in the draft I would rather have Phillip Dorsett at 4 years for a total of around 4-4.5 mil over Cobb for 4 more years at 45+ mil.

I really like Dorsett as well but there's no guarantee the Packers will be able to draft him.

Raji's a deadbeat because he had season ending surgery? Wow, the bar stool GM/coaching/ trainer crowd is getting pretty harsh.

What an absolutely absurd statement. (And obviously the Packers did not agree). I just do not understand couch potatoes who sit around somehow feeling qualified to judge the effort of athletes who have reached the very pinnacle of their sport .... Wierd

Raji has been absolutely terrible since the Packers won the Super Bowl. The Packers offered him a contract averaging $8 million a year with $20 million guaranteed during the 2013 season which he turned down. They quickly took it off the table when they realized he wasn't giving any effort on the field.

Thompson bringing him back on a one-year, prove it deal doesn't mean HRE wasn't right about Raji's lack of effort.
 

Half Empty

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
4,487
Reaction score
611
Appa

What an absolutely absurd statement. (And obviously the Packers did not agree). I just do not understand couch potatoes who sit around somehow feeling qualified to judge the effort of athletes who have reached the very pinnacle of their sport .... Wierd

Can we keep this one handy, just in case you ever post a comment about how a player messed up?

Are you defining the pinnacle of the sport as merely being in the NFL? Raji obviously qualifies. If you're talking about performing well once in the NFL, and especially in 2013, not so much.
 
OP
OP
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
Appa

What an absolutely absurd statement. (And obviously the Packers did not agree). I just do not understand couch potatoes who sit around somehow feeling qualified to judge the effort of athletes who have reached the very pinnacle of their sport .... Wierd
Every front office says the same thing...athletic big men are hard to find.

Raji is an athletic big man. He was 27 years old in the 2014 off season. He was durable and healthy. He should have been in prime position for a big second contract.

The Packers reportedly offered Raji an $8 mil per year contract prior to 2013, which he turned down. He ended up with a a 1 year, $4 million deal after he tested the market.

So if you don't like my opinion about Raji's 2014 season, perhaps you'd trust the opinion of 32 NFL front offices. He was simply motorless in 2013. No matter where you go or what you do, lack of effort over an entire year gets you a ********* mark.

What Raji got from the Packers was a shot-at-redemption contract, not a recognition of "pinnacle" performance as you put it. You should ask yourself, "redemption from what?" If you don't like my answer, come up with your own. And if you don't want to read the opinions of "couch potatoes" you've come to the wrong the place.
 

adambr2

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 8, 2012
Messages
4,013
Reaction score
609
Appa

What an absolutely absurd statement. (And obviously the Packers did not agree). I just do not understand couch potatoes who sit around somehow feeling qualified to judge the effort of athletes who have reached the very pinnacle of their sport .... Wierd

"Mathews is a disgrace to his Packer uniform"
"If he's not sucking it up at this point in his life he's not about to start"
"Plus I know he's a Packer and in some people's minds hence not open for criticism, but is Mathews becoming a borderline cheap shot artist?"

https://www.packerforum.com/threads/where-was-clay-matthews.58137/page-7

By the way, I agree that Clay missing the last few minutes of the NFC Championship was disappointing. I just find it ironic that you'll defend a guy who completely phoned it in and quit on his team for half a season after Rodgers went down and proceed to criticize anyone who "judges" him, but you just rip apart a guy who leaves far more effort out on the field than Raji ever has.
 

Members online

No members online now.
Top