Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Resources
Latest reviews
Search resources
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Let Greg Jennings walk...
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TJV" data-source="post: 440485" data-attributes="member: 4300"><p><span style="color: #000000"><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">Jaybadger82, I don’t see this issue as a “straw man” at all. That term is usually used when someone misinterprets another’s argument in order to contradict it. But the OP brought up this subject so it wasn’t in response to anyone. Not only that, but this is a relevant issue now since Jennings’ deal expires after this season. Thompson’s MO has been to extend players he wants to keep during the last year of their deal. So IMO Mozhino brought up a legit issue particularly as he posted he thinks the Packers should let Jennings walk, if he “is looking for a monster deal” and defined those parameters as “anything over $10M a season”. </span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="color: #000000"><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">Of course I don’t think Jennings should be extended at any price – and I’ll bet even those whose posts could be interpreted that way don’t mean at <em>any</em> price. While I agree huge money spent on WRs is often wasted I also think Jennings is very important to the Packers and the Packers rely on the quality of their WR corp as much or more than any other team. And I don’t worry about his character as far as sloughing off after signing a big deal. BTW, I don’t have that worry about Nelson either. I don’t think it was a coincidence the Packers passing offense wasn’t in sync vs. the Chiefs last season because Jennings missed that game. Yes, the problem of dropped passes cropped up again in that game but I do think it showed how important the attention defenses have to pay to Jennings is to Nelson’s success. That and the attention paid to Finley. </span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'"><span style="color: #000000">While I think Mozhino raises a relevant and timely issue I disagree about his $10M/season “limit”. My guess is that’s the ballpark of the deal they’ll get done. And as with all contracts, it’s the guaranteed money and not the salaries at the end of the deal that are most important. As far as I know, the only significant deals that are up this year are Jennings, Lang, and LS Goode. I’m a little surprised at McCarthy’s recent inference that both Clifton and Driver will be returning this year. I hope he meant after both re-do their deals because together they take up more than $10M of cap space this season. Jennings is much more important to the team than either IMO (just because of age) and I’d rather see both gone and a deal that uses a lot of this year’s cap space on Jennings and Lang and Goode. That would still leave future cap space available to extend Rodgers, Matthews, and Raji. Also, Jennings' current deal counts over $7M on the cap this year anyway so if they tear up that deal, they could add another $7M on this years' cap ($14M total cap space on Jennings in 2012) and still have $3M left over if Driver and Clifton are released. Those numbers are just an example, my point is they could load up Jennings deal with signing bonus money in 2012 lessening the cap hit in future years. Speaking of the cap Kitten, what did you mean by: “</span><span style="color: #141414">Of course this is taking into consideration that there is a cap, but you kind of have to go into this with the mentality that there is <u>eventually going to be a cap</u> and you need to plan for it now.” Of course there is a cap in place now and going forward. </span></span></p><p> </p><p><span style="color: #141414"><span style="font-family: 'Tahoma'">I think we’ll find out relatively early this season how Thompson views Jennings’ value to the team. If they don’t get a deal done in-season that doesn’t mean Jennings is gone as they could still use the tag or let him explore UFA and come back with an offer. But that’s unlikely IMO: If Thompson values Jennings, they’ll get a deal done before the season is over. </span></span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TJV, post: 440485, member: 4300"] [COLOR=#000000][FONT=Tahoma]Jaybadger82, I don’t see this issue as a “straw man” at all. That term is usually used when someone misinterprets another’s argument in order to contradict it. But the OP brought up this subject so it wasn’t in response to anyone. Not only that, but this is a relevant issue now since Jennings’ deal expires after this season. Thompson’s MO has been to extend players he wants to keep during the last year of their deal. So IMO Mozhino brought up a legit issue particularly as he posted he thinks the Packers should let Jennings walk, if he “is looking for a monster deal” and defined those parameters as “anything over $10M a season”. [/FONT][/COLOR] [COLOR=#000000][FONT=Tahoma]Of course I don’t think Jennings should be extended at any price – and I’ll bet even those whose posts could be interpreted that way don’t mean at [I]any[/I] price. While I agree huge money spent on WRs is often wasted I also think Jennings is very important to the Packers and the Packers rely on the quality of their WR corp as much or more than any other team. And I don’t worry about his character as far as sloughing off after signing a big deal. BTW, I don’t have that worry about Nelson either. I don’t think it was a coincidence the Packers passing offense wasn’t in sync vs. the Chiefs last season because Jennings missed that game. Yes, the problem of dropped passes cropped up again in that game but I do think it showed how important the attention defenses have to pay to Jennings is to Nelson’s success. That and the attention paid to Finley. [/FONT][/COLOR] [FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#000000]While I think Mozhino raises a relevant and timely issue I disagree about his $10M/season “limit”. My guess is that’s the ballpark of the deal they’ll get done. And as with all contracts, it’s the guaranteed money and not the salaries at the end of the deal that are most important. As far as I know, the only significant deals that are up this year are Jennings, Lang, and LS Goode. I’m a little surprised at McCarthy’s recent inference that both Clifton and Driver will be returning this year. I hope he meant after both re-do their deals because together they take up more than $10M of cap space this season. Jennings is much more important to the team than either IMO (just because of age) and I’d rather see both gone and a deal that uses a lot of this year’s cap space on Jennings and Lang and Goode. That would still leave future cap space available to extend Rodgers, Matthews, and Raji. Also, Jennings' current deal counts over $7M on the cap this year anyway so if they tear up that deal, they could add another $7M on this years' cap ($14M total cap space on Jennings in 2012) and still have $3M left over if Driver and Clifton are released. Those numbers are just an example, my point is they could load up Jennings deal with signing bonus money in 2012 lessening the cap hit in future years. Speaking of the cap Kitten, what did you mean by: “[/COLOR][COLOR=#141414]Of course this is taking into consideration that there is a cap, but you kind of have to go into this with the mentality that there is [U]eventually going to be a cap[/U] and you need to plan for it now.” Of course there is a cap in place now and going forward. [/COLOR][/FONT] [COLOR=#141414][FONT=Tahoma]I think we’ll find out relatively early this season how Thompson views Jennings’ value to the team. If they don’t get a deal done in-season that doesn’t mean Jennings is gone as they could still use the tag or let him explore UFA and come back with an offer. But that’s unlikely IMO: If Thompson values Jennings, they’ll get a deal done before the season is over. [/FONT][/COLOR] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
No members online now.
Latest posts
Why I Love The 2026-2027 Green Bay Packers
Latest: DoURant
Yesterday at 8:17 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
P
The Crew - 2026
Latest: Pugger
Yesterday at 4:38 PM
Milwaukee Brewers Forum
Christian Watson signs a 4 year 110m extension
Latest: milani
Yesterday at 3:46 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Josh Jacobs facing charges…
Latest: milani
Yesterday at 3:44 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Valuation of NFL Teams
Latest: milani
Yesterday at 3:40 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Let Greg Jennings walk...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
