AROD.."Keeping Woodson should be a top priority"

[Bretsky]

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/187928861.html

[esoxx]

I thought Ted was the GM

[mission]

Top priority for 3mil a year, maybe...

[Joemailman]

Not the first time he's done this. He openly campaigned for the Packers to sign James Jones a couple of years ago at a time when almost nobody else was in Jones' corner. He was right. Now there's an argument to be made that 10 mil is more than Woodson's worth, but I'm not surprised he wants a team leader like Woodson back.

[sharpe1027]

I'm fine with him saying this. It would be much worse if he was criticizing a move after the fact. He's right. Woodson is still under contract and a Packer. No way he should suggest anything other than keeping him around IMO.

[KYPack]

10 million per year?

He is slowing down rapidly.

Cutting Wood and Hawk free up a lot of salary, they must be looking hard at that right now.

[Bretsky]

10 million per year?

He is slowing down rapidly.

Cutting Wood and Hawk free up a lot of salary, they must be looking hard at that right now.


I'd be fine paying Chuck 5 but IMO that's too much.
Apples to Apples...and I know we're not using the money for a big time free agent
But think of the type of quality player...or players....u could get for 10MIL per year

[Pugger]

Evidently Woodson and Rodgers are pretty close teammates and they are both team leaders so it isnt' surprising that AR would want Woodson to stick around. But I don't know if we want to pay him $10M.

[Patler]

Never mind.

[Iron Mike]

Never mind.

http://learnjavafx.typepad.com/.a/6a00e54f133d69883401156f88b4c2970c-800wi

[rbaloha1]

Agree Wood should be brought back at 1/2 price -- Yes, I have a Wood super bowl jersey.

[ThunderDan]

I'd be fine paying Chuck 5 but IMO that's too much.
Apples to Apples...and I know we're not using the money for a big time free agent
But think of the type of quality player...or players....u could get for 10MIL per year

Clay Matthews, ARod and Raji?

[Old School]

Maybe AR should consider saying nothing at times.
We all love Woodson, but didn't keeping Driver an extra year teach us anything?
As has been said, maybe at a much reduced salary - maybe.

[gbgary]

both are leaders! ;)

[Bretsky]

Clay Matthews, ARod and Raji?


We're undoubtedly keeping them whether Woodson comes back or not

[RashanGary]

I'd like to keep Woodson too. He's one of the few players who can play with instinct and game speed inside.

If AR starts throwing hissy fits and making drama over players he wants and doesn't want, I'll be pretty disappointed. He's arrogant, the best players are, but at some point it can be too much. Hopefully he never crosses that line. Lucky for him, he got a lesson on what not to do from the last great QB in Green Bay, but it's always a danger with star players, getting too big for their britches. Damn human nature, it can be a real bitch.

[ThunderDan]

We're undoubtedly keeping them whether Woodson comes back or not

ARod was at $8M for 2012. That's about 7-8M under value.
RAJI was at $3.35M for 2012. That's about 4-5M under value.
CMIII was at $800,000 for 2012. That's about 10M under value.

That's about 20M in cap room we need to clear to keep those three.

[Bretsky]

ARod was at $8M for 2012. That's about 7-8M under value.
RAJI was at $3.35M for 2012. That's about 4-5M under value.
CMIII was at $800,000 for 2012. That's about 10M under value.

That's about 20M in cap room we need to clear to keep those three.

A part of that will come from Jennings departure, whether it be next year or the year after

[RashanGary]

ARod was at $8M for 2012. That's about 7-8M under value.
RAJI was at $3.35M for 2012. That's about 4-5M under value.
CMIII was at $800,000 for 2012. That's about 10M under value.

That's about 20M in cap room we need to clear to keep those three.

We do have something like 8-10/year open right now Jennings opens up another 8. But you way undervalued AR, I think. Top QB's exiting their prime are at about 20-25M/year. AR is going to be a bar-setter being the only truly elite QB in his class coming up for contract right now. I'd add 10 to your AR estimation. My hope is he sees the big picture and understands he can make up salary in endorsements and fame because he signs a decent contract. I mean, 20M/year or 25. Is it that important?

Assuming GJ is gone, we still need about 15 in space. Hawk would make up 5 of that. We do have inside backers at his talent level. I just think he has to go, similar to the way Barnett went. Then the really tough decisions come. Finley and Woodson would lead that list. Tramon is working his way into the conversation the way he's playing, as crazy as that might sound.

We're going to lose some talent. The question is who and where. The biggest question is, has Ted drafted well enough for new, excellent talent to develop and will he continue to draft well so we can sustain?

Big decisions are going to be made this offseason. It's going to be a big one for us, one where we might not get a lot of positive vibes until the ever optimistic draft time and maybe not until we start winning games (if the football gods are so kind) after that. I sense some turmoil from the press this offseason. Things are going to point down far more than they point up from a gaining/losing veteran talent standpoint.

[RashanGary]

Look for the perpetually young cliche to be echoed louder than ever. Hopefully some perpetually successful talk is sprinkled in, but in the words of Nutz, "don't piss off the media", those guys may just have an axe to grind.

[pbmax]

I don't think Brees was able to get his average to $25 mil per year. It will be just above $20 mil per year.

[RashanGary]

I don't think Brees was able to get his average to $25 mil per year. It will be just above $20 mil per year.

Yeah, you're right. AR should be a bar-setter though. Everyone has an opinion, but it seems more people think AR is the best player in the game than any other player. 20 would seem like the minimum for him, wouldn't it.

I'd be happy with that number. You need your contracts for your best players to be fair, but just a little better than full market value. If AR is worth 23, getting him for 20 would be about what you're looking for. Considering he has 2 years left on his current deal, you might be able to add on a few years at 25/year and give a lot of it up front, but keep the average down because his current deal is so low. Might even have a 19/yearish deal on average if they work on it early.

The Packers could really fuck AR in the ass, and even more-so they could rip Matthews a new one. I really hope they don't go that route. These guys are the best players on your team. You have to give them at least close to what they're worth before the final minute. When guys play for far less than their worth right up to the bitter end, it ends up to be just that, "bitter."

[RashanGary]

Pick and choose your battles. Hopefully these guys and the team have some compromise in their approaches. This could go really smooth, and it could be an epic disaster. Players give a little to get paid early. Team gives a little by really opening up and being fair even though they don't have to.

[red]

I'd be fine paying Chuck 5 but IMO that's too much.
Apples to Apples...and I know we're not using the money for a big time free agent
But think of the type of quality player...or players....u could get for 10MIL per year

yeah, but would any of those quality guys have any fucking heart? because thats what wood brings to the table. he's the leader of the defense and plays with a fire that only one other guy on defense has.

you can't just start throwing away all your team leaders. we're already gonna be getting rid of driver and probably jennings on one side of the ball. maybe hawk on the other.

thats a lot of vet leadership out the door right there. guy was hurt all year and was fighting for over a month with the team doctors trying to get back on the field. wasn't his fault he couldn't play the last month of the season and get into game shape for the playoffs like he wanted

[red]

i'm sorry

i a-rod bitching and throwing a fit to get a new contract this offseason? why are we even talking about having to add 10-15 million on to his salary for this season?

he's under contract for 2 more seasons.

next off-season he'll set the bar, unless he really throws a fit this offseason, but i haven't heard anything yet

[RashanGary]

i'm sorry

i a-rod bitching and throwing a fit to get a new contract this offseason? why are we even talking about having to add 10-15 million on to his salary for this season?

he's under contract for 2 more seasons.

next off-season he'll set the bar, unless he really throws a fit this offseason, but i haven't heard anything yet

To me, not paying AR a lot more would fall under the ruthless category and would show a disregard for how much he means to the team, and how important it is to work with him even when they are not forced to. Every situation is different. AR puts his body on the line for far less than he's worth. If you really appreciate him, if you really want to treat him with value as an employee, I think it's well within good judgement to bend a little and do it a year earlier than usual.

It's hard to compare the work world to the NFL, but this is a case where I think there are parallels. If you have a great employee, one who's not only the most valuable piece to your operation, but also a guy you trust to work his ass off as long as he's with the company, I don't think it's a bad idea, at all, to reward that person financially, even if you don't have to. It's about value and trust. AR has both in spades. He's the most valuable player in the NFL, and he's a guy you trust immensely. Dollars well spent, IMO.

I guess if I take a different look like Red, Idon't see it as tragic to wait a year either. The Packers have a history of doing things a certain way and there might be more benefits to treating him the same as his teammates who work their tails off and rely on their paychecks equally. The Packers do things a year early, typically and their extremely fair. Players know if they work hard, they're going to be treated well by the Packers. Jennings is a bit of an exception, but he also took a hard stance early in the season and appeared completely steadfast in getting very top dollar. It's hard to work with a guy a year early if he's completely unwilling to compromise and the Packers have other reasons that make it difficult to pay him. I do think that's the exception, and I don't think there is a feeling in the lockerroom that the Packers take advantage of their employees. I think there is an understanding there, and their approach to player contracts is very fair and very respected within the team. Maybe not putting AR on a pedestal is a type of respect for the team as a whole, and something AR can be proud of for holding his teammates in high enough regard that he didn't throw a fit when he very well could. I'm guys would respect AR a lot and appreciate him as a person for that. I think Matthews already has that respect. He's special as a player and hasn't demanded special treatment. He hasn't put himself above the other players in this regard. . . . Who knows, maybe there is a culture of respect for the team as a whole rather than special treatment and disregard for the little guy.

[Tony Oday]

AR should be traded. He is just a stat whore.

[smuggler]

Not the first time he's done this. He openly campaigned for the Packers to sign James Jones a couple of years ago at a time when almost nobody else was in Jones' corner. He was right. Now there's an argument to be made that 10 mil is more than Woodson's worth, but I'm not surprised he wants a team leader like Woodson back.

Repped as fact.

[pbmax]

Not the first time he's done this. He openly campaigned for the Packers to sign James Jones a couple of years ago at a time when almost nobody else was in Jones' corner. He was right. Now there's an argument to be made that 10 mil is more than Woodson's worth, but I'm not surprised he wants a team leader like Woodson back.

It might also be possible to label James Jones comeback from Dropland as indicative of leadership on the team, no?

[mraynrand]

It might also be possible to label James Jones comeback from Dropland as indicative of leadership on the team, no?

only if it's the tabloid's meme de jour.

[Pugger]

I'd like to keep Woodson too. He's one of the few players who can play with instinct and game speed inside.

If AR starts throwing hissy fits and making drama over players he wants and doesn't want, I'll be pretty disappointed. He's arrogant, the best players are, but at some point it can be too much. Hopefully he never crosses that line. Lucky for him, he got a lesson on what not to do from the last great QB in Green Bay, but it's always a danger with star players, getting too big for their britches. Damn human nature, it can be a real bitch.

I don't think AR was throwing a hissy fit. Somebody asked him a question and he answered it. I just don't see AR becoming anything like our last starting QB.

[ThunderDan]

To me, not paying AR a lot more would fall under the ruthless category and would show a disregard for how much he means to the team, and how important it is to work with him even when they are not forced to. Every situation is different. AR puts his body on the line for far less than he's worth. If you really appreciate him, if you really want to treat him with value as an employee, I think it's well within good judgement to bend a little and do it a year earlier than usual.

It's hard to compare the work world to the NFL, but this is a case where I think there are parallels. If you have a great employee, one who's not only the most valuable piece to your operation, but also a guy you trust to work his ass off as long as he's with the company, I don't think it's a bad idea, at all, to reward that person financially, even if you don't have to. It's about value and trust. AR has both in spades. He's the most valuable player in the NFL, and he's a guy you trust immensely. Dollars well spent, IMO.

I guess if I take a different look like Red, Idon't see it as tragic to wait a year either. The Packers have a history of doing things a certain way and there might be more benefits to treating him the same as his teammates who work their tails off and rely on their paychecks equally. The Packers do things a year early, typically and their extremely fair. Players know if they work hard, they're going to be treated well by the Packers. Jennings is a bit of an exception, but he also took a hard stance early in the season and appeared completely steadfast in getting very top dollar. It's hard to work with a guy a year early if he's completely unwilling to compromise and the Packers have other reasons that make it difficult to pay him. I do think that's the exception, and I don't think there is a feeling in the lockerroom that the Packers take advantage of their employees. I think there is an understanding there, and their approach to player contracts is very fair and very respected within the team. Maybe not putting AR on a pedestal is a type of respect for the team as a whole, and something AR can be proud of for holding his teammates in high enough regard that he didn't throw a fit when he very well could. I'm guys would respect AR a lot and appreciate him as a person for that. I think Matthews already has that respect. He's special as a player and hasn't demanded special treatment. He hasn't put himself above the other players in this regard. . . . Who knows, maybe there is a culture of respect for the team as a whole rather than special treatment and disregard for the little guy.

Look how much we saved on ARod's contract by signing him early last time. If you can save $3M a year for 5 years that allows you to keep a lot more talent around ARod to compete.

[Patler]

Woodson 2012 = Driver 2011.
The guy is done. If he is brought back in 2013 at any price it will be wasted money, just as Driver was wasted money this year.

[Joemailman]

Woodson 2012 = Driver 2011.
The guy is done. If he is brought back in 2013 at any price it will be wasted money, just as Driver was wasted money this year.

The one difference being that this team is not nearly as stacked at Safety as they were at Wide Receiver. It might be possible to justify bringing him back, but not for 10 million.

[Patler]

The one difference being that this team is not nearly as stacked at Safety as they were at Wide Receiver. It might be possible to justify bringing him back, but not for 10 million.

I'm not sure it matters how stacked they are or aren't at safety. Driver declined to the point that he was valued lower than a couple 1st year free agents. The same might happen with Woodson. The Packers could be faced with the same situation they were with Driver this year, wondering what to do with an old, old player who is not good enough to start, and not right for special teams.

[rbaloha1]

Woodson 2012 = Driver 2011.
The guy is done. If he is brought back in 2013 at any price it will be wasted money, just as Driver was wasted money this year.

Completely disagree -- Yes I have a Woodson jersey.

Capers need to allow CW to freelance more especially against the spread option stuff.

Yes, CW no longer has the same speed (despite what CW and coaches maintain). But CW like aging veterans counteract the lack of speed with diagnosing plays quicker like Ray Lewis.

CW only at half price is acceptable.

[Patler]

Completely disagree -- Yes I have a Woodson jersey.

Capers need to allow CW to freelance more especially against the spread option stuff.

Yes, CW no longer has the same speed (despite what CW and coaches maintain). But CW like aging veterans counteract the lack of speed with diagnosing plays quicker like Ray Lewis.

CW only at half price is acceptable.

Move to safety + free lancing + loss of speed = recipe for disaster.

The old freelancing Woodson was entertaining, but the defense was better when the coaches convinced him to play his responsibilities more faithfully.

While Woodson seemed a little slower in 2011, I thought the change was significant this year, and could be coupled next year with loss of quickness (if it hasn't already occurred). Just as Driver was no longer able to shake anyone this year, Woodson may be unable to cover anyone next year.

It's time to move on from Woodson.

[rbaloha1]

Move to safety + free lancing + loss of speed = recipe for disaster.

The old freelancing Woodson was entertaining, but the defense was better when the coaches convinced him to play his responsibilities more faithfully.

While Woodson seemed a little slower in 2011, I thought the change was significant this year, and could be coupled next year with loss of quickness (if it hasn't already occurred). Just as Driver was no longer able to shake anyone this year, Woodson may be unable to cover anyone next year.

It's time to move on from Woodson.

Capers needs to trust CW in order to keep qbs guessing. Is CW coming or playing coverage?

Rather have CW free lancing than Walden trying to play assignment football.

[Pugger]

I love Woodson as much as the rest of us but I'm with Patler here. We kept Driver too long and I hope we don't do that with CW. It was rather sad to see Driver in street clothes and inactive week after week when we could have used his roster spot for someone who can really contribute. :sad:

[rbaloha1]

I love Woodson as much as the rest of us but I'm with Patler here. We kept Driver too long and I hope we don't do that with CW. It was rather sad to see Driver in street clothes and inactive week after week when we could have used his roster spot for someone who can really contribute. :sad:

This is a poor comparasion.

CW played well upon his return -- stopping AP and covering Vernon Davis

Aaah the echo chamber I mean whisper chamber emerges. Please note this is not a political statement:no:

[Pugger]

rb, do you want to pay Woodson $10M in 2013?

[Freak Out]

Woodson 2012 = Driver 2011.
The guy is done. If he is brought back in 2013 at any price it will be wasted money, just as Driver was wasted money this year.

I have to agree with the power hound on this one. For that money you want someone younger/faster/stronger and not as injury prone. :)

[rbaloha1]

rb, do you want to pay Woodson $10M in 2013?

I have continually said Woodson only at half price.

Unfortunately Woodson's warrior pride will not allow a pay cut and its aloha.

Unfortunately Hawk probably agrees to a significant reduction and is kept -- itai.

[Joemailman]

I have continually said Woodson only at half price.

Unfortunately Woodson's warrior pride will not allow a pay cut and its aloha.

That remains to be seen. If he wants to continue playing, he'd take a cut. I doubt anyone else would pay him 10 million.

[rbaloha1]

That remains to be seen. If he wants to continue playing, he'd take a cut. I doubt anyone else would pay him 10 million.

Then its retirement.

[woodbuck27]

10 million per year?

He is slowing down rapidly.

Cutting Wood and Hawk free up a lot of salary, they must be looking hard at that right now.

It certainly would be 'TIME'.

[rbaloha1]

It certainly would be 'TIME'.

While you at it checkout Tramon WILLIAMS

[woodbuck27]

While you at it checkout Tramon WILLIAMS

I'm not a fan of his. He's lost a step and needs to tackle better and not act so chippy/greasy on the field.

He certainly needs to pick it up next season.

[Fritz]

I don't see the value in bringing Woodson back, unless it's as a part-time player. But I don't think he's ready to do that, and I don't think the Pack really works that way, anyway.

Woodson will be in a Detroit uniform next year, I predict. It's the kind of move they'd make.

[mraynrand]

TT should be frugal with Woodson; that's just how TT is.

[smuggler]

ARod was at $8M for 2012. That's about 7-8M under value.
RAJI was at $3.35M for 2012. That's about 4-5M under value.
CMIII was at $800,000 for 2012. That's about 10M under value.

That's about 20M in cap room we need to clear to keep those three.

No, Raji did not play at $7mil level in 2012, he played at about his dollar cost. The other two, you are right, of course.