Official Packers 2023 Free Agency Thread

[Joemailman]

Unrestricted Free Agents (with 2022 cap hit in parentheses):

Allen Lazard (4 million)
Jonathan Abram (1 million)
Sammy Watkins (1.8 million)
Elgton Jenkins (4.7 million)
Dallin Leavitt (1.2 million)
Rudy Ford (1 million)
Eric Wilson (700K)
Keisean Nixon (965K)
Corey Ballentine (482K)
Justin Hollins (375K)

Free agents with void years added (with 2023 cap hit if cut):

Adrian Amos (8 million)
Dean Lowry (1.9 million)
Mason Crosby (1 million)
Marcedes Lewis (1 million)
Robert Tonyan (500K)
Jarran Reed (1.5 million)
Randall Cobb (1.4 million)

Restricted Free Agents (with 2022 cap hit in parentheses):

Yosuah Nijman (965K)
Krys Barnes (895K)
Tyler Davis (895K)
Jake Hanson (825K)

[texaspackerbacker]

A several of those (Abram, Wilson, and Ballentine) I've barely heard of and didn't even know we had.

Of the first group, Lazard would be nice to keep, but it's looking like he's gonna be third or fourth down the line of WRs, so they might not be willing to pay him what it takes. Ford and Nixon should both be re-elected - oops, re-signed. I wonder what it's gonna take to keep Jenkins. If it's a lot, let him go. Hollins looked good in his one game, but it's too soon to tell.

The second group, Amos is a must to keep. Lowery should be gone even if he plays for free. Lewis should get a million again. Tonyan should be kept. He probably will be cheaper now after his injury. Crosby should have been gone already. Reed is a maybe. Cobb is a maybe. Better Cobb than Watkins.

All of the last group except Hanson should probably be kept, although Davis and Barnes should be damn cheap.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Cletidus has a $24M cap hit next year. Packers will actually gain $3M if they cut this wanker before June 1. 3M ain’t much cap-wise, but Cletidus is due $18M next year.

$18M for 3 sacks and plenty of no shows is what the accountants call wasteful spending. Terminate Clark and use the cash on a bona fide #1 rock catcher.

Don’t worry about the cap. It can always be cooked.

[bobblehead]

Unrestricted Free Agents (with 2022 cap hit in parentheses):

Allen Lazard (4 million) EDIT: HE STAYS SOMEHOW. NOT SURE ON THE DETAILS
Jonathan Abram (1 million) GONE
Sammy Watkins (1.8 million) GONE
Elgton Jenkins (4.7 million) EXTENDED
Dallin Leavitt (1.2 million) RE SIGNED 1 YEAR
Rudy Ford (1 million) MAYBE EXTENDED DEFINITE RE SIGN
Eric Wilson (700K) WHO?? j/k PROBABLY GONE
Keisean Nixon (965K) PROBABLY GIVEN 1 YEAR DEAL
Corey Ballentine (482K) WHO CARES
Justin Hollins (375K) TIME WILL TELL

Free agents with void years added (with 2023 cap hit if cut):

Adrian Amos (8 million) NO CHANGE
Dean Lowry (1.9 million) NO CHANGE AND PACKER NATION GROANS
Mason Crosby (1 million) GONE
Marcedes Lewis (1 million) HARD TO SAY. PROBABLY ONE MORE YEAR
Robert Tonyan (500K) MODEST 3 YEAR DEAL
Jarran Reed (1.5 million) MODEST 3 YEAR DEAL
Randall Cobb (1.4 million) GONE UNLESS SHARON INTERVENES

Restricted Free Agents (with 2022 cap hit in parentheses):

Yosuah Nijman (965K) EXTENDED EITHER BEFORE SEASON OR MIDSEASON
Krys Barnes (895K)
Tyler Davis (895K) -------------ALL 3 PLAY OUT THE YEAR WITH
Jake Hanson (825K)

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Also, in the Balding Eagles game, NBC showed Clark being dominated single-handily by Kelce.

When a wanker is being paid $18M a year and he’s being dominated by an undersize, unathletic opponent, said wanker needs to be terminated. Burger flippers have been terminated for outputting far superior productions than Clark has been producing in the rye.

[KYPack]

Cletidus has a $24M cap hit next year. Packers will actually gain $3M if they cut this wanker before June 1. 3M ain’t much cap-wise, but Cletidus is due $18M next year.

$18M for 3 sacks and plenty of no shows is what the accountants call wasteful spending. Terminate Clark and use the cash on a bona fide #1 rock catcher.

Don’t worry about the cap. It can always be cooked.

No, it can't.

You saw how the cap cooked us last year.

[bobblehead]

No, it can't.

You saw how the cap cooked us last year.

People like APB, Tex and a friend of mine keep saying this. When I point out that the "cooking" done this year accomplished nothing except to pay the dead cap for the "cooking" of prior years I get a blank stare. Eventually you have to cook more to cover past expenses than you can currently create in cap savings. Basically if the cap is a cumulative 1 billion over 10 years, you can only spend 1 billion over 10 years. You can shift it around so you are paying most of it in the first 5 years, but sooner or later you have to pay up or you are net losing the transaction. Thats simply math 101, but in my experience a lot of people struggle with math...even those who passed the CPA.

[SudsMcBucky]

People like APB, Tex and a friend of mine keep saying this. When I point out that the "cooking" done this year accomplished nothing except to pay the dead cap for the "cooking" of prior years I get a blank stare. Eventually you have to cook more to cover past expenses than you can currently create in cap savings. Basically if the cap is a cumulative 1 billion over 10 years, you can only spend 1 billion over 10 years. You can shift it around so you are paying most of it in the first 5 years, but sooner or later you have to pay up or you are net losing the transaction. Thats simply math 101, but in my experience a lot of people struggle with math...even those who passed the CPA.

Agreed. This is not a very hard concept to understand. Yes, you can push money out into future years, but eventually you will have to account for it. Some teams structure deals to spread out the years in which different contracts will hit and others don't care about it at the time and the money hits all at once.

[Fritz]

Unrestricted Free Agents (with 2022 cap hit in parentheses):

Allen Lazard (4 million) EDIT: HE STAYS SOMEHOW. NOT SURE ON THE DETAILS
Jonathan Abram (1 million) GONE
Sammy Watkins (1.8 million) GONE
Elgton Jenkins (4.7 million) EXTENDED
Dallin Leavitt (1.2 million) RE SIGNED 1 YEAR
Rudy Ford (1 million) MAYBE EXTENDED DEFINITE RE SIGN
Eric Wilson (700K) WHO?? j/k PROBABLY GONE
Keisean Nixon (965K) PROBABLY GIVEN 1 YEAR DEAL
Corey Ballentine (482K) WHO CARES
Justin Hollins (375K) TIME WILL TELL

Free agents with void years added (with 2023 cap hit if cut):

Adrian Amos (8 million) NO CHANGE
Dean Lowry (1.9 million) NO CHANGE AND PACKER NATION GROANS
Mason Crosby (1 million) GONE
Marcedes Lewis (1 million) HARD TO SAY. PROBABLY ONE MORE YEAR
Robert Tonyan (500K) MODEST 3 YEAR DEAL
Jarran Reed (1.5 million) MODEST 3 YEAR DEAL
Randall Cobb (1.4 million) GONE UNLESS SHARON INTERVENES

Restricted Free Agents (with 2022 cap hit in parentheses):

Yosuah Nijman (965K) EXTENDED EITHER BEFORE SEASON OR MIDSEASON
Krys Barnes (895K)
Tyler Davis (895K) -------------ALL 3 PLAY OUT THE YEAR WITH
Jake Hanson (825K)

I would agree with this assessment. If you do that and trade Rodgers after June 1, you have a rough 2023 but the pieces in place for the following year.

[NewsBruin]

When you cook the cap (converting salary to signing/roster bonus), you lose flexibility. You're now committed to having that guy on your salary cap, no matter if he blows out a knee, or blabs to the press about how the Vikings treat their players better, or takes the offensive coordinator's wife to Bora Bora. If you want to cut or trade him, your cap eats all of that bonus money. Your trading buddies love that prospect because they can swap a lesser player for the player you've already paid out.

And with big-time players, there's no cap-cooking for free. They always want more from that bonus and new salary than they were making before, even though it's money up-front and in-hand that previously wasn't guaranteed.

The Saints are a model example here. Every season, they'd sign Drew Brees to a contract with a ludicrous salary. Every offseason, to get under the cap, they'd change it to a signing bonus and add more years with a ludicrous salary. Every offseason, Drew's arm strength would decline and Drew would say "I don't know if I'm all-in for another season or two." Every year, the Saints would put their fingers in their ears and extend Brees. At least Brees was a guy who elevated the Saints lockerroom and public image, even when he wasn't the same player from his Super Bowl run.

Brees up and retired to no one's surprise (except the front office), and the salary-cap hole was so huge, Sean Payton said nope and quit (secretly hoping for a Brady-led front office in Miami).

[run pMc]

Free agents with void years added (with 2023 cap hit if cut):

Confused by this label -- if they are free agents, you can't cut them unless you mean before the 2023 season starts in March or whenever. They are by definition free agents to sign with whomever they want.
Those void years still count however.
Kevin King is still counting against this year's cap (and IIRC next year's) because of the contract he signed last year had two void years on it.
I'm not a big fan of using void years for this reason -- it's just dead money for a player that has an expired contract.

What am I misunderstanding?

[Joemailman]

Confused by this label -- if they are free agents, you can't cut them unless you mean before the 2023 season starts in March or whenever. They are by definition free agents to sign with whomever they want.
Those void years still count however.
Kevin King is still counting against this year's cap (and IIRC next year's) because of the contract he signed last year had two void years on it.
I'm not a big fan of using void years for this reason -- it's just dead money for a player that has an expired contract.

What am I misunderstanding?

You're right. They don't get cut. They become free agents and the void years are paid out over several years instead of accelerating in 2023.

So the 2023 cap hits for players with void years would be:

Adrian Amos (2.25 million)
Dean Lowry (622K)
Mason Crosby (335K)
Marcedes Lewis (525K)
Robert Tonyan (500K)
Jarran Reed (373K)
Randall Cobb (1.4 million)

[texaspackerbacker]

People like APB, Tex and a friend of mine keep saying this. When I point out that the "cooking" done this year accomplished nothing except to pay the dead cap for the "cooking" of prior years I get a blank stare. Eventually you have to cook more to cover past expenses than you can currently create in cap savings. Basically if the cap is a cumulative 1 billion over 10 years, you can only spend 1 billion over 10 years. You can shift it around so you are paying most of it in the first 5 years, but sooner or later you have to pay up or you are net losing the transaction. Thats simply math 101, but in my experience a lot of people struggle with math...even those who passed the CPA.

You're looking at it like it's a finite situation - even if you extend it and talk about a ten year period instead of just the current one. It's not. By the end of that ten year period you're talking about, you start spending well on into the next five or ten years, and so on and so on. You can keep on kicking the can down the road as long as you need to. That would be the case even if the cap wasn't increasing - which, of course it is. Not doing that would put you at a competitive disadvantage with the rest of the league - which has experts who realize exactly how to take advantage that way - call it cooking or whatever you want to call it.

[Joemailman]

Teams certainly are accepting more dead money than they have in the past. Packers have over 28 million in dead money in 2022. That sounds like a lot. But it's only 16th in the NFL. https://overthecap.com/salary-cap-space Maybe this is a permanent trend. Maybe teams are still trying to dig out of 2020 and 2021 when reduced revenue due to Covid led to lower salary caps. Whatever the case, teams are doing things differently than they used to. It is true that most of the teams with the most dead money are doing poorly, with the exception of Philadelphia and N.Y. Giants. Whether there is a direct cause and effect is debatable I suppose.

[Tony Oday]

Unrestricted Free Agents (with 2022 cap hit in parentheses):

Allen Lazard (4 million) Bye
Jonathan Abram (1 million) Bye
Sammy Watkins (1.8 million) Bye
Elgton Jenkins (4.7 million) Re-sign, he will be extended this year
Dallin Leavitt (1.2 million) bye
Rudy Ford (1 million) small offer
Eric Wilson (700K) bye
Keisean Nixon (965K) re-sign
Corey Ballentine (482K) re-sign
Justin Hollins (375K) re-sign

Free agents with void years added (with 2023 cap hit if cut):

Adrian Amos (8 million) re-sign
Dean Lowry (1.9 million) bye
Mason Crosby (1 million) re-sign
Marcedes Lewis (1 million) re-sign if you can
Robert Tonyan (500K) re-sign if the dollar is right but he has lost a step this year
Jarran Reed (1.5 million) bye
Randall Cobb (1.4 million) if AR is still here re-sign

Restricted Free Agents (with 2022 cap hit in parentheses):

Yosuah Nijman (965K) re-sign
Krys Barnes (895K) bye
Tyler Davis (895K) bye
Jake Hanson (825K) bye

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Uncool Pack fans seem to think “dead money” is cold, hard cash. Cut Cletidus Clark and the Packers get hit with $21M in “dead money.” Uncool Pack fans think that’s $21M down the drain. Truth is, cutting Cletidus actually frees up $18M in cold, hard cash to spend on other players, preferably a Wu-Tang rock catcher. Not to mention, the Packers save $3M against their cap!

I, a minimum-wage burger flipper (who has passed the Wisconsin CPAs), might’ve pissed away $10,000 at the poker tables in the last two years. That 10K is indeed “dead money,” money already burnt. And yes, that is a fucked opportunity cost issue for yours truly, as I constantly earn a real wage of below $7.25/hr ($7.25 + 2% annual raise, minus 5-15% inflation).

But suppose ThunderDan hires me today for an entry level CPA position with a starting salary of $60,000. Suddenly, with the increase in income, I have more spending power. Suddenly, that 10K is no longer an issue.

The NFL salary cap is not constant. So long as revenues continue to soar in the NFL, the cap will, too, continue to soar. Thus, “dead money” ain’t a fucking issue. The cap, therefore, merely serves as an excuse for the pig owners to cut labor expenses. The cap can always be cooked.

Btw, the only reason the Aints are drenched in the ILLUSION of a so-called “cap hell,” is because of, well, let’s just call it an abnormality - an abnormality that not even the NFL’s hotshot economists could forecast. Things are getting back to normal. Revenues continue to soar. And Bezos is gonna make it rain soon.

Mic drop!

[NewsBruin]

You're looking at it like it's a finite situation - even if you extend it and talk about a ten year period instead of just the current one. It's not. By the end of that ten year period you're talking about, you start spending well on into the next five or ten years, and so on and so on. You can keep on kicking the can down the road as long as you need to. That would be the case even if the cap wasn't increasing - which, of course it is. Not doing that would put you at a competitive disadvantage with the rest of the league - which has experts who realize exactly how to take advantage that way - call it cooking or whatever you want to call it.

That's true that you could continually bonus-and-extend players season over season, but there will come a time where you really want to have that cap room available for some purpose, such as when your cheap 1st-round QB gets his first big-boy contract extension, or your 6th-round CB makes his 2nd pro bowl in a row, or when there's a crop of WRs who are set to be free agents. Or when you see there's a year with no advertising/broadcast contracts being renewed and your cap stagnates or drops from last season.

Like I said earlier, if you bonus-and-extend, you had better do it for players you expect will be around for those contracts. Otherwise, you have to watch the free-agent parade from a closed window, or, like the Saints, you have to cut players with unguaranteed salaries to cover the players who have already gone.

[bobblehead]

You're right. They don't get cut. They become free agents and the void years are paid out over several years instead of accelerating in 2023.

So the 2023 cap hits for players with void years would be:

Adrian Amos (2.25 million)
Dean Lowry (622K)
Mason Crosby (335K)
Marcedes Lewis (525K)
Robert Tonyan (500K)
Jarran Reed (373K)
Randall Cobb (1.4 million)

Those are all very manageable. The larger problem is that by doing the guarantee thing they are locked into a huge number for Bak. He has a pretty big salary, and a really big hit for the signing bonus, plus that converted to signing bonus. It bit them in the ass with Z. IIRC we entered this season with 24.5 million dead cap money and next year is worse. The only solution is more voidable years to "soft land" or one really rough year to course correct. Personally, now that Bak is looking good again, I would course correct by trading him and Rodgers. Suck it up and be below average in 2023, but enter 2024 with a healthy cap and a lot of young talent both currently on the roster and from the trades of those 2 for picks.

[bobblehead]

You're looking at it like it's a finite situation - even if you extend it and talk about a ten year period instead of just the current one. It's not. By the end of that ten year period you're talking about, you start spending well on into the next five or ten years, and so on and so on. You can keep on kicking the can down the road as long as you need to. That would be the case even if the cap wasn't increasing - which, of course it is. Not doing that would put you at a competitive disadvantage with the rest of the league - which has experts who realize exactly how to take advantage that way - call it cooking or whatever you want to call it.

Yes tex, you can continue to carry dead money and kick it down the road so you are "even" currently almost indefinitely. The problem comes when 19 other teams DON'T do it and de facto have more room than you because they have kicked nothing down the road so its a lever they can currently pull. When you pull that lever you gain a roughly 2 year cap advantage over teams that aren't pulling it. Then you are simply pulling the lever to stay even. (or worse)

Its fine to do to keep a group together, or add a missing piece to a superbowl roster, but when you pull it over and over for a decade, every team that built up during that time frame that hasn't pulled it yet has an advantage over you. That is where we sit right now, where pulling the lever again simply gets us back to even....maybe not even back all the way at this point, while the Bengals haven't pulled it, have a ton of talent and cap room. Another 15 teams haven't used that method yet, like the eagles. Anyone you are bidding for in free agency you simply can't pay what those teams can since you ALREADY are carrying the dead money from using that future leverage the past few years.

If you don't reset at some point, the dead cap money puts you at a disadvantage year in and year out. The time to reset is probably right now, with Love in his 3rd year and 2 major pieces aging, but still having trade value. Oh....and I don't think the Dolphins have used any leverage either.

As I say in another forum, math must be harder than it seems to me, because a lot of people simply don't get it.

[bobblehead]

Teams certainly are accepting more dead money than they have in the past. Packers have over 28 million in dead money in 2022. That sounds like a lot. But it's only 16th in the NFL. https://overthecap.com/salary-cap-space Maybe this is a permanent trend. Maybe teams are still trying to dig out of 2020 and 2021 when reduced revenue due to Covid led to lower salary caps. Whatever the case, teams are doing things differently than they used to. It is true that most of the teams with the most dead money are doing poorly, with the exception of Philadelphia and N.Y. Giants. Whether there is a direct cause and effect is debatable I suppose.

Ok, I looked at your list and it seems I was way off on the Eagles. Didn't realize they were that bad off, and with a QB on a rookie deal no less. How will they ever resign him? But what you say is true about Covid messing up the cap when guys were on deals according to the theory its always going up. And then teams felt obligated to sign new deals based on old deals instead of the new cap. However if you look at the list, most of the bad teams are near the top and good teams are near the bottom. There are some outliers though and again, its a multi year picture. Next year we are actually in pretty good shape as it stands, but we won't be after we extend Gary, and when Rodgers call it, we will be in hell for a season or 2. I actually really like the "effective cap space", however it would be nice to combine that with people that will need to be extended that won't be on rookie deals.

Again, its all a big picture equation. Right now, according to your chart, the chiefs and bengals are in incredible shape going into this upcoming off season.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Yes tex, you can continue to carry dead money and kick it down the road so you are "even" currently almost indefinitely. The problem comes when 19 other teams DON'T do it and de facto have more room than you because they have kicked nothing down the road so its a lever they can currently pull. When you pull that lever you gain a roughly 2 year cap advantage over teams that aren't pulling it. Then you are simply pulling the lever to stay even. (or worse)

Its fine to do to keep a group together, or add a missing piece to a superbowl roster, but when you pull it over and over for a decade, every team that built up during that time frame that hasn't pulled it yet has an advantage over you. That is where we sit right now, where pulling the lever again simply gets us back to even....maybe not even back all the way at this point, while the Bengals haven't pulled it, have a ton of talent and cap room. Another 15 teams haven't used that method yet, like the eagles. Anyone you are bidding for in free agency you simply can't pay what those teams can since you ALREADY are carrying the dead money from using that future leverage the past few years.

If you don't reset at some point, the dead cap money puts you at a disadvantage year in and year out. The time to reset is probably right now, with Love in his 3rd year and 2 major pieces aging, but still having trade value. Oh....and I don't think the Dolphins have used any leverage either.

As I say in another forum, math must be harder than it seems to me, because a lot of people simply don't get it.

You either suck at math, or you are clueless about the current NFL CBA.

Per the CBA, each team must spend at least 89% of the cap over a 4 year period, or any player on that team over that period of time gets free frogskins up to the 89% threshold. Moreover, all NFL teams as a whole must, on average, spend at least 95% of the cap over the 4 year period. Otherwise, free frogskins to the players.

Thus, there is no such shit as “the problem comes when 19 other teams DON'T do it and de facto have more room…” The current CBA forces the pig owners to spend frogskins on players or be penalized. “Dead money” is inevitable.

Again, dead money is money already spent. And the Cap is NOT constant. With soaring revenues, revenue sharing and a CBA that forces the pigs to spend, Jerry Jones with 40M in dead money ain’t at a disadvantage competitively against Mike Brown with only, say, 3M in dead money. Do the math.

[run pMc]

I don't think GB will be players in FA.
I think Rodgers will be back next year -- he's not walking away from that $58.3M option. Trading him would be difficult, and they would likely be selling low on who I believe is a still-good (if overpaid) player.

As far as re-signing or extending their own goes, besides Jenkins, Lazard, Rudy Ford, Nixon, Njiman and maybe Barnes the rest can probably go. I'd consider letting Lazard and Tonyan test the market; neither should break the bank in even semi-sane free agency. Hollins flashed a little against PHI but you'd want to see more over the next few weeks before determining if he's better than La.Hamilton or Garvin.

[texaspackerbacker]

Again with the trading shit, run pMc? I say again, Rodgers' contract is great BECAUSE it for all practical purposes, prevents a trade. He is strongly likely to be the Packers QB for the three years, which is a Good thing - make that a GREAT thing. Hopefully, he gets extended well beyond that.

I don't mean to pick on you, because others have been far more idiotic about the Rodgers situation.

[run pMc]

Again with the trading shit, run pMc? I say again, Rodgers' contract is great BECAUSE it for all practical purposes, prevents a trade. He is strongly likely to be the Packers QB for the three years, which is a Good thing - make that a GREAT thing. Hopefully, he gets extended well beyond that.

I don't mean to pick on you, because others have been far more idiotic about the Rodgers situation.

No worries tex. I'm not convinced trading him would be a good idea. The defense has lost them the last few games, just as the OL is getting healthy/better and offense appears to be slowly figuring things out. Rodgers injuries and the receivers have hurt things, but he's not playing like a $50M MVP QB should either.

All that said, I think his age and contract make him difficult if not impossible to move, and I also think he still has another good year left in him.
When you have a good QB you do what you can to keep them; I don't see how the team doesn't keep Rodgers.

I think Rodgers will retire before his contract ends, in fact I wouldn't be surprised if he retires after next season. Just a feeling based on hints he's dropped in interviews.

[texaspackerbacker]

Yes tex, you can continue to carry dead money and kick it down the road so you are "even" currently almost indefinitely. The problem comes when 19 other teams DON'T do it and de facto have more room than you because they have kicked nothing down the road so its a lever they can currently pull. When you pull that lever you gain a roughly 2 year cap advantage over teams that aren't pulling it. Then you are simply pulling the lever to stay even. (or worse)

Its fine to do to keep a group together, or add a missing piece to a superbowl roster, but when you pull it over and over for a decade, every team that built up during that time frame that hasn't pulled it yet has an advantage over you. That is where we sit right now, where pulling the lever again simply gets us back to even....maybe not even back all the way at this point, while the Bengals haven't pulled it, have a ton of talent and cap room. Another 15 teams haven't used that method yet, like the eagles. Anyone you are bidding for in free agency you simply can't pay what those teams can since you ALREADY are carrying the dead money from using that future leverage the past few years.

If you don't reset at some point, the dead cap money puts you at a disadvantage year in and year out. The time to reset is probably right now, with Love in his 3rd year and 2 major pieces aging, but still having trade value. Oh....and I don't think the Dolphins have used any leverage either.

As I say in another forum, math must be harder than it seems to me, because a lot of people simply don't get it.

First of all, wait to step up, APB - defeating the king of Facts with what? FACTS!

Yes, bobblehead, you can continue to carry dead money and kick it down the road so you are "even" currently almost indefinitely. Glad you agree. You shoulda stopped right there.

Is it 19 teams that don't do that? Where did you get that number? Yeah, if true, they might be more competitive in free agency. But how many of those teams have been better than the Packers over the past decade or two or three? How many have better personnel now? And how many do you realistically foresee being better than the Packers over the next decade or so?

Also, it seems like you're conflating dead money with void years. Void years is a strategy in "cooking the cap"/beating the system. Dead money happens when somebody you invest in turns out to be a bust or gets a long term injury or some other unforeseen badness. It would, for example, take something monumentally stupid like trading or cutting Rodgers to get a shit ton of dead money. The can kicking I referred to is mainly but not limited to void years or prorated bonuses. If things procede normally or as expected, that works out just fine. It would even without the massive cap increase over time, but with that, even more so.

I'll leave your math skills to our resident CPA to dispute. I'll just ask you, if you know the difference between static analysis and dynamic analysis? As your posts here and elsewhere say you have a bit of a problem with that.

[run pMc]

With respect to the cap and FA, I'll be very interested to see what they do with Kenny Clark, Elgton Jenkins, David Bahktiari, Preston Smith, and Aaron Jones. I think they want to sign Jenkins to a long term contract and I think they need to do some maneuvering to make that happen. Exercising the 5th year option on Savage looks really bad right now; they could use that money elsewhere.

Devondre Campbell is probably safe for next season but I could see them cutting him or restructuring his contract eventually as well.

[texaspackerbacker]

The only sure thing I see there is Aaron Jones, and only then if he doesn't deteriorate before it's time for a decision on him. Clark may already have deteriorated - he only deserves big future money if he snaps back a lot. P. Smith is only marginally worth what he gets paid now, and I doubt he stays beyond his current contract. Jenkins really needs to show he is what he was before the injury. If not, he wouldn't be much of a loss. And Bakhtiari is what I've consistently said he is - overrated.

I don't foresee the Packers having any serious problem signing anybody they need to keep due to cap problems. Free agents from other teams? I wouldn't expect much, but then we've never done much there. If the opportunity came up, though, I bet they could manipulate the cap to make that work too.

[Joemailman]

Lazard is on pace for about 800 yards and 7 TD's. Any reason he shouldn't have a market value at least as great as MVS? ( 3 years, 30 million). How much should Gute offer him?

[Bretsky]

[QUOTE=Joemailman;1126749]Lazard is on pace for about 800 yards and 7 TD's. Any reason he shouldn't have a market value at least as great as MVS? ( 3 years, 30 million). How much should Gute offer him?[/QUOTElazard at 10 mil a year ? Hard pass

[RashanGary]

Lazard is on pace for about 800 yards and 7 TD's. Any reason he shouldn't have a market value at least as great as MVS? ( 3 years, 30 million). How much should Gute offer him?

This is his ceiling in an offense where he’s one of only two established pass catchers with the QB. And the other one isn’t a #1 or #2. So Lazard will never see a better situation. And he’s in his prime.

I don’t think they’ll keep him for MVS money. More potential in Watson, Doubs and Toure. And cheaper.

[RashanGary]

Lazard would be worth 5. But someone will give him more.

[Bretsky]

Again with the trading shit, run pMc? I say again, Rodgers' contract is great BECAUSE it for all practical purposes, prevents a trade. He is strongly likely to be the Packers QB for the three years, which is a Good thing - make that a GREAT thing. Hopefully, he gets extended well beyond that.

I don't mean to pick on you, because others have been far more idiotic about the Rodgers situation.



Aaron got what Sharon wanted

He was the assistant GM for that contract. He strung Gutebag up from a telephone post by the balls, told him how to write the contract, and laughed all the way to signing

[Bretsky]

Unrestricted Free Agents (with 2022 cap hit in parentheses):

Allen Lazard (4 million)
Jonathan Abram (1 million)
Sammy Watkins (1.8 million)
Elgton Jenkins (4.7 million)
Dallin Leavitt (1.2 million)
Rudy Ford (1 million)
Eric Wilson (700K)
Keisean Nixon (965K)
Corey Ballentine (482K)
Justin Hollins (375K)

Free agents with void years added (with 2023 cap hit if cut):

Adrian Amos (8 million)
Dean Lowry (1.9 million)
Mason Crosby (1 million)
Marcedes Lewis (1 million)
Robert Tonyan (500K)
Jarran Reed (1.5 million)
Randall Cobb (1.4 million)

Restricted Free Agents (with 2022 cap hit in parentheses):

Yosuah Nijman (965K)
Krys Barnes (895K)
Tyler Davis (895K)
Jake Hanson (825K)


Of the Unrestricted guys, I'd like them to keep Elgin Jenkins and I do like Rudy Ford who won't break the bank. I'll take Nixon back for specials. The rest....whatever

Would like to see Amos return. Maybe Tonyan if it's cost effective. THe rest...whatever

[bobblehead]

You either suck at math, or you are clueless about the current NFL CBA.

Per the CBA, each team must spend at least 89% of the cap over a 4 year period, or any player on that team over that period of time gets free frogskins up to the 89% threshold. Moreover, all NFL teams as a whole must, on average, spend at least 95% of the cap over the 4 year period. Otherwise, free frogskins to the players.

Thus, there is no such shit as “the problem comes when 19 other teams DON'T do it and de facto have more room…” The current CBA forces the pig owners to spend frogskins on players or be penalized. “Dead money” is inevitable.

Again, dead money is money already spent. And the Cap is NOT constant. With soaring revenues, revenue sharing and a CBA that forces the pigs to spend, Jerry Jones with 40M in dead money ain’t at a disadvantage competitively against Mike Brown with only, say, 3M in dead money. Do the math.

So answer me this hotshot. If you spend SOOOO much over 4 years (because you be cookin) and then the next 4 years you fall short of the 89% because its dead money that was spent previously do you get penalized? If not then you're fact about the CBA is incorrect, but if so then you are limited in the amount of cooking you can do. Which is it?

[bobblehead]

First of all, wait to step up, APB - defeating the king of Facts with what? FACTS!

Yes, bobblehead, you can continue to carry dead money and kick it down the road so you are "even" currently almost indefinitely. Glad you agree. You shoulda stopped right there.

Is it 19 teams that don't do that? Where did you get that number? Yeah, if true, they might be more competitive in free agency. But how many of those teams have been better than the Packers over the past decade or two or three? How many have better personnel now? And how many do you realistically foresee being better than the Packers over the next decade or so?

Also, it seems like you're conflating dead money with void years. Void years is a strategy in "cooking the cap"/beating the system. Dead money happens when somebody you invest in turns out to be a bust or gets a long term injury or some other unforeseen badness. It would, for example, take something monumentally stupid like trading or cutting Rodgers to get a shit ton of dead money. The can kicking I referred to is mainly but not limited to void years or prorated bonuses. If things procede normally or as expected, that works out just fine. It would even without the massive cap increase over time, but with that, even more so.

I'll leave your math skills to our resident CPA to dispute. I'll just ask you, if you know the difference between static analysis and dynamic analysis? As your posts here and elsewhere say you have a bit of a problem with that.

You guys exhaust me. I give up. Their is no cap. Players totally owned management in the CBA by eliminating it. I just don't understand why Jerry Jones doesn't buy the best 5 players on the market every month since winning IS his main goal and the money isn't an issue to him.

You like to say things that make no sense, such as "how many of those teams have been better than the Packers over the past decade or two or three" as if that doesn't prove MY point. Until about 4 years ago TT was careful NOT to get in cap hell. Gutes has gotten us in cap hell in a matter of 4 seasons. We now have a losing record. Thank you for making my point.

[bobblehead]

With respect to the cap and FA, I'll be very interested to see what they do with Kenny Clark, Elgton Jenkins, David Bahktiari, Preston Smith, and Aaron Jones. I think they want to sign Jenkins to a long term contract and I think they need to do some maneuvering to make that happen. Exercising the 5th year option on Savage looks really bad right now; they could use that money elsewhere.

Devondre Campbell is probably safe for next season but I could see them cutting him or restructuring his contract eventually as well.

No run, none of that will happen. They can just cook it to balance and sign everyone and lose no one ever.

[bobblehead]

Lazard is on pace for about 800 yards and 7 TD's. Any reason he shouldn't have a market value at least as great as MVS? ( 3 years, 30 million). How much should Gute offer him?

10 years 5 billion since there is no cap.

[George Cumby]

10 years 5 billion since there is no cap.

Ah.........Texas Math.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

You guys exhaust me. I give up. Their is no cap. Players totally owned management in the CBA by eliminating it. I just don't understand why Jerry Jones doesn't buy the best 5 players on the market every month since winning IS his main goal and the money isn't an issue to him.

You like to say things that make no sense, such as "how many of those teams have been better than the Packers over the past decade or two or three" as if that doesn't prove MY point. Until about 4 years ago TT was careful NOT to get in cap hell. Gutes has gotten us in cap hell in a matter of 4 seasons. We now have a losing record. Thank you for making my point.

The team in a salary cap hell is able to make its QB1 the highest paid QB in the league; its CB1 the highest paid corner in the league; able to sign its top ILB and 3rd corner to competitive contracts; it offered to make its former #1 WR the highest paid rock catcher in the league; it has no problem paying a wanker Yokozuna $18M a year for 3 sacks and subpar productivity game after game after game- all with the “abnormality” stressing revenues.

We know you, Bobble, perceive yourself as the smartest man at Packerrats. But it’s ok to admit that there are billions of things in this world one does not understand. I, for example, do not understand the chemistry of intimate love. You, on the other hand, do not understand the dynamics of the NFL salary cap. :)

Btw: check out the current richest pigs on earth list. None of the NFL pigs made the top 10. Only the Walton heirs made the top 20. Point being? Jerry Jones doesn’t “buy the best 5 players on the market every month” b/c doing so would fuck with his bottom line. Profit is still the name of the game.

Btw 2: The Cap has nothing to do with the Packers sucking this season. It has everything to do with the German Shepherd’s incompetent personal decisions. Do you honestly believe this team would be 4-8 with DK Metcalf, AJ Brown and Jonathan Taylor instead of Savage, Fucking Center and Love?

[run pMc]

10 years 5 billion since there is no cap.

Ah.........Texas Math.

These are GOLD. LMAO

There is a cap despite what some assert. COVID screwed up GB's assumptions of the cap based on contracts they have.
Packers are, at a minimum, tettering on the edge of cap hell. They will have to make cuts or readjustments to make things fit.
Aaron Rodgers has a $59M option, he is the highest paid guy in the building and essentially Gute's boss and MLF's boss (if not their equals).
He has their cap and thus the team held hostage.

Maybe that's Murphy's fault, or Ball's fault. Either way, they have a lot of roster decisions and some of them will be based on their cap space/contract, not performance. Aaron Jones might be gone even though he's the engine of the offense because of his contract, for example. They've already put void years on almost every contract they have, they have played the best cards in their hand and going forward it could get ugly.

When you have the 2nd in the league in cap space devoted to the defense and they still are in the 20's by DVOA, combined with a QB taking up 25% of the cap and then Bahktiari and Jones' contracts, there's not a lot left for guys like Lazard or Jenkins. Unless they get bounceback years from Rodgers and the young players under contract next year they will need a transformational draft to stay relevant and there's a < 1% of that happening.

I'll still be cheering for them win or lose, but the music at this party is about to end. I expect the roster to look younger/different next year and there to be at least 5-6 new starters on Off & Def combined.

[bobblehead]

The team in a salary cap hell is able to make its QB1 the highest paid QB in the league; its CB1 the highest paid corner in the league; able to sign its top ILB and 3rd corner to competitive contracts; it offered to make its former #1 WR the highest paid rock catcher in the league; it has no problem paying a wanker Yokozuna $18M a year for 3 sacks and subpar productivity game after game after game- all with the “abnormality” stressing revenues.

We know you, Bobble, perceive yourself as the smartest man at Packerrats. But it’s ok to admit that there are billions of things in this world one does not understand. I, for example, do not understand the chemistry of intimate love. You, on the other hand, do not understand the dynamics of the NFL salary cap. :)

Btw: check out the current richest pigs on earth list. None of the NFL pigs made the top 10. Only the Walton heirs made the top 20. Point being? Jerry Jones doesn’t “buy the best 5 players on the market every month” b/c doing so would fuck with his bottom line. Profit is still the name of the game.

Btw 2: The Cap has nothing to do with the Packers sucking this season. It has everything to do with the German Shepherd’s incompetent personal decisions. Do you honestly believe this team would be 4-8 with DK Metcalf, AJ Brown and Jonathan Taylor instead of Savage, Fucking Center and Love?

What you describe here is the REASON we are not winning games and are now in cap hell. We lost a top 3 center, 2 versatile experienced OL, our deep threat WR, the best pass rushing OLB on the team, Jamaal Williams (who is playing pretty good ball in Detroit). These aren't guys on their last legs in the NFL we lost, they are guys who are productive and help a team win.

As to your point 2, Its easy to play what if. No, I don't think the packers would suck if they in fact picked the absolute best possible pro with each pick they had. Great point, you should be a GM.

[bobblehead]

These are GOLD. LMAO

There is a cap despite what some assert. COVID screwed up GB's assumptions of the cap based on contracts they have.
Packers are, at a minimum, tettering on the edge of cap hell. They will have to make cuts or readjustments to make things fit.
Aaron Rodgers has a $59M option, he is the highest paid guy in the building and essentially Gute's boss and MLF's boss (if not their equals).
He has their cap and thus the team held hostage.

Maybe that's Murphy's fault, or Ball's fault. Either way, they have a lot of roster decisions and some of them will be based on their cap space/contract, not performance. Aaron Jones might be gone even though he's the engine of the offense because of his contract, for example. They've already put void years on almost every contract they have, they have played the best cards in their hand and going forward it could get ugly.

When you have the 2nd in the league in cap space devoted to the defense and they still are in the 20's by DVOA, combined with a QB taking up 25% of the cap and then Bahktiari and Jones' contracts, there's not a lot left for guys like Lazard or Jenkins. Unless they get bounceback years from Rodgers and the young players under contract next year they will need a transformational draft to stay relevant and there's a < 1% of that happening.

I'll still be cheering for them win or lose, but the music at this party is about to end. I expect the roster to look younger/different next year and there to be at least 5-6 new starters on Off & Def combined.

The year after Gutes took over and spent all the cap space TT had been using on "our own" to sign Turner, Amos and the law firm of Smith & Smith I said "hey, all the people who begged TT for this got their way. Lets see how it works out". It wasn't all bad. We had a monster 3 year run. Now its time to pay the piper. Its simple math. We can't compete with younger teams that have managed the cap better for at least 2023. We need a reset now. Its one way to do it. I'm not a fan of it, but we had 3 legit chances at an Owl. If Love is good and we reset the cap we will maybe have more. I just hope Gutes manages the cash a little better going forward.

[SudsMcBucky]

What you describe here is the REASON we are not winning games and are now in cap hell. We lost a top 3 center, 2 versatile experienced OL, our deep threat WR, the best pass rushing OLB on the team, Jamaal Williams (who is playing pretty good ball in Detroit). These aren't guys on their last legs in the NFL we lost, they are guys who are productive and help a team win.

As to your point 2, Its easy to play what if. No, I don't think the packers would suck if they in fact picked the absolute best possible pro with each pick they had. Great point, you should be a GM.

I think we're finding out why no one is hiring APB to their accounting staff.

[texaspackerbacker]

You guys exhaust me. I give up. Their is no cap. Players totally owned management in the CBA by eliminating it. I just don't understand why Jerry Jones doesn't buy the best 5 players on the market every month since winning IS his main goal and the money isn't an issue to him.

You like to say things that make no sense, such as "how many of those teams have been better than the Packers over the past decade or two or three" as if that doesn't prove MY point. Until about 4 years ago TT was careful NOT to get in cap hell. Gutes has gotten us in cap hell in a matter of 4 seasons. We now have a losing record. Thank you for making my point.

Well, for one thing, Jerry Jones is like a modern day George Halas - not a whole lot of wealth outside of the team. That Denver guy and a couple of others would be more like what you're saying.

It's wrong, of course, to say "there is no cap". As APB and I both said, you can stretch it and manipulate it, but there's obviously a limit to that.

What I "said" was actually a question hahahaha, rhetorical I suppose because the answer is obvious, none or very very few better. You also got it right about Ted not pushing the cap to the limit - one reason I didn't like him. We were good in his time primarily because of Favre and then Rodgers. His handling of things - not maximizing the cap - arguably were why we didn't have more Super Bowls during those great winning seasons.

You say "Gutes has gotten us in cap hell"; No, that's just not true. The only way it is anything close to that is if Rodgers was cut or traded - either of which would be monumentally STUPID and are very very unlikely to happen.

Yeah, there's no getting around that we have a losing record. But there are a helluva lot of other reasons for that than the salary cap.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

What you describe here is the REASON we are not winning games and are now in cap hell. We lost a top 3 center, 2 versatile experienced OL, our deep threat WR, the best pass rushing OLB on the team, Jamaal Williams (who is playing pretty good ball in Detroit). These aren't guys on their last legs in the NFL we lost, they are guys who are productive and help a team win.

As to your point 2, Its easy to play what if. No, I don't think the packers would suck if they in fact picked the absolute best possible pro with each pick they had. Great point, you should be a GM.

The Packers coulda re-signed all the players you mentioned if they wanted to. The Ohio State center is a more than capable replacement for Lindsey. The German Shepherd correctly chose Aaron Jones over Williams. Ditto, P-Smith over Z-Smith. $10M/yr for a one trick pony in MVS ain’t a wise investment. Etc. Etc. Etc.

Harlan Fucking Huckleby! Arguing about the cap with you is as pointless as myself listening to the Coldplay smash hit, “Let Somebody Go” over and over again, which I do because Coldplay is awesome and Serena Gomez is hot. When Chris Martin and Serena sing, “When we called the mathematicians and we asked them to explain/They said love’s only equal to the pain,” I have no idea what they’re talking about because I do not understand the chemistry of imitate love.

You, obviously, do not understand the dynamics of the salary cap. No team in a cap hell would be able to afford A-Rod AND J-Alex AND still have frogskins left over to waste on Cletidus Clark.

The Packers suck due mainly to the German Shepherd’s failure to find a capable replacement for Adams.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

The year after Gutes took over and spent all the cap space TT had been using on "our own" to sign Turner, Amos and the law firm of Smith & Smith I said "hey, all the people who begged TT for this got their way. Lets see how it works out". It wasn't all bad. We had a monster 3 year run. Now its time to pay the piper. Its simple math. We can't compete with younger teams that have managed the cap better for at least 2023. We need a reset now. Its one way to do it. I'm not a fan of it, but we had 3 legit chances at an Owl. If Love is good and we reset the cap we will maybe have more. I just hope Gutes manages the cash a little better going forward.

That spending spree got the Packers over the 89% threshold and helped the NFL with the 95% average. The year after Brady left, Kraft shelled out more in signing bonus frogskins to a few players than what it costed him to purchase the Traitors. New England’s odds of winning the Super Bowl that season was less than my odds of mating with Jennifer Lawrence. Kraft spent anyway. Why? CBA.

Google the CBA before you post!

[bobblehead]

It's wrong, of course, to say "there is no cap". As APB and I both said, you can stretch it and manipulate it, but there's obviously a limit to that.



No tex, that is literally what EVERYONE else is saying. What you and APB continue to say is "you can ALWAYS cook the cap" The implication is that there isn't a limit. As I pointed out (and literally everyone who disagrees with you) is that you can stretch it, manipulate it, kick it down the road, but eventually you have to travel that road.

[bobblehead]

The Packers coulda re-signed all the players you mentioned if they wanted to. The Ohio State center is a more than capable replacement for Lindsey. The German Shepherd correctly chose Aaron Jones over Williams. Ditto, P-Smith over Z-Smith. $10M/yr for a one trick pony in MVS ain’t a wise investment. Etc. Etc. Etc.



Incorrect. If the cap is irrelevant then Gutes technically chose to not resign Lindsey and waved the possibility of a different 2nd round pick at a position of need. He chose Patrick Taylor over Jwilliams. He chose Tipa Galei over ZSmith. he chose Malik Taylor over MVS. If you want an Owl and there is no effective cap, you keep all those guys instead of bottom of the roster guys. Or are you finally in agreement with tex that SOME choices have to be made and there are LIMITATIONS to what you can do?

[bobblehead]

By the way, this would be known as game, set, match as the youngins say.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Incorrect. If the cap is irrelevant then Gutes technically chose to not resign Lindsey and waved the possibility of a different 2nd round pick at a position of need. He chose Patrick Taylor over Jwilliams. He chose Tipa Galei over ZSmith. he chose Malik Taylor over MVS. If you want an Owl and there is no effective cap, you keep all those guys instead of bottom of the roster guys. Or are you finally in agreement with tex that SOME choices have to be made and there are LIMITATIONS to what you can do?

Adams chose Vegas over Green Bay…And, to borrow your logic, your entire argument is debunked. :)

[bobblehead]

Adams chose Vegas over Green Bay…And, to borrow your logic, your entire argument is debunked. :)

I didn't debunk your argument, you did. Both you and tex agree that choices must be made, which de facto means you can't just ignore the cap.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

I didn't debunk your argument, you did. Both you and tex agree that choices must be made, which de facto means you can't just ignore the cap.

Choices must be made because frogskins is not unlimited and profit remains the motive. Not because of the cap.

[bobblehead]

Choices must be made because frogskins is not unlimited and profit remains the motive. Not because of the cap.

Isn't the cap based on income?

[texaspackerbacker]

No tex, that is literally what EVERYONE else is saying. What you and APB continue to say is "you can ALWAYS cook the cap" The implication is that there isn't a limit. As I pointed out (and literally everyone who disagrees with you) is that you can stretch it, manipulate it, kick it down the road, but eventually you have to travel that road.

So in this post, you seem to be seriously saying'doubling down on your ridiculous line, "there is no cap" (I actually thought it was just more of your stupid attempts at sarcasm). Then in your next post, you return to a little bit of lucidity and say, "there is no effective cap" - just another way of saying what APB and I have been saying all along - you can cook it, manipulate it, stretch it all out of shape, whatever. But obviously - as even you basically acknowledged in the second of those two posts, there IS a salary cap, and just as obviously, all that cooking/manipulating/stretching has a limit.

And about that disagreement hahahaha, just like on another unmentionable topic in a different area of the forum, ya'all disagreers are in clear denial of what has been going on for a long time. Most of the teams in the league (was it you or somebody else who pulled a figure of 19 out of the air?) are doing exactly what ya'all are in denial of - including the Packers.

And yeah, some choices do need to be made, or at least it is a good idea to make them. As for the examples you and or APB cited, overpaying for Linsley, MVS, and especially Z. Smith woulda been really stupid. As he got right and you got wrong, the tradeoff was not Malik Taylor for MVS, not Patrick Taylor for J. Williams. and not Tipa for Z. Smith.


So as those youngins you mentioned might say, you smacked your game/set/match shot right into the ol' net.

[run pMc]

I think we all agree that, just as the Sun exists, so does the NFL salary cap.

Managing the cap is important enough that they have Russ Ball to do exactly that.
If you don't think next year's cap situation is a problem, consider how it will force roster decisions and who they can keep.

By contrast the Bears have largely turned this season into a redshirt/training season for its players by trading away Roquan and Quinn, eating a lot of dead money, and coming out of it with over $100 million in cap space next year. Consider what happens if the Packers can't keep Jenkins and he and OBJ sign with the Bears -- they'll have Justin Fields with an instantly improved OL and a WR corps of OBJ, Mooney, and Claypool.