Tramon Williams holding out?

[packers11]

www.rotoworld.com

Packers CB Tramon Williams may not sign his tender as an exclusive rights free agent in hopes of getting a new contract.

It wouldn't technically be a holdout, since Williams would be unsigned. The promising future starter could follow the path blazed by Ryan Grant, who successfully waited for an extension last year after one accrued year in the league. Look for this one to drag on.

Source: Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel

[SnakeLH2006]

www.rotoworld.com

Packers CB Tramon Williams may not sign his tender as an exclusive rights free agent in hopes of getting a new contract.

It wouldn't technically be a holdout, since Williams would be unsigned. The promising future starter could follow the path blazed by Ryan Grant, who successfully waited for an extension last year after one accrued year in the league. Look for this one to drag on.

Source: Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel

Snakes a huge TWill fan. Big fan. But let's hope he doesn't follow the underwhelming path of Grant that far from 2008.

TWill is a pretty good player. Few will dispute that, and Snake feels he'll be a good starting CB if Al falls off or if Wood moves to safety in 2009 or thereafter...it will happen.

Guy's a good ass CB and if not for Al's "resurgence" AFTER his injury, I'd be pushing him for a CB starting slot. Love the guy though....great speed, enthusiasm, instincts for the ball.

Hopefully TT realizes that too, and gets him a long term deal for cheap.

[Lurker64]

Man, giving in to Grant last year is just going to keep biting us in the ass, isn't it?

That was probably Thompson's biggest mistake so far.

[SnakeLH2006]

Man, giving in to Grant last year is just going to keep biting us in the ass, isn't it?

That was probably Thompson's biggest mistake so far.

Agreed. A few on here give stats defending/"showing" Grant was a "good" RB last year, but Snake's been off that train for...............EVER since his incredible 2007 season.

True, Grant had a bunch of yards last year...stats will show he got a bit better ypc over the past few games....but stats don't show the dude had no burst/game breaker ability like in 2007, and couldn't get a first down on 3rd when we needed it (part of the reason we went from 13-3 to 6-10) when he would/could take it to the house. He's pedestrian at best and not the answer at RB as Snake has been rallying that for the past season. I could go on and on, but get rid of the guy (or least to the bench) as I wasn't happy with/nor to this day with his "deal".

TWill on the other hand, is a player on the rise. Great physical (and looks to be gamechanging skills) when given the opportunity. Wood and Al are great, but could always use a spare CB. Lock him up TT (not in the basement though... :cry: :shock: :lol: ).

[gbpackfan]

Tramon Williams has every right to hold out for a new contract. He isn't signed and has no current deal with the Packers. But the Packers have every right to tell him to f**k off. They'll probably work something out but Williams shouldn't expect a blockbuster deal. He hasn't earned it yet. Let Blackman step up.

And another thing, if Williams holds out too long, he is going to have some serious trouble seeing the field this season with Capers installing a new D.

[wist43]

Williams has improved every year, but I'd still be nervous with him as a starter.

That said, he's earning himself a shot at a starting spot, so based on that I'd give him a modest contract, and if he doesn't cut it as a starter, you've still got a good nickel - assuming his attitude didn't implode at losing his starting spot.

[DonHutson]

The best he can realistically hope for this offseason is to get paid like a good nickel back. If I were him I'd take the tender, let Al Harris get a year older, then try to break the bank and get paid like a starter next year.

He'd wait a year to get paid, but he'd probably make double per year what he'd get now. He'd come out ahead in the long run, as long as he stays healthy and keeps producing.

[Patler]

True, Grant had a bunch of yards last year...stats will show he got a bit better ypc over the past few games....but stats don't show the dude had no burst/game breaker ability like in 2007, and couldn't get a first down on 3rd when we needed it (part of the reason we went from 13-3 to 6-10) when he would/could take it to the house.

That is exactly the type of thing that stats would show. You are making the argument, so support it. What was his success on 3rd down carries? I am interested because:

1. I would like to know a source for that type of breakdown :lol:
2. I'm not sure you will find that Grant had many of those opportunities. Quite often Jackson was in the game on 3rd down, not Grant.

Mostly I am interested because of reason #1. I NEED a quick source for detailed statistical breakdowns like that!! :lol: :lol:

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

If you think about it though is he not more valuable than Propping, or Chillar, or some other nobody making millions. I would give him a small deal (very small), maybe something like 3 year 5 million just so he's making some money but so he still has to prove he's capable of one day starting.

But I would sign Jennings, Collins, and others first who are also under paid and much more valuable.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Williams has improved every year, but I'd still be nervous with him as a starter.

Any player that never started before would be cause for nervousness. But every starter was once a first-year starter.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Man, giving in to Grant last year is just going to keep biting us in the ass, isn't it?

That was probably Thompson's biggest mistake so far.

True only in hindsight. Grant had a disappointing 2008 season coming off promising 2007. But I'm not sure what TT was supposed to do, Grant held the cards. Jackson looked like doggy-doo in 2007.

[Patler]

Man, giving in to Grant last year is just going to keep biting us in the ass, isn't it?

That was probably Thompson's biggest mistake so far.

Agreed. A few on here give stats defending/"showing" Grant was a "good" RB last year, but Snake's been off that train for...............EVER since his incredible 2007 season.


What was so bad about Grant's contract? You guys write as if he got some blockbuster deal. He didn't. I won't even argue about his performance last season. just the contract itself. He got a nice paying contract, but one that is also team friendly.

- It's not a huge contract. Grant had just the 13th highest cap figure at his position.
- Much of the value is incentive based. If he gets the yards he gets the money.
- Grant is now under contract through the season of his 29th birthday, the prime RB years.
- There is minimal long term effect. If he doesn't perform he can be released with minimal cap impact.

In the overall scheme of managing a salary cap long term, this was not a bad deal for the Packers. It tied up a promising player at an affordable price through the most significant years of his career, without significant detrimental salary cap implications if he did not perform. All in all, a very reasonable approach for dealing with Grant.

[RashanGary]

I'd rather pay Williams either half way through this season (after we see him play zone) or after this season during his restricted year.

[RashanGary]

I agree that everything was reasonable and team friendly except that they didn't have to do anything for three years. Still, Grant had a very unusual situation and I know fair is kind of a childish concept at times, but I think the team went out of their way to do something fair for a guy that was losing to the system because of the way he went in.

I was against it at the time. The cut throat thing would have been to say retire or play for the price. The reasonable thing was to consider how bad his situation was and how unusual it was, then to work with him while getting a player/contract that under any other circumstance would have been considered great. Look at these contracts signed this week. If we throw Grants out there, I think we'd have the best contract signed this whole UFA period. We complain because we didn't have to do it, but Grant's situation was very unusual. I think the Packers did the right thing, to the player, to make an exception and it helped them at the same time. I'd say the Packers flexed more than Grant. The Packers had all the leverage but they didn't treat him that way.

Tramon is a young guy (not fighting the same unusual up hill battle that Grant was, being in his prime age at his position but only in his first accrued season as an undrafted player). I wouldn't make the same exception (although I do like Tramon better). I'd tell him to play this year and if he plays as well in zone as he does in man, lock him up to a starters caliber contract. He's a 24 year old kid, he's going into his restricted year next year. He's going to make money. Grant could have gotten completely screwed.

[Patler]

I agree that everything was reasonable and team friendly except that they didn't have to do anything for three years. Still, Grant had a very unusual situation and I know fair is kind of a childish concept at times, but I think the team went out of their way to do something fair for a guy that was losing to the system because of the way he went in.

I was against it at the time. The cut throat thing would have been to say retire or play for the price. The reasonable thing was to consider how bad his situation was and how unusual it was, then to work with him while getting a player/contract that under any other circumstance would have been considered great. Look at these contracts signed this week. If we throw Grants out there, I think we'd have the best contract signed this whole UFA period. We complain because we didn't have to do it, but Grant's situation was very unusual. I think the Packers did the right thing, to the player, to make an exception.

Tramon is a young guy (not fighting the same unusual up hill battle that Grant was, being in his prime age at his position but only in his first accrued season). I wouldn't make the same exception (although I do like Tramon better). I'd tell him to play this year and if he plays as well in zone as he does in man, lock him up to a starters caliber contract.

The Packers have made several contract decisions recently just because it was the right thing to do. Tauscher and I think Harris were given contract increases without added years just because the Packers determined they were underpaid for their positions and performance. Each could have been forced to play for a lesser contract.

Williams certainly will not have the same leverage that Grant did last off season. Williams could have from moderate negotiating leverage to virtually no leverage at all, depending on what the Packers REALLY think about Lee's potential in the new defense and what they do in the draft.

[sheepshead]

I wouldnt look at this kid one bit. I think he can be replaced easily. Sorry, show us something this year and we'll think about it. No way on giving him more money.

[bobblehead]

I find it humorous how guys want teams to be fair when they are in tough positions but then guys like Plaxico have a good post season and want to hold out and fuck up team chemistry and cause a distraction 2 years into a 5 year deal or whatever it was.

I warned at the time about this and I think I was the most outspoken person on telling grant to F off and wait til halfway through last season. I personally think that contract was bullshit, especially after his wonderful play in the '07 playoffs. TT offered him a decent deal for a guy with no leverage and his agent ran right to the press and used the BF situation to get more. We didn't buy out ONE SINGLE year of Grants FA years and we gave him something like 5+ million right out of the gates for his 6 good games in '07...and the best 6 game run of his life.

Sorry if I'm a contrarian but I loved TWill last season and I hope for the best, but I would offer him a 3 year 6 million dollar deal and if he didn't sign it I would tell him to F off too. He has no leverage and he has what....5 starts to his resume? And before anyone says that sounds fair believe me, he is looking for a lot more than that.

edit: For all you guys who like to use the JAG term to describe so many guys remember this....TWill is a guy who didn't get drafted and lost a training camp battle to jarret bush in '07....at this point he is JAG who has shown a few flashes...he deserves shit.

[sheepshead]

I think he gave up too many big plays, sorry, I just dont see him as the long term answer.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

I think he gave up too many big plays, sorry, I just dont see him as the long term answer.

Let’s not forget how shitty the d-line was last year though. It’s hard to cover for 20 seconds. Also, keep in mind that the guy plays behind two pro bowl corners, who do you think the QB is going to target when he sees Woodson, Harris, and Williams?

The guy is improving every year and I think if he keeps getting better he can easily be a starter one day. Give the guy 1-2 million over the next couple years and force him to get even better if he wants a big pay day in the future.

[Patler]

edit: For all you guys who like to use the JAG term to describe so many guys remember this....TWill is a guy who didn't get drafted and lost a training camp battle to jarret bush in '07....at this point he is JAG who has shown a few flashes...he deserves shit.

I don't believe in taking extreme advantage of players just because you can. Like it or not, it causes disharmony, hurt feelings and complaining. A good locker room is important. But that doesn't mean the team has to sell out to the players either. It is sort of like dealing with your kids. While you do have power and authority over them, you must use it with discretion.

Grant last year and Williams this year are more than JAGs. Herron, Wynn, Bush, perhaps Blackmon as a cornerback are JAGs. Grant and Williams performed better than that. To me, with the proof provided from actual NFL performances, they should be considered overlooked or slow to blossom talent. They should be compared to equivalently perceived draft choices now. You should ask yourself where they would be drafted and what they would receive for a contract if they were drafted this year. That would fairly compensate them for their potential demonstrated by minimal NFL performances.

Grant got much more then this, but my position following 2007 was that Grant was as good of a prospect as Jackson was when Jackson was drafted, so Grant should have received a three year contract which coupled with his 2007 contract, would have paid him about the same as Jackson got in his rookie contract. You could draw a similar parallel between Williams and Lee, although I think Williams performance in 2008 makes him a better prospect now than Lee was when he was drafted. I think there is justification for an approach like that, with fairness to the team and the player.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I wouldnt look at this kid one bit. I think he can be replaced easily. Sorry, show us something this year and we'll think about it. No way on giving him more money.

Do you realize how many young CB-wannabees the packers cycle through before hitting on one as good as TW?

maybe he is just mediocre now, but who knows where he can go.

[pbmax]

We didn't buy out ONE SINGLE year of Grants FA years and we gave him something like 5+ million right out of the gates for his 6 good games in '07...and the best 6 game run of his life.
Grant is 26 and will by 27 at the end of the '09 season. Under the previous CBAs you get to UFA status after five years. His first year of UFA likely will be played at an age of 31. How many years of Grant do you want after age 30?

There is leverage and there is no leverage. Williams is much closer to no leverage. Grant was the only competent back on the roster as far as anyone could tell in the 08 offseason. He almost HAD to be the starter. His contract guaranteed him nothing except for his first year and the Packer's can break free of it after year two with little to no cap consequence (the hit even now is manageable).

Williams is the third CB, and while the nickel back might play 60% of the snaps, there are two more talented players in front of him and talent behind him. There are also veteran CBs falling off teams left and right. He has to learn a new defense. If Williams holds out, he is asking to be replaced.

[Waldo]

I think he gave up too many big plays, sorry, I just dont see him as the long term answer.

He also made a lot of plays.

He ranked #20 in the NFL in passes broken up. With Wood and Nick ahead of him, only 17 other teams in the NFL had any DB break up more passes than him.

He ranked #6 in the NFL in interceptions, by far the most of any nickel CB.

He ranked #17 in the NFL (tied with a lot of guys) in FF's

Overall he ranked #7 in the NFL in forced turnovers.

The two biggest mistakes with the Grant situation were the timing of it (they should have aggressively addressed the problem much earlier), and the amount (fault Grant here more then the team, were his demands lowered it would have been much smoother and fan sentiment not all up in arms).

I was all for a 2+3 optioned contract with Grant, paying him ~3M/yr for the first two years (3M SB, 2M/yr salary), then a year 3 option bonus of 5M and salaries of 4M thereafter. Cap structure would be 2.6M, 2.6M, 6.2M, 6.2M, 6.2M. He'd get 6M up front the first year, have a cheap year of 2M, then 9M the 3rd yr, and 4M each yr thereafter. I'm not sure why they didn't go this route, it had been done before in situations like this, with the "prove it" time built into the contract and the big payday for the player to play for.

That's exactly what I'm advocating for Tramon as well. I've met and talked to his agent, he seems like a real good guy. If TT grabs the bull by the horns this can go much smoother than it did with Grant. Especially with a different structured prove-it contract. It is already written in stone that Harris is not a starter in '10 by contract, his contract drops from 5.5M this year to 2M next year. So for Williams, offer a 2+3 with year 2 incentive bonus.

Same as I advocated with Grant, first two years of the deal, use a base salary of about 2M. Were he a RFA he likely would get a 1st tender, which is a base salary of 2M. Plus a modest signing bonus, roughly 3M or so, then boost the salaries to 4M the 3rd year and pay an option bonus of 5M. But year 2 offer a roster bonus incentive, 125K/gm that he starts, 2M if he starts each game. This makes it a 5yr, 26M deal max value. Structured with two prove it steps. The total cap hit per year assuming he earns every penny of the roster bonuses and the team picks up the option is 2.6M, 4.6M, 6.2M, 6.2M, 6.2M.

The team has outs with a contract like this. After the first year he can be cut the dead cap hit would be 2.4M, roughly a wash with the space saved from salary. If he doesn't earn the starting role year 2, his cap hit is 2.6M, nickel CB money. If he doesn't earn the starting role, and the team see's no future, they skip the option bonus, he becomes a FA, and the team has a 1.8M dead cap hit, the price to pay for the option to keep him. He becomes starter, they pick up the option, and is paid quite reasonably for a starter. Lots of protections in a contract like that for both the player and team, and pretty fair to both sides. Plus he has something to play for, starting year 2, and the option bonus year 3. No resting on the laurels, the big money is already in the contract, it is up to him to earn the big money 2nd half of the deal.

[Patler]

I wouldnt look at this kid one bit. I think he can be replaced easily. Sorry, show us something this year and we'll think about it. No way on giving him more money.

Do you realize how many young CB-wannabees the packers cycle through before hitting on one as good as TW?

maybe he is just mediocre now, but who knows where he can go.

I agree. Who would have thought that Ahmad Carrol, Joey Thomas, Bhawah Jue, Michael Hawthorne, Patrick Dendy, Mike Hawkins, Jason Horton and the like could be forgotten so easily? I feel much better with Tramon Williams than if any of these guys were available. Sure Williams made mistakes, but he also had 5 interceptions, 2 forced fumbles and played well-enough replacing Harris that teams did not have an easy time picking on him. That was a huge step forward from the performance of any 3rd CB in the last 5 years or more in GB.

Here is an opinion question for the masses:
In your opinion, when was the last time the Packers had a 3rd cornerback who played as well as Williams did in 2008?

[packers11]

I would give him a 5 year 15-20 mill dollar contract... He's only going to get better and Al Harris has a maximum of 2 years left (hes 35 right now)...

Get T-Wills locked for a very cheap price...

Just think how many teams lack a decent #2 cb... He is above average right now and could probably start at #2 on half of the teams in the NFL...

Have you seen some CB's contracts this offseason? Lock up T-Wills while hes on the rise and a lot cheaper than you could sign him in 1-2 years...

[pbmax]

Here is an opinion question for the masses:
In your opinion, when was the last time the Packers had a 3rd cornerback who played as well as Williams did in 2008?
I am pretty sure his last name was Williams too :lol:
Tyrone, if I recall, while we had Doug Evans and Craig Newsome.

[sheepshead]

I wouldnt look at this kid one bit. I think he can be replaced easily. Sorry, show us something this year and we'll think about it. No way on giving him more money.

Do you realize how many young CB-wannabees the packers cycle through before hitting on one as good as TW?

maybe he is just mediocre now, but who knows where he can go.

Exactly--lets see what he does this year. Im not saying dump him, but teams were scoring at will on us many games and he did little to stop them. There were games when teams went after him. Not exactly making offenses work around him by any means.

[Patler]

Here is an opinion question for the masses:
In your opinion, when was the last time the Packers had a 3rd cornerback who played as well as Williams did in 2008?
I am pretty sure his last name was Williams too :lol:
Tyrone, if I recall, while we had Doug Evans and Craig Newsome.

You are probably right! I can't think of anyone more recent than that.

[falco]

was hoping they would make some effort to get him locked up cheap last year...i think he will be one of our starting corners for the next 6-7 years or more, but this is a tough situation for the packers...he showed a lot of promise last year, but was still very green. best situation for him is to sign the tender and earn a big contract during the season this year.

[Partial]

I would try and lock him up now for 4-5 years. In all likelyhood, it won't cost enough that he'd be a liability in the event they had to cut him. I really like his potential and his knack for the turnover.

The Pack have all the leverage, and all the guy wants is some insurance to take care of his family. I'm cool with it. Throw a cool few mil per year at him and let him keep growing with the team and hopefully take over a starting spot when Al moves on.

[Fritz]

I think he gave up too many big plays, sorry, I just dont see him as the long term answer.

He also made a lot of plays.

He ranked #20 in the NFL in passes broken up. With Wood and Nick ahead of him, only 17 other teams in the NFL had any DB break up more passes than him.

He ranked #6 in the NFL in interceptions, by far the most of any nickel CB.

He ranked #17 in the NFL (tied with a lot of guys) in FF's

Overall he ranked #7 in the NFL in forced turnovers.

The two biggest mistakes with the Grant situation were the timing of it (they should have aggressively addressed the problem much earlier), and the amount (fault Grant here more then the team, were his demands lowered it would have been much smoother and fan sentiment not all up in arms).

I was all for a 2+3 optioned contract with Grant, paying him ~3M/yr for the first two years (3M SB, 2M/yr salary), then a year 3 option bonus of 5M and salaries of 4M thereafter. Cap structure would be 2.6M, 2.6M, 6.2M, 6.2M, 6.2M. He'd get 6M up front the first year, have a cheap year of 2M, then 9M the 3rd yr, and 4M each yr thereafter. I'm not sure why they didn't go this route, it had been done before in situations like this, with the "prove it" time built into the contract and the big payday for the player to play for.

That's exactly what I'm advocating for Tramon as well. I've met and talked to his agent, he seems like a real good guy. If TT grabs the bull by the horns this can go much smoother than it did with Grant. Especially with a different structured prove-it contract. It is already written in stone that Harris is not a starter in '10 by contract, his contract drops from 5.5M this year to 2M next year. So for Williams, offer a 2+3 with year 2 incentive bonus.

Same as I advocated with Grant, first two years of the deal, use a base salary of about 2M. Were he a RFA he likely would get a 1st tender, which is a base salary of 2M. Plus a modest signing bonus, roughly 3M or so, then boost the salaries to 4M the 3rd year and pay an option bonus of 5M. But year 2 offer a roster bonus incentive, 125K/gm that he starts, 2M if he starts each game. This makes it a 5yr, 26M deal max value. Structured with two prove it steps. The total cap hit per year assuming he earns every penny of the roster bonuses and the team picks up the option is 2.6M, 4.6M, 6.2M, 6.2M, 6.2M.

The team has outs with a contract like this. After the first year he can be cut the dead cap hit would be 2.4M, roughly a wash with the space saved from salary. If he doesn't earn the starting role year 2, his cap hit is 2.6M, nickel CB money. If he doesn't earn the starting role, and the team see's no future, they skip the option bonus, he becomes a FA, and the team has a 1.8M dead cap hit, the price to pay for the option to keep him. He becomes starter, they pick up the option, and is paid quite reasonably for a starter. Lots of protections in a contract like that for both the player and team, and pretty fair to both sides. Plus he has something to play for, starting year 2, and the option bonus year 3. No resting on the laurels, the big money is already in the contract, it is up to him to earn the big money 2nd half of the deal.

Aha! You're Russ Ball!

[RashanGary]

Wow, thanks for the run down on Williams production, Waldo. I've really liked him as a player for some time. I didn't have the numbers to back it up, but I thought he was a hell of a good young player. I love the way he challenges every ball. He's the anti Blackmon. Blackmon NEVER challenged a ball. Williams is always right there, making the play or damn near making it. He's always doing the right thing it seems. It's nice to see that impression backed up.

I still think this is a tad early. I'd love to do it half way through the season, after watching him in zone coverage. If he's a good zone corner, damn, he can play man too and that gives you a lot of flexibility in your coverage schemes. It allows Capers the ability to constantly mix it up where a guy like Harris is predictable.

Williams is fast becoming one of the core young players that looks like he's going to be a hell of a player for a long time (Driver, W. Henderson, M Tausher) type guy. Not a superstar, but a guy you don't want to live without.

[Joemailman]

Williams excelled last year when he replaced Al Harris as the starter. 4 of his interceptions occurred during this period. He didn't due as well when replacing Woodson. There was some talk last year that the Packers played more zone when Harris was out of the lineup, but went back to almost exclusive man defense when Harris returned. If this is the case, it would seem that Williams' ability to play zone effectively may be a more natural fit in the 3-4 defense than Harris.

If Williams and Jarrett Bush were both to sign the offers they have been tendered, Bush would make more money than Williams. I don't think anyone here would argue that Bush is worth more than Williams. If the Packers see him as Harris' eventual replacement, perhaps as early as 2010, they should give him a better contract now.

[falco]

Williams excelled last year when he replaced Al Harris as the starter. 4 of his interceptions occurred during this period. He didn't due as well when replacing Woodson. There was some talk last year that the Packers played more zone when Harris was out of the lineup, but went back to almost exclusive man defense when Harris returned. If this is the case, it would seem that Williams' ability to play zone effectively may be a more natural fit in the 3-4 defense than Harris.

If Williams and Jarrett Bush were both to sign the offers they have been tendered, Bush would make more money than Williams. I don't think anyone here would argue that Bush is worth more than Williams. If the Packers see him as Harris' eventual replacement, perhaps as early as 2010, they should give him a better contract now.

maybe it's best to give him a moderate sized deal (i.e. 2-3 years, 2-3 mil per year), and give him an extension with big $$$ when/if he outplays it

[Tarlam!]

With TT's philosophy of building a team, he needs to pay his players. TW is a player, so, pay the man.

[bobblehead]

edit: For all you guys who like to use the JAG term to describe so many guys remember this....TWill is a guy who didn't get drafted and lost a training camp battle to jarret bush in '07....at this point he is JAG who has shown a few flashes...he deserves shit.

I don't believe in taking extreme advantage of players just because you can. Like it or not, it causes disharmony, hurt feelings and complaining. A good locker room is important. But that doesn't mean the team has to sell out to the players either. It is sort of like dealing with your kids. While you do have power and authority over them, you must use it with discretion.

Grant last year and Williams this year are more than JAGs. Herron, Wynn, Bush, perhaps Blackmon as a cornerback are JAGs. Grant and Williams performed better than that. To me, with the proof provided from actual NFL performances, they should be considered overlooked or slow to blossom talent. They should be compared to equivalently perceived draft choices now. You should ask yourself where they would be drafted and what they would receive for a contract if they were drafted this year. That would fairly compensate them for their potential demonstrated by minimal NFL performances.

Grant got much more then this, but my position following 2007 was that Grant was as good of a prospect as Jackson was when Jackson was drafted, so Grant should have received a three year contract which coupled with his 2007 contract, would have paid him about the same as Jackson got in his rookie contract. You could draw a similar parallel between Williams and Lee, although I think Williams performance in 2008 makes him a better prospect now than Lee was when he was drafted. I think there is justification for an approach like that, with fairness to the team and the player.

If TT offered him the Lee contract he would be outraged, whine like a bitch and run to the press....I almost garauntee it. Grant was offered MORE than the Jackson contract and that is exactly what he did.

My 3 year 6 million is probably in the ballpark and i'm telling you he will cry like a schoolgirl if TT offers him that.

[LL2]

It doesn't sound like Williams is looking for a blockbuster contract, just something more adequate than what he made the last two years. I think he's a promising future starter. I'd have no problem paying him between 2-3 million a year and if the guy wants incentives on top of that give it to him. Contracts with incentives are the best ones. Also, DB's are getting some very lucrative deals now. If he can get 5 picks as a part time starter, then he's worth considering long term.

We probably also need to draft that Jenkins kid if can't get someone like Raji or Orakpo in the draft. If we draft Jenkins the secondary could be set for a handful of years.

[sheepshead]

It doesn't sound like Williams is looking for a blockbuster contract, just something more adequate than what he made the last two years. I think he's a promising future starter. I'd have no problem paying him between 2-3 million a year and if the guy wants incentives on top of that give it to him. Contracts with incentives are the best ones. Also, DB's are getting some very lucrative deals now. If he can get 5 picks as a part time starter, then he's worth considering long term.

We probably also need to draft that Jenkins kid if can't get someone like Raji or Orakpo in the draft. If we draft Jenkins the secondary could be set for a handful of years.


Yeah, maybe...its just this business of putting a gun to our heads before he's proven he can play everyday. There's lots of guys with "potential" not making $3 million a year.

[Patler]

If TT offered him the Lee contract he would be outraged, whine like a bitch and run to the press....I almost garauntee it. Grant was offered MORE than the Jackson contract and that is exactly what he did.

My 3 year 6 million is probably in the ballpark and i'm telling you he will cry like a schoolgirl if TT offers him that.

I think Williams situation is different from that of Grant last year.

What did TT offer Grant that he declined, other than the minimum tender in Feb? I am seriously asking, because I don't know this.

When did Grant "whine like a bitch and run to the press". I thought it was handled fairly low-key for the way these things can go. If anything, Favre helped Grant more than any complaining that Grant did. The Packers really didn't need two roster confrontations at the same time. Grant's agent took advantage of that.

[bobblehead]

I would give him a 5 year 15-20 mill dollar contract... He's only going to get better and Al Harris has a maximum of 2 years left (hes 35 right now)...

Get T-Wills locked for a very cheap price...

Just think how many teams lack a decent #2 cb... He is above average right now and could probably start at #2 on half of the teams in the NFL...

Have you seen some CB's contracts this offseason? Lock up T-Wills while hes on the rise and a lot cheaper than you could sign him in 1-2 years...

I'm telling you right now if you offered him 5/15 he would in no way sign it.

He is a guy with potential, but I'm sick of that (cletidus hunt anyone). I think that Bigby was better at the end of '07 and in the playoffs than Williams was replacing Harris. Bigby signed his deal. Williams options are go work at mcdonalds or sign his tender. I would like to see TT offer something like 3/yrs 6mill but with 3 mil garaunteed but it won't ever happen and he wouldn't sign it anyway.

I still hate the grant contract cuz he basically got 5 mill garaunteed. Thats money he didn't really earn last year. Sorry if I think RB is the easiest position to fill....make holes, watch him run. There are a few Adrian Petersons in the league, but Grant isn't one of them.

I just think that guys who we rescue off the scrap heap, coach into players should sign the deals untiil they are free agents (or until the team offers more).

[bobblehead]

If TT offered him the Lee contract he would be outraged, whine like a bitch and run to the press....I almost garauntee it. Grant was offered MORE than the Jackson contract and that is exactly what he did.

My 3 year 6 million is probably in the ballpark and i'm telling you he will cry like a schoolgirl if TT offers him that.

I think Williams situation is different from that of Grant last year.

What did TT offer Grant that he declined, other than the minimum tender in Feb? I am seriously asking, because I don't know this.

When did Grant "whine like a bitch and run to the press". I thought it was handled fairly low-key for the way these things can go. If anything, Favre helped Grant more than any complaining that Grant did. The Packers really didn't need two roster confrontations at the same time. Grant's agent took advantage of that.

I'm too lazy to look it up, but right before camp they offered him a deal that was comparable to what all the rats thought would be pretty fair. His agent IMMEDIATELY ran to the press over it. I'll try to find the PR thread on it.

[Patler]

Yeah, maybe...its just this business of putting a gun to our heads before he's proven he can play everyday.

Heck, drafted rookies who have never even had an NFL practice do that all the time. At least these guys have shown something in NFL games. Grant and Williams have been presented with opportunities to improve their situations from that of "undrafted rookie free agents" with a year or two of experience, the lowest rung on the ladder of player salaries, to something better than that. I can't blame them for trying to take advantage of it.

[bobblehead]

Yeah, maybe...its just this business of putting a gun to our heads before he's proven he can play everyday.

Heck, drafted rookies who have never even had an NFL practice do that all the time. At least these guys have shown something in NFL games. Grant and Williams have been presented with opportunities to improve their situations from that of "undrafted rookie free agents" with a year or two of experience, the lowest rung on the ladder of player salaries, to something better than that. I can't blame them for trying to take advantage of it.

Like I said, when he signs a team friendly upgrade to the minimum I'll apologize, but I'm pretty confident that he will want a sizable contract.

[Patler]

Like I said, when he signs a team friendly upgrade to the minimum I'll apologize, but I'm pretty confident that he will want a sizable contract.

I guess I just don't see why negotiating to get the best that you can, when you have no contract, is a bad thing or something to condemn a player for. Very few undrafted players get the opportunity that Grant or Williams have had. They had/have a stack of chips to play. I have no problem with them playing their stacks.

[Patler]

Like I said, when he signs a team friendly upgrade to the minimum I'll apologize, but I'm pretty confident that he will want a sizable contract.

Unlike most on here, I think Grant's contract was fairly team-friendly. Not one sided in favor of the team, to be sure; but not a bad contract for the team either.

[sheepshead]

Yeah, maybe...its just this business of putting a gun to our heads before he's proven he can play everyday.

Heck, drafted rookies who have never even had an NFL practice do that all the time. At least these guys have shown something in NFL games. Grant and Williams have been presented with opportunities to improve their situations from that of "undrafted rookie free agents" with a year or two of experience, the lowest rung on the ladder of player salaries, to something better than that. I can't blame them for trying to take advantage of it.

As I have stated numerous times, the NFL draft is the biggest most expensive crap shoot in all of sports. There should be a rookie cap and any GM that could get something of value for its 1st round pick should get out of the first round.

[sharpe1027]

Here is an opinion question for the masses:
In your opinion, when was the last time the Packers had a 3rd cornerback who played as well as Williams did in 2008?
I am pretty sure his last name was Williams too :lol:
Tyrone, if I recall, while we had Doug Evans and Craig Newsome.

Car trunks everywhere were scared of Tyrone.

[Zool]

Like I said, when he signs a team friendly upgrade to the minimum I'll apologize, but I'm pretty confident that he will want a sizable contract.

I guess I just don't see why negotiating to get the best that you can, when you have no contract, is a bad thing or something to condemn a player for. Very few undrafted players get the opportunity that Grant or Williams have had. They had/have a stack of chips to play. I have no problem with them playing their stacks.

Exactly. He's not under contract so he's not holding out. He's just not able to shop his wares anywhere but GB. It will be hard to have an incentive laden contract for a nickle back but something will get done.

[pbmax]

As I have stated numerous times, the NFL draft is the biggest most expensive crap shoot in all of sports. There should be a rookie cap and any GM that could get something of value for its 1st round pick should get out of the first round.
Only the first 15 picks of the first round are ridiculous. The rest of the draft contracts are reasonable. Not undrafted reasonable (the subject of this thread can attest to that), but perfectly manageable. The first 10 picks are insane. Peter King had an item last week about the money the Patriots saved by not getting the number 3 overall pick. Its 4 additional players from the end of the 1st and the second round.

[red]

to me it comes down to how much he wants

if they just offered him the minimum, and he wants a bit more and a longer contract then fine

but if he wants something like 3 or 4 million a yearover 4 or 5 years then i would say no, let him rot

i've said before, i'm just not sold on him being our future starter. so if he wants starter money then i would say he's not worth it right now

but like someone else said, you can't blame the guy for wanting a longer deal, and some more money. and he hasn't missed anything yet

of course he is our nickleback, and we are sitting on 30 some million in free cap space. and chances are we aren't going to be using it all this season. so why not throw the dog a bone. maybe give him a couple million for one year and see what happens

[sheepshead]

As I have stated numerous times, the NFL draft is the biggest most expensive crap shoot in all of sports. There should be a rookie cap and any GM that could get something of value for its 1st round pick should get out of the first round.
Only the first 15 picks of the first round are ridiculous. The rest of the draft contracts are reasonable. Not undrafted reasonable (the subject of this thread can attest to that), but perfectly manageable. The first 10 picks are insane. Peter King had an item last week about the money the Patriots saved by not getting the number 3 overall pick. Its 4 additional players from the end of the 1st and the second round.

Look this up-one in three is a serious contributor, 1/3 are out of football in five years, 1/3 are serviceable.Just look at previous year drafts. Youll see names you havent heard from since draft day.

[Pugger]

I don't remember Grant bitching about his contract to the press last summer either. Of course there were 'other' distractions keeping TT and company busy during that time. :wink:

[Fritz]

Somebody wrote earlier that Favre may have been the biggest factor in helping Grant get a better contract.

This got me thinking: maybe Favre should start a new career as a player agent. He could threaten to come back every year, piss off the fans, put pressure on management of whatever team has his rights (he'd represent players on that team only), and whoever his client was on that team would get a bigger contract than otherwise.

Cool biz. Brett "Bus" Favre. The heck with ESPN and endorsements. Brett would be an agent.

[Patler]

Somebody wrote earlier that Favre may have been the biggest factor in helping Grant get a better contract.

This got me thinking: maybe Favre should start a new career as a player agent. He could threaten to come back every year, piss off the fans, put pressure on management of whatever team has his rights (he'd represent players on that team only), and whoever his client was on that team would get a bigger contract than otherwise.

Cool biz. Brett "Bus" Favre. The heck with ESPN and endorsements. Brett would be an agent.

The way you describe his approach, he might be more like Brett "Favrenhaus"! A Drew Rosenhaus in reverse. Instead of threatening to holdout, he threatens to return! A new take on an old tactic! Genius!

[cpk1994]

Somebody wrote earlier that Favre may have been the biggest factor in helping Grant get a better contract.

This got me thinking: maybe Favre should start a new career as a player agent. He could threaten to come back every year, piss off the fans, put pressure on management of whatever team has his rights (he'd represent players on that team only), and whoever his client was on that team would get a bigger contract than otherwise.

Cool biz. Brett "Bus" Favre. The heck with ESPN and endorsements. Brett would be an agent.

The way you describe his approach, he might be more like Brett "Favrenhaus"! A Drew Rosenhaus in reverse. Instead of threatening to holdout, he threatens to return! A new take on an old tactic! Genius!Not to mention that Drew's way to answer every question is "Next Question!" while Brett talks forever. :lol:

[bobblehead]

I don't remember Grant bitching about his contract to the press last summer either. Of course there were 'other' distractions keeping TT and company busy during that time. :wink:

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/29548649.html

I'd pick out some juicy quotes from Grants agent, but that would be a problem with JSO so you will have to click the link.

Funny how some people remember history differently.

[Guiness]

to me it comes down to how much he wants

if they just offered him the minimum, and he wants a bit more and a longer contract then fine

but if he wants something like 3 or 4 million a yearover 4 or 5 years then i would say no, let him rot

i've said before, i'm just not sold on him being our future starter. so if he wants starter money then i would say he's not worth it right now

but like someone else said, you can't blame the guy for wanting a longer deal, and some more money. and he hasn't missed anything yet

of course he is our nickleback, and we are sitting on 30 some million in free cap space. and chances are we aren't going to be using it all this season. so why not throw the dog a bone. maybe give him a couple million for one year and see what happens

What a mess. Yes, it's a ridiculous situation with Pat Lee and Jared Bush making more money than him, but his situation is what it is. UFA who put it together last year. I think you can probably draw a straight line between Grant's refusal to sign and his, and Rodgers getting a deal halfway through his first season starting.

IMO GB will tell him to sign, be a good boy, and they'll talk during the season. Of course, none of us know what has already gone on between the two parties, but you have to think these discussions could've been kept a little quieter???

[bobblehead]

Like I said, when he signs a team friendly upgrade to the minimum I'll apologize, but I'm pretty confident that he will want a sizable contract.

I guess I just don't see why negotiating to get the best that you can, when you have no contract, is a bad thing or something to condemn a player for. Very few undrafted players get the opportunity that Grant or Williams have had. They had/have a stack of chips to play. I have no problem with them playing their stacks.

Exactly. He's not under contract so he's not holding out. He's just not able to shop his wares anywhere but GB. It will be hard to have an incentive laden contract for a nickle back but something will get done.

I'm fond of this argument...I really am. JWalk wasn't able to shop his wares anywhere but GB either. He had exactly the same options. His contract was more or less "slotted" based on where he was picked. TWills contract offer from GB is slotted based on not being drafted.

As I said at the time, If we had actually drafted Grant in the 7th round and everything went down identically do you think he gets a 5 million dollar bonus? No. Would you be saying...well, he is under contract and should play it out?? These guys are being REWARDED for not being drafted by your argument.

JWalk TWill and Grant all had exactly the same options....play for the money on the table or sit at home. If all Grant wanted was a JWalk contract I would have had no problem with it, but we offered him something close to a JWalk contract and his agent had a hissy fit. Same goes for TWill, if he wants 1 million this year or 6 million over 3 years I am all for him...you go boy!! But that is not what he is looking for.

[Patler]

Like I said, when he signs a team friendly upgrade to the minimum I'll apologize, but I'm pretty confident that he will want a sizable contract.

I guess I just don't see why negotiating to get the best that you can, when you have no contract, is a bad thing or something to condemn a player for. Very few undrafted players get the opportunity that Grant or Williams have had. They had/have a stack of chips to play. I have no problem with them playing their stacks.

Exactly. He's not under contract so he's not holding out. He's just not able to shop his wares anywhere but GB. It will be hard to have an incentive laden contract for a nickle back but something will get done.

I'm fond of this argument...I really am. JWalk wasn't able to shop his wares anywhere but GB either. He had exactly the same options. His contract was more or less "slotted" based on where he was picked. TWills contract offer from GB is slotted based on not being drafted.

As I said at the time, If we had actually drafted Grant in the 7th round and everything went down identically do you think he gets a 5 million dollar bonus? No. Would you be saying...well, he is under contract and should play it out?? These guys are being REWARDED for not being drafted by your argument.

JWalk TWill and Grant all had exactly the same options....play for the money on the table or sit at home. If all Grant wanted was a JWalk contract I would have had no problem with it, but we offered him something close to a JWalk contract and his agent had a hissy fit. Same goes for TWill, if he wants 1 million this year or 6 million over 3 years I am all for him...you go boy!! But that is not what he is looking for.

There is a big difference, Walker had a contract, Grant and Williams did not. Walker could have held out before he signed his rookie contract. Many do just to get the deal sweetened a bit. Many others do whenever their contracts expire.

Grant and Williams were not "slotted", they were offered minimums which they declined and opened negotiations. Not all undrafted rookies sign close to the same contracts. Some get bonuses, some get better than minimums, Some sign multi-year (usually two year) contracts while others do single years. A few years back the Packers signed an undrafted rookie (I've forgotten who, but I think it was a lineman) and paid him more than their last draft picks. They gave Jon Ryan something like $50K in bonuses and a multi-year contract.

Grant and Williams aren't being rewarded for not being drafted, they are being rewarded for not being drafted AND performing as well as high round picks while having risked (or maybe offered) only a short term contract. Some guys make out like bandits for being drafted high even though they perform lousy (Ryan Leaf, J. Reynolds, Mandarich, etc.) In Grants case he made out well by not being drafted, signing a single year contract, and performing very well in 2007. Who would you rather pay?

[Guiness]

here is a big difference, Walker had a contract, Grant and Williams did not. Walker could have held out before he signed his rookie contract. Many do just to get the deal sweetened a bit. Many others do whenever their contracts expire.

Grant and Williams were not "slotted", they were offered minimums which they declined and opened negotiations. Not all undrafted rookies sign close to the same contracts. Some get bonuses, some get better than minimums, Some sign multi-year (usually two year) contracts while others do single years. A few years back the Packers signed an undrafted rookie (I've forgotten who, but I think it was a lineman) and paid him more than their last draft picks. They gave Jon Ryan something like $50K in bonuses and a multi-year contract.

Grant and Williams aren't being rewarded for not being drafted, they are being rewarded for not being drafted AND performing as well as high round picks while having risked (or maybe offered) only a short term contract. Some guys make out like bandits for being drafted high even though they perform lousy (Ryan Leaf, J. Reynolds, Mandarich, etc.) In Grants case he made out well by not being drafted, signing a single year contract, and performing very well in 2007. Who would you rather pay?

As I said earlier, this situation is a mess. Patler's right, TWill is doing nothing wrong by refusing to sign - and Grant didn't either. Their not under contract, and don't have to accept what they are offered if they don't want to. Of course, their alternatives aren't even as good Kurt Warner's were oh-so-long ago. They can stock shelves at the local supermarket, but the Packers retain their rights, so they can't go to another team.

I'm not sure what the solution is. The Packers have shown a willingness to renegotiate with a player who out-performs, but the question for a guy like TWill is 'when?' Maybe they shouldn't offer the minimum to a guy like TWill in the first place?

I think this is an area the CBA is weak in in general. I don't know that the minimum should be increased - does a Jason Hunter or Joe Porter deserve a raise because Williams played well?

If he refuses to sign, and GB plays hardball, not releasing or upping the offer, he's effectively out of the NFL, right? That doesn't seem right, but on the other hand GB took a chance, developed him, and he turned into a player. They should get something out of that.

I almost think they should put him on the block for a 2nd round pick. If no one comes knocking tell him 'you want to be paid like a 2nd rounder, but no one will give one up for you'. If someone does offer it up, well, you've got yourself a second round pick. The problem with this, of course, is if no one offered it, Tramon would probably have his nose pretty far out of joint over this.

[MadtownPacker]

Al aint gonna last forever and Woodson isnt brand new either. T-Will has shown much more than Grant ever did. This is the guy to spend money on. Pay your own is true and this is the time to do it. I would not hold it against TT at all if somehow he didn't pan out.

[bobblehead]

Like I said, when he signs a team friendly upgrade to the minimum I'll apologize, but I'm pretty confident that he will want a sizable contract.

I guess I just don't see why negotiating to get the best that you can, when you have no contract, is a bad thing or something to condemn a player for. Very few undrafted players get the opportunity that Grant or Williams have had. They had/have a stack of chips to play. I have no problem with them playing their stacks.

Exactly. He's not under contract so he's not holding out. He's just not able to shop his wares anywhere but GB. It will be hard to have an incentive laden contract for a nickle back but something will get done.

I'm fond of this argument...I really am. JWalk wasn't able to shop his wares anywhere but GB either. He had exactly the same options. His contract was more or less "slotted" based on where he was picked. TWills contract offer from GB is slotted based on not being drafted.

As I said at the time, If we had actually drafted Grant in the 7th round and everything went down identically do you think he gets a 5 million dollar bonus? No. Would you be saying...well, he is under contract and should play it out?? These guys are being REWARDED for not being drafted by your argument.

JWalk TWill and Grant all had exactly the same options....play for the money on the table or sit at home. If all Grant wanted was a JWalk contract I would have had no problem with it, but we offered him something close to a JWalk contract and his agent had a hissy fit. Same goes for TWill, if he wants 1 million this year or 6 million over 3 years I am all for him...you go boy!! But that is not what he is looking for.

There is a big difference, Walker had a contract, Grant and Williams did not. Walker could have held out before he signed his rookie contract. Many do just to get the deal sweetened a bit. Many others do whenever their contracts expire.

Grant and Williams were not "slotted", they were offered minimums which they declined and opened negotiations. Not all undrafted rookies sign close to the same contracts. Some get bonuses, some get better than minimums, Some sign multi-year (usually two year) contracts while others do single years. A few years back the Packers signed an undrafted rookie (I've forgotten who, but I think it was a lineman) and paid him more than their last draft picks. They gave Jon Ryan something like $50K in bonuses and a multi-year contract.

Grant and Williams aren't being rewarded for not being drafted, they are being rewarded for not being drafted AND performing as well as high round picks while having risked (or maybe offered) only a short term contract. Some guys make out like bandits for being drafted high even though they perform lousy (Ryan Leaf, J. Reynolds, Mandarich, etc.) In Grants case he made out well by not being drafted, signing a single year contract, and performing very well in 2007. Who would you rather pay?

I respectfully disagree. Grant and Williiams by not being drafted basically had each seasons salary slotted in stone until they became UFA. Walker by being drafted (16?) had his contract slotted based on history, CBA, and contracts around him that year.

Sure he could have held out as a rookie, but we would be squeeling about a guy never proving anything in the NFL holding out. Bottom line, he outplayed his rookie contract significantly when he held out. TWill and Grant have outplayed the tender. I really honestly fail to see a big difference. JWalk had every right to withhold his services and sit home....so does TWill. The Packers have every right to tell them to enjoy the couch.

[bobblehead]

here is a big difference, Walker had a contract, Grant and Williams did not. Walker could have held out before he signed his rookie contract. Many do just to get the deal sweetened a bit. Many others do whenever their contracts expire.

Grant and Williams were not "slotted", they were offered minimums which they declined and opened negotiations. Not all undrafted rookies sign close to the same contracts. Some get bonuses, some get better than minimums, Some sign multi-year (usually two year) contracts while others do single years. A few years back the Packers signed an undrafted rookie (I've forgotten who, but I think it was a lineman) and paid him more than their last draft picks. They gave Jon Ryan something like $50K in bonuses and a multi-year contract.

Grant and Williams aren't being rewarded for not being drafted, they are being rewarded for not being drafted AND performing as well as high round picks while having risked (or maybe offered) only a short term contract. Some guys make out like bandits for being drafted high even though they perform lousy (Ryan Leaf, J. Reynolds, Mandarich, etc.) In Grants case he made out well by not being drafted, signing a single year contract, and performing very well in 2007. Who would you rather pay?

As I said earlier, this situation is a mess. Patler's right, TWill is doing nothing wrong by refusing to sign - and Grant didn't either. Their not under contract, and don't have to accept what they are offered if they don't want to. Of course, their alternatives aren't even as good Kurt Warner's were oh-so-long ago. They can stock shelves at the local supermarket, but the Packers retain their rights, so they can't go to another team.

I'm not sure what the solution is. The Packers have shown a willingness to renegotiate with a player who out-performs, but the question for a guy like TWill is 'when?' Maybe they shouldn't offer the minimum to a guy like TWill in the first place?

I think this is an area the CBA is weak in in general. I don't know that the minimum should be increased - does a Jason Hunter or Joe Porter deserve a raise because Williams played well?

If he refuses to sign, and GB plays hardball, not releasing or upping the offer, he's effectively out of the NFL, right? That doesn't seem right, but on the other hand GB took a chance, developed him, and he turned into a player. They should get something out of that.

I almost think they should put him on the block for a 2nd round pick. If no one comes knocking tell him 'you want to be paid like a 2nd rounder, but no one will give one up for you'. If someone does offer it up, well, you've got yourself a second round pick. The problem with this, of course, is if no one offered it, Tramon would probably have his nose pretty far out of joint over this.

MYTH....he does NOT want to be paid like a second rounder. Bet me on it, name the wager. If TT offered him the BJack contract he would whine like a schoolgirl.

[Partial]

Assumption. He knows he doesn't have any leverage. He just wants a cushion so if he retires he doesn't have to work again. Give him 2-3 mil and let him live off the interest. He'll be fine. He doesn't have any leverage.

[Guiness]

I respectfully disagree. Grant and Williiams by not being drafted basically had each seasons salary slotted in stone until they became UFA. Walker by being drafted (16?) had his contract slotted based on history, CBA, and contracts around him that year.

Sure he could have held out as a rookie, but we would be squeeling about a guy never proving anything in the NFL holding out. Bottom line, he outplayed his rookie contract significantly when he held out. TWill and Grant have outplayed the tender. I really honestly fail to see a big difference. JWalk had every right to withhold his services and sit home....so does TWill. The Packers have every right to tell them to enjoy the couch.

Actually, I would say he has a lot more right than JWalk to sit at home; and the repercussions are different. Javon had a contract - which undoubtedly included daily fines for not showing up. The Pack could've fined him that amount every day he missed. If TWill decides not to show up, then he's just not there.

[Guiness]

MYTH....he does NOT want to be paid like a second rounder. Bet me on it, name the wager. If TT offered him the BJack contract he would whine like a schoolgirl.

We don't know, but what you're saying is a good assumption. You're missing my point though - it was that when no one will give up a second rounder, it's something the Pack can point to and say 'see, you're not even worth that.'

This idea doesn't work in reality of course, because he'd be one disgruntled employee after this type of treatment.

[Patler]

I respectfully disagree. Grant and Williiams by not being drafted basically had each seasons salary slotted in stone until they became UFA. Walker by being drafted (16?) had his contract slotted based on history, CBA, and contracts around him that year.

Sure he could have held out as a rookie, but we would be squeeling about a guy never proving anything in the NFL holding out. Bottom line, he outplayed his rookie contract significantly when he held out. TWill and Grant have outplayed the tender. I really honestly fail to see a big difference. JWalk had every right to withhold his services and sit home....so does TWill. The Packers have every right to tell them to enjoy the couch.

OK, we have numerous points of disagreement. :lol:

Why would any player have 4 contracts slotted in stone, just because they weren't drafted? The only thing I will agree tends to be slotted is the initial compensation for the first contract signed by a player. Thereafter, any contract he signs reflects past NFL performance, whether it is a FA contract, a renegotiated contract, or an RFA contract based on the various levels of RFA tenders.

Rookie contracts tend to be slotted, but performance bonuses can be negotiated into them. "Slotting" affects only the face value of the contract. Spitz agent was good enough to negotiate in a $1M bonus that Spitz earned last year. That is not part of any "slotting" and will result in Spitz being paid as well as Colledge through the first four years, even though Colledge was drafted about 30 "slots" higher. It is those types of things that rookies will sometime hold out for. Rodgers negotiated a bunch of performance bonuses that would have paid him extremely well, some say at a top 5 level, if he had become a starter earlier in his career. That's not part of "slotting". What the ERFAs are doing is really no different. Increased pay based on past performance. Grant and Williams both deserve more than a 2nd or 3rd year free agent off the street signed to be the bottom of the roster and inactive on game days.

I completely disagree that Walker outperformed his contract. Not even close, in my opinion. Not at the time he was complaining. He was paid over $5M the first two years, and did little. Yes, his third year was very good, but to that point he had been paid very well, too. If he had produced in his fourth year (and I believe he had a 5 year rookie contract) he maybe could have argued that he outplayed his contract, but not after just one decent year.

[Merlin]

Man, giving in to Grant last year is just going to keep biting us in the ass, isn't it?

That was probably Thompson's biggest mistake so far.

His biggest mistake? Maybe his biggest contractual mistake but by no means his biggest mistake to date.

[bobblehead]

I respectfully disagree. Grant and Williiams by not being drafted basically had each seasons salary slotted in stone until they became UFA. Walker by being drafted (16?) had his contract slotted based on history, CBA, and contracts around him that year.

Sure he could have held out as a rookie, but we would be squeeling about a guy never proving anything in the NFL holding out. Bottom line, he outplayed his rookie contract significantly when he held out. TWill and Grant have outplayed the tender. I really honestly fail to see a big difference. JWalk had every right to withhold his services and sit home....so does TWill. The Packers have every right to tell them to enjoy the couch.

OK, we have numerous points of disagreement. :lol:

Why would any player have 4 contracts slotted in stone, just because they weren't drafted? The only thing I will agree tends to be slotted is the initial compensation for the first contract signed by a player. Thereafter, any contract he signs reflects past NFL performance, whether it is a FA contract, a renegotiated contract, or an RFA contract based on the various levels of RFA tenders.

Rookie contracts tend to be slotted, but performance bonuses can be negotiated into them. "Slotting" affects only the face value of the contract. Spitz agent was good enough to negotiate in a $1M bonus that Spitz earned last year. That is not part of any "slotting" and will result in Spitz being paid as well as Colledge through the first four years, even though Colledge was drafted about 30 "slots" higher. It is those types of things that rookies will sometime hold out for. Rodgers negotiated a bunch of performance bonuses that would have paid him extremely well, some say at a top 5 level, if he had become a starter earlier in his career. That's not part of "slotting". What the ERFAs are doing is really no different. Increased pay based on past performance. Grant and Williams both deserve more than a 2nd or 3rd year free agent off the street signed to be the bottom of the roster and inactive on game days.

I completely disagree that Walker outperformed his contract. Not even close, in my opinion. Not at the time he was complaining. He was paid over $5M the first two years, and did little. Yes, his third year was very good, but to that point he had been paid very well, too. If he had produced in his fourth year (and I believe he had a 5 year rookie contract) he maybe could have argued that he outplayed his contract, but not after just one decent year.

These will all be great points as soon as TWill signs a 4 year deal sort of like JWalks but that isn't what he wants.

JWalk had exactly the same right that TWill has....play or sit. Sure, they could fine him and do the other things allowed by the CBA, but he had every right to sit and pay the fines and accept the consequences.

Spitz and College have done a lot more than TWill has so far in their career....will he sign a deal comparable to theirs?? Will he report if we give him a 1million dollar bonus like spitz got?

Bottom line is this (for my opinion). He is telling us volumes about what kind of guy he is. He is also feeling bold because we caved to grant last year after about the same amount of starts. This team is going to have to take a stand at some point or next year it will be anyone else who "outplayed" his deal or is an RFA.