PackersRS
Cheesehead
so should I answer the question or would you rather let it go?
There you go! See? Sarcasm is a much better way to deal with these situations! ...
so should I answer the question or would you rather let it go?
No, dude, on our team DL is NOT A POSITION OF NEED. No matter how many times YOU try and say it is, the facts are it is not. We proved at least 5 times last season alone that Jenkins was expendable, winning all 5 games he sat out. That alone PROVES WE DIDN'T NEED HIM.
The Packers have three players who we know can play well in the base at NT or DE: Raji, Pickett, and Green. Having that kind of versatility helps depth-wise. Neal is slated to start, he certainly looks like the guy drafted to take Jenkins’ spot. The staff is said to be high on Wilson who only plays DE and who I thought did pretty well in his rookie season. IMO Raji, Neal and Wilson will be counted upon to generate pass rush on passing downs, although Green looked pretty good on one memorable play didn’t he? I assume that’s the five DL 13 Times Champs is talking about. There are five more players listed at DE and/or NT with Wynn and Guy probably leading that group but the other three weren’t brought in because they look good in pads. And we all know Thompson & staff’s ability to find diamonds in the rough.... The point is we are periously thin at DL in my opinion. We saw how those big guys go down with injuries last year. The depth on the DL needs to be addressed.
Jenkins is a good inside pass rusher, but this is a 3-4 defense. His skills at run stopping were nothing out of the ordinary. Run stopping is what is emphasized among the DL in a 3-4 while pass rushing is a secondary skill. He might feel more comfortable in a 4 man front like Philly runs. Then his primary job will be to rush the passer. In Green Bay, that is not his primary job. That is the job of the linebackers.
So he was good, yes. But expendable. There might be one or maybe two good years left in his tank. I don't know. He's only had one complete season out of the past 3 I believe. He wanted a long term contract for "security". Thompson was smart not to sink top 5 money over a long term contract into a guy who may break down again and is definitely getting old.
I agree with most of this. But Jenkins did provide a necessary pass rush from the DE position. As far as his being hurt that's true but so have the other guys like Pickett and Neal. Neal has shoulder problems going all the way back to Purdue. Injuries I hope do not occur but I think are inevitable. The contract Jenkins got with Philly was not top five money. From what I read it is essentially a 1 year deal for around $4 million. My point has always been that I am concerned about the DE line with what I consider 5 guys right now. The article I posted raised the same concerns.
side question, how are the eagles going to be able to keep everyone? I cant imagine they have room to sign Jackson to a new deal and give Vick a big contract. team is going to implode
The Eagles have cap credits from last year so they can actually spend over the cap. The Ronnie Brown deal is pretty cheap, about $1 million for 1 year.
The Eagles have cap credits from last year so they can actually spend over the cap. The Ronnie Brown deal is pretty cheap, about $1 million for 1 year.
side question, how are the eagles going to be able to keep everyone? I cant imagine they have room to sign Jackson to a new deal and give Vick a big contract. team is going to implode
As I understand it, every team has "cap credits" and they aren't from last year (which was an uncapped year), they are from the new CBA. I believe this is the way it works: Each team has up to a $3M veteran cap credit for 2011. Up to 3 players may be designated if they are currently under contract and they have 5 or more accrued seasons. A team may take up to $1M cap credit for each player. That cap savings has to be accounted for in future years and can be stretched over 4 years, from 2014-17. Also, in 2012 teams will have another $1.5M in credits under the same rules and will have to account for them over the same 4 year period. IOW a team could save $3M off of the cap this season on three players' contracts and then incur $750,000 in dead cap money for each season from 2014 through 2017.
Regarding the Eagles, I heard Andy Reid this morning on Mike & Mike. He was asked about Asante Samuel and it sounded to me like he will be traded if a team meets their asking price. Regarding having all three CBs on the rosters he used the phrase, "for now" more than once. I don't know what kind of cap relief that would provide the Eagles if that happens but I'd guess it would be significant. And I must admit I wouldn't mind seeing Samuel traded to a team like the Panthers.
I don't know exactly what credits he's talking about or how the Eagles got them. And I agree, I wouldn't mind seeing Asante moved to a bad team.caplannfl: Keep in mind the Eagles had cap credits from last season, so they had more money than most think.
Eagles have wiggle room under cap. I've read there could be a big increase in the salary cap for 2012 so I doubt they are in trouble then.
From CBA agreement:
"Beginning in 2012, salary cap to be set based on a combined share of ''all revenue,'' a new model differentiated by revenue source with no expense reductions. Players will receive 55 percent of national media revenue, 45 percent of NFL Ventures revenue and 40 percent of local club revenue".
Admitedly I don't know what that all means.
As of Tuesday, seven teams were over the cap | ProFootballTalk
Packers have like $15 mil and change that they have opened up in the cap. Im sure they will use it internally during the season.
Someone good is going to get released in the next 24 hours so teams can get under the cap. should be interesting.
Perhaps they might pick up a linebacker opposite Matthews? One can only hope! That would be about the perfect scenario.
As I was saying in the other thread, though we have cap room, we need that room to sign guys like Finley, Sitton and Nelson that will be FAs in 12, not to mention guys like Matthews, Rodgers, Jennings, Shields, that soon enough will have their contracts expiring.
The guy we bring in FA will have to be a better option than one of those guys, because it will probably mean giving up one of them in the future.
If you're refering to Tauscher and Barnett, well, before that we were close to the cap.As far as Rodgers goes I think we have a different definition of the word "soon".
As far as Matthews, the franchise tag might come in handy with him. He will want Ware money.
Let's not forget we will have two huge contracts coming off the books when some of these others are being added.
If you're refering to Tauscher and Barnett, well, before that we were close to the cap.
I don't think TT counts the cap the way it's normally done. He counts it with his long-term signed players. So though we are $15M under the cap, he considers the future contract of Sitton, Finley, Nelson, Matthews when making the math to know how much we are really under the cap.