Will the Packers find it harder to re-sign their own?

[Patler]

Having won the Super Bowl, is it now harder for the Packers to re-sign their own players? Since they have a ring, will Hawk, Jenkins, Colledge, Kuhn, Hall, etc. be more interested in maximum money than they might have been otherwise?

I think it will be for some who have not had huge paydays yet. The appeal of a ring might lessen in the face of financial security for life.

[Smidgeon]

It's only financial security if they treat it as such.

However, I see your point and originally thought it was coming from the angle of "other teams would pay more for a player from a Super Bowl winning team than the player is worth, thus making it difficult for the Packers to match." Some offers are too good to turn down regardless of the ring/financial security question.

[Patler]

It's only financial security if they treat it as such.

However, I see your point and originally thought it was coming from the angle of "other teams would pay more for a player from a Super Bowl winning team than the player is worth, thus making it difficult for the Packers to match." Some offers are too good to turn down regardless of the ring/financial security question.

I wasn't so much thinking that other teams will over-value them, but that they will have less incentive to stay in GB. To some, the ring means a lot, and now they have it. A poor team offering a better contract, say a larger guarantee even if total contract value is similar, might be more appealing to these guys now than it would have been before.

[RashanGary]

That might play into it a little. I think the money is the overriding motivation for any decision made by just about any NFL player.

I'd like to have all of our major UFA's, but I think they'll all get offers far greater than the one we have. When they leave, they'll feel like they're going to a team that really wants them where the Packers didn't want them enough to match the bid. It's true. The other team wants them more. The guys Ted wants around, he works with a year ahead of time, before the negotiation power shifts to the player. Hawk, Jones, Colledge and Jenkins were not identified as those types of players. I doubt we're going to put up a huge fight now, after we let them get this far. Colledge is the only one I could see us keeping because I don't think anyone is going to drastically overvalue him.

[gbgary]

Will the Packers find it harder to re-sign their own?



not if the players are interested in winning.

[King Friday]

It depends on the player. Guys who like to play on winners and teams that play in prime time a lot will choose to stay in Green Bay if they are paid close to what they could earn elsewhere. If all they are concerned with is the money, then good luck to the newest member of the Oakland Raiders.

[Fritz]

This is an excellent thread, and brings up one of Thompson's mistakes. Had he gotten this team to the cusp but not over the top - say, to the NFC Championship game but no further - he would've been better able to re-sign those guys, since they'd still be hungry for the ring.

I think Thompson Fubared this one.

[Jimx29]

not if the players are interested in winning.

That's the bottom line. There's plenty of reason to believe that we are pretty close to a dynasty and could/should have a few more rings before the current decade is out.

[packerbacker1234]

It comes down to if the packers are even willing to spend money right now. When teh CBA ends so does the revenue from the NFL, as well as the salarie cap. Point is until there is a new CBA in place teams have no idea what sort of money they have available under a new cap, let alone how much will be payed by shared NFL revenue. This means right now, all players if paid are paid by the teams (as in, if hawk was still on the roster, the PACKERS would of forked over the 10.5 mil themselves).

So, you hav eto walk a fine line. Sign players at risk or wait for the new agreement which likely wont progress much until the summer. Ther eis no way there will be an actual season long hold out, but the sides need to stop being stupid and actually work out the differences stopping a new CBA from getting done. Lockouts are not going to help the players - who wont get paid - and the owners - who lose money on contracts.

So... will we have a hard time resigning our own? It jsut depends if other teams are willing to spend the money. Jenkins is most likely being brought back. Hawk is only debatable because Barnett is still on the roster and Bishop AND CHillar were both extended, meaning the packers clearly like them in hte 3-4.

[Fritz]

Just the opposite. Jenkins is most likely gone, and Hawk is probably coming back.

[Patler]

If the lockout begins, no one can be signed anyway. But that just postpones the issue, it doesn't change it. Looks like Hawk is coming back, but if I were to have picked one who would, it probably would have been Hawk. He should be set financially already anyway with a very nice rookie contract. Plus, he seems to have an old school attitude about football, the team, coaches decisions, etc..

Jenkins I think is the most likely to be gone. He has complained off an on for the last 5 years about his contract, the team attitude toward him, the defensive scheme and how it might affect him, etc. Not serious stuff, but a general attitude of not being happy. I think he has little incentive to stay in GB, someone will offer a big contract, and GB has others ready to step in, even if not as good.

[bobblehead]

I think we keep Hawk for sure...just my opinion :P

[Fritz]

If the lockout begins, no one can be signed anyway. But that just postpones the issue, it doesn't change it. Looks like Hawk is coming back, but if I were to have picked one who would, it probably would have been Hawk. He should be set financially already anyway with a very nice rookie contract. Plus, he seems to have an old school attitude about football, the team, coaches decisions, etc..

Jenkins I think is the most likely to be gone. He has complained off an on for the last 5 years about his contract, the team attitude toward him, the defensive scheme and how it might affect him, etc. Not serious stuff, but a general attitude of not being happy. I think he has little incentive to stay in GB, someone will offer a big contract, and GB has others ready to step in, even if not as good.

Corey Williams, Act Two. Except GB won't get a pick for Jenkins.

[prime311]

This is an excellent thread, and brings up one of Thompson's mistakes. Had he gotten this team to the cusp but not over the top - say, to the NFC Championship game but no further - he would've been better able to re-sign those guys, since they'd still be hungry for the ring.

I think Thompson Fubared this one.


I agree. TT definitely outsmarted himself this time. They should've tanked the Championship and then they would have a much easier time winning the SB sometime in the future.

[VermontPackFan]

Corey Williams, Act Two. Except GB won't get a pick for Jenkins.

I agree, Jenkins is probably gone but I have a hard time comparing him to C. Williams, CJ was a much more productive player for several more years. Some other team is going to pony up big cash for this versatile pass rushing defensive lineman, sorry to see him go but TT has prepared the roster for his departure.

I would think James Jones is another candidate for a big dollar offer elsewhere based on flashes of excellence and potential. I dont think TT will break the bank trying to keep him either.

[Guiness]

Any chance of the NFL equivalent of the 'sign and trade' deal with CJ? Worked out with C.Williams, even if the pick resulted in Brohm...

[get louder at lambeau]

I agree, Jenkins is probably gone but I have a hard time comparing him to C. Williams, CJ was a much more productive player for several more years.

They were almost twins when Williams got traded, same number of years in the NFL, one late pick (Wiliams) and one undrafted, both able to play DE and DT, and both having very similar stats (Williams 17 sacks total, Jenkins 15). Since then Jenkins has outperformed Williams, but who doesn't underachieve in Cleveland and Detroit? Their career numbers are still very similar, with Jenkins having 5.5 more sacks and Williams having 3 more turnovers caused and 43 more tackles.

[VermontPackFan]

They were almost twins when Williams got traded, same number of years in the NFL, one late pick (Wiliams) and one undrafted, both able to play DE and DT, and both having very similar stats (Williams 17 sacks total, Jenkins 15). Since then Jenkins has outperformed Williams, but who doesn't underachieve in Cleveland and Detroit? Their career numbers are still very similar, with Jenkins having 5.5 more sacks and Williams having 3 more turnovers caused and 43 more tackles.

Wow, stats are stats but I never would have guessed they were even close. I still will say that Jenkins is a much better player than Williams. Why? Apparently I dont have the stats to back me up so I guess I am going on gut instinct...

[HarveyWallbangers]

They were almost twins when Williams got traded, same number of years in the NFL, one late pick (Wiliams) and one undrafted, both able to play DE and DT, and both having very similar stats (Williams 17 sacks total, Jenkins 15). Since then Jenkins has outperformed Williams, but who doesn't underachieve in Cleveland and Detroit? Their career numbers are still very similar, with Jenkins having 5.5 more sacks and Williams having 3 more turnovers caused and 43 more tackles.

Plus, Jenkins was a late bloomer, so it seems like he's older (and more injury prone) than Williams was when he left. I liked Williams. Just not for the money he was about to get. I think Jenkins is a better player, but he's older and hurt a lot. I don't think he's worth the money he's about to get--especially if Neal and Jolly come back strong.

[Guiness]

Damn good production based on where we got them! Certainly better than the 3rd we spent on another DT, Lee from Oregon.

I remember when Jenkins first got here - Kris Jenkins younger brother, and there were stories (from Kris) about how Cullen was a better all around athlete, would always beat him at 1on1 basketball.

[prime311]

Any chance of the NFL equivalent of the 'sign and trade' deal with CJ? Worked out with C.Williams, even if the pick resulted in Brohm...


They would've had to tag him and I don't think they wanted to risk having to pay him the tag number. Now its too late to tag so I don't see any incentive for him to sign with the Pack just to get traded.

[Guiness]

They would've had to tag him and I don't think they wanted to risk having to pay him the tag number. Now its too late to tag so I don't see any incentive for him to sign with the Pack just to get traded.

I didn't know it was too late to tag, but I think your reason for them not doing it is right...they are afraid of getting stuck with the cheque.

[RashanGary]

The year Hawk just had, his reliability over the years. . . I think we just found out it won't be much harder to sign at least some of our guys. What they're saying Hawk got, I think we got a bit of a bargain there.

Mostl players dream of hitting UFA in their prime. Hawk didn't even test it.

[Packgator]

Mostl players dream of hitting UFA in their prime. Hawk didn't even test it.

Hawk was a FA for a few hours. His agent said "a bunch" of teams called right after he was released. I'm sure a deal was pretty much done before he was released but he got some sense of his value (to other teams) during the few hours he wasn't a Packer.

[Guiness]

According to the agent, he didn't answer the phone when it started ringing. It does sound like the deal was essentially done before he was released.

I, for one, am happy with our big free agent signing this year!

[rbaloha1]

Hawk is a throwback player -- plays hard and expects to be compensated fairly without the drama.

The Colledge and Crosby are good tenders. If someone want Colledge great -- second round compensation. Although Crosby is less accurate than Longwell the smooth kicking stroke should allow for a long successful career.

[swede]

Though he may not look it, I think that Hawk is a pretty smart person. Even if he thought the FA market would have brought him another 1 or 2 million per year he must have balanced that against the not unlikely possibility that he would have sacrificed individual and team success for the extra cash. The idea that Hawk is "just a guy" is the old conventional wisdom that does not take into account his statistical contributions, the hidden contributions of a defensive player that fills the right gaps, and the leadership he brought to our defense over the 2nd half of the season.

He may well have been "just a guy" had he gone to a team that wanted him to be a star all by himself.

Good call, AJ.