Raiders to release Kameron Wimbley

[Sparkey]

Anyone think he would be a nice complement to Matthews ? He is definately not a Mario Williams type player but he far away better than what the Packers have opposite Matthews.

[Fritz]

Why'd they release him?

[woodbuck27]

Why'd they release him?


The Raiders would have guaranteed Wimbley $17.5 million (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/03/01/raiders-face-a-key-deadline-in-wimbley-deal/) had they kept him on their roster through Saturday.

While the Raiders are still on the hook for $6.5 million of Wimbley’s $11 million base salary,

releasing him saves them $4.5 million in 2012 salary cap space and clears him completely off the books for 2013.

[Sparkey]

If he's on the roster by Saturday, Wimbley will lock in $25.5 million of guaranteed money for the next three years. So, expect this move to become official very soon (maybe by the time you're done reading this post?).

[Upnorth]

If affordable he would be a great pickup. I wonder if he will linger long enough for TT to act. We have a good history with bay area players!

[woodbuck27]

If affordable he would be a great pickup. I wonder if he will linger long enough for TT to act.

TT will not give him any notice.

I expect the Bears to give him plenty.

[Lurker64]

Since the reason the Raiders released him was because he wouldn't agree to take a paycut, I highly doubt that we're willing to meet his asking price (especially given the cap situation.)

[woodbuck27]

Since the reason the Raiders released him was because he wouldn't agree to take a paycut, I highly doubt that we're willing to meet his asking price (especially given the cap situation.)

The move had to happen Friday because if Wimbley were on the roster as of Saturday, an additional $4.5 million in 2012 base salary would have become fully guaranteed, $11 million in full salary guarantee for 2013 would have been triggered, and $2 million of Wimbley’s base salary in 2014 would have become fully guaranteed.

Thus, the Raiders avoiding $17.5 million by cutting Wimbley.

And so he hits the open market, only three days after the market opened. ..... REF: PFT.Com

[Lurker64]

The move had to happen Friday because if Wimbley were on the roster as of Saturday, an additional $4.5 million in 2012 base salary would have become fully guaranteed, $11 million in full salary guarantee for 2013 would have been triggered, and $2 million of Wimbley’s base salary in 2014 would have become fully guaranteed.

Thus, the Raiders avoiding $17.5 million by cutting Wimbley.

And so he hits the open market, only three days after the market opened. ..... REF: PFT.Com

The Raiders had been working on convincing him to restructure his contract to take less money since McKenzie came on board.

[denverYooper]

PULL THE TRIGGER TT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Lurker64]

PULL THE TRIGGER TT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Would you do it if it means you lose Greg Jennings after next season?

[pbmax]

Wouldn't take 'a' paycut or wouldn't take 'the' paycut necessary for the Raiders to keep him? Because the Raiders are digging out of a cap hole and Wimbley might have to have agreed to quite a haircut. Potential for a big difference.

Wimbley's agent was quite complimentary of McKenzie's efforts but said ultimately there wasn't enough room. Hard to say unless we know whether the Raiders were proposing a simple restructuring or an actual cut of guaranteed money.

[woodbuck27]

Would you do it if it means you lose Greg Jennings after next season?

Where's ' the Exit ' ?

[pbmax]

Would you do it if it means you lose Greg Jennings after next season?

I might if he fit the need. WR is the area the Packers do the best in. But Thompson probably will not see it that way.

[woodbuck27]

I might if he fit the need. WR is the area the Packers do the best in. But Thompson probably will not see it that way.

I'll take a slice of that.

[Bretsky]

Would you do it if it means you lose Greg Jennings after next season?


Not a fair assumption to make. In a couple yrs the cap will also be much higher, and we can franchise GJ if need be. With that being said, this dude will cost too much money for TT to pursue. He's be a great fit though but he's in that area of his career where he will not come cheap, nor should he

[Upnorth]

Would you do it if it means you lose Greg Jennings after next season?

We have Jennings locked up for the next 2 years, and by then the cap will be up another 20ish million. I think we might have some space, especially if we could get a 4 yr 16 mil contract for Wimbley. I just doubt he goes for that little.

[Joemailman]

We have Jennings locked up for the next 2 years, and by then the cap will be up another 20ish million. I think we might have some space, especially if we could get a 4 yr 16 mil contract for Wimbley. I just doubt he goes for that little.

Jennings is a FA after this year.

[wist43]

I'm hoping TT makes a run at him... even if we signed a reasonable front seven FA, we'd still need to target another front seven guy early in the draft just to be able to field something resembling an NFL calibur defense.

That said, Ted is Ted... we're not getting any significant FA help - gravity and the draft.

[Lurker64]

Jennings is a FA after this year.

Yes, and any big signings that Ted makes now will make it more difficult to retain Jennings. While I'd love to land Langford and Wimbley, if we did so it's almost certain that Greg Jennings would end up elsewhere.

Surely other people have noticed the huge $$$ that high end WRs are getting these days...

[HarveyWallbangers]

Jennings is a FA after this year.

Not only that, Rodgers, Matthews, and Raji are all set for extensions in the next year. Rodgers alone will probably command most of the increase in the salary cap. He's going to get $18M/year. All you have to is look at what the Colts had to do around Peyton Manning. Keep a corps group, let some guys go, and play little in FA.

[smuggler]

Wimbley didn't restructure because it made more sense for him to be paid $6.5 mil to be released. That doesn't necessarily mean he'll be unreasonable in Free Agency. In fact, I'm guessing he wanted out of the rebuilding project that just started this season in Oakland. He's 28.

[gbpackfan]

I just don't buy the notion that if we sign free agents now, we won't be able to in the future. You never know what next season will bring. We can't just sit on our hands. TT needs to improve this team. We are so close to winning another super bowl, but we need a couple more pieces. I only see this team losing pieces since the super bowl win, not adding any. Jenkins and Wells. What was TT's plan with Jenkins? Neal? That blew up in his face. What is his plan with Wells? EDS? God, I hope not. What is his plan for the defense? I hope something, cause it was god awful last year. Free agency isn't the end all, be all, but it is a tool that teams should use to improve themselves. Not a virius to be avoided at all cost.

[smuggler]

Next season is when the new cap goes into effect. From a competitive standpoint, it makes since to extend some of our players now as opposed to next year. Perhaps we are working on an extension for Jennings. It would be nice to get that done before the season.

[woodbuck27]

Next season is when the new cap goes into effect. From a competitive standpoint, it makes since to extend some of our players now as opposed to next year. Perhaps we are working on an extension for Jennings. It would be nice to get that done before the season.

Greg Jennings will wait to see how he can get his very best contract. He'll wait to see just how much pie will be available after the new CAP allocation.

[Tony Oday]

I still don't thin Jennings is elite. I would rather have a Johnson or Fitzgerald than him. I think he is good just not elite.

The defense took a step back last year, no reason it can't take a step forward this year. Though Wist will have you believe we have a pop warner defense we are only one year removed from a title and are coming off a 15-1 season. I would love to see a "name" fa come in here but thus far TT doesn't want to put us in cap Hell. I would imagine we go the Patriots route and sign an older cap casualty on the d line.

[smuggler]

Jennings is better than Vincent Jackson, who just got 5/55 so Jennings will probably see around that in FA if it comes to it. Elite or not. He's a top-5 receiver.

[Lurker64]

Next season is when the new cap goes into effect. From a competitive standpoint, it makes since to extend some of our players now as opposed to next year. Perhaps we are working on an extension for Jennings. It would be nice to get that done before the season.

Nope, the cap won't go up much next season. When it goes up is 2014 with the new TV contract money. That corresponds' with Finley's FA year not Jennings. Jennings we have to fit under a 125m or so cap.

[Scott Campbell]

Can you even imagine how much Rodgers is going to make next time around?

[King Friday]

These money questions are PRECISELY why you don't retain Driver this year. He costs too much (prob $2M even if restructured) and offers nothing more than Cobb as a #4 WR (arguably less, because Cobb is also a dynamic return man). The NFL is a business, and the good business sense says you cut ties with the old guy a year too early and use the spot to develop a replacement while you still have a stud group of receivers to work with otherwise.

You need to free up as much cash as possible to keep the good young talent on the team...and probably will still need to make a tough decision on someone that we will have to let walk over the next 2-3 years. That is why Ted is going to avoid free agency and build in the draft...where he can replenish the talent pool at a cheap cost to the team. Woodson will be a prime renegotiation target after this year, which will probably net us $3-4M. Raji will likely have his contract reworked by the end of this season as well, to help push more money out into 2014 and beyond. That should give us plenty of room to resign Jennings and Lang.

[smuggler]

You can say that up until the point when one of the receivers goes out for the year. Then you regret cutting Driver. Assuming everyone stays healthy, I agree.

[Tony Oday]

There are two backups on the PS that can fill in.

[smuggler]

They aren't going to be as good as Driver in 2012.

[King Friday]

They aren't going to be as good as Driver in 2012.

We have Jennings, Nelson, Jones, Cobb, Finley plus about 12 other TEs. If we dump Driver, we will get another WR in to be our #5. Paying $2M a year for a #5 WR who can't play special teams and will probably continue to hinder Cobb's development (because you ain't keeping Driver to sit his ass on the bench) just makes no sense. Dump Driver, let Cobb take over the #4 spot (maybe even #3) that he rightfully should have without looking over his shoulder at the aging fan favorite, and bring in a youngster to learn the system and help on special teams. That is PRECISELY how it is supposed to work in the NFL if you are properly doing your job in terms of roster development.

You don't need a ton of production from your #5 WR. I have plenty of confidence in Thompson to find a capable #5 WR if he dumps Driver...and that guy will be much cheaper and will be able to contribute on special teams.

[smuggler]

Driver to Seahawks. Calling it now.

[Upnorth]

Shoulda cut DD and Clifton and used money to resign Wells. Can some one put up the beating a dead horse animation for me?

[Bretsky]

I don't think Wells wanted to come back

[Joemailman]

Shoulda cut DD and Clifton and used money to resign Wells. Can some one put up the beating a dead horse animation for me?

:beat:

[pbmax]

I am pretty sure its 13 TEs if Quarless can get on PUP and be available by Week 12 to line up as the fourth FB in the new inverted SUV backfield.

[Pugger]

I don't think Wells wanted to come back

I don't think so either.

[SnakeLH2006]

Would you do it if it means you lose Greg Jennings after next season?

Yep..cuz GJ is good. Arod is elite. D is worst EVER...We'd get a passrusher.

[Fritz]

I don't think you can pay a guy in his prime the prime dollars needed to get him and still hope to keep GJ, Rodgers, Raji, and Mathews.

[Patler]

I don't think you can pay a guy in his prime the prime dollars needed to get him and still hope to keep GJ, Rodgers, Raji, and Mathews.

If the WR pipeline keeps flowing with young talent in GB, in view of what some WRs got for contracts this year, it might be difficult or unwise to pay what it will cost to keep Jennings anyway.

[woodbuck27]

We have Jennings locked up for the next 2 years, and by then the cap will be up another 20ish million. I think we might have some space, especially if we could get a 4 yr 16 mil contract for Wimbley. I just doubt he goes for that little.

If Wimbley checked out healthy. If TT could attain him for $4 Million$ per season for whenever. TT should seriously try to sign this talent.

A problem lies with our teams 'front seven'. If we look at the starters on that front seven and are honest with ourselves there's room for upgrades. We need a quality FA to fill a position and fit in that front seven.

Bringing in Kameron Wimbley will reflect positively for our draft. He will add a definite 'talent' to our front seven.

TT should ask himself is... ** Can Kameron Wimbley a solid fit at ouitside linebacker. Would the addition of 'a Kameron Wimbly talented player' not that there might be any comparable player presently available to TT. Take the heat off Clay Matthews.

Clay Matthews is being compromised. Clay Matthews and Kameron Wimbley = sweet. Real sweet at $4 million$ per season.

I need to get too 'the reality' check. Am I dreaming? Is Kameron Wimbley still available and affordable to TT?

Is any 'very much needed 'and talented' position player' available in Free Agency? So many have been signed inan extremely busy and exciting Free Agency.

Is there any Free Agent 'with TALENT' available at Ted Thompson's 'pay schedule'?

I went to bed last night knowing that Jeff Saturday was in Green Bay at Ted Thompsons bidding. I thought I read that Saturday may be affordable to the Packers at $2 -3 Million$ for two seasons. There are questions such as age and health? Ted Thompson 'only' has so much money to work with. I'mm aware of the talk that Saturday will be Peyton Manning's center in Denver.

Jeff Saturday will make his best deal. He'll look at a possible Green Bay Packer offer. I suspect he will be in and out of Green Bay and not signed. I may be wrong.

Can he not clear more CAP space? That may come at a cost of necessary 'damage control' ... RE: the Roster and Packer fans; but that comes with the territory.

The bottom line is for Ted Thompson to ensure that Aaron Rodgers isn't compromised.

now I"ll check out the status of Kemeron Wimbley and Jeff Saturday.

** On March 14, 2010, Wimbley was traded to the Oakland Raiders for a third round pick in 2010 NFL Draft, which was used on Quarterback Colt McCoy of Texas.

The Raiders intended to put him at defensive end, hoping it would bring him back to his 2006 (rookie campaign) form. Instead they moved him to strongside linebacker. On August 21, 2010, during a pre-season game against the Chicago Bears, Wimbley recorded 4 sacks in one half on quarterback Jay Cutler.

He finished the 2010 regular season with 58 tackles (46 solo), 9 sacks, a pass defended and a forced fumble.

Wimbley started all 16 games in his first season with the Raiders.

[pbmax]

Wimbley will be closer to $12 million per year in his next contract than he will to $4 mil.

[wist43]

Well, I just read the JSO article on Walden... M3 saying they're going to go with Jones and Lattimore.

So, we're covered ;)

[woodbuck27]

Wimbley will be closer to $12 million per year in his next contract than he will to $4 mil.

Wow ! $12 Million$ !

Is he worth that much CAP? I thought that $4 Million$ was a tad light.

[pbmax]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/03/20/titans-kamerion-wimbley-agree-to-five-year-deal/

5 years, 35 million (avg $7 mil/yr). $11.5 million in his first year. $13.5 guaranteed.

[Cheesehead Craig]

That's more than the Pack had available to sign him.

[woodbuck27]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/03/20/titans-kamerion-wimbley-agree-to-five-year-deal/

5 years, 35 million (avg $7 mil/yr). $11.5 million in his first year. $13.5 guaranteed.

OK He's a Tennessee Titan. I have work to do. I believe the Titans did pretty well. The Titans plan to use him as a full-time defensive end. He had planned to visit two other teams before signing with Tennesee. Maybe Ted Thompson pursed him?

I simply want to know that Ted Thompson is very busy. OUR team needs fixing and it's up to him to do all the front end work. His way of bringing in no talent players is not holding up our defense.

I'm neglecting the Free Agency thread. Losing track of recent events.

[wist43]

Jones and Lattimore...

We're going to get heavy doses of Jones, Lattimore, and Walden - all is well ;)

[Guiness]

If the WR pipeline keeps flowing with young talent in GB, in view of what some WRs got for contracts this year, it might be difficult or unwise to pay what it will cost to keep Jennings anyway.

Been thinking (but not saying) that for a while. We've got depth at WR. If there's a spot we can clear some salary without a big drop-off, it's at WR.

I know he's very good to elite, and the three behind him will probably not measure up to him...but the Pack would be in better shape than if they lost Raji or Mathews. It might be a decision that has to be made.

[woodbuck27]

Been thinking (but not saying) that for a while. We've got depth at WR. If there's a spot we can clear some salary without a big drop-off, it's at WR.

I know he's very good to elite, and the three behind him will probably not measure up to him...but the Pack would be in better shape than if they lost Raji or Mathews. It might be a decision that has to be made.

My greater concern is what will be the cost to our CAP to make Aaron Rodgers a PACKER for life.

I'm not at all concerned with whether or not we retain Greg Jennings. There will be other speedy guys that can run routes and catch Aaron Rodgers well thrown pass's.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I'm not sure the pipeline is that great. They have a lot of decent players, but Jennings is the straw the stirs the drink. Without Jennings, the other guys don't look as good. They should be able to keep Matthews, Rodgers, and Jennings. You keep your elite players. It's why Thompson has the model that he has. It's why he doesn't overpay for average FAs.

[Guiness]

I'm not sure the pipeline is that great. They have a lot of decent players, but Jennings is the straw the stirs the drink. Without Jennings, the other guys don't look as good. They should be able to keep Matthews, Rodgers, and Jennings. You keep your elite players. It's why Thompson has the model that he has. It's why he doesn't overpay for average FAs.

But Mathews, Jennings, Raji and Rodgers? That could cause problems. If the first three average $10mil/year (could easily happen) and Rodger's pushes $18million (Brady averages 18, Eli 16, details of Peyton and Brees to come) that's getting towards 40% of the cap. And that's before you have to pay a left tackle.

[Upnorth]

If the WR pipeline keeps flowing with young talent in GB, in view of what some WRs got for contracts this year, it might be difficult or unwise to pay what it will cost to keep Jennings anyway.

The talent and depth of our WR and QB may make GJ cheaper than what the market dictates. When he went down this year our passing game did not suffer tremendously. I think GJ is a great talent, but the rest of our talent might discount his value to other teams.

[Upnorth]

But Mathews, Jennings, Raji and Rodgers? That could cause problems. If the first three average $10mil/year (could easily happen) and Rodger's pushes $18million (Brady averages 18, Eli 16, details of Peyton and Brees to come) that's getting towards 40% of the cap. And that's before you have to pay a left tackle.

If we can only sign 3 of the 4 you mention, I would leave Jennings out. I don't want to but if we are cash strapped, to me WR are far more expendable that DE or OLB.

[gbgary]

Jones and Lattimore...

We're going to get heavy doses of Jones, Lattimore, and Walden - all is well ;)

walden is/was talking/visiting with dal i heard.

[Patler]

I'm not sure the pipeline is that great. They have a lot of decent players, but Jennings is the straw the stirs the drink. Without Jennings, the other guys don't look as good. They should be able to keep Matthews, Rodgers, and Jennings. You keep your elite players. It's why Thompson has the model that he has. It's why he doesn't overpay for average FAs.

Jennings makes the offense better (or different); but I doubt it will devolve into an average passing game if he leaves. Rodgers is the straw that stirs this drink, not Jennings. The drink he stirs may change based on the ingredients available, but it will be well-stirred even without Jennings, in my opinion.

[Upnorth]

Jennings makes the offense better (or different); but I doubt it will devolve into an average passing game if he leaves. Rodgers is the straw that stirs this drink, not Jennings. The drink he stirs may change based on the ingredients available, but it will be well-stirred even without Jennings, in my opinion.

I always thought of Rodgers as a 'shaken, not stirred' kinda guy!

[woodbuck27]

OK He's a Tennessee Titan. I have work to do. I believe the Titans did pretty well. The Titans plan to use him as a full-time defensive end. He had planned to visit two other teams before signing with Tennesee. Maybe Ted Thompson pursed him?

I simply want to know that Ted Thompson is very busy. OUR team needs fixing and it's up to him to do all the front end work. His way of bringing in no talent players is not holding up our defense.

I'm neglecting the Free Agency thread. Losing track of recent events.


http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...ive-year-deal/ (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/03/20/titans-kamerion-wimbley-agree-to-five-year-deal/)

Titans, Kamerion Wimbley agree to five-year deal

Posted by Michael David Smith on March 20, 2012, 9:09 AM EDT

[Guiness]

Back to the original topic - that was a mother of a stupid contract the Raiders had with Wimbley. Did they renegotiate that with him when they traded for him from Cleveland or did Cleveland sign him to an extension? Either way, nice deal for a guy who was only halfway through his rookie contract!!! He should've had no leverage.

[woodbuck27]

Back to the original topic - that was a mother of a stupid contract the Raiders had with Wimbley. Did they renegotiate that with him when they traded for him from Cleveland or did Cleveland sign him to an extension? Either way, nice deal for a guy who was only halfway through his rookie contract!!! He should've had no leverage.


http://oak.scout.com/2/953976.html

Raiders trade for Browns' Wimbley http://media.scout.com/Media/Image/48/482517.jpg
Wimbley
By Adam Caplan (http://javascript<b></b>:location.href='http://search.scout.com/a.z?s=66&p=4&c=1&search=1&sskey=%22' + author + '%22&sssiteid=66&type=2';)

Posted Mar 14, 2010

http://cle.scout.com/a.z?s=149&p=9&c=2&cid=1091474&nid=4209206&fhn=1

Wimbley finalizes $48 million deal
by Aaron Wilson of Scout.com (http://www.scout.com/), August 2, 2011 at 10:26 am ET

http://cle.scout.com/a.z?s=149&p=9&c=2&cid=1166188&nid=4209206&fhn=1

Agent: No contact recently with Raiders, Wimbley
by Aaron Wilson of Scout.com (http://www.scout.com/), March 9, 2012 at 10:46 pm ET

I hope that gives it to you.

[SnakeLH2006]

GJ is great...Arod is elite (ala Brady making lesser players better). Arod will clear $20 mill in a new deal...save cash on GJ's $12 mill and spend it on D...The O will be 95% as good with Arod/no GJ...the D would be 25% better w $12 mill invested in a passrushing playmaker (whomever it is) making Clay and the DB's better. Simple math.