PDA

View Full Version : McGinn : Wednesday Chat



motife
10-18-2006, 06:54 PM
WEDNESDAY, Oct. 18, chat transcript
Bob McGinn
Journal Sentinel Packers beat writer

As the Packers get back into action after the bye week, Bob McGinn answers your questions on the team in our weekly Insider chat.

Q: Mike of Coon Rapids MN - Mr. McGinn, What qualities does Will Blackman possess that makes the Packers coaches high on his abilities for defensive back? What abilities do you see? Thank you.

A: Bob McGinn - Mike: Will has very good size, he's real smart and he had a 41-inch vertical jump. He played WR as a senior at BC. He played cornerback before that. The Packers are eager to see him play. So am I.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Pat of Indy - Bob, Noticed comments from several JS staffers lately regarding Ted Thompson. I'm not nearly as optimistic as you all seem to be. Last year's draft looks like a complete disaster, he's let several very good players go (Wahle, Sharper, McKenzie, Walker, Rivera, Longwell, etc) and his free-agent signings have been a total waste of money. Also, I don't understand the McCarthy hiring; what did he do to deserve the job? Has the guy been associated with a consistent winner at any level? I guess I'm asking : how long before the honeymoon is over? Do you know of executives elsewhere that might be a better fit in Green Bay?

A: Bob McGinn - Pat: I don't believe in judging someone after 20 months ... one way or another. As for executives elsewhere, that's also hard to say. It's a big, big job in GB the way it presently is structured. Unless you're talking about someone like Bill Polian or Matt Millen or A.J. Smith, guys who have total authority, it's hard to predict how a typical personnel guy would perform in such an encompassing role.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Ted of 5 min south of the Falls. - I give you credit for you're mea culpa on Drew Henson. Any others you care to divulge that you were wrong about.

A: Bob McGinn - Sure. How 'bout Miami in the Super Bowl this year.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Nathan of Pound, WI - How did you find Koren Robinson to deal with as a reporter? Did he come off as thuggish to you?

A: Bob McGinn - Absolutely not. He is a real engaging guy. I liked him. Despite the circumstances, he'd sit there and answer questions about his legal affairs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Martin of Fox Vally - Bob, you know the salary cap as well as anyone,was there really a salary cap crisis when Ted Thompson took over in 2005? It seems to me like Sherman has been made a scapegoat for a cap problem that didn't exist.

A: Bob McGinn - Martin: Just off the top, I don't recall writing or thinking that there was. Sounds like revisionist history to me. Andrew Brandt has done a darn good job in that regard over the years so there is no salary cap crisis. I suppose some Thompson apologists say that there was.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Tom Randall of Chicago - Hey Bob: Just a quick question for you. Have Thompson or McCarthy ever made you guys laugh? Do you find them to be interesting guys to cover? I'm a huge Packer fan and have to say I hang on every word that comes out of their mouth. I find both of them to be very charismatic with obvious natural born leadership traits. ;) Seems like that great personality is flowing down to the players and Lambeau Field is once again booming with optimism and excitement. They all seem so happy. ;);) I honestly hope Brett finds a new team next year because this one is going absolutely NOWHERE FAST.

A: Bob McGinn - Tom: Every now and then, yes, they both do. But everybody is trying to do a job here. And there aren't a whole lot of yuks when you go 4-12 followed by 1-4 for 5-16 in 1 1 /2 years, at least in the case of Thompson. Thus, the coverage reflects that. If they win, we write that. If they lose, we write that. It's pretty simple. And at this time they're losing. The job we do is the same regardless of how the team fares. That's to help readers understand what's going on with the Packers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Louie of San Diego - Bob, Why do you think that defensive secondary has had such a hard time tackling people ? The long run by Tony Fisher of the Rams was pathetic.

A: Bob McGinn - Lou: Other than the misses by Manuel that have been so glaring, the tackling by the secondary has been at least adequate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jack Johnson of Venice Beach - Hey Bob: In honor of the baseball playoffs, I'll call this Teddy at the bat. Here comes the pitch. STRIKE ONE: Refusing to speak to Javon Walker. STRIKE TWO: Cutting Najeh Davenport and trading Samkon Gado. If he didn't like these guys he should have drafted a RB in the draft. Incompetence #3: Taking AJ Hawk with the fifth pick. Top 5 players must have the potential to dominate a game. He doesn't have it. THREE STRIKES and your out Ted. Imagine this for a moment. Add 25 years to your age. What if you were that age the next time the Packers make the playoffs? Sound unlikely? Ask a Milwaukee Brewers fan how unlikely it is.

A: Bob McGinn - Hey Jack: A voice of gloom and doom. Only thing is, it's easier to turn things around in NFL than in MLB because of legitimate revenue sharing and the salary cap.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Dean Richard of Waukesha - Hi Bob. Please offer your subjective opinions on the players who might replace Koren Robinson. Can Brewster or Francies play? Is there anyone else available who can help this team while Ferguson is out?

A: Bob McGinn - Dean: Brewster cannot play. Francies is a crafty little guy with OK speed. Cal Russell can fly but is raw. Scottie Vines just got waived off Detroit's PUP list. Corey Bradford is another ex-Lion. Charlie Adams did some good things for Denver last year and is 6-2. David Boston is out there. So is Todd Pinkston, but he has two Achilles problems. And ex No. 1 pick Tyrone Calico is available, too.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Steve of Twin Ciies - Bob... Recently, a story was published on ESPN.com about two knuckleheads who visited/toured (virtually) every stadium in the NFL and then rated these stadiums from first to worst. Lambeau Field took top honors. In your respected tenure with the Journal-Sentinel and GB Press-Gazette you, too, have had a chance to witness the good and the bad that NFL stadiums have to offer. In fact, many of the facilities that you first visited have either been blown up or are awaiting plans to be destroyed. If you could, please, list your top three and bottom 2 or 3 all-time greatest and worst NFL venues. Many thanks...

A: Bob McGinn - Hi Steve: I'm not going to consider Lambeau Field ... My top 8: 1. Silverdome; 2. old Mile High; 3. old Soldier Field; 4. Tennessee; 5. Dallas; 6. Ford Field; 7. Arrowhead; 8. Superdome. My bottom 12: 1. Candlestick; 2. Georgia Dome; 3. Astrodome; 4. Metrodome; 5. Raymond James; 6. FedEx Field; 7. Sun Devil Stadium; 8. Riverfront; 9. Oakland Coliseum; 10. Joe Robbie; 11. Shea; 12. RCA Dome.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Scott of Minneapolis - Bob - What is the status of Charles Rodgers? Has anyone worked him out, have the scouts decided that he just can't play?

A: Bob McGinn - Scott: I guess he lost a lot of speed. That was apparent to some observers this summer in training camp. Plus, he has poor work habits and thinks he's a lot better than he currently is.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Ed of Texas - With Robinson suspended for a year what happens with his 2 year contract? Packers or Miami this Sunday? Thanks and keep up the good work.

A: Bob McGinn - Ed: His contract is tolled, I think. He still has a year left with GB in 2007.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: gene of chicago - Thanks for taking my question, Bob, and for all the coverage. After Monday night's game, Dennis Green shouted " The Bears are who we thought they were!" several times. Has Coach Green had problems identifying the opposing team? Do you expect him to recognize that the Packers are, in fact, the Packers?

A: Bob McGinn - Gene: Denny obviously doesn't think the Bears are all they're cracked up to be. They certainly weren't Monday night. Denny is one of the few coaches in the sanitized world of press conferences that lets you know what he's thinking. Too bad all these other Belichick clones aren't like him. Three cheers for Denny Green.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jim of Chicago - Do you think Clifton is going to get any healthier as the season goes along? Sounds as if this might be the end of the line for him. Thanks.

A: Bob McGinn - Jim: Clifton looks better to me. It might not last because he does have bad knees, but for now it's not a real problem. At least I don't think it is.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Terry of Chicago - Hi Bob, Why didn't TT just tell Brett he was totally rebuilding for this year. The way he has handle the WR situation is just another example, as he is basically going with Driver and 4 rookies now that the Robinson rental is up. 3 rookies on OL, no quality/depth @ RB, two rookie LB's, 2 rookie kickers. Geez, this team is set up to fail for 2006 and maybe 2007 b/c of youth. Brett can't be happy that this is what the Packers are doing around him. The way they are setting up Rodgers should be playing and learning, b/c everywhere else the team is basically starting over.

A: Bob McGinn - Hi Ter: Ted Thompson says he is playing to win and operating in the best interests of the franchise. Time will tell if he is correct.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Mark of Waukesha - Is 4 and 26 still haunting the Packers?? Sherman drafted Ahmad Carroll first because he was supposed to be the answer to preventing another 4th and 26 with his great speed. Sherman became so obsessed with losing that game it blurred his judgment from then on. He traded up to get BJ Sanders during the same draft because of his supposed ability to kick into the coffin corner. (Look at all the draft picks given away and wasted on that one.) You have to wonder if they had held Philly on 4and 26 if they would be a totally different team with Sherman still the coach today.

A: Bob McGinn - Mark: Interesting. Carroll really was in response to McKenzie's threat. The Packers gave up on Bidwell and then jumped on Sander. Remember, there is no 4th and 26th if he goes for it on 4th and 1. No bad punt by Bidwell, either.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Ty of Milwaukee - Hi Bob, Beautiful move with Korean Robinson....unreal. We all knew this was coming but I think some of us wondered if Ted Thompson knew something we did not. This was obviously a big waste of time when we could have been trying to get other returners/receivers experience in this REBUILDING YEAR. There has only been one thing that I have never liked about the Green Bay Packers and curious to get your thoughts..? Who is at the top of the food chain for the Green Bay Packers organization..? I thought it was the Chairman and CEO Bob Harlan who is retiring this year to be replaced by John Jones. Why do people not hold Bob or John or whoever is the CEO of the Packers accountable for their decisions. Why is it Bob Halrlan who picks his successor or does the other members of the board have input..? Why was Bob not blamed for giving Mike Sherman the coach and GM duties..? In light of the recent decisions by Ted Thompson, I am nervous about who is taking the reigns from Bob Harlan. I am worried about who holds the leash of the Cowboy Ted Thompson. I mean did you see the press conference with Ted when Korean Robinson was picked up. He had this big grin on his face like he just won the lottery until a reporter asked him who would be responsible if Korean got in a car drunk and killed someone in Green Bay. His expression after that question makes me believe he never thought he would have to field that kind of question. Is Ted Thompson living in on the same planet we are..? Can you please help me with this Bob.??..sorry to be long winded. FAVREFOREVER~

A: Bob McGinn - Thompson is given a long leash by Harlan, Jones and the 7-man executive committee. Period. He can't do whatever he wants but almost. They have a ton of money and an adoring fan base. It's a wonderful place to work and the resources are beyond incredible. This is a franchise with many, many advantages in the NFL of today.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: JP of Orlando - Bob, Thompson has made another gaffe and this time it has exposed him for what he is - a fraud & imposter of a GM..Leaving this team with no sensible WR knowing full well Robinson will not make it past week 7, and then not rejoin the team until week 6-7 next year...Can you explain his logic?

A: Bob McGinn - JP: Robinson was a shot in the dark. At least he didn't bring shame on the organization during his brief time here. But now the name of the organization is linked to him. And for what?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Mark Wheeler of New Berlin - Hi Bob, Thanks for taking our questions. Mine is less a question and more of a comment on the status of the Packers. First of all, the start to this season should not be a surprise to us. Let’s face it, Brett’s the best thing this team has going and he’s not the quarterback he was a few years ago. The O-Line is extremely young. The running back situation is not healthy and we have a rookie head coach. It’s also a team with no Blue chip players and few Red chip players. To expect this team to prosper this year is looking at it through “green tinted” glasses. I for one don’t blame Sherman for missing out on the Blue chip players, it’s not easy to find them in the bottom half of the draft, but we are left with few positives from the Sherman drafting days. Mike certainly has some responsibility here. To blame either the coaching staff or Ted Thompson for the state of this team is premature. I think Ted’s approach of not over paying a player is a good one. The one mistake I think he made was paying Woodson so much. I wonder if Harris would have been so upset with his contract if Woodson had not been paid what he was. Signing Woodson was flying in exactly the opposite direction TT had taken up to now. Stick to the strategy Ted. Blaming Mike McCarthy is even more far fetched. My goodness he’s got 5 games under his belt with a team that lacks talent right now. Again, to expect this team to be a good NFL football team this year is unrealistic. So what do we as fans have to look forward to? This year it’s going to be all about improvement. See if the O-Line matures and improves; see if some of the young D-Line guys turn into real NFL players. We need to see improvement at safety, the defensive backfield as a whole and at the running back position. I suspect some of this will come to be and some of it won’t. Those areas that do not improve need to be addressed by Ted Thompson. To those fans calling for Brett to be benched…is that what we really want? Throwing a young QB into this mess could very well crush him. Maybe the best thing that happened to this team was Brett’s return. Not necessarily to win games but to isolate Rogers from the verbal, mental and physical beating he would no doubt take on a team that needs to fix a lot of problems. There now I feel better!

A: Bob McGinn - Mark: You deserved a forum. Glad I could give it to you.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Matt of Rochester - What is the status of Green and who will start at RB this week?

A: Bob McGinn - Matthew: Green is set to go ... at least that's what McCarthy said Monday. Now how long he lasts is another question.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Rick of Boston, MA - Thanks for taking the time to answer every knuckleheaded question that could ever be related to the Green Bay Packers. Mine included. Now I remember back to when a teen-aged, baby faced Gary Sheffield was the top prospect for the Milwaukee Brewers. He hated everything about his team and I think the city of Milwaukee… he was an original big market, primetime, me, me, me guy. Heck he had hoodlum relatives the likes of Doc Gooden and Darryl Strawberry (right?) to prove that the old smell of yeast wafting under the 27th street bridge couldn’t compare to the fun, games, woman and trouble the big city could offer him. So what did Sheffield do? He played like crap, often throwing the ball over the first baseman’s head, booting ground balls and the laughing all the way to the dug-out in hopes of the Brewers finally giving up on him and trading him to the bright lights of a big market – this much he admitted to later. Here is the question, at least the football related part. On a scale of one-to-one hundred, what do you think the odds that Ahmad Carroll pulled the same stunt? Yes he was bad, I agree. But how does a guy who had something like 4.3 / 4.4 speed in the forty a couple years ago, go to being blown away by an average possession receiver? How does a top draft pick go to being unable to cover & tackle anyone beyond 5th grade flag football? It could be he got fat and lazy because of the money but… Now if a potential Hall of Famer (?) like Sheffield did it and admitted to it, would it be inconceivable that a young guy who never seemed to be all that bright sand-bagged it in GB? What do you think? Oh, have to go, I see someone over der on the grassy knoll...

A: Bob McGinn - Rick: Oh, I suppose it's possible. Carroll knew darn well he'd get another job in a hurry. But I kind of like him and doubt he would do that. He wanted to win too much. He had strong relationships with some of his teammates. Football is unlike baseball in that so much blood and sweat goes into winning even one game. To turn your back on teammates and coaches in the NFL is something I don't think goes on very often, if at all.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: John of Columbia City, IN - Hi Bob. I love your work. I know there is a lot of talk about talent in Green Bay being low but I firmly believe a guy like Parcells or Lombardi could take over this team and have a winner next season. For that reason, I think the jobs Thomson and Mccarthy do will tell the tale on whether this is a 4 year re-building job or a 20 year job. With that in mind, supposing we add more good players next year in the draft like Hawk and Jennings, do you think 08 is a realistic playoff year or is the QB position too up in the air to predict that far ahead?

A: Bob McGinn - John: Anything's possible. Did anyone see NO playing like this? But they need many more good players before that can happen.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Patrick Fuller of Edmond, OK - Bob: You do damn good work, and as a fan, really appreciate it. With Robinson and Ferguson gone, any chance we'll see talented draft busts Charles Rogers or Rashaun Woods in Green Bay anytime soon?

A: Bob McGinn - PF: No on Rogers. The guy is trouble as a person and virtually worthless as a player. Woods isn't any good, either. I listed some names previously. Maybe one of those.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Mike of Platteville - Bob, I'm wondering what you think of a theory I have about Thompson. Thompson is smart like a fox, rather than dim-brained. He hired Koren Robinson to help Favre have a good year (and chase the records), not as a future acquisition (though that my still turn out). In other words, Robinson was a way to make this year's 3-13 team a bit more enjoyable. Thompson is saving cap money to build up reserves so that in 2-4 years he can tie up the players he's developing NOW with longer term contracts. And he'll need bonus money to do that. He's using Favre to develop his young players, trying to see where the core is and who he needs to dump. He did hit on two very good players in the draft--Hawk and Jennings, either of which or both might turn out to be special. If I'm Thompson, I'm thinking that we're not *rebuilding*--we're *developing* the wherewithal to go after a run in maybe 3 years. I think Thompson is doing the right things, and in the end, we might well end up seeing him as a fox, not a chicken. Your thoughts?

A: Bob McGinn - Mike: It all depends on if the guys Thompson has procured in 20 months plus the guys he will procure in next year or two come through for him. If they don't, he's dead in the water.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: edwardo of fort wayne - i have been faithfully reading your column and occasionally exchanging e-mails with you for over ten years now, but i'm afraid the party is about to end. tell me, who wins if your tigers play my cardinals in the world series? i'm still hurting from that lost 3-1 lead in 1968. and please bob, the pontiac silverdome the #1 stadium? the place was a dump, and you are just too smart not to know it. and the fans? some drunk tried to pick a fight with my ten-year-old nephew just for wearing a packers jersey. they kept paddy wagons idling in a circle around that mess.

A: Bob McGinn - Ed: I understand I'm the only one in America that loved the place. I still do. Hope it's never razed. I'm guessing it'll be the Mets vs. Tiges in Series and Tiges will roar, 4-0.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: RH of Texas - Bob- I know players, coaches, GM's etc.... say they never read or watch the media. But is that even reality. I would think somewhere along the line, someone somewhere with-in 1265, every word or story is read or viewed. Is it even possible that McCarthy or Thompson operate completely inside a media free vacuum? Are they completely unaffected by the media?

A: Bob McGinn - RH: Not completely but by and large, I would say yes. There is a ton of stuff written and said about them every day. Can you imagine paying attention to much of it if every ounce of your being is tied to winning that week's game, at least if you're McCarthy? You wouldn't want your focus altered by media/fan stuff. Plus, they have a large PR staff to let them know of any media/fan developments they must be made aware of.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Kip of Stony Brook - With Koren Robinson suspended and Robert Ferguson possibly out for the season, where do the Packers go from here for another receiver? Who's out there? I'm guessing that we'll be seeing much more of Ruvell Martin.

A: Bob McGinn - Hey Kippy: The Packers just made a roster move. They promoted WR Chris Francies from practice squad and signed WR Carlton Brewster to the PS. Yes, Martin is No. 3 now. Ferguson might miss the rest of the year with Lisfranc injury.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Dale of Saginaw - Let's pretend for a minute that the Pack draft the WR Johnson out of Georgia Tech. Big time playmaker. Would he open up the offense and have to be doubled all the time so that Jennings would be even better? Then wouldn't that also open up the run game like Smith does for Carolina? I think we need corners and safeties more, but a big time playmaker on offense would open things up. Do I make sense?

A: Bob McGinn - Hi Dale: You make a lot of sense. WR is one of their many areas of need, and a great one can help a run game.Witness Randy Moss in Minnesota. You just couldn't go 8 in the box with him outside. But Johnson will be poked and prodded and scrutinized between now and April. ... Thanks to all for taking part. That's it for this time. ///Bob McGinn

Partial
10-18-2006, 07:44 PM
Alright, which one of you draft gurus is Dale from Saginaw?!?

Bretsky
10-18-2006, 07:56 PM
Thanks Motife for posting; great stuff.

I found special interest in the after effects of 4th and 26. Never thought of it this way and the effects.

IF Sherman goes for it on 4th and 1............................

4th and 26 never happens ..........and.........possilby......

McKenzie might have stayed and

they would not have reached for Ahmad Carroll and

Bidwell's pooch punt that sailed into the end zone would have never happened

..........and Green Bay might have possibly found more reason to resign him..............

and NO BJ Sanders

Ah, the decision that defined Sherman's stay in GB; 4th and 1

KYPack
10-18-2006, 09:25 PM
Q: Martin of Fox Vally - Bob, you know the salary cap as well as anyone,was there really a salary cap crisis when Ted Thompson took over in 2005? It seems to me like Sherman has been made a scapegoat for a cap problem that didn't exist.

A: Bob McGinn - Martin: Just off the top, I don't recall writing or thinking that there was. Sounds like revisionist history to me. Andrew Brandt has done a darn good job in that regard over the years so there is no salary cap crisis. I suppose some Thompson apologists say that there was.


-------------------------------------------------------------

This ain't true Bob.

There was a crisis and we had to get rid of 3 all-pro's to get out of it.

Is McGinn really this clueless?

MJZiggy
10-18-2006, 09:54 PM
He didn't write about it; therefore, it didn't exist.

b bulldog
10-18-2006, 10:08 PM
More love for CJ! :cool:

pbmax
10-18-2006, 10:56 PM
Q: Martin of Fox Vally - Bob, you know the salary cap as well as anyone,was there really a salary cap crisis when Ted Thompson took over in 2005? It seems to me like Sherman has been made a scapegoat for a cap problem that didn't exist.

A: Bob McGinn - Martin: Just off the top, I don't recall writing or thinking that there was. Sounds like revisionist history to me. Andrew Brandt has done a darn good job in that regard over the years so there is no salary cap crisis. I suppose some Thompson apologists say that there was.


-------------------------------------------------------------

This ain't true Bob.

There was a crisis and we had to get rid of 3 all-pro's to get out of it.

Is McGinn really this clueless?
KYPack, this might be a battle of semantics, but I don't recall a Cap crisis over Wahle. At least not in the Washington Redskins sense of the word.

Paying Wahle the 6 million would have left them over the cap in the neighborhood of $6 mil. Not good, but a comparatively small crisis.

Not paying the bonus saved them $11 mil in cap room and allowed them to make RFA offers to the rest of the FAs. As the clip below says, they would have been about dead even at that point. This is much the way the cap played out under Sherman.

What killed them with Wahle was that Sherman gave him a contract that left him with all the leverage. The Pack wasn't going to pay $6 mil and carry an $11 mil cap numer for him. They would have had to redo the contract if they choose to have him back.

But they would have to redo on his terms, since by simply refusing to give a hometown discount, Wahle was already, effectively, a Unrestricted Free Agent. And thatmeant the Packers were going to have to pay market price.

And Wahle got a contract that turned out to be even more lucrative than the one they paid their starting left tackle.


Packers struggling to make the cap fit
Green Bay doesn't have a lot of wiggle room
By TOM SILVERSTEIN
tsilverstein@journalsentinel.com
A week before all 32 National Football League teams must be under the $85.5 million salary-cap limit, the Green Bay Packers have their work cut out for them.

After tagging tight end Bubba Franks with a $2.095 million transition designation Monday, they stand at more than $6 million over the impending cap, according to NFL Players Association salary data. That number will reach at least $11 million early next week when the Packers make qualifying offers to all or some of their seven restricted free agents.

If anyone is expecting the Packers to dump salaries the way the Tennessee Titans did when they cut six prominent players this week, their fears are misguided. By releasing guard Mike Wahle, whose contract was structured in a way that his $11.337 million cap number would force the Packers to renegotiate or cut him, the Packers will gain $11 million of cap room.

But even minus the $11 million from Wahle, the Packers will be only slightly under the $85.5 million cap next Tuesday, and that's assuming they don't re-sign any of their nine unrestricted free agents - including guard Marco Rivera and linebacker Hannibal Navies - before the start of free agency.

They are in a bit of a tight spot.

"There's a lot of moving parts there," general manager Ted Thompson said. "Things are being talked about."

Wiping Wahle's $11 million salary - a $5 million base and $6 million roster bonus - off the books will provide the necessary room to get under the cap, but things get a lot more complicated if the Packers try to renegotiate the deal. At this point there isn't any sign they're willing to meet his desire to be paid among the top guards in the league, but talks are ongoing.
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=303999

Partial
10-19-2006, 12:21 AM
More love for CJ! :cool:

Hehehe, I thought it was you asking that question!! :lol:

Patler
10-19-2006, 02:00 AM
Of course there was a cap problem.
The Packers released Wahle and Grey Ruegamer to end up something like $200,000 under the cap. But that gave them no room at all to sign anyone, including Wahle. They didn't get any cap flexibility until Sharper was released too. So where would any money come from to sign Wahle with?

Some money to sign Wahle to a revised contract could have come from continuing to amortize his signing bonus from the last contract, but that would have gained only about $750,000, which was only slightly more than the minimum salary he would have had to been paid under a renegotiated deal. Which means of course there is no money for the amortized portion of the signing bonus for the new contract. That would have had to come from somewhere else.

For too many years the Packers deferred cap hits, and it bit them in 2005. One of the reasons was that the cap did not increase as much a couple years as it had others. The Packers just had too much hit them in 2005. Too bad, it was a year too soon. The money would have been there this year.

KYPack
10-19-2006, 07:45 AM
Of course there was a cap problem.
The Packers released Wahle and Grey Ruegamer to end up something like $200,000 under the cap. But that gave them no room at all to sign anyone, including Wahle. They didn't get any cap flexibility until Sharper was released too. So where would any money come from to sign Wahle with?

Some money to sign Wahle to a revised contract could have come from continuing to amortize his signing bonus from the last contract, but that would have gained only about $750,000, which was only slightly more than the minimum salary he would have had to been paid under a renegotiated deal. Which means of course there is no money for the amortized portion of the signing bonus for the new contract. That would have had to come from somewhere else.

For too many years the Packers deferred cap hits, and it bit them in 2005. One of the reasons was that the cap did not increase as much a couple years as it had others. The Packers just had too much hit them in 2005. Too bad, it was a year too soon. The money would have been there this year.

Thanks, Patler.

There is SO much revisionist history on this issue.

I am flat out shocked to see McGinn make the statements he did on this issue. Why he would make this false assement of the situation is beyond me. The only thing I can figure is he's trying to curry favor with Brandt

The one thing I see raised by crazy fans is that TT had 7 million in cap room, he could've used that to sign Wahle. He had that money AFTER the 3 moves. When Sharper refused negotiation (wisely IMHO), that ended any hope of retaining Wahle.

Sherman had effectively painted TT in a corner and there was no way out. I'm very critical of Thompson's handling of vet FA's, but he did the best he could for the team in the late winter and spring of '05

prsnfoto
10-19-2006, 09:34 AM
I agree with you guys as far as the cap numbers I read all the same drivel, here is my question why is it that every year I read about how the Redskins,Raiders and others are 20 million over the cap and yet are some of the most aggressive in FA signings there must be some kind of voodo math going on or the D. Synders of this league are paying people under the table?

Packnut
10-19-2006, 09:53 AM
The cap excuse has been worn to death by the TT supporters when in reality there were ways. The fact is TT did'nt even try with Wahle. He did'nt try with Walker. TT is a freaking moron.

KYPack
10-19-2006, 10:33 AM
The cap excuse has been worn to death by the TT supporters when in reality there were ways. The fact is TT did'nt even try with Wahle. He did'nt try with Walker. TT is a freaking moron.

No PNut.

That ain't true.

Read Patler's response. That is a great synopsis of the '05 cap nightmare.

Thompson had very few cards to play and made the best of a bad situation.

The Walker situation was totally different and I can see your criticism of that whole deal. Walker made that one hard. I would've liked to see a #1 pick for him, but it takes two to make a deal.

pbmax
10-19-2006, 10:49 AM
I agree with T2's decision not to sign Wahle, and felt that we long ago needed to strip down and rebuild. But to say T2 COULDN'T have signed Wahle is revisionism itself:

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=306456


...Thompson refused to blame the losses on the tight salary cap situation he inherited when he was hired to replace coach Mike Sherman as general manager Jan. 14. He made it clear that his decision not to match the massive offers was based on his evaluation of their value and the needs of the team.

The Packers have $8.3 million in salary cap money tied into Clifton ($2.956 million), center Mike Flanagan ($2.708 million) and right tackle Mark Tauscher ($2.664 million) this season, and money might be best committed elsewhere.

Thompson said he could have adjusted the Packers' tight cap to accommodate the Wahle or Rivera contract, but it would have meant paying the price set in the market. It's very clear from his decision to pass on both players that Thompson set a price on their worth and decided he was not going to be bullied into a mistake.

"I don't want to blame it on the salary cap," Thompson said. "We just felt we pushed the envelope as far as we could go, and to their credit both players would have liked to stay here but the people who were after them were willing to go much higher than we were"....
Now Sharper has a role in this. They were $6 mil over after tendering Franks. And Franks didn't sign a long term deal until the eve of training camp, so even a cap friendly deal there wouldn't have helped.

To sign Wahle, the Pack might have needed to release Sharper earlier. And that would have meant a greater cap hit on his accelerated bonus in 05. But even Thompson says it COULD have been done.

And to complete the tortured logic of this post, I am glad he didn't. To juggle the cap to accomodate Wahle (or worse Sharper or Rivera) would have left the Pack with no flexibility for another couple of years. This is how Sherman got us into this mess.

I much prefer having the dollars in the season, extending those who deserve it and signing the rest to the players as LTBE incentives that we get back next year, ala Craig Nall last year.

Remember, the people claiming you can't get the cap money BACK next year clearly aren't paying attention.

Fritz
10-19-2006, 12:31 PM
Good thread, good thread. My impression was that it was a foregone conclusion - even before Sherman was released from his GM duties - that Wahle was not keep-able under the contract. That upcoming year, with the eleven mil salary, was built in as a kind of free agency trigger, everybody knowing the Pack wouldn't/couldn't pay that kind of money.

Do I wish Wahle had stayed? Well, mostly, yes, but let's say he had stayed for a large salary. Then what? The Pack goes 6 - 10 last year instead of 4 - 12? Maybe in the long run it's better he didn't stay. Now, if TT had been nicer to JWalk, and renegotiated his contract after his injury in Detroit (knowing that Walker was a very, very hard worker), we'd have a wide receiver rotation to scare the bejesus out of the opposition.

Creepy
10-19-2006, 01:40 PM
Talking to Walker after his injury was too late. Walker wanted the money with two years ona contract, GB wasn't going to pay him until the end of the season or the next year. When Walker got hurt he decided he wanted out of GB becuase he didn't get the money and the injury would keep him from getting the money he thought he could get in FA.

Had GB given him the money , he would have still been injured and we would have him instead of Jennings. At this time jennings has played better than Walker in his first two years and is a better fit than Walker. With Walker Favre would throw those hail mary's into coverage and Walker would come down with some of them, but I also remember quite a few being ints.

Wahle was good in the power game, but how eefectiv would he have been in the new cut blocking scheme. For Wahle to stay here GB would have to have stayed with the same running scheme and their is no guarantee that it wouldn't have changed to what we have now.

Nobody canb predict whether Wahle remaining last year would have given GB a 6-10 or better record. Rivera was still gone and Flanagan was injured or playing injured the entire season. Maybe GB would have ran a little better to the left, but no guarantee. It still doesn't mean that
the interior line would have protecetd better.

IMHO, get over Wahle being gone and get behind what is their. The running gamne is improving and if they open those same holes on Sunday with green intsead of herron, rthen you will see some big gains. herron did a great job, but on at least 3 occasions Gree with his pseed would have either went to the house or put GB in scoring position instead of a 6 to 9 yard gain.

Packnut
10-19-2006, 02:44 PM
The cap excuse has been worn to death by the TT supporters when in reality there were ways. The fact is TT did'nt even try with Wahle. He did'nt try with Walker. TT is a freaking moron.

No PNut.

That ain't true.

Read Patler's response. That is a great synopsis of the '05 cap nightmare.

Thompson had very few cards to play and made the best of a bad situation.

The Walker situation was totally different and I can see your criticism of that whole deal. Walker made that one hard. I would've liked to see a #1 pick for him, but it takes two to make a deal.

C'mon, there have been several national and local writers who paint a different picture than Patler does. We have an expert at the cap thing and your gonna tell me he could'nt have done something? It's funny how OTHER teams have managed to get things done is'nt it? Take a good look at Snyder. True, they went after the wrong guys but the cap did'nt get in the way.

Packnut
10-19-2006, 02:54 PM
I agree with T2's decision not to sign Wahle, and felt that we long ago needed to strip down and rebuild. But to say T2 COULDN'T have signed Wahle is revisionism itself:

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=306456


...Thompson refused to blame the losses on the tight salary cap situation he inherited when he was hired to replace coach Mike Sherman as general manager Jan. 14. He made it clear that his decision not to match the massive offers was based on his evaluation of their value and the needs of the team.

The Packers have $8.3 million in salary cap money tied into Clifton ($2.956 million), center Mike Flanagan ($2.708 million) and right tackle Mark Tauscher ($2.664 million) this season, and money might be best committed elsewhere.

Thompson said he could have adjusted the Packers' tight cap to accommodate the Wahle or Rivera contract, but it would have meant paying the price set in the market. It's very clear from his decision to pass on both players that Thompson set a price on their worth and decided he was not going to be bullied into a mistake.

"I don't want to blame it on the salary cap," Thompson said. "We just felt we pushed the envelope as far as we could go, and to their credit both players would have liked to stay here but the people who were after them were willing to go much higher than we were"....
Now Sharper has a role in this. They were $6 mil over after tendering Franks. And Franks didn't sign a long term deal until the eve of training camp, so even a cap friendly deal there wouldn't have helped.

To sign Wahle, the Pack might have needed to release Sharper earlier. And that would have meant a greater cap hit on his accelerated bonus in 05. But even Thompson says it COULD have been done.

And to complete the tortured logic of this post, I am glad he didn't. To juggle the cap to accomodate Wahle (or worse Sharper or Rivera) would have left the Pack with no flexibility for another couple of years. This is how Sherman got us into this mess.

I much prefer having the dollars in the season, extending those who deserve it and signing the rest to the players as LTBE incentives that we get back next year, ala Craig Nall last year.

Remember, the people claiming you can't get the cap money BACK next year clearly aren't paying attention.

I know you and I never agree on anything and this is the case again. It's funny how time makes people have selective memory. A few yrs back, the Pack led the league in short yardage success. Who the hell did Green run behind? It was Mr Wahle. Now go back to the Philly game and tell me that 1st half would'nt have been different with Wahle to run behind. May-be even the Bears game is different with Wahle in there on all those short yardage plays. Momentum can change a game.

To say we did'nt need Wahle is just ridiculous when you look at the fiasco at OL last season and this one. You claim the money is better spent else where. On who? Woodson and Manuel? We're what 8 mill under the cap? Add in the cash spent on Woodson and Manuel and then the signing bonuses TT paid to all the clowns he brought in that are gone. The money was there for Wahle and Walker.

KYPack
10-19-2006, 03:22 PM
The cap excuse has been worn to death by the TT supporters when in reality there were ways. The fact is TT did'nt even try with Wahle. He did'nt try with Walker. TT is a freaking moron.

No PNut.

That ain't true.

Read Patler's response. That is a great synopsis of the '05 cap nightmare.

Thompson had very few cards to play and made the best of a bad situation.

The Walker situation was totally different and I can see your criticism of that whole deal. Walker made that one hard. I would've liked to see a #1 pick for him, but it takes two to make a deal.

C'mon, there have been several national and local writers who paint a different picture than Patler does. We have an expert at the cap thing and your gonna tell me he could'nt have done something? It's funny how OTHER teams have managed to get things done is'nt it? Take a good look at Snyder. True, they went after the wrong guys but the cap did'nt get in the way.

I don't care how some national writers paint it. Hell, McGinn is just as bad. his statement I commented on is 100% wrong! If any writers disagree with the scenario Patler outlined, They are wrong.

Other teams don't always mamge to "fool" the cap.

Ask Tennessee if they fooled the cap. Why do you think they cuts six vet players a couple years ago? They were in the same cap jail we were in and had to make that move.

The cap is real. Few understand, you can't go over the cap. When you reach the limit, the league refuses to accept contracts from your team. That's why the Pack, the Titans and other teams have HAD to release players to get under the cap. if they didn't, they could sign no more players.

I've taken a look at Synder. He's had to do just what we are talking about. He's always right at the cap, but he's never been over it, because you can't be.

Partial
10-19-2006, 03:35 PM
The cap excuse has been worn to death by the TT supporters when in reality there were ways. The fact is TT did'nt even try with Wahle. He did'nt try with Walker. TT is a freaking moron.

No PNut.

That ain't true.

Read Patler's response. That is a great synopsis of the '05 cap nightmare.

Thompson had very few cards to play and made the best of a bad situation.

The Walker situation was totally different and I can see your criticism of that whole deal. Walker made that one hard. I would've liked to see a #1 pick for him, but it takes two to make a deal.

C'mon, there have been several national and local writers who paint a different picture than Patler does. We have an expert at the cap thing and your gonna tell me he could'nt have done something? It's funny how OTHER teams have managed to get things done is'nt it? Take a good look at Snyder. True, they went after the wrong guys but the cap did'nt get in the way.

I don't care how some national writers paint it. If they disagree with the scenario Patler outlined, They are wrong.

Other teams don't always mamge to "fool" the cap.

Ask Tennessee if they fooled the cap. Why do you think they cuts six vet players a couple years ago? They were in the same cap jail we were in and had to make that move.

Tyhe cap is real. Few understand, you can't go over the cap. When you reach the limit, the league refuses to accpet contracts from you team. that's why the Pack, the Titans and other teams have HAD to release players to get under the cap. if they didn't, they could sign no more players.

I've taken a look at Synder. He's had to do just what we are talking about. he's always right at the cap, but he's never been over it, because you can't be.

Poppycock! We were not in an even comparable situation to the Titans. They kept pushing back bonuses because from 1999-2004 they were one of the premier teams in the league trying to make a push while their window stayed open. The Packers were just at or below the cap because they had expensive players who weren't pulling their weight. They were not pushing back the big bucks annually to take another shot at the super bowl. They are two sepeate and very different situations you speak of. Not even close to the same.

mraynrand
10-19-2006, 06:36 PM
The Packers were a premier team in both 2002 and 2003. They were 8-1 in 2002 before injuries became crippling and were 1 play (several 1 plays) away from being in the NFC championship game in 2003. If that's not premier then we have different definitions of the word. Sherman was doing exactly the same thing as the Titans - trying to keep together a squad of veterans for a last push at the Superbowl with Favre. These are obvious facts.