a James Jones vs Greg Jennings discussion

[red]

jones has had a pretty damn good year.

what does everyone think his trade value is at this point? he's a decent WR with a cap friendly contract who some team out there might think could be a good #2 or even a solid #1

if they trade jones for a good draft pick, would they then keep jennings?

who would you rather have? jennings, who is a better player, but injury prone and his going to be making some big coin. or jones, who is not as good, but is still a good #2 or 3, and comes dirt cheap allowing us to resign some other guys

getting rid of finley would also clear up room that can be used on jennings, so jennings plus a draft pick might be nice

but all that free cap space by letting fin and jennings go would really be nice

[George Cumby]

jones has had a pretty damn good year.

what does everyone think his trade value is at this point? he's a decent WR with a cap friendly contract who some team out there might think could be a good #2 or even a solid #1

if they trade jones for a good draft pick, would they then keep jennings?

who would you rather have? jennings, who is a better player, but injury prone and his going to be making some big coin. or jones, who is not as good, but is still a good #2 or 3, and comes dirt cheap allowing us to resign some other guys

getting rid of finley would also clear up room that can be used on jennings, so jennings plus a draft pick might be nice

but all that free cap space by letting fin and jennings go would really be nice

I don't think he has much trade value. One good year plus potential isn't going to sell other GM's IMO.

Yes.

Jones, based on availability.

Ditch Jmike, keep the other two. Jennings will come cheaper due to injury history.

Good thread.

[Joemailman]

The big question is how much injuries the past 2 years have hurt Jennings' market value. If they can afford Jennings, I'd go with him. Jones has played really well, but what you've seen this year is probably his ceiling. I think Jennings is still capable of being a Pro Bowl player.

I would like at it from a slightly bigger picture. You have Jennings, Jones, Nelson and Cobb. Two years from now, you'll probably only have 3 of them. Which 3 do you want? I'd want Jennings, Nelson and Cobb, but again, it depends on what it would cost to keep jennin gs.

[LegandofthePack15]

Jennings over Jones any day. Not even close.

Jennings is faster and he's a better route runner. Jennings is a complete receiver whereas Jones is merely a possession receiver.

[George Cumby]

Jennings over Jones any day. Not even close.

Jennings is faster and he's a better route runner. Jennings is a complete receiver whereas Jones is merely a possession receiver.

I totally agree, but based on GJ's injury history, I have significant concers.....

[The Shadow]

You just don't let players like Jennings go. He is an important cog for many reasons. His presence opens up things for other players - like James Jones & Jordy. I thought that little video of Greg trying to cheer up Crosby was instructive - it's important to have that great teammate mentality.
I think his value is underestimated; because the Pack has a lot of weapons, he does not get targeted as much as his talent warrants.
He always reminds me of Reggie Wayne - and if the Pack had to rely on him more his stats would go up.

[King Friday]

Rodgers can make a lot of receivers look good. You do NOT pay huge money to a WR, especially one with an injury history that is relatively extensive. Yeah, Jennings is better than Jones...but it doesn't matter.

[Bossman641]

That Jones guy is pretty good. Let's keep him.

[Smeefers]

Keep em both if you can, but I think Jennings is the odd man out. I want to say Jennings is starting to get old, but he's only 29. He's got another 3 to 4 years left, but I don't think you break the bank on a guy at the end of his career. If he wants to get paid, he'll go somewhere else.

Regardless, I don't think you get rid of Jones. Dude is cheap and productive and he doesn't mind riding the pine. Well, he didn't, maybe that changes after this year, but I think he's earned a lot more looks in the future after the performance he's had this year.

[RashanGary]

I'd go this route:

JJ - 6M/year
JN - 8M/year


That's the same price as Jennings. Keep the two, move Cobb up the list. . . . Put your money to Matthew and Rodgers. We have WR's. We don't have star QB's and star OLB's. Also let Finley go. Put that money at Raji and the OL coming up for contract. Draft a RB and move to a balanced offense.

[rbaloha1]

Agree that Jennings is the more complete receiver.

Opponents double cover GJ majority of the time. JJ is single covered majority of the time.

[mmmdk]

Agree that Jennings is the more complete receiver.

Opponents double cover GJ majority of the time. JJ is single covered majority of the time.

This.
But it's all about the money; so JJ it is and bye, bye GJ.

[Upnorth]

I'd go this route:

JJ - 6M/year
JN - 8M/year


That's the same price as Jennings. Keep the two, move Cobb up the list. . . . Put your money to Matthew and Rodgers. We have WR's. We don't have star QB's and star OLB's. Also let Finley go. Put that money at Raji and the OL coming up for contract. Draft a RB and move to a balanced offense.

I agree with this post emphatically, but would add that Woodsons money will go a long way to keeping the important piece as well.

[red]

how long until we have to pay cobb more money?

ok, i looked it up. he signed a 4 year deal. so probably after next season they're gonna be talking about a new contract and the way he's playing, he's also going to be looking for the same type of money that jennings is gonna get

so keep in mind, IF jennings walks, cobb might also be walking in 2 years. so cobb might not be a long term solution either

so the thought of "well we can let jennings go because we still have jordy, jones and cobb" is only gonna maybe go away soon.

TT has some tough decisions to make

[RashanGary]

Agreen, Redd. 25 yr old Cobb >> 30 year old Jennings. And cheaper. JJ and Nelson very reasonable prices. . . .

Mark Murphy said they have a lot of big contracts coming up and not enough money for all of them. Said we're going to have to let some of them go. Some of the big contract guys. Not garbage guys. We're going to lose playmaker(s.) Which ones?

Whether it's Jennings or Raji. . . . Finley or Cobb. . . . . Down the line. We're going to lose some of our great players. It's just a fact.


TT is going to have to keep drafting. We can't keep everyone. We need new great players (like Cobb, Bulaga, House, Hayward. . . .) All guys who show early signs of being excellent players. There are many others in the last couple years who can still pan out to be great. AR wasn't great on day 1. Sitton wasn't. Raji either. TT just has to keep getting players and the coaches have to keep developing them the way they have.

[VegasPackFan]

I think you have a QB that can make any WR good if not great. Cobb is younger and cheaper. Lock up the Defensive players and keep drafting smart.

[Smidgeon]

Agreen, Redd. 25 yr old Cobb >> 30 year old Jennings. And cheaper. JJ and Nelson very reasonable prices. . . .

Mark Murphy said they have a lot of big contracts coming up and not enough money for all of them. Said we're going to have to let some of them go. Some of the big contract guys. Not garbage guys. We're going to lose playmaker(s.) Which ones?

Whether it's Jennings or Raji. . . . Finley or Cobb. . . . . Down the line. We're going to lose some of our great players. It's just a fact.


TT is going to have to keep drafting. We can't keep everyone. We need new great players (like Cobb, Bulaga, House, Hayward. . . .) All guys who show early signs of being excellent players. There are many others in the last couple years who can still pan out to be great. AR wasn't great on day 1. Sitton wasn't. Raji either. TT just has to keep getting players and the coaches have to keep developing them the way they have.

Just to bite on the tangent:

I think Cobb and Jennings are tough to compare. Jennings runs silky smooth routes and is one of the best deep ball receivers in the NFL. Cobb works the middle and can make anyone miss. In my opinion, they and Jones or Nelson form a good three way complementary system. Jones/Nelson and Jennings outside, Cobb inside.

Granted, the money won't work out that way, but that's how I see it.

And no. I'm not saying Jones is better than Nelson. Just that they're similarly typed receivers.

[woodbuck27]

how long until we have to pay cobb more money?

ok, i looked it up. he signed a 4 year deal. so probably after next season they're gonna be talking about a new contract and the way he's playing, he's also going to be looking for the same type of money that jennings is gonna get

so keep in mind, IF jennings walks, cobb might also be walking in 2 years. so cobb might not be a long term solution either

so the thought of "well we can let jennings go because we still have jordy, jones and cobb" is only gonna maybe go away soon.

TT has some tough decisions to make

All TT has to ensure is that his drafting team is as good as it needs to be. In this age of FA good players will leave Green Bay. TT simply needs a constant influx of talented young players and a great coaching staff.

[Cheesehead Craig]

If the Packers let both Finley and Hawk go, that frees up a bunch of money for Jennings now and Cobb down the road.

[red]

All TT has to ensure is that his drafting team is as good as it needs to be. In this age of FA good players will leave Green Bay. TT simply needs a constant influx of talented young players and a great coaching staff.

yeah but when you do hit on a bigtime player in the draft you have to try and keep them

the whole point of the draft is to find good players

i'd rather not get to the point where we're letting a mathews go because he costs too much and because we can just draft another OLB. we've all seen that that is easier said then done

[NewsBruin]

It's not worth its own thread, so I wanted to post it in here, clipped into my "I must have taken Crazy Pills" file:


James Jones is this year's breakout star. Aaron Rodgers is as good as ever, and as long as he's in Green Bay, he'll be Chicago's kryptonite. He just doesn't make the mistakes most quarterbacks make, and he knows he can get out of trouble with his feet when he has to. And it helps for him to have the most underrated (but not for long) wide receiver in football, James Jones. The hands and speed and route-running of Jones make it possible for Rodgers to feel confident about throwing a pass to a spot, knowing if it's supposed to be a 13-yard curl, Jones isn't going to cut it off at 11 or lengthen it to 15. When I watch Jones, I think of a guy who shuts out all the outside distractions and focuses on one thing -- catching the ball. You saw it on one of his three touchdown catches from Rodgers at Soldier Field, in the far left of the end zone, being screened by a Chicago corner ... and not looking at the hands or arms in front of him. Only the ball. Touchdown. Here's a stat of the day: Jones has a league-leading 12 touchdown receptions. Twelve -- that's the number of touchdowns Calvin Johnson, Wes Welker and Steve Smith have combined to catch.

Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nfl/news/20121217/week-15/#ixzz2FKzuBP8b

I think Jones is worth keeping, because he's currently cheap and worth his pay. I don't think keeping him affects the Jennings decision, just because Jones is cheap for now. I don't think Jones is proven consistent enough to be a dependable #1, but the light could turn on. Greg Jennings is a proven #1, and with our current corps, that is worth something. I think the next bona fide #1 on our roster is Cobb, but that would take away the majority of his multipurpose touches (aside: I hope MM's got some run/catch/throw options with Cobb under wraps that he's saving for the playoffs).

Unlike Finley, I think Jones is producing enough now to keep paying his contract and watch him develop (but I haven't watched a full Packer game in 2 seasons, so don't use me to back your opinions). And I think if we got rid of both Jones and Finley, who on offense would be our token bash-this-guy-for-being-selfish-whiney-and-unfocused-why-can't-he-just-be-grateful-to-be-on-the-roster Packer?

[pbmax]

Welcome back NB!

I often wonder if TDs give us a warped perspective of WRs because of play calling and the desire by an offense to go away from maximum coverage. The guy who might be most open for TDs is the guy the defense fears the least (Bubba Franks).

[NewsBruin]

Thanks, but I've been lurking. I'm serious when I post that most of y'all are closer to and smarter aboot the Pack and the NFL than I am. It's educational enough for me to lurk around here and get more about the Pack than I can find anywhere else in the South Alabama area.

[woodbuck27]

yeah but when you do hit on a bigtime player in the draft you have to try and keep them

the whole point of the draft is to find good players

i'd rather not get to the point where we're letting a mathews go because he costs too much and because we can just draft another OLB. we've all seen that that is easier said then done

It's just the way it is today Red. Hard to work at the same job in one place for too long.

That's especially the case when PRO athletes can demand so much; that always growing as their true value becomes evident among competing teams.

[woodbuck27]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nfl...#ixzz2FKzuBP8b

" Here's a stat of the day: Jones has a league-leading 12 touchdown receptions. Twelve -- that's the number of touchdowns Calvin Johnson, Wes Welker and Steve Smith have combined to catch. " Fr. LINK

That factoid may make James Jones very costly to retain. TT has more to be concerned about then 'just' whether or not to sign Greg Jennings.

We see how TT operates. He has a bottom line or deal to offer any of his players and if the shoe fits ...fine. That player remains a Green Bay PACKER.

GO PACK GO !

[Teamcheez1]

I thought Jones had two years left on his contract?

[Patler]

Welcome back NB!

I often wonder if TDs give us a warped perspective of WRs because of play calling and the desire by an offense to go away from maximum coverage. The guy who might be most open for TDs is the guy the defense fears the least (Bubba Franks).

Are you suggesting defensive coordinators didn't spend sleepless nights scheming to control Bubba??? :smile:

[Pugger]

Keep em both if you can, but I think Jennings is the odd man out. I want to say Jennings is starting to get old, but he's only 29. He's got another 3 to 4 years left, but I don't think you break the bank on a guy at the end of his career. If he wants to get paid, he'll go somewhere else.

Regardless, I don't think you get rid of Jones. Dude is cheap and productive and he doesn't mind riding the pine. Well, he didn't, maybe that changes after this year, but I think he's earned a lot more looks in the future after the performance he's had this year.

No, DRIVER is the odd man out.

[pbmax]

Are you suggesting defensive coordinators didn't spend sleepless nights scheming to control Bubba??? :smile:

I wouldn't be surprised if Dick Jauron still had nightmares about him, otherwise ..., no.

[Smeefers]

No, DRIVER is the odd man out.

Well, I don't think there's any question of Driver being released next year any more. I was solidly in the "keep him" group last year, and I've flopped like a pancake on that issue. Dude isn't effective anymore.

[Pugger]

Can we use the remainder of Driver's money to resign Jennings? I think his presence helps our other WRs because of the attention he attracts.

[red]

Can we use the remainder of Driver's money to resign Jennings? I think his presence helps our other WRs because of the attention he attracts.

the free cap space from driver will give you about a quarter of what you need for jennings

[NewsBruin]

Can we use the remainder of Driver's money to resign Jennings? I think his presence helps our other WRs because of the attention he attracts.

Without having seen a lot of the games, I think that's way too optimistic. Driver's not the first veteran WR that's gone through the league.

Defensive Back Coach: Looking at this season's film, I think Driver's lost a step, and the passing stats bear that out.

Devensive Coordinator: Hmmm, yes. But his name is Donald Driver, he made the Pro Bowl in 2010, and he does a lot of charity work.

DBC: Charity Work? Well, I hadn't considered that angle. Still, 37-year-old receivers have a bit of a drop-off in production from their first decade in the league.

DC: And he does work hard. Plus a Google search often puts the words, "crafty," "cagey," and "hard worker" next to his name.

DBC: Damn, that's twice the word "work" comes up when talking about 80. But he's only had 4 catches in the last 4 games.

DC: That's too small a sample size. Look over the whole season. He's had 8 receptions.

DBC: Holy shit! He's on pace for a 12-catch season! No wonder you're the DC. That's it, I'm bracketing him on every play!

[NewsBruin]

On second read, it was more obvious you meant Jennings' attention. But I'm too proud of myself to edit the above post.

[mraynrand]

Without having seen a lot of the games, I think that's way too optimistic. Driver's not the first veteran WR that's gone through the league.

Defensive Back Coach: Looking at this season's film, I think Driver's lost a step, and the passing stats bear that out.

Devensive Coordinator: Hmmm, yes. But his name is Donald Driver, he made the Pro Bowl in 2010, and he does a lot of charity work.

DBC: Charity Work? Well, I hadn't considered that angle. Still, 37-year-old receivers have a bit of a drop-off in production from their first decade in the league.

DC: And he does work hard. Plus a Google search often puts the words, "crafty," "cagey," and "hard worker" next to his name.

DBC: Damn, that's twice the word "work" comes up when talking about 80. But he's only had 4 catches in the last 4 games.

DC: That's too small a sample size. Look over the whole season. He's had 8 receptions.

DBC: Holy shit! He's on pace for a 12-catch season! No wonder you're the DC. That's it, I'm bracketing him on every play!

If Pugger had meant the attention Driver attracts, this would have been an all time great sarcastic beat down. repped.

[Patler]

Can we use the remainder of Driver's money to resign Jennings? I think his presence helps our other WRs because of the attention he attracts.


the free cap space from driver will give you about a quarter of what you need for jennings

Per JSO, Jennings' 2012 cap figure is $7.5 million, and Driver's is $2.3 million. Assuming Driver's roster spot is taken by a rookie in 2013, the minimum salary for his replacement will be $405,000. That would give you about $9.4 to work with. Might be close to enough.

[woodbuck27]

RE: Greg Jennings and I saw him interviewed this AM on NFL Access and his reaction to being resigned by the Packers Vs testing the FA market and considering how the Packers have handled other eligible FA Vets in the past:

Found 1 hour ago Dec.18, 2012 on Pro Football Zone:

http://www.yardbarker.com/nfl/articles/greg_jennings_doesnt_want_to_play_under_the_franch ise_tag_next_season/12462688

Greg Jennings doesn’t want to play under the franchise tag next season

GO PACKERS !

[Pugger]

Can we use the remainder of Driver's money to resign Jennings? I think his presence helps our other WRs because of the attention he attracts.


the free cap space from driver will give you about a quarter of what you need for jennings

I didn't think Drivers salary would cover what Jennings needs but it could help...

[Pugger]

If Pugger had meant the attention Driver attracts, this would have been an all time great sarcastic beat down. repped.

Huh?

[Bretsky]

[QUOTE=woodbuck27;702805]RE: Greg Jennings and I saw him interviewed this AM on NFL Access and his reaction to being resigned by the Packers Vs testing the FA market and considering how the Packers have handled other eligible FA Vets in the past:

Found 1 hour ago Dec.18, 2012 on Pro Football Zone:

http://www.yardbarker.com/nfl/articles/greg_jennings_doesnt_want_to_play_under_the_franch ise_tag_next_season/12462688

To Jennings not wanting to be franchised
WHO CARES ?

If the figures is low enough that is a no brainer. This is what the system is. If he doens't want to get franchised....then he can sign a long term deal and give the Packers some value. The only card the Packers have is the tag. and it's undoubtedly their right to use it. Jennings may not like it....but the stystem is the same one that grossly overpaid him for his lack of production in 2012

[red]

tag and trade

there is no way some other team wouldn't trade for jennings under the franchise number

he's at least worth a 1st round pick. you can't just let that walk for nothing.

and yes, the 4th round comp pick we'd get in 2014 can suck my ass

[Joemailman]

Packers are becoming a balanced offense. They are currently 15th in the NFL in both rushing attempts and passing attempts per game. The days of needing 4 starting caliber wide receivers may be coming to an end. I wouldn't be surprised if they trade both Jennings and Finley and draft their eventual replacements.

[rbaloha1]

It is unfortunate that GJ fails to recognize he is coming off an injury which makes it tougher to obtain a Larry Fitzgerald type contract.

GJ should quietly hope he gets franchised.

[Joemailman]

tag and trade

there is no way some other team wouldn't trade for jennings under the franchise number

he's at least worth a 1st round pick. you can't just let that walk for nothing.

and yes, the 4th round comp pick we'd get in 2014 can suck my ass

St. Louis has Washington's #1 pick the next 2 years, plus their own #2. There's a team with a pick to trade that could use a quality wide receiver.

[red]

St. Louis has Washington's #1 pick the next 2 years, plus their own #2. There's a team with a pick to trade that could use a quality wide receiver.

then take both our picks and trade up for Teo

[pbmax]

It is unfortunate that GJ fails to recognize he is coming off an injury which makes it tougher to obtain a Larry Fitzgerald type contract.

GJ should quietly hope he gets franchised.

Maybe not Fitz money, but plenty of other receivers have received more guaranteed money than $9 mil upfront. I think he will attract that kind of bonus again.

[Bretsky]

tag and trade

there is no way some other team wouldn't trade for jennings under the franchise number

he's at least worth a 1st round pick. you can't just let that walk for nothing.

and yes, the 4th round comp pick we'd get in 2014 can suck my ass


Given the contract he's going to demmand and his age we won't get a #1 these days
I coudl see a #2

The Rams are the best fit in the NFL out there

[RashanGary]

They say he wants Vincent Jackson money 11/year. Jackson has 1,200 yards, averaging 20 YPC. Same age.

GJ is 5'11": Jackson 6'5".
Jennings has 6,200 yards on his career right now. Jackson is at 6,000.
Jennings 50 TD, Jackson 45
Jennings has had injuries keeping him out of games 4 of his 7 years in the league. Jackson 1 out of 7.




The Packers look to be about 10M under the cap for the coming years barring cuts and raises to players like Jennings/Rodgers.

Cuts:
Woodson 10M
Pickett 6M
Finley 7M
Hawk 5M
Driver 2M
Jennings 9M
Open space 10M

That's about 49M in open space if you just take an axe to the roster in ways that kind of make sense to clear space. I took Jennings out to add him later.


Rodgers (making 10M/year) Brees (making 25M/year) Lets assume AR is nice enough to take the same deal as Brees. We're down to 34
Matthews age 26 (making 2M/year) Ware age 30 (making 12M/year) Let's assume Matthews takes that deal. Down to 24
Raji should go from 6 to 8. Down to 22
Bulaga from 1 to 8. We're at 15
Nelson from 4 to 6. 13 left


Then you have the decisions of Jones, Brad Jones, Newhouse, Burnett, Shields, Walden, Neal, Pickett, Woodson, Hawk, Finley and Jennings (among others.) These guys have to split 13 million dollars. 500K a piece and give Jennings 10 :)

How far can we strip the team down of players? I'm sure it's more complicated than this breakdown, but it looks like we can keep Jennings and 1 or 2 of the other guys in the list depending on the price.

Our guys are either young, just hitting their first big deal or in the primes of their careers. We're not loosing many players to age. With Jennings injuries the last two years especially, his age and the franchise tag, we do have some negotiating leverage in the offseason. It's not out of the realm to keep him, but if we do we'll be letting go a few high priced players and having to let go a bunch of the core glue guys shortly down the road. We only have two real superstars on this team. AR and CMIII. I don't know if it's appropriate to treat Jennings as such. Is he that much better than JJ, Nelson or Cobb? Is he worth two or three times the salary?

I wouldn't be against keeping him around on the franchise tag for 2 years, then letting him go so we can keep some of the core younger players that come up. I'm sure it would be an issue for him though and they're already digging in like they're pretty pissed off about the situation. Something tells me the GJ camp isn't going to be bending over any time soon. The Packers have WR's and a tag on Jennings along with it. I have a feeling this isn't going to go smoothly.

[woodbuck27]

They say he wants Vincent Jackson money 11/year. Jackson has 1,200 yards, averaging 20 YPC. Same age.

GJ is 5'11": Jackson 6'5".
Jennings has 6,200 yards on his career right now. Jackson is at 6,000.
Jennings 50 TD, Jackson 45
Jennings has had injuries keeping him out of games 4 of his 7 years in the league. Jackson 1 out of 7.




The Packers look to be about 10M under the cap for the coming years barring cuts and raises to players like Jennings/Rodgers.

Cuts:
Woodson 10M
Pickett 6M
Finley 7M
Hawk 5M
Driver 2M
Jennings 9M
Open space 10M

That's about 49M in open space if you just take an axe to the roster in ways that kind of make sense to clear space. I took Jennings out to add him later.


Rodgers (making 10M/year) Brees (making 25M/year) Lets assume AR is nice enough to take the same deal as Brees. We're down to 34
Matthews age 26 (making 2M/year) Ware age 30 (making 12M/year) Let's assume Matthews takes that deal. Down to 24
Raji should go from 6 to 8. Down to 22
Bulaga from 1 to 8. We're at 15
Nelson from 4 to 6. 13 left


Then you have the decisions of Jones, Brad Jones, Newhouse, Burnett, Shields, Walden, Neal, Pickett, Woodson, Hawk, Finley and Jennings (among others.) These guys have to split 13 million dollars. 500K a piece and give Jennings 10 :)

How far can we strip the team down of players? I'm sure it's more complicated than this breakdown, but it looks like we can keep Jennings and 1 or 2 of the other guys in the list depending on the price.

Our guys are either young, just hitting their first big deal or in the primes of their careers. We're not loosing many players to age. With Jennings injuries the last two years especially, his age and the franchise tag, we do have some negotiating leverage in the offseason. It's not out of the realm to keep him, but if we do we'll be letting go a few high priced players and having to let go a bunch of the core glue guys shortly down the road. We only have two real superstars on this team. AR and CMIII. I don't know if it's appropriate to treat Jennings as such. Is he that much better than JJ, Nelson or Cobb? Is he worth two or three times the salary?

I wouldn't be against keeping him around on the franchise tag for 2 years, then letting him go so we can keep some of the core younger players that come up. I'm sure it would be an issue for him though and they're already digging in like they're pretty pissed off about the situation. Something tells me the GJ camp isn't going to be bending over any time soon. The Packers have WR's and a tag on Jennings along with it. I have a feeling this isn't going to go smoothly.

Wow... with all of that TT will be too confused.

The talk today on NFL access and specifically here's what Eric Davis said that makes too much sense:

The Minnesota Vikings need a starting QB who can run an offense efficiently.

The answer is Alex Smith...a perfect fit. The Vikings are a perfect fit for another upcoming FA.

His name...... Greg Jennings.

Greg Jennings has made it very clear. He wants to retire a Packer. He likes being a Packer. It's up to Ted Thompson to make that a reality. The way that TT handled Scott Wells and Cullen Jenkins bothers Greg Jennings. He's concerned about Ted Thompson and TT's plans for him as a Packer or not.

TT always has $his bottom line$.

IMO we will see TT ' tag him ' rather than see Greg Jennings line up against us in 2013.

If you like watching him play you may get the best chance seeing him wearing purple in 2014.

GO PACKERS !

[red]

most of those guys don't have to be signed this offseason, it would be nice, it would be nice, but all are under contract through the 2013 season, and nelson, bulaga and rodgers are signed on for 2 more seasons

personaly, i don't see bulaga getting a new contract at all this offseason. he played a few games like crap then got injured for the rest of the year. see if he improves next year and can stay healthy, then work on his contract after next season

[Smeefers]

They say he wants Vincent Jackson money 11/year. Jackson has 1,200 yards, averaging 20 YPC. Same age.

GJ is 5'11": Jackson 6'5".
Jennings has 6,200 yards on his career right now. Jackson is at 6,000.
Jennings 50 TD, Jackson 45
Jennings has had injuries keeping him out of games 4 of his 7 years in the league. Jackson 1 out of 7.




The Packers look to be about 10M under the cap for the coming years barring cuts and raises to players like Jennings/Rodgers.

Cuts:
Woodson 10M
Pickett 6M
Finley 7M
Hawk 5M
Driver 2M
Jennings 9M
Open space 10M

That's about 49M in open space if you just take an axe to the roster in ways that kind of make sense to clear space. I took Jennings out to add him later.


Rodgers (making 10M/year) Brees (making 25M/year) Lets assume AR is nice enough to take the same deal as Brees. We're down to 34
Matthews age 26 (making 2M/year) Ware age 30 (making 12M/year) Let's assume Matthews takes that deal. Down to 24
Raji should go from 6 to 8. Down to 22
Bulaga from 1 to 8. We're at 15
Nelson from 4 to 6. 13 left


Then you have the decisions of Jones, Brad Jones, Newhouse, Burnett, Shields, Walden, Neal, Pickett, Woodson, Hawk, Finley and Jennings (among others.) These guys have to split 13 million dollars. 500K a piece and give Jennings 10 :)

How far can we strip the team down of players? I'm sure it's more complicated than this breakdown, but it looks like we can keep Jennings and 1 or 2 of the other guys in the list depending on the price.

Our guys are either young, just hitting their first big deal or in the primes of their careers. We're not loosing many players to age. With Jennings injuries the last two years especially, his age and the franchise tag, we do have some negotiating leverage in the offseason. It's not out of the realm to keep him, but if we do we'll be letting go a few high priced players and having to let go a bunch of the core glue guys shortly down the road. We only have two real superstars on this team. AR and CMIII. I don't know if it's appropriate to treat Jennings as such. Is he that much better than JJ, Nelson or Cobb? Is he worth two or three times the salary?

I wouldn't be against keeping him around on the franchise tag for 2 years, then letting him go so we can keep some of the core younger players that come up. I'm sure it would be an issue for him though and they're already digging in like they're pretty pissed off about the situation. Something tells me the GJ camp isn't going to be bending over any time soon. The Packers have WR's and a tag on Jennings along with it. I have a feeling this isn't going to go smoothly.

Noooo! Numbers make things much more solid! I want to role around in the ambivalence of it all. Bah, TT can resign everyone... AND pick up some huge free agents.

[RashanGary]

With that logic, Red, you could cash out your 401K today and go buy a Corvette or whatever else it is would make you happy. Winning the SB isn't equivocal to spending everything you have right away. It's more like real life, where the ultimate goal requires some planning and balancing of priorities.

I'll bet you all of us have made some decisions (or not made them) on the account of financial restriction. Maybe you had to sell your boat, or worse. I'll bet nobody who loves to fish gets up in the morning, divorced, up against the cap, happy to be selling one of the things that brings joy to their life. . . . But they do it. They do it because life doesn't tomorrow and they want to make sure when tomorrow comes they have a life worth living.

For the love of Pete. Look at the big picture. You make it sound like the whole idea is lunacy. It's like our parents said when were were 8 years old, "money doesn't grown on trees." it's the age old lesson that we can't always get what we want. I don't think anyone wants to see GJ go. TT, MM, AR, anyone. . . . And there is no guarantee he does. But there's a salary cap and we're going to have to start shredding the roster if we want to keep him.


He's not a blue chip player. He's a red. We have AR and CMIII. Greg Jennings does not get, nor should he, that kind of treatment.

[mraynrand]

He's not a blue chip player. He's a red. We have AR and CMIII. Greg Jennings does not get, nor should he, that kind of treatment.

and we have TT, who can draft WRs of high (red) value in the second round. GJ played right away. GB can get more guys like him, and since GB has a stable of decent receivers, they can work the new guy in gradually, like they did with Cobb. Plus, you want to save that money to sign Finley. He's a blue-chipper all the way! :lol:

[Bretsky]

To me, GJ is an easy franchise and trade guy if TT thinks he can get a pick for him. Worst case is we could carry him for a yr but pulling, say a 2nd, would be solid. We can draft another WR this year.

[run pMc]

I think TT let's Jennings shop around for a contract and if it's not steep considers matching offer.

Of course, Minnesota will overpay Jennings, pair him with Harvin, Peterson and Ponder and still struggle to get 8 wins.

Meanwhile, TT drafts another WR and plugs him in. Rodgers > most QB's; I bet Larry Fitzgerald wishes he had a real QB to throw to him. If we've learned anything this year, it's that M3's offense can withstand losing GJ with Jordy/JJ/Cobb and maybe Finley picking up the slack. Granted, it's better with GJ than without it, but with his age, injury history, and the Donald Driver Experience coasting to an end before our eyes, I think they'll let him walk. A big part of that is (unlike Minnesota) GB has an above average passing offense with Rodgers at the helm.

GJ's seems like a really good guy and a good #1WR, and it will stink to lose him. I think there are other parts of the roster that need more help/money thrown at them.

[Pugger]

Even tho he has been hurt this year Greg is still considered a top 10 WR in the league. It would help if we had any clue what TT thinks Greg is worth...

[red]

To me, GJ is an easy franchise and trade guy if TT thinks he can get a pick for him. Worst case is we could carry him for a yr but pulling, say a 2nd, would be solid. We can draft another WR this year.

and a tag and trade like others have said keeps him away from our rivals

[Guiness]

I agree that we tag - then trade, if we can. But unlike Flynn last year, who cares if we're stuck with him? If healthy, he'll be a solid contributor, whereas Flynn would've been a $15 million ride the pine guy.

Injuries have to be a concern though. There is some question if he's even worth the tag. Is there any chance he plays a 16 game season?

[gbgary]

tt will make jennings an offer that makes sense for the Packers and then he'll let him go. After drafting three o-lineman he'll draft a wr.

[Pugger]

I agree that we tag - then trade, if we can. But unlike Flynn last year, who cares if we're stuck with him? If healthy, he'll be a solid contributor, whereas Flynn would've been a $15 million ride the pine guy.

Injuries have to be a concern though. There is some question if he's even worth the tag. Is there any chance he plays a 16 game season?

How many games did he miss last season? Isn't this the first year he's missed a significant number of games?

[Teamcheez1]

How many games did he miss last season? Isn't this the first year he's missed a significant number of games?

Regular Season
2010 Played 16 games
2011 Played 13 games
2012 Will be 8 games including the next 2

There are also games included above that he did not finish.

The trend line is down as he is on the other side of 30 now. TT will not tag Jennings unless he can trade him. That $10M+ can be used a lot of other places.

He will either make a reasonable offer or no offer and let him head to free agency. I would say Driver and Woodson won't be far behind.

[Fritz]

Anybody know what REASONABLE chance is there to do a tag-and-trade? With Flynn, lots were clamoring for that - it would have been nice and I hoped for it, too - but realistically it was way too big of a risk, and why would anyone do that if the guy was a FA anyway?

So what are the realistic chances that TT could tag Jennings and trade him? And what could reasonably be expected in return?

[red]

Regular Season
2010 Played 16 games
2011 Played 13 games
2012 Will be 8 games including the next 2

There are also games included above that he did not finish.

The trend line is down as he is on the other side of 30 now. TT will not tag Jennings unless he can trade him. That $10M+ can be used a lot of other places.

He will either make a reasonable offer or no offer and let him head to free agency. I would say Driver and Woodson won't be far behind.

how is 29 on the wrong side of 30?

clay mathews played 16 of 16 in 2009
15 of 16 in 2010
15 of 16 in 2011
and his already missed 4 games this season. there are also games included above that he did not finish

by your simple logic mathews is on that same downward spiral, and at 26 he is also on the "wrong side of 30"

[red]

Anybody know what REASONABLE chance is there to do a tag-and-trade? With Flynn, lots were clamoring for that - it would have been nice and I hoped for it, too - but realistically it was way too big of a risk, and why would anyone do that if the guy was a FA anyway?

So what are the realistic chances that TT could tag Jennings and trade him? And what could reasonably be expected in return?

with flynn the tag number would have been around 15 million. that's a lot of coin who if traded would be a so-so started (or a non starter). teams might not have wanted to trade for a cap number that high. and if no one wanted him, we would have been stuck with a backup QB making top 5 QB money

jennings is a top 5 WR in the NFL, like it or not. many teams would love to have him. his tag number would be around 10 million, maybe even a little less. thats less money then what he's gonna get per year in his next contract. tagging him is an absolute steal. you would have no problem trading him with a 10 million dollar cap number. and if nobody does want him? we get to keep our best wr for another year at below market value

plus the biggest deal IMO with a tag in trade vs. just letting him walk (other then the draft picks) is that you get to have some say over where he goes. if he's just a free agent there is nothing we can do to stop him from walking right over any of the boarders and going to a team where he will fuck us in the ass for years to come.

as for trade value. the dolphins got 2 third round picks for marshall last year (a guy with a ton of baggage)

[sharpe1027]

The main downside I see to tagging Jennings is that you loose some flexibility to sign other players to extensions during the franchise year. Paying him $10 Mill for next season will not be bad because he will certainly improve the team. It may, however, lead to one or more players hitting free agency in two years b/c they won't have the money to extend before then.

That being said, I'd love to keep him with the team as long as possible. He is a great WR and seems like a genuinely good guy.

[pbmax]

A tag and trade for Jennings would benefit from his rank as a player, he is a better and more accomplished WR (not sure he is top 5 though) than Flynn was a QB, and the fact that the WR tag number will be lower than a the QB number.

It will be complicated by the fact that Jennings is older and that WRs grow on trees.

Result: Never going to happen.

Packers have too many needs with cap space to tie him up with the tag and wait for a deal and as a result, it would need to be agreed to ahead of time. Makes it less likely.

[Fritz]

A tag and trade for Jennings would benefit from his rank as a player, he is a better and more accomplished WR (not sure he is top 5 though) than Flynn was a QB, and the fact that the WR tag number will be lower than a the QB number.

It will be complicated by the fact that Jennings is older and that WRs grow on trees.

Result: Never going to happen.

Packers have too many needs with cap space to tie him up with the tag and wait for a deal and as a result, it would need to be agreed to ahead of time. Makes it less likely.

Having watched Billy Schroeder and Robert "Turd"Ferguson in the green and gold, I dunno if they grow on trees. However, CHFF makes a good case that they are "hood ornaments."

Plus, I respect your opinion and so I think you are prolly right; thus I am reduced to merely hoping some Jerry Jones-like GM will pony up a second or third rounder for GJ.

[red]

Having watched Billy Schroeder and Robert "Turd"Ferguson in the green and gold, I dunno if they grow on trees. However, CHFF makes a good case that they are "hood ornaments."

Plus, I respect your opinion and so I think you are prolly right; thus I am reduced to merely hoping some Jerry Jones-like GM will pony up a second or third rounder for GJ.

a gm like jerry jones HAS given up a first AND a third for a much less accomplished WR in the not too distant past

[pbmax]

Having watched Billy Schroeder and Robert "Turd"Ferguson in the green and gold, I dunno if they grow on trees. However, CHFF makes a good case that they are "hood ornaments."

Plus, I respect your opinion and so I think you are prolly right; thus I am reduced to merely hoping some Jerry Jones-like GM will pony up a second or third rounder for GJ.

True about WRs, not all the fruit on that tree is good. But its a position, unlike QB, LT or pass rushing DE that usually lends itself to finds after the 2nd round. Meaning the draft can be a real resource short term without having to give up picks.

[Fritz]

I wonder if any GM's have toyed with drafting primarily LT's, QB's, and DE's nearly exclusively in the first two rounds...

[red]

bump

i still wonder what would have happened had we kept jennings and let jones and or cobb walk

jennings was the last WR we had that could actually get open on his own, something cobb wishes he could do. and cobb got the same money we could have thrown at jennings a year early to keep him happy

and before anyone says jennings sucked after he left. yeah, but he never had a real QB after he left either

[call_me_ishmael]

Jennings was the much better player.