Roster Questions

[Mondio]

it's not my preferred choice, but out of the 3, it's about the only maybe scenario I see one of them actually being traded.

 

[PackerDNA]

I remember reading a couple of years ago that Oakland was interested in trading for Cobb. Give Reggie a call.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Cobb's age definitely makes him the most "tradable" of the 3 for sure. Maybe there is a team out there that really wants Cobb and doesn't want to see him released and allow him 30 other options. What I ideally would like to see happen, if another team has a player (CB, OLB) in a similar situation, they and the Packers can sit down with the 2 players, work out a restructure and a trade, a win win. But then again, if Cobb would restructure his deal, I would want him to stay in GB where I think he is a valuable tool for AR.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Appears the Bears are taking their lumps on Mike Glennon and releasing him, at least we don't find ourselves in that situation very often in Green Bay.

 

[Poppa San]

The Packers at the moment, IMO are thin in WR depth

How many teams are NOT thin past there top 3 at any position?

 

[Veretax]

I really don't see any team, even Washington, trading for Jordy or Cobb. Why trade away something for a one year overpaying contract when you can hit the FA market and go after value and a long term deal? We see this every year from other teams, vet players not playing up to their contracts and they are cut, not traded. I doubt Cobb, Matthews and Nelson will be exceptions to this.

The redskins aren't always the smartest when it comes to acquiring talent though. (I say that as a fan who has watched many missteps over the years.)

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

How many teams are NOT thin past there top 3 at any position?

I am talking about "depth" beyond the starters, so don't confuse that with the quality of the group with the 3 starters included. As far as "any position", I was talking about WR, so saying "any position" is somewhat irrelevant, especially when you consider how many WR's are used during a game. While I am not overly familiar with the other 31 teams depth beyond their top 3, we are talking about possibly releasing 1-2 of our top 3 receivers, so yes, our depth beyond Adams, Nelson and Cobb, should be considered. If Nelson and/or Cobb are released because of being overpaid and no WR FA's were signed, I am comfortable at saying, the Packers would not just be thin at WR, they would look like one of the worst WR groups in the NFL. You would be talking about starting 1-2 of the following players:

1. Geronimo Allison: Career: 35 receptions 455 yds. 2 TD's
2. Trevor Davis: Career: 8 receptions 94 yds. 1 TD
3. Jeff Janis: Career: 17 receptions 200 yds. 1 TD
4. Michael Clark: 4 receptions 41 yds.

I am guessing that if you added up the career stats of those 4 players (64 receptions, 690 yds and 4 td's), you would be able to find quite a few teams that have a #2, #3 or a #4 WR that have not only equaled that in a career, but in one season.

Off the top of my head teams like the Patriots, Buccaneers, Falcons, Eagles, Saints, Steelers, Bengals and Jaguars have a deeper WR group and if you remove Cobb and/or Nelson, which is what this discussion was about, most teams in the NFL would probably have a much better and deeper group.

 

[PikeBadger]

I have no sympathy for any other team but GB. So I really don't care about the feelings of any other team once Cobb is shipped off and we get compensation back. Conversely, think how you should react to GB paying "a guy" coming off those stats $9.5 million!!! Also, more to your original point, the poster that opined so eloquently was probably me...me...me!!! But, seriously, I've been calling for Cobb to be traded ever since the season after he signed that deal. He was paid for past production, hasn't played up to expectations, and it just isn't a good deal.

That’s normally the way it goes when players first NFL contract gets close to expiration. We got way more production out of Cobb than his initial contract, which of course is what makes for really good teams when you have some guys overplaying their compensation. Eventually, you have to pay em or lose em. His 2nd contract wasn’t really out of line at the time of signing and Ball kept the guarantee $ to a very reasonable and Packer normal percentage of the entire package.

Ball always keeps that percentage under 33% except for Rodgers who was about 40%. We’re an outlier in that regard and its been a contributing factor in us being cap healthy for so long.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

That’s normally the way it goes when players first NFL contract gets close to expiration. We got way more production out of Cobb than his initial contract, which of course is what makes for really good teams when you have some guys overplaying their compensation. Eventually, you have to pay em or lose em. His 2nd contract wasn’t really out of line at the time of signing and Ball kept the guarantee $ to a very reasonable and Packer normal percentage of the entire package.

Ball always keeps that percentage under 33% except for Rodgers who was about 40%. We’re an outlier in that regard and its been a contributing factor in us being cap healthy for so long.

Spot on. I would also add, while it's "easy" to look at Cobb or Jordy's numbers and compare them to guys who have put up higher numbers and are paid less, but would those players come to Green Bay and put up the same numbers? The value of a player at many positions goes beyond their stats. Their familiarity with the playbook, their relationship on the field with their QB, etc. is something that is hard to measure. Are Cobb and Nelson overpaid right now? Yes, but it isn't as black and white as stats and dollars.

 

[Half Empty]

On the other hand, many contend that virtually any WR would put up better numbers catching what AR throws. If rosters were pure science...

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

On the other hand, many contend that virtually any WR would put up better numbers catching what AR throws. If rosters were pure science...

I think there is some truth to that, but I also see some truth to the notion that it takes time for AR to establish chemistry with his receivers. I still can't imagine starting the 2018 season with Adams, Allison and whoever at WR. Not to mention that beyond Allison, the cupboards are pretty bare. I don't remember a season that we actually got to the end of the year without losing at least 1 if not 2 WR's for games. I may sound like Chicken Little, but TT whiffed on most of his WR's since Adams was drafted and that is starting to show.

 

[Mondio]

since Adams they've mostly all been later round picks though. One thing we have not been deficient in over the past decade has been people to catch the ball. They haven't been able to invest that draft stock recently, and rightly so. They invested in 2 guys that have been injured and underperforming to a degree recently, but neither is at a point in their career where they "should be" done. Cobb should be in his absolute prime. Jordy is on the tail end, but still has a season or 2 left of really good play I think. He's smart and his QB knows what he's going to do out there and vice versa.

They realized the Jennings, Jones, Driver was ending and got Adams too, but some of the other pieces that were center pieces to this team had bad things happen. matthews and injury, Perry, Dline anchor retiring after getting lazy. Collins and Finley forced into retirement. OTher holes needed attention, WR seemed fine. Would have been nice had those other higher draft investments worked better, but for a long time, we haven't had to worry about pass catchers. Players are just like investments. You never know what's going to happen and sometimes you just have to live with it for a bit. It's time to invest some more in the position, I expect they will and won't be 5th round and later this year.

 

[Dantés]

People like to think that Rodgers would turn any receivers into gold, but that hasn't been the case. Just think back to the Falcons game last year when most of the starters were hurt... it didn't go well. Rodgers is elite, but he's not a one man team.

One other thing to consider is that WR's are some of the most volatile FA propositions. They often struggle, changing teams. The best course, in my opinion, is to keep one or both of Nelson/Cobb to pair with Adams and invest a top 100 pick in the position, perhaps as high as #14 in Calvin Ridley.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

People like to think that Rodgers would turn any receivers into gold, but that hasn't been the case. Just think back to the Falcons game last year when most of the starters were hurt... it didn't go well. Rodgers is elite, but he's not a one man team.

One other thing to consider is that WR's are some of the most volatile FA propositions. They often struggle, changing teams. The best course, in my opinion, is to keep one or both of Nelson/Cobb to pair with Adams and invest a top 100 pick in the position, perhaps as high as #14 in Calvin Ridley.

Agree strongly with this. I think both Cobb and Jordy (and their agents) probably agree as well, which will make renegotiating their contracts difficult. If I was a betting man, Jordy restructures and finishes his career in GB. Who the third guy is will come down to options in Free Agency and the draft and if none pan out, Cobb is still on the team.

 

[Dantés]

Agree strongly with this. I think both Cobb and Jordy (and their agents) probably agree as well, which will make renegotiating their contracts difficult. If I was a betting man, Jordy restructures and finishes his career in GB. Who the third guy is will come down to options in Free Agency and the draft and if none pan out, Cobb is still on the team.

Nelson has already implied that he would take a pay cut from what I've heard.

Cobb is more expendable, IMO, as a slot only option. Nelson, Adams, Montgomery, and hopefully a signed TE and rookie can play in the slot.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I'm kind of being tongue and cheek when I say this, but it is actually in the back of my mind. If the Packers decide to part ways with Cobb and or Jordy, will they "consult" with AR before that decision. My guess is that this should be and will be treated like Van Pelt and "no", but I can't help to wonder what AR's reaction of such a move(s) would be. I guess my response would be "Hey Aaron, if you want to kick in part of your soon to be new contract money, we will pay them."

 

[Mondio]

I'm kind of being tongue and cheek when I say this, but it is actually in the back of my mind. If the Packers decide to part ways with Cobb and or Jordy, will they "consult" with AR before that decision. My guess is that this should be and will be treated like Van Pelt and "no", but I can't help to wonder what AR's reaction of such a move(s) would be. I guess my response would be "Hey Aaron, if you want to kick in part of your soon to be new contract money, we will pay them."

My guess is they go by what they think the guy still has left, what their overall plan is to accomplish on offense and how each will be used, health considerations and guys on the roster than could fill in for plan B if any of them go down, plus after season evals of what they did last year and they'll make their decision how they want to proceed with roster spots and cap cash. I don't think Rodgers is privy to any of it, nor will he be. He has enough to worry about to get himself ready for another season.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

My guess is they go by what they think the guy still has left, what their overall plan is to accomplish on offense and how each will be used, health considerations and guys on the roster than could fill in for plan B if any of them go down, plus after season evals of what they did last year and they'll make their decision how they want to proceed with roster spots and cap cash. I don't think Rodgers is privy to any of it, nor will he be. He has enough to worry about to get himself ready for another season.

I agree with you that Rodgers won't be involved in the decision, but I can't help to wonder, after his reaction to Van Pelt, what his reaction will be if he loses 1 or 2 of his top 3 WR's before their contracts in Green Bay are up.

 

[PackerDNA]

As long as the replacements are better, I think he'll be fine.

 

[McKnowledge]

Isn't that how all non-incentive based contracts are determined?

It is easy to sit here and **** and moan about guys like Matthews and Cobb not living up to their contracts, but that is part of the NFL, guaranteed money and cap. Once those 2 players signed their names to their contract, they were Green Bay Packers for X years and Y dollars and had they produced beyond their paid amount, like #12 has, I doubt there would be much discussion, other than "how do we convince them to give us a hometeam discount and resign for less than market?"

I'm also getting tired of reading we should have cut Cobb/Matthews long ago, look at their contracts and the Packers roster and let me know how that makes sense 1 or 2 years ago. Could the Packers have traded either player 1 or 2 years ago? Probably not, guaranteed contracts are a b*tch.

There can be as many as 31 other teams interested in signing a player, if you aren't willing to take the downside risk of signing guys, the NFL probably isn't a game you want to be in.

Neither of us are in the game (NFL)...we're fans...spectators. Plus when I ****...I shake...and wash/dry my hands. Go to the doctor if you **** and moan. I cannot speak on CM3, he doesn't need the ball to produce. Has he lived up to the contract?...no; has CM3 offered production despite the high expectations...yes!!! Has Cobb delivered Tier 1/2 WR production based on his contract?...no!!! Furthermore, #12 is a NFL Franchise QB!!! Please don't make the argument that all players are equally important to a franchise; the QB runs the show!!! What else?....oh yea there is no such thing as a fully guaranteed NFL contract!!!!!! Salaries can be manipulated if an organization chooses to do so. There is always a market for a wide-out like Cobb, there are 31 other NFL teams, and you mean to tell me GB couldn't get a 3/4th rounder for Cobb?

 

[Half Empty]

He didn't say "fully" guaranteed, you added that. The contracts to which he referred, in the context of trading the players in previous years, were guaranteed to the extent that it would have been a b*tch trying to trade them, as I previously posted.

And, until/unless Cobb is gone this year, whether cut or traded, we won't know if there's a market for him in the 3-4 round range. I contend (as I previously posted) that, with his recent production and current contract, that there wouldn't be that market.

I know I said I was done, and I know that the best way to silence a troll is ignoring them, so I'm showing weakness by responding again. However, part of the reason is to offer a bet - if the Pack trades Cobb for at least a 4th round choice, I'll quit posting. If he leaves in some other fashion, you quit. If he stays with the team, we both can continue. Deal? Please message me if you accept, as I'll be using that wonderful Ignore feature as soon as I post this.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Neither of us are in the game (NFL)...we're fans...spectators. Plus when I ****...I shake...and wash/dry my hands. Go to the doctor if you **** and moan. I cannot speak on CM3, he doesn't need the ball to produce. Has he lived up to the contract?...no; has CM3 offered production despite the high expectations...yes!!! Has Cobb delivered Tier 1/2 WR production based on his contract?...no!!! Furthermore, #12 is a NFL Franchise QB!!! Please don't make the argument that all players are equally important to a franchise; the QB runs the show!!! What else?....oh yea there is no such thing as a fully guaranteed NFL contract!!!!!! Salaries can be manipulated if an organization chooses to do so. There is always a market for a wide-out like Cobb, there are 31 other NFL teams, and you mean to tell me GB couldn't get a 3/4th rounder for Cobb?

As a Packer fan, I can always "hope" that we would get value for guys like Matthews, Cobb or Nelson if they were traded, but the fact of the matter is you normally don't. Look around the league at what happens this time of year, teams are out right cutting overpaid players. The Texans had to bribe the Browns last year with a 2nd rd pick just to take Osweiler off their books. The "value" in releasing a player is strictly the $$ you gain back by doing so.

 

[PikeBadger]

As a Packer fan, I can always "hope" that we would get value for guys like Matthews, Cobb or Nelson if they were traded, but the fact of the matter is you normally don't. Look around the league at what happens this time of year, teams are out right cutting overpaid players. The Texans had to bribe the Browns last year with a 2nd rd pick just to take Osweiler off their books. The "value" in releasing a player is strictly the $$ you gain back by doing so.

Agree, at this time of year, a lot of teams are cleaning up their mistakes of the past.... and preparing to make more mistakes.