1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
  2. Announcement is LIVE: Read the Forum Post

The problem of franchising Flynn.

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Raptorman, Jan 20, 2012.

  1. weeds

    weeds Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    2,115
    Ratings:
    +1,063
    Wanna bet?? ;)
     
  2. Bagadeez04

    Bagadeez04 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2010
    Messages:
    381
    Ratings:
    +133
    Some on here keep saying this...but the Packers only have their standard 7 draft picks (one per round) and an additional 7th rounder as a compensatory from the Jets.

    They do not have the ammo to significantly trade up in this year's draft unless they give up future picks...which I can't see Ted doing.

    This is going to be a pretty standard draft...who knows maybe he moves up in the mid-later rounds if he sees someone he likes. I'm thinking where we'll be picking in the 1st we're looking at ILB, CB, safety or an interior O lineman. The OLB's available at that point will have some question marks that might make it too much of a gamble.
     
  3. AmishMafia

    AmishMafia Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,529
    Ratings:
    +1,837
    The free agent compensatory picks have yet to be awarded. A website that is reasonably accurate has predicted 2 fourths (Jenkins and college) and 2 sevenths (Spitz and I forget who)
     
  4. FrankRizzo

    FrankRizzo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 2, 2010
    Messages:
    5,889
    Ratings:
    +1,679
    We will get an extra comp pick for Jenkins and for Colledge. Offensive linemen count too.

    Next year we will get another comp pick at the end of round 3 for Flynn, unless Teddy someone goes out and signs a FA or two of his own such as Adam Carriker or Manny Lawson, etc.

    So we will be getting a comp pick at the end of round 3.
     
  5. GreenBlood

    GreenBlood Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,705
    Ratings:
    +652
    You do that. You be pissed all you want. The fact is that if they franchised him, by March 13 they would have had to make cap space to accommodate his potential $14.4M contract WHETHER HE SIGNED THE TENDER OR NOT. That would involve cutting players or restructuring other contracts or whatever else to get under the cap. It simply would have been a stupid thing to do. So go ahead and be pissed. If you think through the risks involved, eventually you'll come to your senses.
     
  6. SpartaChris

    SpartaChris Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2007
    Messages:
    3,042
    Ratings:
    +965
    There are two circumstance fans need to realize that were at play with the decision not to use the tag on Matt Flynn:

    1) The Packers needed a firm trade partner before they'd be willing to slap the franchise tag on Matt Flynn. It's too risky otherwise, to pay a backup more guaranteed money than the starter is getting. Not to mention the level of cap space that still needed to be cleared first. Miami would have been the likely spot for Flynn except they're wanting to take a serious run at Peyton Manning. It would be way too risky for us to use the tag and then wait to see if they land Manning or not.

    2) According to PFT the tag numbers still aren't set in stone as they're tied to a percentage of the salary cap, which also still isn't known yet. Apparently the NFL and NFLPA are looking at ways to try and increase the salary cap. This means all those players who received tags could wind up making MORE guaranteed money than originally thought.

    Put those two factors together and you have a very risky proposition for a GM who's usually risk averse.
     
  7. AmishMafia

    AmishMafia Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,529
    Ratings:
    +1,837
    There are only 2 things in my mind possibly at play here:

    1. TT is straight-by-the-book and did not want to bend the rules by doing a tag and trade. This would mean that when this occured with Cory Williams, TT was sincere in keeping him, only later decided to trade to Cleveland. I believe this is the reason we did not tag Flynn. TT's comments that we don't do that I thought was entirely for show. We tag him to be our backup QB, but by golly, Seattle came along with an offer we couldn't refuse.

    2. Flynn is not as valuable as I thought. I figured he would bring a high 2nd and maybe a late first in value. I find it hard to believe that we were only offered a 3rd in 'wink wink nudge nudge' negotiations. I don't think TT takes the risk for only a 3rd round pick - especially when next year is going to be a deeper draft. This also may mean that TT is not going to sign any free agents. Anyone shocked at that statement?

    I doubt having salary cap space had much to do with the decision. Its a very likely bet they will redo Clifton's and Woodson's contracts - and perhaps even cut Clifton anyway.
     
  8. NelsonsLongCatch

    NelsonsLongCatch Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,216
    Ratings:
    +626
    I think people might be over-valuing the compensation for Jenkins and Colledge. I could easily see the Packers get something like 5th or 6th round pick for each guy.
     
  9. JoshuaRHuffman

    JoshuaRHuffman Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2010
    Messages:
    414
    Ratings:
    +60
    This has probably been mentioned or brought up... but:

    The Packers could've traded Matt Flynn. However, I don't believe that Flynn is under any obligation to sign past 2012 if he were traded. Nobody is trading a first-round or second-round pick for Flynn unless he agrees to a long-term contract with them immediately after the trade is completed.

    Basically, I'm saying that there's the risk with Flynn playing hardball by refusing to sign anything past that one-year contract that could pay him $14 million or more.

    We know that TT is a master with finding gems in lower rounds (or undrafted free agents). He probably didn't think the risk of a $14-million hit on the cap would've been worth it when he might (I've heard it's not guaranteed) get a third-round compensatory pick by just letting him leave.

    Or maybe there's some other technicality with franchise tags that I'm not aware of that forces him to sign past 2012...don't see how though.
     
  10. JoshuaRHuffman

    JoshuaRHuffman Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2010
    Messages:
    414
    Ratings:
    +60
    On another note, www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/finleyearly22212-140081103.html

    According to JSOnline back when Finley was re-signed, the Packers had $10 million to $13 million after they signed Finley. They could supposedly save more than $10 million by releasing Clifton and Driver. That would mean 20-23 million. So I'm not sure how much that available cap space had to deal with this decision. It sounds like they could've fit him under if they had a trade partner ready for March 13.
     
  11. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3,926
    Ratings:
    +3,017
    Like many of you, I’m disappointed they didn’t tag Flynn. I think it was worth the risk. But I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that Thompson and staff know more about it than I do. BTW, I agree it wasn't the cap space, that space was easily cleared but other points made no doubt played a part.

    Regarding trading up, in 2010 Thompson went into the draft with the Packers 7 picks and a compensation pick (#169) at the end of the 5th round. My guess is he saw Morgan Burnett falling well beyond were the Packers had him valued and he traded the Packers 3rd (#86) and 4th (#122) for the Eagles 3rd rounder (#71) to grab him. That wasn’t as sexy as the trade up for Matthews – just 15 spots in the third round – but IMO it gives us a clue about Thompson trading up in drafts. I don’t think Thompson goes into any draft “knowing” he’s going to trade up. It’s only as he and his staff watch how the Packers’ board corresponds to what is happening during the draft that he decides to explore a trade up. Burnett’s value and availability at that time in the draft were just too much to pass up so they went looking for a trade partner and found one a couple of spots ahead of the Bears. I don’t think the Matthews’ trade was planned ahead either. By that I mean they didn’t go into that draft determined to do “anything” to get Matthews. If Matthews would have been picked at 15 or 18 for example, acquiring him would have been too expensive on draft day.

    So I doubt we’ll see a dramatic trade-up ala Mathews but that would be my guess every draft. However, Thompson will have more ammunition in the upcoming draft than he did in 2010, so a trade up in the second or third round is certainly possible. But here’s my point: I don’t think Thompson thinks about this as many of us fans do. Even after the draft starts I’ll bet Thompson has no idea if a trade will happen or not, or even if he’ll attempt one. It all depends upon how the Packers’ board corresponds to what is happening during the draft. And of course it takes two to tango so we actually don’t know how many times Thompson has attempted to trade up. Or trade down, for that matter.
     
  12. Alex

    Alex Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2012
    Messages:
    407
    Ratings:
    +213
    Saving room to sign Mario Williams! (just day dreaming :))
     
  13. ExpatPacker

    ExpatPacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Messages:
    1,323
    Ratings:
    +519
    Williams price tag will probably be exorbitant, in the range of 10 mill per year. IMO it would be too much of a stretch for the Packers.

    The thing I am now wondering about is Wells. Word is the Packers want to pay him 5 mil a year. Wells and his agent want 7.5 mill a year. Again, IMO 7.5 mill for a multi-year contract for Wells is too much. If we were going to pay that kind of money for an OL, I'd much prefer to spend it on a multi-year contract for Carl Nicks, who is now available.

    Chris Myers is also 1 year younger and is generally considered the better OC over Wells. He is also a FA and the Packers have met with him. Possibly to send a message to Wells, or, who knows? They could let Wells go and sign Myers to a decent multi-year deal?
     
  14. 13 Times Champs

    13 Times Champs Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2011
    Messages:
    3,924
    Ratings:
    +1,379
    Yep. We aren't loaded with draft picks. Like I posted you can't trade any compensatory picks and they are coming at the end of round three or later. His second rounder comes at the end of round two and that also doesn't give him much ammo to move up. I think he's going to stand with the picks he has now. He may move around in the later rounds.
     
  15. 7thFloorRA

    7thFloorRA Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Messages:
    1,904
    Ratings:
    +838
    Ted is probably not going to sign anyone else's free agents and I am fine with that as it is how he generally rolls. He will draft a ton of guys but what is going to piss me off is when he marches the exact same crap out there on defense while the rookies get the entire year to "learn the system". I could see a new safety getting some reps but I fear it will be another season of Hawk, Walden, CJ Wilson and Neal.
     
  16. Rocky11

    Rocky11 Superbowl bound Pack

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2012
    Messages:
    231
    Ratings:
    +61
    PLEASE!!! Not another defensive year like last year. I am still hoarse from all the yelling at them through the TV.
     
  17. GreenBlood

    GreenBlood Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,705
    Ratings:
    +652
    First of all, you should chill a little. You seem to get pissed off a lot when the Packers don't do exactly what you want them to do. J/K

    But for real, there's no precedent for what you're assuming will happen. Raji, Matthews and Hawk all started as rookies. Shields was immediately put at nickle back as a rookie. Bishop contributed a great deal as a rookie. So did Zombo. So any claim that the Packers won't use the rookies they acquire and that the defense won't change is simply without merit.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. GreenBlood

    GreenBlood Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,705
    Ratings:
    +652
    Yeah, all those turnovers were simply intolerable!
     
  19. Rocky11

    Rocky11 Superbowl bound Pack

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2012
    Messages:
    231
    Ratings:
    +61
    GreenBlood. It is tough to "defend" last year's defense. The worst in the NFL or at least close. How many games would we have lost it we didn't have the turnovers. Offense A+ Defense D- IMO.
     
  20. ExpatPacker

    ExpatPacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Messages:
    1,323
    Ratings:
    +519
    The problem on the horizon now is that unless TT goes after a quality FA, that we're basically going to get the standard mantra that's been repeated since the loss on Jan 15: we need to work on fundamentals like blocking and tackling, that was our biggest problem...do that along with getting a few draft picks and the Packers will be all shiny and good again.

    I am one who begs to differ. It's more than just poor tackling and a couple of holes to fill in the draft. This defense will not see much improvement at all if there aren't some serious personnel changes happening plus off-season work, which many include a serious look at the defense strategy. I do not see where we have players in development who are ready to step in. DJ Smith? Neal? Maybe. Green at RB? maybe. And the draft? I hope we get some impact players. Will we get anyone who can make a real impact right away? Maybe.

    I'm concerned that there is too much false confidence between coach and GM out there.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  21. AmishMafia

    AmishMafia Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,529
    Ratings:
    +1,837
    Why? This is nearly the same defense, personnel wise, as the one in 2010 that was top 5.

    Here are a few things to keep in mind: Loss of Collins, injury to Neal, injury to Tramon, slow start for Shields; all contributed to our suck *** defense. These guys should all be back.

    Each year there are a few players who step to the plate and emerge as players for us. Two years ago was anyone really counting on Bishop to become a force? How about Burnett? He stepped in after being injured in 2010 to show a lot of promise at safety.

    If Neal stays healthy, if CJ Wilson steps up his game, if Collins comes back; if Zombo/Walden/Jones busts their *** this offseason and comes in and lights it up; etc. There are a bunch of pieces already here that may step up and take this defense back to 2010. Throw into the equation a draft pick or two and we maybe set. Fortunately, there should be BPA DE available at the end of the first and a good OLB at the 2nd round pick. But you know? If TT goes a completely different direction, I am more excited about the prospect he drafts. To ignore need and take a pretty good DE and instead go with a RB or something - well, TT must think very highly of that player. And TT has an amazing record on draft picks.

    And if your response is 'sign Mario Williams' also provide a list of all the players we can't resign because Mario just ate up $53M over the next 5 years. Just choose at least 2 from the list (Raji, CM3, Tramon, Rodgers, Jennings, Bulaga).
     
    • Like Like x 1
  22. 13 Times Champs

    13 Times Champs Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2011
    Messages:
    3,924
    Ratings:
    +1,379
    Is this the same defense as 2010? Jenkins is gone, Pickett is increasing in age and slowed noticeably last year, Collins has a serious neck injury and may never play again, and Woodson is aging and has slowed as well.

    Where is the improvement going to come from on the current roster? Hawk regresses with each snap. Zombo, Walden and Jones? Really? These guys have had ample opportunity and have failed. Walden got benched, Zombo is limited athletically and injuries may have taken a toll on him. Jones has also been injured and even McCarthy believes he can only be a part time answer at LB. Neal looks like a mistake and Wynn and Wilson are ordinary. I believe Burnett and Williams should play better next season but better play is needed in too many areas. This isn't 2010!!! More talent is needed on defense.

    I think Thompson needs to go outside his blueprint and acquire help via free agency this off season and it is critical that he strike paydirt in the draft to help our defense.
     
  23. AmishMafia

    AmishMafia Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,529
    Ratings:
    +1,837
    Was Jenkins good? Did we miss him? He was cut from the team after his 2nd year. Packers later resigned him and he stuck. Have you given up on Neal, Wilson and Wynn already? Remember they are also short one offseason due to the lockout. Hey, Jenkins improved and made the team in his 3rd year, why can't Neal, Wilson, or Wynn?

    The last thing we need to start doing is a major knee jerk reactionary moves.

    I think some are of the impression that winning a super bowl is as easy a simply making the decision. In reality it is a very difficult process of building talent, teamwork, and chemistry. Tossing money at big name free agents temporarily increases your talent but at the possible expense of chemistry and teamwork. Long term you lose talent because you can't sign your own emerging stars.

    But please, lets think about this. Packers are the most succeasful team over the last two years and the most talented. No this last season didn't end as we would have wanted, but let's not change the NFLs most successful front office's MO just as a knee jerk. There are 30 teams that would trade with us in a heart beat. And one team full of delusional lucky Giants fans.
     
  24. FrankRizzo

    FrankRizzo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 2, 2010
    Messages:
    5,889
    Ratings:
    +1,679
    Surely he knows more about those details than you do.
    But that doesn't mean he's right and you're wrong.
    Thompson makes errors too. Everyone does.

    This from the great Walter the other day:
    Sadly, I guess not.
     
  25. ExpatPacker

    ExpatPacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2011
    Messages:
    1,323
    Ratings:
    +519
    These are not knee-jerk reactions, they are legitimate concerns about a defense that was the worst in the NFL last year. If you think that someone in the Packers' coaching staff is going to wave his magic wand and *poof*, the defense will be back to its 2010 form, then good luck to you. 13times Champs had some very legitimate points about Woodson, Collins, and no...our roster right now to fill spots at ROLB and DE are not promising at all. We hope Williams and Shields will bounce back and play better next year, but to rely on that is a recipe for having the worst defense next year yet again.

    What I'm saying is that: TT and MM have to be pro-active in the personnel department . No, signing Mario Williams is not the answer. I agree about the restrictions his price-tag would put on us. But right now, a good off-season emphasizing fundamentals and the potential draft picks we have do not make for a significant upgrade to our defense...and our defense sucks.
     
    • Like Like x 2

Share This Page