Packers Will Have To Cut Players

[ThunderDan]

Per a WSJ article this morning by Tom Oates.

The new salary cap for 2011 will be right around $120,000,000 and the Packers are right up to that number without signing any of their free agents or their drafted players.

To make room to sign the needed players veterans like Tauscher, Barnett, Chillar, etc. with big contracts are most likely going to be cut. Tauscher and Barnett alone would clear almost $10M in cap space.

It will be interesting to see how the Packers get under the cap far enough to sign the veterans that they need and the incoming rookies.

It will also be interesting to see how the Packers deal with the cap going forward knowing they are going to have to pay Raji, Clay and Sitton big salaries to keep them.

[Bretsky]

Green Bay I think is in better shape than most. I think about 20 teams are over the cap. There will be a TON of players cut and many opportunities for teams to get players from other teams

[Joemailman]

I think Barnett, Tauscher and Chillar will all be released. With Brad Jones probably moving inside, and the drafting of D.J. Smith, they have plenty of depth at ILB. Looking ahead, this could very well be the last years for Clifton and Driver, which would free up a lot of money. You can bet TT has structured a lot of contracts so that the salary cap impact will be manageable.

[vince]

I think Barnett, Tauscher and Chillar will all be released. With Brad Jones probably moving inside, and the drafting of D.J. Smith, they have plenty of depth at ILB. Looking ahead, this could very well be the last years for Clifton and Driver, which would free up a lot of money.
I agree with all that. Perhaps Chillar sticks but I do like the idea of Brad Jones going from sideline to sideline from in the middle on passing downs.

[red]

i don't see chillar getting cut, didn't we just give him a new deal?

i would love for tauscher to just call it quits so we don't have to cut him. i don't see any way he's on this team this year

there has to be some trade value for barnett. he's not great, but above average. if we were new england we could probably get a 1st round pick for him

i agree with b, there's gonna be a lot of guys cut around the league this year

[prime311]

No ones going to trade for Barnett and take on his salary. I expect him and Tausch will both be released. I don't think they'll release Chillar, but who knows. His contract is only around 3M this year IIRC.

[vince]

From National Football Post's Sunday Blitz (http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/NFP-Sunday-Blitz-1914.html)

The Packers are all ears when it comes to talking about trading Nick Barnett. Moving him would save them more than $4 million on the salary cap, and they could use that space. Barnett is a versatile, valuable defender who can start in multiple schemes and at multiple positions, but he’s now behind Desmond Bishop and A.J. Hawk on the Packers’ depth chart. If the Packers can’t get what they want for Barnett before camp or early in camp, they may hang onto him to see if teams increase their offers as camp and preseason go on. Releasing him also could be an option at some point.

Barnett's salary isn't crazy if he's starting, which he presumably would be for another team.

[Bretsky]

I wonder where just cutting Tauscher gets us to
I don't think we really need Chillar anymore...but GB always seemed to be in love with his versatility

It would be nice to get something for Barnett

There will be some jawdropping cuts around the NFL this week and next

[Yoop]

Barnett is still a starting caliber LBer, 2 years removed from being a pro bowl alternet, just because he lost his start to Bishop, hardly detracts from that, I cant see Ted letting him walk, Chiller and Poppinga have never lived up to there contracts, I could see Ted letting them walk first, Barnett is worth a 3rd, but because of the injury the offer likely will be a 4th. imo.

[Partial]

My prediction is Taush is gone and immediately signed to a front office position ala Rob Davis. They'll take care of their own. I would guess Chillar sticks, Barnett goes, but who knows at this point.

[digitaldean]

I saw Oates on a talk show this weekend stating that Tausch would be cut and Barnett gone. I'd have to say that Jolly would also be a foregone conclusion. James Jones may also be out as well. The luxury of having 3 FBs may also be bye-bye. Maybe they could restructure a couple of contracts if necessary. But since TT usually isn't a FA player anyway, I don't think they have to do some wholesale cutting.

[vince]

I think Tausch may be pegged as Assistant O-line Intern or something like that. There is no Assistant O-line coach right now, since Fontenot moved to Running Backs and Bennett moved to Receivers.

[ThunderDan]

I saw Oates on a talk show this weekend stating that Tausch would be cut and Barnett gone. I'd have to say that Jolly would also be a foregone conclusion. James Jones may also be out as well. The luxury of having 3 FBs may also be bye-bye. Maybe they could restructure a couple of contracts if necessary. But since TT usually isn't a FA player anyway, I don't think they have to do some wholesale cutting.

Just so you know James Jones costs -0- against the Packers cap right now, same with Colledge, Crosby, Kuhn etc. To be able to resign anyone plus the rookies we have to cut players to make room. I think that is why Barnett and Tauscher are almost certainly gone. I like the thought of restructuring contracts but I don't see TT kicking the can down the street knowing he has to sign Matthews, Raji, Sitton and probably redoing ARod's deal in the next couple of years.

TT is really going to have to watch the cap going forward with so many young, talented players on the roster. Unpopular choices are going to be made to keep us under the cap. We have 5 potential superstars on the team and they will eat a large portion of our cap. Between Arod, Jennings, Matthews, Raji and Sitton (when the young guys get their 2nd contracts) we could have $45-55M tied up in 5 players.

[3irty1]

Poppinga's name needs to be mentioned way before Chillar's.

[bobblehead]

One extra point though. We still have a ton of guys under contract that won't make the team. Guys that were IR last year and we have no serious interest in bringing back. Maybe many of them were signed to one year deals, but I think releasing some of them will clear up a some room.

As many said, Tausch is a foregone conclusion at this point. Between Barnett and Chillar I think Barnett goes first due to higher salary and possible trade value. I could envision a stunner where Driver goes and we resign Jones (if Jones signed a reasonable deal). Probably won't happen, but I could see it being possible. Again, I'm not sure how the rules work with the cap and exactly when you have to be at the number, but if any draft picks actually make the team they likely replace guys who had similar salaries. A lot of possibilities to play out, but I can't wait for the answers....get the deal done and lets start defending.

[pbmax]

Before we send out pink slips, read this item about the next two years of salary cap.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/07/22/looking-at-how-salary-cap-flexibility-will-work-in-2011/


We reported Thursday that NFL teams would have a mechanism to make it easier to keep high priced veterans in 2011.

When the league rolled out their settlement agreement (which hasn’t yet been agreed to by the players), we found out how it all work.

Teams will have roughly $3.5 million in what would otherwise be performance-based pay available to fund veteran player salaries. Teams could also “borrow” $3 million from a future salary cap that could be paid back.

The salary cap is set to be $120.375 million in 2011. Combining the two exemptions for 2011, the number really rises to $126.885. An extra $6.5 million won’t save guys that truly deserve to get cut, but it will make life easier for teams near the cap limit.

Look for plenty of teams to “borrow” from future years. With television revenue likely to rise significantly in the future, teams can feel confident the salary cap is going to rise quite a bit.

In 2012, each club can also “borrow” up to $1.5 million in cap room from a future year.

[Patler]

I've seen that mentioned several times, and I still do not fully understand what they mean by "Teams will have roughly $3.5 million in what would otherwise be performance-based pay available to fund veteran player salaries." It seems to be an "either-or" situation with only one alternative clear. If they are referring to the money distributed by the league to players who far outperformed their pay, I didn't recall payments being that high. Besides, that would seem to be funding high priced veterans with money that would otherwise go to some of the lowest paid guys. Guys like Shields and Zombo who likely were at minimum salaries but played a lot.

As for borrowing from future caps, it doesn't sound like a TT sort of approach, does it?

[SkinBasket]

Poppinga's name needs to be mentioned way before Chillar's.

Word to the dirty guy.

[pbmax]

Not at all, normally. And while I, like you, do not fully understand the performance based pay money, that doesn't seem to be borrowing from the future like the other $3 mil that is available. But as they have a larger than normal slew of FAs, including all the 4th and 5th year RFAs who did not hit Free Agency in the last two years, there might not be a choice. Clearly some, like Tauscher are going to be cut/renegotiated, but even if they find $10 million in room, they are still going to have a slew of bodies to sign and veterans will be a larger percentage than typical.

But so much depends on how crazy offers are to Jones, Jackson, Colledge and Spitz, its hard to predict.

[KYPack]

Yeah, P, I'm a little lost here, too.

I saw many projections of the '11 cap at 132 - 137 mil. Now it's comes in at 120 (126 with the slush fund/ funny money clause)? The salary floor will be raised from 90% as opposed to the old 80%.

I can't believe the players would go for that without making a peep if a bunch of other significant perks weren't included in the CBA. It's a 10 year deal, but I wonder what all is in that package to placate the players. I'd have to believe the tags will go away and quicker FA will now be available to the players. Both sides dumped on the rookies, but there has to be a lot sweetners for the players to get the deal in a fast as it seems it will be done.

[Patler]

I did some digging. Apparently there was no performance based pay program for the 2010 season, I assume as a result of the non-salary cap year provisions. In 2009 performance based pay amounted to $109.5 million, or a little over $3.4 million per team on an average. So perhaps it is not an either-or situation. The performance based pay system may not even exist for the 2011 season.

Too bad it wasn't there last year. I would have expected Shields and Zombo to get a lot.

[Ballboy]

Looking at salary website, these are some names that came up"

Barrnett @ $5,500,000
Wilhelm @ $3,000,000
Chillar @ $2,000,000
Don Lee @ $2,200,000
Poppy @ $2,200,000
Tausch @ $4,100,000
J Bush @ $1,400,000
Underwood @ $480,000(character issues)

Just over $20,000,000 of contracts that could/will be dumped.

[Old School]

Maybe we could send a 7th round pick to Kansas City in return for 10 mil in salary cap. That would help get them to the 99% floor.

[Fritz]

Ted borrowing against the future? Not very Tedly.

How did the Pack go from being one of the youngest teams in the league, with many people complaining that TT didn't like to spend money at all, to a team that has the second-highest amount of money committed to vets, just behind Dallas? How'd that happen?

[Joemailman]

Looking at salary website, these are some names that came up"

Barrnett @ $5,500,000
Wilhelm @ $3,000,000
Chillar @ $2,000,000
Don Lee @ $2,200,000
Poppy @ $2,200,000
Tausch @ $4,100,000
J Bush @ $1,400,000
Underwood @ $480,000(character issues)

Just over $20,000,000 of contracts that could/will be dumped.

Donald Lee has already been released. Jarrett Bush isn't going anywhere. The rest could be gone.

[MJZiggy]

Ted borrowing against the future? Not very Tedly.

How did the Pack go from being one of the youngest teams in the league, with many people complaining that TT didn't like to spend money at all, to a team that has the second-highest amount of money committed to vets, just behind Dallas? How'd that happen?

He kept all the kids?

[red]

how much does harrell count against the cap? i can see him going away if he has anything higher then like the minimum

[Tarlam!]

Ted borrowing against the future? Not very Tedly.

How did the Pack go from being one of the youngest teams in the league, with many people complaining that TT didn't like to spend money at all, to a team that has the second-highest amount of money committed to vets, just behind Dallas? How'd that happen?

+1. How did that happen?

[red]

what about a guy like robert gallery?

he was a bust at LT, but he's been a nice solid LG. he's a guy that wouldn't cost a ton and IMO would be an upgrade over colledge

also, he fits the packer mold, big white guy with long flowing hair and tats

[red]

+1. How did that happen?


i read somewhere last season that we had one of the highest "cap" numbers last year, if there had been a cap. we might have even been over the cap if there was one

i think, and hope, what we are seeing is TT throwing a lot of bonus money into that uncapped year, freeing up future room

TT's whole idea is to draft good players and resign the ones that really look good, the problem is that TT has drafted way too many guys that have turned out being too damn good

[vince]

what about a guy like robert gallery?

he was a bust at LT, but he's been a nice solid LG. he's a guy that wouldn't cost a ton and IMO would be an upgrade over colledge

also, he fits the packer mold, big white guy with long flowing hair and tats
You will never give up your dreams of vet. free agent signings will you red? Of all years (if there are any with Ted), I don't think this is the year for any veteran free agent signings by Ted. Not enough cap room, too much chaos, not enough time to let the market sort out, promising young guys who look like they're ready to fill in for a mostly average and/or risky group of free agent losses, team already coming off the Super Bowl with 15 guys returning from IR ...

[Lurker64]

how much does harrell count against the cap? i can see him going away if he has anything higher then like the minimum

Harrell counts against the cap about the same whether you cut him or keep him (due to bonus acceleration if cut). It's probably actually cheaper, this year if you kept him assuming he won a roster spot, simply because a vet minimum salary+cost of cutting Harrell > cost of keeping Harrell.

[red]

You will never give up your dreams of vet. free agent signings will you red? Of all years (if there are any with Ted), I don't think this is the year for any veteran free agent signings by Ted. Not enough cap room, too much chaos, not enough time to let the market sort out, promising young guys who look like they're ready to fill in for a mostly average and/or risky group of free agent losses, team already coming off the Super Bowl with 15 guys returning from IR ...

no, i think i'm fine if we just leave the team alone for this year, and ted as proven his way of doing things works

its just too damn fun thinking about signing other guys

[Patler]

Harrell counts against the cap about the same whether you cut him or keep him (due to bonus acceleration if cut). It's probably actually cheaper, this year if you kept him assuming he won a roster spot, simply because a vet minimum salary+cost of cutting Harrell > cost of keeping Harrell.

I'm not sure that is the case, and we won't know for sure until details of the new CBA come out. Under the old rules, a player cut after June 1 counted against the current salary cap for his "normal" bonus amount, and any accelerated bonus came in the following year's salary cap. (At one time I think the team had an option whether or not to use the two-year provision.) Since Harrell is in his next to last year, there never would have to be any acceleration under the old rules, what's left of his prorated signing bonus would be applied against 2011 and 2012.

Or...am I getting old and the two-year rule went away in the 2006 CBA revision????

[mission]

Donald Lee has already been released. Jarrett Bush isn't going anywhere. The rest could be gone.

Keep Bush (did i say that?) and cut the rest.

[Joemailman]

how much does harrell count against the cap? i can see him going away if he has anything higher then like the minimum

Harrell's contract:

7/27/2007: Signed a six-year, $14.507 million contract. The deal contains $8.1 million guaranteed, including a $1 million first-year roster bonus and a $5.3 million option bonus in the second year. 2011: $650,000 (+ $575,000 roster bonus), 2012: $1,536,750, 2013: Free Agent

[mission]

Can't see that roster bonus getting paid but who knows... maybe TT feels they've already put so much into it... why not a little half mil to make sure he's not the next Reggie White? :lol:

[HarveyWallbangers]

JSO had an article stating that the Packers would save over $1M by cutting Harrell.

That figure on Wilhelm can't be right, can it? I would think we signed him for the vet minimum after he was cut.

[pbmax]

Ted borrowing against the future? Not very Tedly.

How did the Pack go from being one of the youngest teams in the league, with many people complaining that TT didn't like to spend money at all, to a team that has the second-highest amount of money committed to vets, just behind Dallas? How'd that happen?

Because of M3s obsession with TEs and LBs, he spent like a drunken sailor on the LB corps in the last few years. Plus Jennings and Rodgers.

I think Ted will spend whichever amount comes from performance pay ABOVE the cap because it seems it does not have to be paid back.

[pbmax]

JSO had an article stating that the Packers would save over $1M by cutting Harrell.

That figure on Wilhelm can't be right, can it? I would think we signed him for the vet minimum after he was cut.

Thought exactly same thing when I saw it. Looks like a typo more than his salary. Where did the Pack get him from? Though he's a vet, so his contract could have contained a bit of fakery at the end.

[pbmax]

Harrell's contract:

7/27/2007: Signed a six-year, $14.507 million contract. The deal contains $8.1 million guaranteed, including a $1 million first-year roster bonus and a $5.3 million option bonus in the second year. 2011: $650,000 (+ $575,000 roster bonus), 2012: $1,536,750, 2013: Free Agent

Same as Patler on the rules, but I doubt that option bonus was prorated. If it wasn't guaranteed, then its cleared the books. Only a fraction of the $1 million signing bonus would accelerate.

[Patler]

That figure on Wilhelm can't be right, can it? I would think we signed him for the vet minimum after he was cut.


Thought exactly same thing when I saw it. Looks like a typo more than his salary. Where did the Pack get him from? Though he's a vet, so his contract could have contained a bit of fakery at the end.


Looks like this is the contract the Packer inherited for Wilhelm:


The Chargers yesterday continued their building for the future, locking up linebacker Matt Wilhelm through 2011. Wilhelm, seen as the successor to Donnie Edwards at inside linebacker, was due to become an unrestricted free agent after the season.



(redacted for brevity)


The deal is very similar to the five-year contract signed by linebacker Stephen Cooper in August.
Wilhelm will get approximately $6.5 million over the first two years of the extension and almost $15 million if he plays out the entire pact.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Did the Packers claim him (off waivers) for that figure? Or did they sign him to the vet minimum after he cleared waivers? I don't think they would have inherited that salary--unless they claimed him off waivers. It appears they didn't claim him.


The Green Bay Packers acquired two linebackers Tuesday and were expected to sign one more by the time the team hits the practice field Wednesday.

The team announced it signed veteran Matt Wilhelm and was awarded first-year pro Diyral Briggs off waivers. The Packers released linebacker Maurice Simpkins and placed defensive end Mike Neal and linebacker Brady Poppinga on injured reserve.

[Fritz]

I read on another site (sorry, Mad) what seemed a good analysis of Harrell's situation. In short, it would not save the Pack much if anything to cut Harrell now. It's cheaper to keep her, as the old song says.

I can't see Tauscher being kept, though, nor Poppinga. Those two plus Barnett would clear some room. And Wilhelm, if those numbers are right.

[pbmax]

I read on another site (sorry, Mad) what seemed a good analysis of Harrell's situation. In short, it would not save the Pack much if anything to cut Harrell now. It's cheaper to keep her, as the old song says.

I can't see Tauscher being kept, though, nor Poppinga. Those two plus Barnett would clear some room. And Wilhelm, if those numbers are right.

Link! I can't see that is the case.

[Fritz]

Here's the Lancelot Link (Secret Chimp).

Does anyone at all remember that show?

http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=451492&start=0

[pbmax]

Here's the Lancelot Link (Secret Chimp).

Does anyone at all remember that show?

http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=451492&start=0

If Waldo is right, then that option bonus must have been guaranteed.

[Patler]

The significance of the June 1 cutoff had been diminished in recent years by allowing teams to designate a specific number of veterans for release and having bonus acceleration occur in the second year even if they were released before June 1. I think they were allowed to do it with 2 or 3 veterans. The thing I am not sure of is if it was applicable to a rookie contract.

If the "second year" option is still available and used by the Packers, there would be no acceleration in 2011 (or 2012 because it is the final year anyway). The savings in 2011 would be his salary ($650,000) and his unpaid bonus ($575,000) for a savings $1,225,000. Worrying about how much his replacement costs is somewhat irrelevant because that exists whenever a layer is let go. Chances are it will be a lot less than the $1.225 million Harrell would cost. It could be one of the rookies that have to be signed anyway. By releasing Harrell the Packers have that much more to give to another player or players. It would free up $1.225 million to sign the rookies with.

[Fritz]

I am, without any solid reason or proof, in Harrell's corner. Keep him. One last time. Let him compete with Lawrence "Justa" Guy and Jarious Wynn (whom the Packers, remember, cut last year before the season started).

[Patler]

With reference to Wilhelm:
Did the Packers claim him (off waivers) for that figure? Or did they sign him to the vet minimum after he cleared waivers? I don't think they would have inherited that salary--unless they claimed him off waivers. It appears they didn't claim him.

I think Wilhelm was picked up after the trade deadline. For a vet with >4 years service his contract goes with him in that situation. The Packers had to assume his existing contract.

[red]

I am, without any solid reason or proof, in Harrell's corner. Keep him. One last time. Let him compete with Lawrence "Justa" Guy and Jarious Wynn (whom the Packers, remember, cut last year before the season started).

i see no reason why we shouldn't just give him a chance this year. but if he so much as breaks a finger nail, let him go

[Fritz]

Me and Red, all we are saying, is give him a chance.

Okay now, let's all lock arms and sing. "All we are saying, is give him a chance!"

I'm with ya, Red. This is it. One more shot, and if it works, they've got a rotational guy who's better than Jarius Wynn (at least that's who got cut for Harrell last year). If the guy gets hurt, his NFL career is over.

[pbmax]

Boo-boo by Silverstein.

JSO reports releasing Justin Harrell (not the poster) would save $1.25 million. Waldo at another forum that Mad probably doesn't want me to mention (Football's Future) had him down for far less savings.

Since Spoon's number is simply his bonus plus salary, he seems to have missed the acceleration.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/126225798.html

[Bretsky]

i see no reason why we shouldn't just give him a chance this year. but if he so much as breaks a finger nail, let him go


frickin fruitcake; might as well start the Bring back da Fraud Club :)
ditch him

[imscott72]

I'm also in the "bring back Harrell" fan club. As much as it pains me to say this, they should let Tausch go and save the 4+M. That's just way too much for someone that has a lot of miles on the tires. When Harrell is healthy he's shown he can contribute.

[Fritz]

Why not let him compete? Or ask him to renegotiate. I can't imagine at this point anyone would pay him a million dollars guaranteed.

[Iron Mike]

Looks like they won't be cutting Mason Crosby......

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/126242738.html

[pittstang5]

On Harell...

Didn't he tear his ACL? Will he even be able to play? If he is, he's not going to be 100%.

[smuggler]

I'm surprised that they didn't offer Harrell a minimum contract at least during camp. I mean, if it's free to kick the tires, why not? But I guess it's just a bit of a sore spot by now. I expect if he actually gets another shot, he will make a roster (if healthy). He was talented and had a good heart, but his body betrayed him (and us).

[MJZiggy]

I thought he had a roster bonus coming due. I think they're betting on him not getting other offers and bringing him back to camp for vet minimum to see what's left of him.

[Joemailman]

Are Packers thinking of bringing back Tauscher, or are they hoping there will be a retirement announcement?

[pbmax]

Are Packers thinking of bringing back Tauscher, or are they hoping there will be a retirement announcement?

So far looks like he is staying. They might be holding onto that as something they could do to sign an unexpected FA (like Jones or Jenkins should the price drop).

[smuggler]

From what I'm hearing, Tauscher is done. I don't think he will make it through training camp.

[Joemailman]

Report Chillar has a hamstring problem. http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/126351908.html

The vultures are circling...

[vince]

Looks like we'll see whether Brad Jones can play inside. I think he can.

[gbgary]

Packers being cut, and their free agents are being signed, left and right. does tt really think ufas and draft picks are going to fill the void?

[vince]

Packers being cut, and their free agents are being signed, left and right. does tt really think ufas and draft picks are going to fill the void?
Them and the 15 guys coming off IR. The roster is still loaded IMO.

[Joemailman]

Packers being cut, and their free agents are being signed, left and right. does tt really think ufas and draft picks are going to fill the void?

Brandon Jackson replaced by Starks/Green
Jason Spitz wasn't going to make the team
Brady Poppinga isn't really a loss.
Nick Barnett already replaced by Desmond Bishop
Justin Harrell-'Nuff said
Cullen Jenkins will be replaced by Mike Neal/C.J. Wilson
James Jones (if lost) will be replaced by Randall Cobb/Finley

Packers are okay.

[Bretsky]

the one loss that might really hurt is Jenkins; but we're lookin good

[gbgary]

yeah but that depth that saved us last year is now a concern. jenkins hasn't attracted much attention, they said, so maybe there's a chance he can be resigned. chillar gone now. hmmm