Next years free agents

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

I was thinking about next year's free agents, so I did a little searching and found that no starters on offense or defense will be free agents except ben talor if he wins the job.

This means that next years draft picks and free agents that we pick up will be added to our existing starters either as upgardes at many positions or as depth.

Does this mean that TT is doing something right?

[Pack0514]

If no starters on offense will be free agents after this year, who do you have starting at RB?

Both Green and Davenport will be FA and Gado will be RFA. Correct me if I am wrong.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

right right sorry, forgot about Rbs

[Pack0514]

Dont worry about it, its still an awesome position to be in for the Packers..... especially if the starters they have play well together. And yes, I do believe TT is doing something right. I think he needs to do something about the Mac, Walker, Harris types, but from a talent evaluater / young team builder, he is doing a nice job. IMO.

[Patler]

Besides the running backs, Colin Cole, Rob Davis, Scott Wells and Cullen Jenkins are others who will be starters or major contributors whose contracts expire after 2006.

Other possible contributors in their last years include Rod Gardner, Kendrick Allen and Donald Lee.

[Schuhc14]

I could be wrong, but I think Colin Cole, Scott Wells and Cullen Jenkins are all RFA, meaning we will get them back for one year fairly cheap.

[Partial]

they should lock up their young DTs long term.

[Patler]

I could be wrong, but I think Colin Cole, Scott Wells and Cullen Jenkins are all RFA, meaning we will get them back for one year fairly cheap.

Like when we got KGB and Diggs back "fairly cheap" when they were RFAs? :roll:

Hopefully TT will not make the mistakes handling RFAs that Sherman did.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

Besides the running backs, Colin Cole, Rob Davis, Scott Wells and Cullen Jenkins are others who will be starters or major contributors whose contracts expire after 2006.

Other possible contributors in their last years include Rod Gardner, Kendrick Allen and Donald Lee.


Rob davis doesn't play offense or defense
Scott wells is not yet a starter, but if he does he will not be hard to resign
colin cole and cullen jenkins are guys who rotate, not solid starters IMO.

My whloe point was that for sure starters such as, driver, franks, pickett, kampman, KGB, Barnett, Hawk, etc. etc. will be on are team for at least the next two years. I did not mean that everyone on the team will not be a free agent next year like rod gardner, kendrick allen and donald lee.

[Partial]

They need to resign CC. The Cole Train is gonna be unstoppable this season.

[RashanGary]

The Packers don't have any contracts to do in the near future that look big. They structured Kampman, Pickett and Woodson's contracts in a way that will not cause big hits after this season. The short story is that the Packers should have a big amount of cap space next year. They will probably tie up their core role players and still be very well off. If Brett comes back next year, there are real possiblities to compete. If not, it's Aaron Rodgers and as much as we can be optimistic, I'd have a hard time predicting a winning season with a QB that is not proven. You never know though. There was a day when STeve Young wasn't proven either. There are 20 Randy Wrights for every Steve Young so I'm not getting my hopes up.

[MJZiggy]

Fascinating avatar RTT.

[RashanGary]

Thanks....

I can no longer be a NIck Collins stalker. I have to move on with my life and become my own poster.

[Patler]

Besides the running backs, Colin Cole, Rob Davis, Scott Wells and Cullen Jenkins are others who will be starters or major contributors whose contracts expire after 2006.

Other possible contributors in their last years include Rod Gardner, Kendrick Allen and Donald Lee.


Rob davis doesn't play offense or defense
Scott wells is not yet a starter, but if he does he will not be hard to resign
colin cole and cullen jenkins are guys who rotate, not solid starters IMO.

My whloe point was that for sure starters such as, driver, franks, pickett, kampman, KGB, Barnett, Hawk, etc. etc. will be on are team for at least the next two years. I did not mean that everyone on the team will not be a free agent next year like rod gardner, kendrick allen and donald lee.

Not meaning to pick on you, but you said "except ben talor (sic) if he wins the job." You could just as well have said except for "Ben Taylor, Scott Wells, Rod Gardner and one of Colin Cole, Kendrick Allen and Cullen Jenkins if they win starting jobs."

You pointed out the possibility of Taylor, I just wanted everyone to know that he isn't the only likely starter to be that is in his last year on his contract. Wells, Gardner and one of Cole, Jenkins or Allen are all possible starters, just like Taylor, whom you did mentioned. Actually, Wells is a returning starter, but not at the position he started for the second half of last year.

But, the Packers are in decent shape. Unless someone really steps forward, none of the players is a real key resigning. Wells or one of the DTs is probably the most likely to be #1 on the list for getting re-signed. I like Taylor, but I suspect he is looked on as only a temporary starter at LB. Hopefully, we are both wrong and at the end of 2006 everyone will be complaining about all the great FAs the Packers have to work in under the 2007 cap. That would be a very good development!

[Patler]

Rob davis doesn't play offense or defense.

Poor long snappers get no respect!

[Partial]

Thanks....

I can no longer be a NIck Collins stalker. I have to move on with my life and become my own poster.

I'm hoping your new name is Greg Jennings and everyone is on his band wagon by the end of training camp. :smile:

[RashanGary]

I should change my name to Greg Jennings. I think he's going to be GREAT. Not Randy Moss great, but Antonio Freeman great.

[Partial]

Well, according to the rules you have 57 more hours left to change, or you cannot change names again for a significant period of time.

[RashanGary]

Oh no...I better change it then.

GregJennings will do. If you would change it for me that would be GREAT!!

[MJZiggy]

If (God forbid) he bombs, you're gonna be a hurtin' camper by the end of the season...

[RashanGary]

I'm willing to risk whatever forum reputation I have on Greg Jennings. I think he's a stud.

[MadtownPacker]

I agree, sign me up for the Jennings fan club.

800yds, 6 TDs in 2006

[HarveyWallbangers]

Besides the running backs, Colin Cole, Rob Davis, Scott Wells and Cullen Jenkins are others who will be starters or major contributors whose contracts expire after 2006.

Other possible contributors in their last years include Rod Gardner, Kendrick Allen and Donald Lee.

Rob Davis a major contributor? He's been a decent long-snapper, but calling him a major contributor is a bit steep.

He was talking about projected/likely starters. I don't think Lee (only if Franks gets hurt) and Allen are likely starters. Gardner, Wells and either Cole or Jenkins could be. Gardner will be an UFA next year. Are the other three UFAs?

[Patler]

Besides the running backs, Colin Cole, Rob Davis, Scott Wells and Cullen Jenkins are others who will be starters or major contributors whose contracts expire after 2006.

Other possible contributors in their last years include Rod Gardner, Kendrick Allen and Donald Lee.

Rob Davis a major contributor? He's been a decent long-snapper, but calling him a major contributor is a bit steep.

He was talking about projected/likely starters. I don't think Lee (only if Franks gets hurt) and Allen are likely starters. Gardner, Wells and either Cole or Jenkins could be. Gardner will be an UFA next year. Are the other three UFAs?

If you note, I included Gardner, Lee and Allen as "possible contributors".

Rob Davis is one of the two or three critical players on 8-10 plays every game. Packer fans are spoiled because Davis is so good. Even among the longsnappers, he is considered one of the best in the business, especially for his velocity on snaps to the punter.

As I said, longsnappers just get no respect! :mad:

[Oscar]

I think special team players as a group go underappreciated. We mention a kicker when he makes a game winning kick. We talk alot abouta kicker when he misses one. It all starts with the snap.. Wether its a punt or extra point. I think special teams are gonna be the difference between a 6 and 10 or a 10 and 6 record this season...Ok.. maby not.. :smile:

[HarveyWallbangers]

If you note, I included Gardner, Lee and Allen as "possible contributors".

Rob Davis is one of the two or three critical players on 8-10 plays every game. Packer fans are spoiled because Davis is so good. Even among the longsnappers, he is considered one of the best in the business, especially for his velocity on snaps to the punter.

As I said, longsnappers just get no respect! :mad:

Personally, I think you are getting carried away. The guy was talking about starters for this year, and you went off on a tangent about other guys--many who aren't starters, and most that are nominal starters. His point is valid. Maybe there will be two or three borderline starters instead of the one he listed, but the Packers are in good shape next year. They aren't going to be losing any long-time studs like Mike Wahle, Darren Sharper, or Marco Rivera via UFA.

You can continue to try to bring down his argument by talking about some relatively meaningless players, but personally I think you should apologize to him. It's not your best effort.
:D

Be careful, PaCkFan_n_MD! Shamler can be a real thorn in the ass.
:evil:

Are Wells, Jenkins, and Cole unrestricted FAs?

[Patler]

If you note, I included Gardner, Lee and Allen as "possible contributors".

Rob Davis is one of the two or three critical players on 8-10 plays every game. Packer fans are spoiled because Davis is so good. Even among the longsnappers, he is considered one of the best in the business, especially for his velocity on snaps to the punter.

As I said, longsnappers just get no respect! :mad:

Personally, I think you are getting carried away. The guy was talking about starters for this year, and you went off on a tangent about other guys--many who aren't starters, and most that are nominal starters. His point is valid. Maybe there will be two or three borderline starters instead of the one he listed, but the Packers are in good shape next year. They aren't going to be losing any long-time studs like Mike Wahle, Darren Sharper, or Marco Rivera via UFA.

You can continue to try to bring down his argument by talking about some relatively meaningless players, but personally I think you should apologize to him. It's not your best effort.
:D

Be careful, PaCkFan_n_MD! Shamler can be a real thorn in the ass.
:evil:

Are Wells, Jenkins, and Cole unrestricted FAs?

Geez, harvey, did you even read my posts? I AGREED with him and the point he was making.

He mentioned Taylor as the only starter who would be a free agent. Someone else brought up that Green and Davenport would be too. All I said in my first post was this:

"Besides the running backs, Colin Cole, Rob Davis, Scott Wells and Cullen Jenkins are others who will be starters or major contributors whose contracts expire after 2006.

Other possible contributors in their last years include Rod Gardner, Kendrick Allen and Donald Lee."

That's all I said. I was not arguing with him anynore than Pack0514 was in mentioning Green, Davenport and Gado.

As I said in reply to the originator of this thread:

"You pointed out the possibility of Taylor, I just wanted everyone to know that he isn't the only likely starter to be that is in his last year on his contract. Wells, Gardner and one of Cole, Jenkins or Allen are all possible starters, just like Taylor, whom you did mentioned. Actually, Wells is a returning starter, but not at the position he started for the second half of last year.

"But, the Packers are in decent shape. Unless someone really steps forward, none of the players is a real key resigning. Wells or one of the DTs is probably the most likely to be #1 on the list for getting re-signed. I like Taylor, but I suspect he is looked on as only a temporary starter at LB. Hopefully, we are both wrong and at the end of 2006 everyone will be complaining about all the great FAs the Packers have to work in under the 2007 cap. That would be a very good development!"

What is wrong with that? He wasn't talking about studs, because after all he mentioned "only" Taylor. Taylor has never started for GB, Wells has.

As far as Davis and rspect for longsnappers, that was just for fun.

It appears to me you really didn't read what I wrote and in response to what. However, you are the 4th person in the last three weeks who has found it necessary to call me names simply for posting information, so I no longer will. It sure seems to rub people the wrong way when I do, and it really is not my intention or desire to aggravate anyone.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

Yes apologize to me immediately…à¢ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚¬Ã‚¦Ã¢â‚¬Ã ‚¦Ã¢â‚¬Â¦Ã¢à¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚¬Ã‚¦..just kidding. :smile:



Harvey got what I was trying to say in that we well not be losing anyone of note or young stars after this year. I was really just trying to start a topic that everyone can talk about and that would give optimism for the future.

I guess shamrockfan is right in that I should not have mentioned Talor because that opened the door for what he saying about wells, Jenkins and Cole. Although am not sure if I agree with bring up Grander, Allen, and Rob Davis because I thought the point of my post was pretty clear.

[Schuhc14]

I could be wrong, but I think Colin Cole, Scott Wells and Cullen Jenkins are all RFA, meaning we will get them back for one year fairly cheap.

Like when we got KGB and Diggs back "fairly cheap" when they were RFAs? :roll:

Hopefully TT will not make the mistakes handling RFAs that Sherman did.

That was Sherman’s fault. If KGB had signed with anyone else (Eagles) we would have gotten their first round draft pick and saved a boat load of cap space since we gave Gbaja-Biamila the first-round tender offer worth $1.35 million. So what I mean by next year when I said we'll get them "fairly cheap" is at most we give them the first round tender (now 1.4 Mil). If anyone signs them to a bigger contract (highly unlikely) I would gladly take a 1st round draft pick and saved cap space for either Cole, Jenkins, or Wells. Bottom line, at most Cole, Jenkins, or Wells will cost us 1.4 M next year or we get a first round pick if they sign a bigger contract with another team. I figure that as "fairly cheap".

P.S. I think Samkon, Donald Lee, Leach, Horton, Chris White, and Noah Herron, are all also RFA's.

[Partial]

I would just lock 'em up longterm before they have a big year. Keep em for 6 years at 1.5 mil per

[Schuhc14]

P.S. I think Samkon, Donald Lee, Leach, Horton, Chris White, and Noah Herron, are all also RFA's.

My bad, Samkon, White, and Herron are Exclusive-Rights Free Agents (ERFA), meaning they have no outside negotiating power. However Lee, Leach and Horton are RFA's.

[Rastak]

If you note, I included Gardner, Lee and Allen as "possible contributors".

Rob Davis is one of the two or three critical players on 8-10 plays every game. Packer fans are spoiled because Davis is so good. Even among the longsnappers, he is considered one of the best in the business, especially for his velocity on snaps to the punter.

As I said, longsnappers just get no respect! :mad:

Personally, I think you are getting carried away. The guy was talking about starters for this year, and you went off on a tangent about other guys--many who aren't starters, and most that are nominal starters. His point is valid. Maybe there will be two or three borderline starters instead of the one he listed, but the Packers are in good shape next year. They aren't going to be losing any long-time studs like Mike Wahle, Darren Sharper, or Marco Rivera via UFA.

You can continue to try to bring down his argument by talking about some relatively meaningless players, but personally I think you should apologize to him. It's not your best effort.
:D

Be careful, PaCkFan_n_MD! Shamler can be a real thorn in the ass.
:evil:

Are Wells, Jenkins, and Cole unrestricted FAs?

Geez, harvey, did you even read my posts? I AGREED with him and the point he was making.

He mentioned Taylor as the only starter who would be a free agent. Someone else brought up that Green and Davenport would be too. All I said in my first post was this:

"Besides the running backs, Colin Cole, Rob Davis, Scott Wells and Cullen Jenkins are others who will be starters or major contributors whose contracts expire after 2006.

Other possible contributors in their last years include Rod Gardner, Kendrick Allen and Donald Lee."

That's all I said. I was not arguing with him anynore than Pack0514 was in mentioning Green, Davenport and Gado.

As I said in reply to the originator of this thread:

"You pointed out the possibility of Taylor, I just wanted everyone to know that he isn't the only likely starter to be that is in his last year on his contract. Wells, Gardner and one of Cole, Jenkins or Allen are all possible starters, just like Taylor, whom you did mentioned. Actually, Wells is a returning starter, but not at the position he started for the second half of last year.

"But, the Packers are in decent shape. Unless someone really steps forward, none of the players is a real key resigning. Wells or one of the DTs is probably the most likely to be #1 on the list for getting re-signed. I like Taylor, but I suspect he is looked on as only a temporary starter at LB. Hopefully, we are both wrong and at the end of 2006 everyone will be complaining about all the great FAs the Packers have to work in under the 2007 cap. That would be a very good development!"

What is wrong with that? He wasn't talking about studs, because after all he mentioned "only" Taylor. Taylor has never started for GB, Wells has.

As far as Davis and rspect for longsnappers, that was just for fun.

It appears to me you really didn't read what I wrote and in response to what. However, you are the 4th person in the last three weeks who has found it necessary to call me names simply for posting information, so I no longer will. It sure seems to rub people the wrong way when I do, and it really is not my intention or desire to aggravate anyone.


Oh, don't stop posting info Shamler, Harvey was probably listening to a baby cry all damn night so he was a little cranky. I actually agree that a long snapper is a very important part of the team. FG's win games all the time and if any of these, your kicker, holder or long snapper suck, you could lose a couple games you should have won.

[MJZiggy]

so I no longer will.

The how the hell will I know what info is right if I don't get it from our stat rat?

[MJZiggy]

Good thought, Rastak, how hard is it to recover from a bad snap for a punter or a kicker? How many times have we watched a ball bobble down the field because of a misfired ball? Nothing ever good comes from it and it hasn't happened to us for quite some time. I was very happy to see Davis brought back this year.

[Rastak]

Good thought, Rastak, how hard is it to recover from a bad snap for a punter or a kicker? How many times have we watched a ball bobble down the field because of a misfired ball? Nothing ever good comes from it and it hasn't happened to us for quite some time. I was very happy to see Davis brought back this year.


Yea, that was a good move...those long snappers can play a long time too.

[Oscar]

Thats what I was saying earlier in the thread. Special team players can be the difference. Wether its a few games won or a few games lost. BTW, I'm always interested in reading Shamrocks thoughts, stats, and his oppinions. :smile:

[HarveyWallbangers]

Come on, now! How many teams are in the hurtbag at snapper? Seems like the snapping is terrific in the NFL now (hell, if you can make hundreds of thousands doing it, you are bound to get more good candidates). I haven't watched too many games where I think "damn, if they only had a better snapper, they'd be mint." Sure, every snapper has a bad snap or two, but I don't see it being too hard to replace Davis.

[Noodle]

If Shamler stops feeding us the real deal, then this board will just be gasbag central. He makes everyone pick up their game a little and use a little thing called "Google" every so often before popping off.

Shamler, don't let the bastards get you down. Bring on the truth. Sure it's easier to just spout opinions, but a few facts now and then adds big time to the quality of this forum.

I'm wondering why Shamler got so thin-skinned, though. No need to pull a Tarlam just because a few numbnuts didn't like your posts. Come on, Shamler, I know you're man enough to gut out a few Oklahoma drills. :wink:

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Come on, now! How many teams are in the hurtbag at snapper? Seems like the snapping is terrific in the NFL now (hell, if you can make hundreds of thousands doing it, you are bound to get more good candidates). I haven't watched too many games where I think "damn, if they only had a better snapper, they'd be mint." Sure, every snapper has a bad snap or two, but I don't see it being too hard to replace Davis.

Wallbangers has a point. That is why I am agreeing with him. Any fat guy on earth can be a long snapper if given the opportunity, including Nutz. Snaping the ball is like flipping burgers. All you need is practice. Problem is, coaches in the NFL arent as patient as your manager at McDonalds.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Patler,

I don't think you've posted since you responded to my post. I hope you realize I was joking with the "thorn in the ass" comment. I really like your style of posting (e.g. backing everything up with facts). I would have thought you could "feel" the sarcasm dripping from my post.

[packerpete]

Wallbangers has a point. That is why I am agreeing with him. Any fat guy on earth can be a long snapper if given the opportunity, including Nutz. Snaping the ball is like flipping burgers. All you need is practice. Problem is, coaches in the NFL arent as patient as your manager at McDonalds.

You should know all the details of McDonalds employment, I am certain that you test the patience of your manager at Micky D's every day.