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
You are the new GM what now
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="Sky King" data-source="post: 698205" data-attributes="member: 7171"><p>The "Addition by Subtraction" modus operandi is a non-sustainable concept for a D&D team. Not only are there existing holes to fill via the upcoming draft but creating additional holes would only serve to weaken the team further. And when the inevitable injuries occur during next season it could negatively affect even the strongest positions (at the time that camp closes) can get transformed into one of their weakest. We've seen that occur two years in a row. And we all have a better chance of winning the lottery than we would of having TT fill multiple holes on the roster through free-agency. Hence, the title of this thread I suppose.</p><p></p><p>Regardless of who is the GM it's the middle and bottom of this roster that perpetually need to be strengthened. I don't see how weakening the top of the roster makes the middle and bottom of the roster somehow get stronger. Allison, for example, may turn-out to be the next big thing at receiver, and he may very well make Cobb or somebody else become expendable some day. But lofty expectations for Adams last season didn't quite pan out as had been hoped regardless of the reason(s). It took an additional full season for him to begin reaching the potential that some had predicted for him. </p><p></p><p>Paying $12 million for one established player on the roster may be better than paying $6 million for no player whatsoever. And let's not forget to subtract the replacement player's salary from the potential $6 million in cap savings, so the savings would not be $6 million. For a likely middling to bottom of the roster type of player it will actually cost the Packers (gross) $6 million of dead cap liability plus the salary of the guy who takes his place on the roster. That looks like a very bad ROI to me. Paying more for less is bad business.</p><p></p><p>If Cobb is amenable to renegotiating his contract then it might actually help the cap without also reducing quality depth on the roster. If he's not amenable then maybe they'll all just need to go about their business for at least one more season under the terms of that mutually agreed upon contract.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Sky King, post: 698205, member: 7171"] The "Addition by Subtraction" modus operandi is a non-sustainable concept for a D&D team. Not only are there existing holes to fill via the upcoming draft but creating additional holes would only serve to weaken the team further. And when the inevitable injuries occur during next season it could negatively affect even the strongest positions (at the time that camp closes) can get transformed into one of their weakest. We've seen that occur two years in a row. And we all have a better chance of winning the lottery than we would of having TT fill multiple holes on the roster through free-agency. Hence, the title of this thread I suppose. Regardless of who is the GM it's the middle and bottom of this roster that perpetually need to be strengthened. I don't see how weakening the top of the roster makes the middle and bottom of the roster somehow get stronger. Allison, for example, may turn-out to be the next big thing at receiver, and he may very well make Cobb or somebody else become expendable some day. But lofty expectations for Adams last season didn't quite pan out as had been hoped regardless of the reason(s). It took an additional full season for him to begin reaching the potential that some had predicted for him. Paying $12 million for one established player on the roster may be better than paying $6 million for no player whatsoever. And let's not forget to subtract the replacement player's salary from the potential $6 million in cap savings, so the savings would not be $6 million. For a likely middling to bottom of the roster type of player it will actually cost the Packers (gross) $6 million of dead cap liability plus the salary of the guy who takes his place on the roster. That looks like a very bad ROI to me. Paying more for less is bad business. If Cobb is amenable to renegotiating his contract then it might actually help the cap without also reducing quality depth on the roster. If he's not amenable then maybe they'll all just need to go about their business for at least one more season under the terms of that mutually agreed upon contract. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
shockerx
Calebs Revenge
DABIGZ
SudsMcBucky
Latest posts
2025 NFL Schedule Release
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
22 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
2025 Roster - Semi Live Thread
Latest: Pokerbrat2000
25 minutes ago
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
H
Is it time?
Latest: Heyjoe4
Today at 8:44 AM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
NFC North Predictions
Latest: Calebs Revenge
Yesterday at 11:50 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Mike McCarthy Gone
Latest: Poppa San
Yesterday at 11:39 PM
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
Forums
Open Football Discussion
Green Bay Packers Fan Forum
You are the new GM what now
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
