Nick Collins Situation

[Joemailman]

It is widely anticipated that if Nick Collins does not get a contract extension in the next couple of days that the Packers will apply the 1st and 3rd tender on him. It also seems to be widely anticipated that TT would match any offer rather than lose Collins.

However...this is considered to be a very strong draft. If another team were to offer Collins a contract, is it possible that TT doesn't have Collins evaluated as high as most of us, and would take the picks, giving him 5 picks in the top 86?

Even if he would be inclined to match, is it possible that some team would make Collins an offer so big that TT would not have the resources to match? Perhaps even a poison pill? A team that is a Super Bowl contender, but could use a safety? Like Minnesota? They gave up a 1st and 2 3rds for Jared Allen. Who's to say they wouldn't give up a 1st and 3rd for Nick Collins?

Any thoughts? Perhaps TT will sign Collins in the next 48 hours and make this a moot point.

[mission]

I heard that we met with Collins' agent at the combine and contract talk progressed quite well according to the agent.

Can't remember now where I read that but it wasn't from Joe Arrigo or anything.

[SkinBasket]

At first, I think a 1st and a 3rd for Collins would be a slight win for us. But then I remember that after all these years, we had Atari Bigby starting at the other safety, and I recall just how hard it is to find adequate, much less a good/great safety. Keep him. Pass on the 1st and 3rd. It's close, but Atari, and all his predecessors, make a fine counterpoint with nothing more than their continued employment.

[Brandon494]

Collins is still young and a top 5 FS in the league. You have no way of knowing what you are going to get with that 1st and 3rd pick. Its not like its going to be a top 15 pick.

[RashanGary]

Collins is a legit top 5 safety in my opinion. He's not Troy Polamalu or Ed Reed though. He's not as consistent as the very best.


I'd be happy with a 5 year, 30 million with 20 guaranteed and another possible 5 million if he continues to perform at the very top level. That's a lot of money, but NC is worth a lot of money.


I'd pay him near the top, but not over the top.

[The Leaper]

You keep Collins, as long as he isn't demanding crazy money. Like others have mentioned...Collins is a known commodity. He's not an elite player, but he's a very good one. He'll look even better if we can bolster our pass rush during the offseason.

[red]

if we do tag him at the highest level i just can't see anyone giving up a 1st and a 3rd for nick collins

[Joemailman]

if we do tag him at the highest level i just can't see anyone giving up a 1st and a 3rd for nick collins

If Collins is worth more than a 1st and a 3rd to the Packers, as most here seem to feel, why wouldn't he be worth a 1st and a 3rd to some other team?

[ThunderDan]

It is widely anticipated that if Nick Collins does not get a contract extension in the next couple of days that the Packers will apply the 1st and 3rd tender on him. It also seems to be widely anticipated that TT would match any offer rather than lose Collins.

However...this is considered to be a very strong draft. If another team were to offer Collins a contract, is it possible that TT doesn't have Collins evaluated as high as most of us, and would take the picks, giving him 5 picks in the top 86?

Even if he would be inclined to match, is it possible that some team would make Collins an offer so big that TT would not have the resources to match? Perhaps even a poison pill? A team that is a Super Bowl contender, but could use a safety? Like Minnesota? They gave up a 1st and 2 3rds for Jared Allen. Who's to say they wouldn't give up a 1st and 3rd for Nick Collins?

Any thoughts? Perhaps TT will sign Collins in the next 48 hours and make this a moot point.

That is a thought provoking question.

I think I would let a team take Nick Collins if it was a Tampa Bay, Washington, KC or other teams in that area. You would pretty much be assured of getting Eric Barry from Tenn and a high 3rd round pick.

I really like Collins but a 1 and a 3 high in the draft order would be damn hard to pass up in this draft.

[Fritz]

The problem also is one of timing. Your team just finished an 11-5 season and may be ready for a deep playoff push. If you give up Collins and get the 1 and 3, and even if you get an Eric Berry, he's still a rookie. He might be the best thing since sliced bread in two or three years, but if you think your team is primed right now for a Super Bowl run, do you put a rookie back there to run the show?

I dunno.

[Brandon494]

You really think someone with a top 5 or even top 15 pick when trade their 1st and 3rd for Nick Collins? :roll: Keep Dreaming....

[Brandon494]

PACKER UPDATE-
There’s absolutely no reason for Ted Thompson to offer safety Nick Collins a long-term contract. Why? Let another restricted free agent explain. “The teams have the leverage,” Giants defensive tackle Barry Cofield told the Newark Star-Ledger. “They have the opportunity to tender guys, keep them for cheap, and I expect them to do just that. They’re businessmen, this is a business, so that’s what I expect.” Granted, the former Northwestern star isn’t a two-time Pro Bowler, but he’s also not going to make over $3 million in 2010. “Look, the players agreed to this CBA in ‘06 and now they have to live with the ramifications,” opined an agent. “It’s easy to sympathize with the 212 players who will lose out on unrestricted free agency, but that’s life. The NFL isn’t a charity and its 32 teams are under no obligation to ‘make things right’ by handing out lucrative deals a year or two before they have to. In fact, they’d be downright foolish to do so.”

Thompson’s definitely no fool and that’s why very little progress has been made on a multi-year deal. It was never really about wanting to see how Collins played in the new defensive scheme. It was always more about the CBA. The Packers certainly aren’t a cheap organization, but they’re always well-aware of the bottom line. They have to be. That’s why Thompson tends to open up his wallet only when he absolutely has to or when a highly productive player is grossly underpaid. Otherwise, he prefers to sit back and let things work themselves out. That’s precisely the strategy he has been using when it comes to Collins and it’s the one that makes the most sense at this particular time.

Without a long-term contract in hand, there’s virtually no chance of seeing Collins at any of the offseason activities. In fact, he can’t participate in any of the mini-camps or OTAs without signing his tender – something he almost certainly isn’t going to do until training camp, if then. “This could get contentious, but the Packers and Collins won’t be the only team and restricted free agent engaged in this uncomfortable dance,” said the agent. “Similar situations will be happening all around the league. It’s just the way things are in 2010, and at some point, the players will have to accept that.” Perhaps, but few players are as enlightened as Cofield. Something tells us that Collins is going to create quite a stir in the weeks and months to come. And something tells us that Thompson won’t care

[ThunderDan]

You really think someone with a top 5 or even top 15 pick when trade their 1st and 3rd for Nick Collins? :roll: Keep Dreaming....

Why don't you re-read my post?
:roll:
I didn't say anyone would do it. I said that is where I would deal Collins because then you can make sure you get his replacement.

[hoosier]

PACKER UPDATE-
There’s absolutely no reason for Ted Thompson to offer safety Nick Collins a long-term contract. Why? Let another restricted free agent explain. “The teams have the leverage,” Giants defensive tackle Barry Cofield told the Newark Star-Ledger. “They have the opportunity to tender guys, keep them for cheap, and I expect them to do just that. They’re businessmen, this is a business, so that’s what I expect.” Granted, the former Northwestern star isn’t a two-time Pro Bowler, but he’s also not going to make over $3 million in 2010. “Look, the players agreed to this CBA in ‘06 and now they have to live with the ramifications,” opined an agent. “It’s easy to sympathize with the 212 players who will lose out on unrestricted free agency, but that’s life. The NFL isn’t a charity and its 32 teams are under no obligation to ‘make things right’ by handing out lucrative deals a year or two before they have to. In fact, they’d be downright foolish to do so.”

Thompson’s definitely no fool and that’s why very little progress has been made on a multi-year deal. It was never really about wanting to see how Collins played in the new defensive scheme. It was always more about the CBA. The Packers certainly aren’t a cheap organization, but they’re always well-aware of the bottom line. They have to be. That’s why Thompson tends to open up his wallet only when he absolutely has to or when a highly productive player is grossly underpaid. Otherwise, he prefers to sit back and let things work themselves out. That’s precisely the strategy he has been using when it comes to Collins and it’s the one that makes the most sense at this particular time.

Without a long-term contract in hand, there’s virtually no chance of seeing Collins at any of the offseason activities. In fact, he can’t participate in any of the mini-camps or OTAs without signing his tender – something he almost certainly isn’t going to do until training camp, if then. “This could get contentious, but the Packers and Collins won’t be the only team and restricted free agent engaged in this uncomfortable dance,” said the agent. “Similar situations will be happening all around the league. It’s just the way things are in 2010, and at some point, the players will have to accept that.” Perhaps, but few players are as enlightened as Cofield. Something tells us that Collins is going to create quite a stir in the weeks and months to come. And something tells us that Thompson won’t care

That argument certainly makes sense from an economic perspective. But recent history suggests that TT pays attention to other considerations as well. He was under no obligation to redo Driver's contract or extend Harris's when he did. Those were gestures intended to show that the Packers value their core players. If Collins is part of that core, I expect TT will at some point soon make a similar gesture. It could also be argued that Collins is not significantly underpaid at this point in his career, as Driver and Harris were.

[ThunderDan]

The problem also is one of timing. Your team just finished an 11-5 season and may be ready for a deep playoff push. If you give up Collins and get the 1 and 3, and even if you get an Eric Berry, he's still a rookie. He might be the best thing since sliced bread in two or three years, but if you think your team is primed right now for a Super Bowl run, do you put a rookie back there to run the show?

I dunno.

That's a good point also.

On the flip side, if you find the next Ronnie Lott or Ed Reed the drop off may not be too steep and would be hardly noticable. Plus you get an extra 3rd that you can package and move up in the 1st round to get the OT you want instead of having to wait and see what is left at 23.

And before anyone goes crazy, this is what I would do. Not that the Packers are going to do it or are remotely thinking about it.

[MadScientist]

The problem also is one of timing. Your team just finished an 11-5 season and may be ready for a deep playoff push. If you give up Collins and get the 1 and 3, and even if you get an Eric Berry, he's still a rookie. He might be the best thing since sliced bread in two or three years, but if you think your team is primed right now for a Super Bowl run, do you put a rookie back there to run the show?

I dunno.

That's a good point also.

On the flip side, if you find the next Ronnie Lott or Ed Reed the drop off may not be too steep and would be hardly noticable. Plus you get an extra 3rd that you can package and move up in the 1st round to get the OT you want instead of having to wait and see what is left at 23.

And before anyone goes crazy, this is what I would do. Not that the Packers are going to do it or are remotely thinking about it.

And if the other team could get a Lott or Reed with that pick, why would they bother giving that plus a 3rd for Collins?

While the Packers aren't forced to do anything in the way of a long term contract, ticking off the star players isn't good business. I expect Collins will get a decent long term contract, but at a bit below the rate he would get as a UFA.

[ThunderDan]

The problem also is one of timing. Your team just finished an 11-5 season and may be ready for a deep playoff push. If you give up Collins and get the 1 and 3, and even if you get an Eric Berry, he's still a rookie. He might be the best thing since sliced bread in two or three years, but if you think your team is primed right now for a Super Bowl run, do you put a rookie back there to run the show?

I dunno.

That's a good point also.

On the flip side, if you find the next Ronnie Lott or Ed Reed the drop off may not be too steep and would be hardly noticable. Plus you get an extra 3rd that you can package and move up in the 1st round to get the OT you want instead of having to wait and see what is left at 23.

And before anyone goes crazy, this is what I would do. Not that the Packers are going to do it or are remotely thinking about it.

And if the other team could get a Lott or Reed with that pick, why would they bother giving that plus a 3rd for Collins?

While the Packers aren't forced to do anything in the way of a long term contract, ticking off the star players isn't good business. I expect Collins will get a decent long term contract, but at a bit below the rate he would get as a UFA.

Its highly unlikely. I guess you have the bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

Can a struggling franchise afford pick after pick in the top 10 without crippling themselves long-term? In that case a safe player like Nick Collins would be worth a lot.

I agree with your last paragraph. I think Collins will get a long-term contract at some point this year.

[packerbacker1234]

No idea why we would consider letting Collins go.

Say we aim for this safety everyone is talking about.

- Other teams obviously know about him, were not the only team looking to possibly draft the guy.

- What guarentee is there that he wont be a bust and will be the next big thing at safety? There isn't one.

What do we know about collins?

- Top 5 FS in the league.
- Getting more consistent play at the "top" level of his game each year.
- Is a proven commodity on a playoff/superbowl contendor
- Is the leader of the secondary
- Experienced in current system

I mean, why would we give that up? And who says collins can't be an ed reed? Great ball sense and picking off stuff left and right. He already is good in run support (not great) and pretty decent in coverage... his int numbers are going up and I have no real complaints about him last year. In previous years it was a wonder that he wasn't consistently great, but he has slowly gotten more consistent with each season.

Meanwhile, we trade him off for some picks at the expense of costing us a shot at teh SB? really? At his age?

He's one of the best in the game, why would we want to let him go? I think hoping the next guy is Ed Reed is so unrealistic it baffles me it was brought up. Ed Reed is just special at the position, absolutely special. Possibly the greatest safety to ever play the game, all around. Collins is meanwhile a top 5 FS, which to me, makes him a premier safety in this league.

Sorry, I'd lock him up long haul.

[gbgary]

a signed, happy, collins is better than any alternative.

[Fritz]

I don't think anyone here is seriously advocating that TT ship Collins off. The idea is more along the "what if" lines. One factor that hasn't been mentioned much is the cost of the contract. Sure, it's uncapped this year or will be soon, but there's talk that a future agreement could hold owners responsible for any contracts they hand out in this uncapped year.

But what if a Dan Snyder doesn't care and gives Nick Collins a bajillion dollar contract? I mean, I love Nicky and all, but what if he gets an absolutely stoopid contract from someone? Then what? And what if it could cost you down the road?

Having said that, I think the consensus is that the team would be better off signing Collins to a big but relatively reasonable (given what that means for an NFL top safety) contract.

[Kiwon]

I hope the Pack can keep Collins.

If he's smart, he'll sign a multi-year contract with a sizeable bonus before the possible players' strike in 2011.

[red]

its official, nick got the highest tender. a 1st and a 3rd

i really doubt anyone would give that up in a pretty deep draft at safety

so it looks like a safe bet that he's our safety next season

[Fritz]

Agreed. Unless...unless the Vikings decide a late round first and third are not too much to give up for a guy whose signing will hurt a division rival and put them over the top....

I doubt it would happen. I'm just sayin'.

[vince]

Fortunately, the restriction puts the Packers in a no-lose situation here. You don't want to lose Collins, but I don't think Collins is worth a 1 and 3, so if someone makes an offer the team can't justify matching, the compensation is more than fair.

[mission]

Picks from losing a RFA are applied to this year's upcoming draft, correct?

[retailguy]

Collins is a legit top 5 safety in my opinion. He's not Troy Polamalu or Ed Reed though. He's not as consistent as the very best.




Collins is a good safety and I'm damn glad we got him, but top 5? No chance. He's not "that" good. If they'd have tendered him at a 1st round pick we'd have likely kept him too.

My guess is that the thinking was that NO (or some other low 1st round team) would have tried to poach him with the 1st round tender, since they've got the weakest 1st round pick, it wasn't worth the risk... :wink:

glad he's sticking around, but just don't agree with top 5....

[Scott Campbell]

its official, nick got the highest tender. a 1st and a 3rd

i really doubt anyone would give that up in a pretty deep draft at safety

so it looks like a safe bet that he's our safety next season



Heck, I hope somebody would give up that much. I'd take it.

[mngolf19]

Agreed. Unless...unless the Vikings decide a late round first and third are not too much to give up for a guy whose signing will hurt a division rival and put them over the top....

I doubt it would happen. I'm just sayin'.

Fritz they mentioned the Vikes doing something similar in the Mpls paper today. They had the Vikes looking at giving up their 1 and 3 for Jahri Evans of NO if possible.

[Scott Campbell]

Unlike the draft order, these high round tenders sure do create a huge advantage for the good teams in the league.

[Fritz]

That's a good point, Scott. There's a huge difference between losing the 29th pick overall and the 10th pick overall.

But then again, if you have one of the top 2 or 3 picks in the draft, the rookie money is so stupid that if you felt none of the top three guys had that value and potential, why not trade away the albatross of that pick for a proven player who is probably young, too?

[pbmax]

Picks from losing a RFA are applied to this year's upcoming draft, correct?
Yes.

[RashanGary]

Collins was 2nd team all pro this year and a probowler again. Of the top safeties, Collins is the youngest.

I still think he's top 5. Physically, he's top 1 or 2. Playmaking, he's top 2 or 3. Consistency is where he lacks so he drops out of that elite discussion (Reed, Polamalu). He's in that next tier down from elite. Legit starting probowl, 2nd team all pro. That's top 5. Only a handful of others played at that level the last 2 years and Collins is still on the rise.

I'd say you underrate Collins.

[red]

Collins was 2nd team all pro this year and a probowler again. Of the top safeties, Collins is the youngest.

I still think he's top 5. Physically, he's top 1 or 2. Playmaking, he's top 2 or 3. Consistency is where he lacks so he drops out of that elite discussion (Reed, Polamalu). He's in that next tier down from elite. Legit starting probowl, 2nd team all pro. That's top 5. Only a handful of others played at that level the last 2 years and Collins is still on the rise.

I'd say you underrate Collins.

disagree, i'd say top 10 but no higher

last year he finally started to pick the ball off, and he has a great ability to run back every int for a td

other then the td's, imo, he isn't anything special. he's not bad at anything (like sharper is) but he's not special either

if someone gives up a first and third, i'd be happy and hope we get a decent safety someplace else.

if nobody else wants him and we keep him, i'd be happy too

[The Leaper]

Unlike the draft order, these high round tenders sure do create a huge advantage for the good teams in the league.

Yeah...but aren't the highest finishing teams from last year limited on signing free agents? This year, it's kind of moot.

[red]

Unlike the draft order, these high round tenders sure do create a huge advantage for the good teams in the league.

Yeah...but aren't the highest finishing teams from last year limited on signing free agents? This year, it's kind of moot.

i think that just counts for unrestricted free agents, not restricted FA's

[RashanGary]

Wow, 10th best. . Doesn't even belong in the probowl, let alone starting or 2nd team all pro. Players and coahces, and media members have him vastly overrated.

[red]

Wow, 10th best. . Doesn't even belong in the probowl, let alone starting or 2nd team all pro. Players and coahces, and media members have him vastly overrated.

yes, IMO

flashy int's returned for TD's = highlights

highlights = pro bowls

other then the td's what does he do that makes him special?

darren sharper made the pro bowl too, and he just did what he always does. make the big play 5% of the time and be a below average safety the rest of the time. thats exactly why it was time for him to leave green bay, thats why the queens dumped him, and if i'm not mistaken its why the saints just let him walk

now i don't think collins is as bad as sharper, but take away the big returns and you're left with a pretty decent safety, but not special

[Brandon494]

but he does makes those INT which makes him a special player.

Please name five FS you rank above Nick Collins

[Bretsky]

I think I'd put Collins in the 4-7 range; honestly there are not a tremendous number of great safeties right now. It's hard to name five that are better.

The argument to be made if you say top ten.....is that Collins should be bunched in and considered about even with about the second tier of safeties....or a group of 5-8.

But it'd be hard to name five you'd rather have then Collins.

[Gunakor]

other then the td's what does he do that makes him special?

13 INT's over the past 2 seasons. 2nd amongst safeties in INT's both years (tied for 2nd overall in 2008). That's not a fluke, that's a trend. I'd say that makes him special. Maybe not HOF quality, but special nonetheless.

[Bretsky]

Wow, 10th best. . Doesn't even belong in the probowl, let alone starting or 2nd team all pro. Players and coahces, and media members have him vastly overrated.

yes, IMO

flashy int's returned for TD's = highlights

highlights = pro bowls

other then the td's what does he do that makes him special?

darren sharper made the pro bowl too, and he just did what he always does. make the big play 5% of the time and be a below average safety the rest of the time. thats exactly why it was time for him to leave green bay, thats why the queens dumped him, and if i'm not mistaken its why the saints just let him walk

now i don't think collins is as bad as sharper, but take away the big returns and you're left with a pretty decent safety, but not special


Sharper, overall, is a SOLID safety !! You got your FFL draft scouts giving you safety info ? :lol:

Maybe Watching Collins play next to Atari's game has cause me to have an inflated view of Collins but I still find it hard to name five that are better

[Gunakor]

I can't think of 5 better free safeties than Collins either. Brian Dawkins is comparable, Kerry Rhodes, Michael Griffin and Brandon Meriweather are a shade below. Ed Reed is certainly better, but it seems like he's always injured nowadays. Beyond that I can't think of any other FS worth having this discussion about.

[steve823]

I can't think of 5 better free safeties than Collins either. Brian Dawkins is comparable, Kerry Rhodes, Michael Griffin and Brandon Meriweather are a shade below. Ed Reed is certainly better, but it seems like he's always injured nowadays. Beyond that I can't think of any other FS worth having this discussion about.

Antoine Bethea and Mike Griffin are both good free safeties too, but I agree with your point. Not many safeties can compare with Collins. He may not be an elite player, but he is still one of the top safeties.

[RashanGary]

Sharper, overall, is a SOLID safety !! You got your FFL draft scouts giving you safety info ? :lol:




Agreed. Especially the years he had in Minnesota. He left here, seemed to get himself in the best shape of his career and hand 3 or 4 outstanding years for them.

The number of interceptions he got, how long he played, the SB ring. . . He's had an outstanding NFL career.

His career is just about over, but it's been a great one. I don't think he's as good as Reed or Polamalu but all we see of Reed and Polamalu are highlights anyway. Maybe we watch a few games. I think the standard that safeties never get beat is just as foolish as CB's never getting beat or QB's never making bad throws. These guys are on the best stage. The way we're judging our safeties around here, especially Collins and Sharper, shit, it just seems down-right ridiculous.

[RashanGary]

As far as Collins goes, he's one of the best ball hawks in the NFL. He's the fastest safety in the NFL. He's one of the surest tacklers.


Ed Reed - 32
Dawkins - 36
Sharper - 34

Troy Polamalu - 28
Adrian Wilson - 30
Brandon Merriweather - 26
Nick Collins - 26
Antrel Rolle - 27
Bob Sanders - 27
Antoine Bethea - 25
Chris Hope -29


Polamalu is the gold standard right now. Reed was, but is getting older. I guess you could make the case for Collins anywhere between 3 and 10. He's not as accomplished as some of the older players but he's been more effective the last two years than any of them, including Polamalu.

Because of his young age, incredible athleticism, elite tackling ability, health and nose for the ball, I feel comfortable putting him in the top 5. I can see, if you're a hater and want to show up for the free agency period (the one time of year when the Thompson haters have over 2% of the Packer posting volume, so think they are making sense to anyone but themselves), it would be easy to dismiss what Collins does on top of all the other good things that are happening in Green Bay.

[Fritz]

Rolle's signing had to make Collins's agent smile.

[RashanGary]

Rolle's signing had to make Collins's agent smile.

Yep.

The Packers have the choice to sit back, tender him this year, franchise him next year and franchise him the year after that (essentially making it a 3 year contract, that goes year by year rather than committing huge money and risking injury).

Collins and his agent know that. They know they're only option is to hold out until the season starts.


Ultimately, I think the Packers are going to have to get close to that contract to make Collins happy. I don't think anyone wants the drawn out drama that is going to come with a long contract battle. I hope the Packers recognize they have a great player, he's put his time in and try to avoid the hold out. I hope Collins recognizes that he's not a UFA, the team does have some leverage and rather than force a record breaking deal, flex a little and take maybe 34 million with 12 guaranteed and some incentives tied in rather than making it ugly for a couple million of dollars that the Packers will never part with (they have the power to go year by year and they'd rather go year by year than pay it all up front).

The benefit of waiting until the last moment to work out a deal is that you never have players coming back 2 years later demanding more and you don't have to risk up front money on a player that can get injured. The downfall is that if they continue to ascend, their price goes up. Ted's approach has benefits and downfalls. We just paid a 33 year old tackle 7 mil per year because we let him get to UFA. We've let Collins get to a point where he can legally hold out. That's what happens when you wait. Now we have to play fair and give him close to UFA price or he will hold out and hurt the team. That's the way it works. This is one of the bigger challenges of Ted's style.

[RashanGary]

I like Ted's approach. It really limits the injury risks. Also, even when players do sign early deals, they come back bitching for more (see McKenzie, Boldin, Grant, Driver, Tauscher and others). . . At the end of the day, there is very little benefit to locking up the early deals because they just become trouble.


So you wait, you don't give much up front but you wait until a player has more bargaining power. What you gain in lessening the early risk and lessening the early dollars, you have to pay for by working through more challenging contract situations.

That's where we are. It's a challenging contract, but I think both sides have to work together on this and it can have a happy ending. On our end, I don't think it's worth a million per year to have these hold outs every year. On Collins end, I don't think it's worth a million per year to increase his injury risk after a hold out, to go through the hold out, to make it harder to focus on football, to give up the big up front check all for 1 million per year.

Find a happy middle guys. Make this thing work.

[MJZiggy]

When have Taush or Driver ever come back bitching for more? Ted offered Driver an upgrade. He didn't need to do that. He takes care of the core and I do believe he'll take care of Collins before too long.

Also, when you look at the career ints to determine who's elite, you also have to factor in the length of the career. Reed, Dawkins and Sharper have high numbers, but much longer careers than the others on the list.

[RashanGary]

The main point there was that if you give a player money up front (take on additional risk) in exchange for a better price, you don't really get a better price. The player get's his money up front and if the player outperforms, they go asking for more money anyway, so what was the benefit of the team giving money up front? None. All benefit to the player.

Make them wait, then give them a fair deal. The contract is harder to negotiate when you get close to UFA (that's where we are now with Collins), but there would have been no benefit to locking him up early as he would be bitching 2 years down the road that he's worth more than 3.5 mil per year and we'd get a hold out anyway. Regardless, there is no way around NFL contracts being difficult and while I like Ted's approach, it doesn't take away all of the difficulty. Here we are now, in a difficult situation.

[Bretsky]

TT has the leverage here; Collins has none. This might get a bit ugly here but TT has to play the waiting game on this one........given the state of the salary cap...the Roelle deal just made it worse.

[RashanGary]

I'd say 50/50 right now. It could work out, it could get ugly.

If Collins agent wants to try to force anything more than Collins is worth, it's going to get ugly. Ted's building a history of not getting pushed around. Hopefully some of these past situations help remind these agents that Ted is perfectly willing to take on a long, ugly fight if he knows it's right (see the Brett Favre and Javon Walker dramas). It could be one of the ugly fights, or it could pan out. I think most of that will be up to Collins because the Packers have a solid history of being fair.

[pbmax]

There was an article last year that Driver had, publicly or privately, asked for a contract adjustment each year, for something like 4 straight years. So, yes, I think both of them (Tauscher got adjusted a couple of years into his last multi-year contract) have asked for more and gotten it.

But Collins might not get that second franchise tender. After the first, he would be eligible for the 20% salary increase the second year. That adds up quickly.

[retailguy]

Ted's building a history of not getting pushed around.

I agree with this. He just taught clifton a hell of a lesson about asking for too much money.

[pbmax]

Ted's building a history of not getting pushed around.

I agree with this. He just taught clifton a hell of a lesson about asking for too much money.
I can't tell if this is a critique or not, RG. Unless its a very odd deal, Thompson and Ball just guaranteed less money for a 3 year deal than the franchise tag would have given him for one. And no one would have blinked if they franchised Clifton and then done something longer term with Pickett.

Clifton is averaging under 7 mil per year in the deal and probably can be cut after one year with little dead money and/or cap hit.

And if earlier reports are to be believed, 3 years and 20 million PLUS guaranteed money in line with Flozell Adams' deal (16 mil guaranteed) were Sexton's targets. The Packers gave him the years and the average, but got a much more reasonable guarantee in return (less than half of 16 on a deal that is exactly half as long). That seems to be the definition of fair and equitable, with both sides giving up something.

[RashanGary]

A VERY positive breakthrough on the Collins front:




Signed by the New York Giants, safety Antrel Rolle, five years, $37 million, $15 million guaranteed.

Collins may be locked into free-agent purgatory, but he just found out what a guy with lesser credentials can get on the open market. Given Collins has more Pro Bowl selections (2 to 1), interceptions (17 to 12), passes defended (50 to 34) and forced fumbles (5 to 3) in the same number of seasons as Rolle, it would be reasonable to think he is deserving of a better deal.

Collins' agent, Allen Herman, said he wasn't specifically looking at Rolle's deal because Collins is in a different situation. Rolle was able to negotiate that contract as a complete free agent and Collins comes with first- and third-round draft choice compensation tied to him.

Herman said he thinks there are a number of progressive-thinking teams that will negotiate favorably with restricted free agents who were scheduled to be unrestricted with a salary cap. He said some teams will recognize that a cap will return and by signing players to long-term deals this year, they'll be able to write off big chunks of the contract now, leaving lesser amounts to count in the future.

Asked if he thought the Packers were one of those progressive teams, Herman said yes.

"If you look at what they did with Clifton, it's obvious they're trying to keep the team together," Herman said. "They're right on the cusp of something special."ent situation. Rolle was able to negotiate that contract as a complete free agent and Collins comes with first- and third-round draft choice compensation tied to him."

[RashanGary]

Like we talked about earlier, if Collins and his agent understand that they're not unrestricted, this thing can go smoothly.

Certainly Collins deserves a boat load of money, near the top of his position, but if him and his agent recognize that you don't get record breakers when you're restricted, this thing can work out really well for both sides. I think the Packers want to pay him what he's worth and he wants to get paid what he's worth. I think that can happen now. I was worried about how the Collins camp would view this and I'm not nearly as worried anymore.

I'm going to guess 5 years, 32 with 10 up front and some of it tied to incentives. Just a really good deal for a safety, money up front, fair but not over the top price. Just a good, fair deal that makes Collins a wealthy man and give the Packers a long term deal with one of hteir best players.

[RashanGary]

Ted's building a history of not getting pushed around.

I agree with this. He just taught clifton a hell of a lesson about asking for too much money.

Looked like a pretty fair deal. Clifton never held out, never went public trying to force an issue. There was never a stand. . . It was just normal business and as we're accustomed to with Ted. When a player isn't a total wack job, it goes pretty smoothly.

[Gunakor]

As far as Collins goes, he's one of the best ball hawks in the NFL. He's the fastest safety in the NFL. He's one of the surest tacklers.


Ed Reed - 32
Dawkins - 36
Sharper - 34

Troy Polamalu - 28
Adrian Wilson - 30
Brandon Merriweather - 26
Nick Collins - 26
Antrel Rolle - 27
Bob Sanders - 27
Antoine Bethea - 25
Chris Hope -29


Polamalu is the gold standard right now. Reed was, but is getting older. I guess you could make the case for Collins anywhere between 3 and 10. He's not as accomplished as some of the older players but he's been more effective the last two years than any of them, including Polamalu.

Because of his young age, incredible athleticism, elite tackling ability, health and nose for the ball, I feel comfortable putting him in the top 5. I can see, if you're a hater and want to show up for the free agency period (the one time of year when the Thompson haters have over 2% of the Packer posting volume, so think they are making sense to anyone but themselves), it would be easy to dismiss what Collins does on top of all the other good things that are happening in Green Bay.

Troy Polamalu, Adrian Wilson and Chris Hope are SS. And Bob Sanders is a cripple.

[packers11]

good job Giants for making Nick Collins 10x harder to pay now... :bang:

Rolle is so overrated, Collins is way better IMO...

[gbgary]

good job Giants for making Nick Collins 10x harder to pay now... :bang:



well...that's what happens when you decide to play games.

[Lurker64]

Honestly, the Packers are in a decent position in terms of getting Collins paid. Working on the assumption that a salary cap will return eventually, they're free to massively front-load the contract (as much as they feel comfortable spending this year), and then have him count comparatively little towards the cap.

Since Collins is in a position of having relatively little freedom in all of this (he's an RFA this year, and he can be franchised relatively cheaply next year), he might as well go along with whatever reasonably generous offer the team sees fit to extend to him.

[pbmax]

Honestly, the Packers are in a decent position in terms of getting Collins paid. Working on the assumption that a salary cap will return eventually, they're free to massively front-load the contract (as much as they feel comfortable spending this year), and then have him count comparatively little towards the cap.

Since Collins is in a position of having relatively little freedom in all of this (he's an RFA this year, and he can be franchised relatively cheaply next year), he might as well go along with whatever reasonably generous offer the team sees fit to extend to him.
True. He is possibly two years away from at least having the leverage of being overly expensive (franchise tag). One year is a risk, two at under $4 million per for each is a big risk.

[RashanGary]

Did anyone read where Collins' agent said they aren't using Rolle's contract as a major sticking point because Rolle negotiated that with no restrictions and Collins has a 1st and 3rd restriction.

The guy sounds like he understands the Packers don't have to and won't pay that price. Sounds like he's realistic with his negotiations.

That was the first thing from the Collins camp that makes me think this thing is going to go well. I have a feeling we'll see Collins locked up before TC starts to a deal less than Rolle's.

[pbmax]

Did anyone read where Collins' agent said they aren't using Rolle's contract as a major sticking point because Rolle negotiated that with no restrictions and Collins has a 1st and 3rd restriction.

The guy sounds like he understands the Packers don't have to and won't pay that price. Sounds like he's realistic with his negotiations....
Yes, and he probably meant it a little. But it still helps Herman/Collins more than the Packers to do a deal early, esp. if he is an RFA next year as well.

Herman was quite aggressive with Grant's situation and it paid off. He would tell us all we look like we just lost 15 pounds if he thought that would get him a deal earlier.

[RashanGary]

He won't be a RFA next year as far as I can tell. He will have 6 accrued years. He'll get a franchise tag tough.

With all respect to Thompson and the Packers, Collins doesn't have a contract right now. The only right he has now is to not sign that thing. It's not a ton of leverage, but Nick is one of our best players on defense and it certainly hurts the Packers to not have him there during camp.

The Packers have more leverage, but Collins has some. I think it's gotten to the point where it makes sense for both sides to start ironing out a deal. Collins has done everything right. There is no reason to make him wait longer. If the price turns out to be unrealistic, sure, but I don't see any reason the Packers have to be hard asses to Collins here. He's done nothing but do everything right.

[pbmax]

Yep, blew that one. He will have six years next year.

[Fritz]

Did anyone read where Collins' agent said they aren't using Rolle's contract as a major sticking point because Rolle negotiated that with no restrictions and Collins has a 1st and 3rd restriction.

The guy sounds like he understands the Packers don't have to and won't pay that price. Sounds like he's realistic with his negotiations....
Yes, and he probably meant it a little. But it still helps Herman/Collins more than the Packers to do a deal early, esp. if he is an RFA next year as well.

Herman was quite aggressive with Grant's situation and it paid off. He would tell us all we look like we just lost 15 pounds if he thought that would get him a deal earlier.

That sh_t wouldn't fly with me. If I lost 15 pounds I'd look like I just came out of a Nazi prison camp.

[steve823]

Why can't we just try to sign him this year and try to front-load the contract to help us out a lot in the future? Isn't that the advantage of this uncapped year? I mean I know negotiations weren't going well until recently ,but I just thought that getting it done this year would be to our advantage.

[gbgary]

He won't be a RFA next year as far as I can tell. He will have 6 accrued years. He'll get a franchise tag tough.

With all respect to Thompson and the Packers, Collins doesn't have a contract right now. The only right he has now is to not sign that thing. It's not a ton of leverage, but Nick is one of our best players on defense and it certainly hurts the Packers to not have him there during camp.

The Packers have more leverage, but Collins has some. I think it's gotten to the point where it makes sense for both sides to start ironing out a deal. Collins has done everything right. There is no reason to make him wait longer. If the price turns out to be unrealistic, sure, but I don't see any reason the Packers have to be hard asses to Collins here. He's done nothing but do everything right.

yup...do it NOW or it may cost rolle money, or more, next year.

[packers11]

Why can't we just try to sign him this year and try to front-load the contract to help us out a lot in the future? Isn't that the advantage of this uncapped year? I mean I know negotiations weren't going well until recently ,but I just thought that getting it done this year would be to our advantage.

I was thinking the same thing... Give him a 6 year 40 mill deal with atleast 10-15 million coming from the first year. Mine as well take advantage of the no cap. Am I missing something?

[pbmax]

Well, either Herman is just fantastic at generating good pub or Collins thinks they are going to get a deal done. Might be trying to ride the Antrel Rolle wave into a deal before someone else signs to change the numbers.

Collins signs his tender. (http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/87114157.html)

Has anyone seen numbers for Ryan Clark?

[hoosier]

According to AP it is 4 years, $14M total. No word on the structuring.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Ryan Clark isn't anywhere near Collins, and I doubt his deal will have any impact on Collins. That would be like Brandon Chillar's deal affecting Julius Peppers.
:D

[RashanGary]

Well, either Herman is just fantastic at generating good pub or Collins thinks they are going to get a deal done. Might be trying to ride the Antrel Rolle wave into a deal before someone else signs to change the numbers.

Collins signs his tender. (http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/87114157.html)

Has anyone seen numbers for Ryan Clark?

Honestly, this is not a surprise. The Packers locked up Rodgers a year before UFA. They locked up Barnett a year before UFA. Donald Lee, Ryan Grant, Donald Driver, Al Harris, Brady Poppinga, Brandon Chillar, Cullen Jenkins all before UFA.


Collins' agent came out already and said he wasn't using Rolles deal because that was unrestricted and Collins is restricted. If JS wasn't such a crock of crap news paper, anyone with a brain would have known Collins and his agent are not asking for unrealistic numbers.

Now this comes out, and despite a lot of information pointing toward this thing having a happy ending, there is this strange perception (mainly created by JS and their idioticly transparent pot stirring, paper selling garbage). Anyone with half a brain would ignore any sentiment given by JS. Just listen to the press conferences yourself. Use your own sense. Don't rely on a journalist who has more motivation to sell papers than to create an honest impression. They don't lie directly, but what's the harm in making an impressin that's a little juicier or to keep a source. I guess nothing if everyone and their brother knew what a crock it was. The problem is, people trust these idiots. It causes drama where there is non.

[RashanGary]

dp

[TennesseePackerBacker]

This is a positive step forward. One would think a deal would get done very shortly. It's also a good PR move on the part of Collins agent. The ball is in GB's court now. If they don't actively pursue a deal it could reverberate to other Packers FA signings in the future. I don't see how the Packers can't close on this now.

[Tony Oday]

He will get paid and I hope he does...though I hope we find an SS more ;)

[pbmax]

Ryan Clark isn't anywhere near Collins, and I doubt his deal will have any impact on Collins. That would be like Brandon Chillar's deal affecting Julius Peppers.
:D
I don't know. I have seen both disappear at key times in games. :lol:

[pbmax]

Well, either Herman is just fantastic at generating good pub or Collins thinks they are going to get a deal done. Might be trying to ride the Antrel Rolle wave into a deal before someone else signs to change the numbers.

Collins signs his tender. (http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/87114157.html)

Has anyone seen numbers for Ryan Clark?

Honestly, this is not a surprise. The Packers locked up Rodgers a year before UFA. They locked up Barnett a year before UFA. Donald Lee, Ryan Grant, Donald Driver, Al Harris, Brady Poppinga, Brandon Chillar, Cullen Jenkins all before UFA.


Collins' agent came out already and said he wasn't using Rolles deal because that was unrestricted and Collins is restricted. If JS wasn't such a crock of crap news paper, anyone with a brain would have known Collins and his agent are not asking for unrealistic numbers.

Now this comes out, and despite a lot of information pointing toward this thing having a happy ending, there is this strange perception (mainly created by JS and their idioticly transparent pot stirring, paper selling garbage). Anyone with half a brain would ignore any sentiment given by JS. Just listen to the press conferences yourself. Use your own sense. Don't rely on a journalist who has more motivation to sell papers than to create an honest impression. They don't lie directly, but what's the harm in making an impressin that's a little juicier or to keep a source. I guess nothing if everyone and their brother knew what a crock it was. The problem is, people trust these idiots. It causes drama where there is non.
Justin, you cannot take the word of an agent at face value. If he didn't use the Rolle contract in some manner, he should be sued for breach of fiduciary duty. He is just greasing the skids for the PR battle. Now, he may be right, it may not be much of a battle, but he was also the only guy talking while Grant was holding out. And not even Herman has revealed what the Packers are thinking.

Signing the tender could simply be a goodwill gesture.

And I would trust the journalist before the agent, if the agent worked for someone beside myself. The journalist must rely to some degree on his reputation to ensure employment, readership and access. The agent only needs to serve a single player. And it may serve that player to dissemble to the public.

[bobblehead]

I think everyone misread this situation. With the 1 and 3 attached I would bet Collins has not even heard a peep of an offer. Not even a cricket chirping. I think the agent and he decided "hey, we are signing the deal sooner or later, if we sign it now we get goodwill". The pack want to lock him up, he wants a long term deal, by signing he gets goodwill and attends offseason stuff. But signed it FOR the goodwill...nah.

[pbmax]

I just went back and re-read this stuff. There is no indication that the Packers have moved in any direction since last year when they could not agree.

When the negotiations with Grant were going nowhere, Herman started popping up everywhere in the State to comment on the lack of progress. Training camp was just about to begin and Favre-a-palooza was in full swing. I am getting a distinct feeling of Drew Rosenhaus from this guy. I think he is simply trying to create public pressure. I doubt its a coincidence this happened shortly after Kampman left.

Or I am simply far too cynical to believe in good faith gestures.

[vince]

I agree with Bobble and PB that they’re not close to a deal because if things were close, they would hold off on signing the tender and just wait for the deal in that case. If negotiations were active and the team had urgency here to progress to a deal, signing the tender now only hurts Collin's negotiating position and doesn't make sense.

However, given IMO the more likely case where the team is not actively negotiating, it seems to me that NOT signing the tender would spur greater public pressure/urgency on the team to negotiate than signing it, so I don’t think the public pressure play is the main reason for signing. I think the strategy is to make a good faith gesture to the Packers to get them to the table, as I think you’re saying Bobble. This could be based on some discussion that would likely be characterized as less than a negotiation that Thompson and the agent reportedly had at the combine.

That said, signing the tender obviously is a good sign for those who want to see smooth negotiations and Collins be a Packer for a long time no matter how close they may be to a long-term deal or what the actual motivation for doing so may be.

Justin, you seem to be all over this situation and I agree with much of your assessment of it, except for one thing you are saying. I disagree that locking up players to early deals is a bad move because they just become trouble in the later years of the deal, forcing a renegotiation and eliminating any discount the early deal may have included. Players rarely have the leverage to force teams to renegotiate in those situations, although teams often renegotiate because it's in their best interests too.

Locked down players can bitch until they’re blue in the face, but that doesn’t change the fact that the team holds all the cards in these situations and the player will usually hurt their position, at least publicly, by making efforts to renegotiate ugly.

Even in this situation where Collins was not technically under contract (although he was/is under control of the Packers for the next 3 years if they want it as you’ve stated with the RFA tender/Franchise tags - which pretty much amounts to the same thing as being under contract), that lesson has already been learned, and is being implemented by Collins’ agent here. Collins has clearly outperformed his original deal, and by signing the tender, is now locked in at a discounted rate for 2010 too, but the most effective strategy for him is not to become trouble as you indicated they should or would do in this case. He seems to be taking the position that, given the control the Packer possess, he’s willing to sign a deal for under market rate relative to if he were a UFA.

Another case is Rodgers’ contract. The Packers, by signing him early, have locked down a top 5 QB long-term for what will amount to be far below market rate, particularly as soon as Manning signs a new deal. Now the Packers may choose to renegotiate later on (probably not for at least 2-3 more years), but that will be because the team thinks it’s in their best interests to do so at that time. Rodgers’ only leverage point would be if he outperforms the original contract, which is what the Packers hope he does anyway! Rather than waiting for Rodgers to become firmly entrenched as a $20 mil/year QB, the Packers are likely to get discounted production by signing him early for some number of years until they think it makes sense for them to renegotiate and get new discounted production for more years. All the while, everyone is happy.

Obviously you have to do the deals with the right players, and I agree that Ted often has a bit more of a tendency to wait and let these things sort themselves out, thus paying more current market rates at times, which is probably prudent because you're not always right. But signing (the right) players early and seeing them outplay their deals is exactly what is needed for consistent winning. Renegotiate up if/when it makes sense, but do it when you hold the cards and when you think it’s the right thing for the team – not when the player holds the leverage and they know it’s the right thing for themselves.

Signing Collins this year at some point means, as you’ve stated, they will get a better deal for some number of years than if/when he’s a UFA. That’s the whole point of having (the right) players locked down early.

[Fritz]

My question in these cases is this: what kind of guy is he?

If he's of the Cletidus Hunt variety, signing that big deal early (and probably ever) is a bad idea, because his motivation is then gone and he's in the tank.

I think Thompson had no qualms about Rodgers's signing because TT knew what kind of guy Rodgers was. He wasn't going to sign and then slack.

It doesn't appear Collins is that kind of guy, either, though my sense is that it took a little longer for Collins to become that kind of guy. But he is now, so I think a deal makes sense.

The puzzling guy in all this is Jolly. He can be a force, but is he motivated if he has a big contract in his back pocket? I bet Ted spends a lotta nights wondering about that.

[RashanGary]

Over the last year or so, McCarthy and Thompson have both said they were moving into the next stage of building this team and now they are going to have to identify the core players to give 2nd contracts to.

At the combine, Thompson said he Nick Collins is one of the core players they want to keep on the team.

A big part of the worry is that we know Collins is not as good as a Troy Polamalu or Ed Reed but may want to be paid as an elite player. Then a lesser but unrestricted player, Rolle, signed for what appears to be more than he's worth, possibly making negotiations tougher. Being restricted, though, Collins and his agent should know that they do not have the power to force as bad of a deal on teh Packers.

From teh Packers perspective, Collins is an upper tier safety, bordering on elite. He's just entering his prime. The Packers just said they value him as a core player they want to keep. Based on Jennings and Rodgers contracts and how I perceive Collins value, I think Collins will receive close to the total Rolle got, but less guranteed and more in incentives. Essentially we'd be getting a better player with a better contract that if Collins keeps playing the way he has, will look even better over time and if he falls off a little, will still be ok.

I think Ted Thompson is building solid relationships with these agents. By all accounts, everything Thompson does is straightforward and fair. For Collins to sign that tender, I think the Packers had to have told Collins agent they were serious about signing Nick, they felt he was the most value to the team if he was in the offseason program. Maybe they gave Herman a comfort level that the price was going to be high enough and Ted is known as being honest enough, that they felt little risk in signing. In fact, they might feel having Nick showing up, learning, working hard only increases his value to the team (and it does). If this thing gets ugly and NIck doesn't show up, the Packers signing the deal just becomes riskier (injuries after hold outs, poor play after not being in defense, etc). . If it starts ugly, it could finish ugly. Maybe both sides recognize that. Maybe Collins has communicated he wants a certain type of contract and the Packers have communicated that they believe he's worth a certain type of contract and now they have to start ironing out the details and exact amounts.


I see this thing going very well. From the agent understanding NIck is not unrestricted to the Packers waning Nick to be a core member of their team, to the Packers having a history of signing core players a year early, to Collins signing the tender. Everything about this says mutual compromise.

I'll bet Nick is signed before the start of the season to a deal that's very fair to both him and the Packers. Yet another step in the right direction for this team.

[vince]

Per Silverstein on Twitter (http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=382681)

Packers S Nick Collins signing three-year, $23.4 M contract extension, sources said. Will get $14 mil in the first year.

[swede]

Per Silverstein on Twitter (http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=382681)

Packers S Nick Collins signing three-year, $23.4 M contract extension, sources said. Will get $14 mil in the first year.

Any idea why the short deal? Is it so he can get paid big one more time, or does it have to do with the uncertainty of the present labor situation?

[mission]

Per Silverstein on Twitter (http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=382681)

Packers S Nick Collins signing three-year, $23.4 M contract extension, sources said. Will get $14 mil in the first year.

Any idea why the short deal? Is it so he can get paid big one more time, or does it have to do with the uncertainty of the present labor situation?

It's three years beyond the next one, right? I know some people were saying it's essentially a four year deal.

[Tarlam!]

I loved this and thought it worth sharing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TneH0aP1pdw&feature=player_embedded

[MJZiggy]

I loved this and thought it worth sharing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TneH0aP1pdw&feature=player_embedded

That is so damn fun!