36 Mil to Spend: TT is going to stay skimpy on spending...

[bobblehead]

Re: FA's

No one is crying "sign everyone!" Signing a couple guys every year to shore up weaknesses isn't a crime however. You can't go into next season refusing to sign anyone because there are contracts expiring in the near future. The NFL is a "win now" league. If you don't win now, then your job is on the line. If we end up 8-8 or worse next season, I wouldn't want to be in TT's shoes.

Actually it isn't a win now league..

Marty Schottenheimer and Mike Shanahan disagree..

You mean shanahan who tried to win now by trading for JWalk, trading up for Cutler (giving away valuable long term picks), went to FA to try and solve his DL problems....that mike shanahan?? The shanahan who was the coach of the same team since we lost our last superbowl but has barely made the playoffs since...I would say he was given ample time to produce another winner.

[bobblehead]

3 times as much talent? Dude, you're high. TT has done well on finding marginal starters in the bottom of the draft, but he has struck out on the top for the most part.

The most talented player on the Pack came from FA.
The second most talented in a 2nd round pick of his.
The third is an old LT that was already here.
The fourth is a DL Sherman drafted.
The fifth is a guy Sherman added as a FA DL.

big shock that the most talented NFL players on the roster have actually played in the NFL longer than 3 years....HUGE SHOCK!!

[Fritz]

3 times as much talent? Dude, you're high. TT has done well on finding marginal starters in the bottom of the draft, but he has struck out on the top for the most part.

The most talented player on the Pack came from FA.
The second most talented in a 2nd round pick of his.
The third is an old LT that was already here.
The fourth is a DL Sherman drafted.
The fifth is a guy Sherman added as a FA DL.

Nick Collins (second), Greg Jennings (second), Aaron Rodgers (first), A.J. Hawk (first), Jermichael Finley (third) - there's a partial list, Partial.

That's not striking out, not even for the most part. Striking out for the most part is what guys like Al Davis and Matt Millen do.

[Bretsky]

Their 2008 cap had about $9.5 million carried forward from 2007.
In 2007 it was about a million as I recall.
In 2006 it was about $2 million from a bonus provision signed with Craig Nall the last week of 2005.

Do you get the feeling Thompson carried over as much money as he could this year, so he could work out long-term deals with some key players like Jennings, Kampman, Collins. etc. this offseason?

He could have also overestimated his talent last year so he didn't think he had needs to use all of the cap space.

That being said, TTT will probably always be a carry it forward guy

[FritzDontBlitz]

When does TT plan to build an offensive line to protect his QB?

[gbgary]

Re: FA's

Is'nt that the whole purpose to all this? You do what it takes (spending money) and assemble the best team you can. Yes, it's inevitable that you can't sign everyone and you will lose good players at some point. Again though, you at least take your best shot at a championship. If you sign the right guys and have developed some form of depth and IF things go your way, you win a SB. Then, you re-tool-re-build or whatever and make another run a few years down the line. THAT is the NFL cycle.

How come some teams manage to put good teams on the field every year? Are they awesome at signing free agents? You are right about one thing though, you've got to put a good team on the field and hope things go your way.

we keep barely missing signing this guy and that guy (supposedly). ted's gonna have to realize (especially now that Brett's gone) that he's going to have to pay a little more to get people to play in that "tiny hamlet in eastern wisconsin".

Why sign guys that need more $$ to convince them to play for GB.

to win. hypothetical...equal money ** sunny-and-warm or Green Bay, dome or Green Bay, winning-record or Green Bay, metropolitan-area or Green Bay? hey, i love Green Bay, the town i grew up in is just like it. i have a great time when i'm in Green Bay...but money talks with professional athletes. TT has to be willing to give Green Bay an edge over the competition and money is it at the moment.

[Waldo]

Re: FA's

Is'nt that the whole purpose to all this? You do what it takes (spending money) and assemble the best team you can. Yes, it's inevitable that you can't sign everyone and you will lose good players at some point. Again though, you at least take your best shot at a championship. If you sign the right guys and have developed some form of depth and IF things go your way, you win a SB. Then, you re-tool-re-build or whatever and make another run a few years down the line. THAT is the NFL cycle.

How come some teams manage to put good teams on the field every year? Are they awesome at signing free agents? You are right about one thing though, you've got to put a good team on the field and hope things go your way.

we keep barely missing signing this guy and that guy (supposedly). ted's gonna have to realize (especially now that Brett's gone) that he's going to have to pay a little more to get people to play in that "tiny hamlet in eastern wisconsin".

Why sign guys that need more $$ to convince them to play for GB.

to win. hypothetical...equal money ** sunny-and-warm or Green Bay, dome or Green Bay, winning-record or Green Bay, metropolitan-area or Green Bay? hey, i love Green Bay, the town i grew up in is just like it. i have a great time when i'm in Green Bay...but money talks with professional athletes. TT has to be willing to give Green Bay an edge over the competition and money is it at the moment.

I really don't want guys that need extra $$ to play for GB than other teams to be on the team. I don't think that TT does either. Why sign guys that don't want to be there.

[Farley Face]

Re: FA's

Is'nt that the whole purpose to all this? You do what it takes (spending money) and assemble the best team you can. Yes, it's inevitable that you can't sign everyone and you will lose good players at some point. Again though, you at least take your best shot at a championship. If you sign the right guys and have developed some form of depth and IF things go your way, you win a SB. Then, you re-tool-re-build or whatever and make another run a few years down the line. THAT is the NFL cycle.

How come some teams manage to put good teams on the field every year? Are they awesome at signing free agents? You are right about one thing though, you've got to put a good team on the field and hope things go your way.

we keep barely missing signing this guy and that guy (supposedly). ted's gonna have to realize (especially now that Brett's gone) that he's going to have to pay a little more to get people to play in that "tiny hamlet in eastern wisconsin".

Why sign guys that need more $$ to convince them to play for GB.

to win. hypothetical...equal money ** sunny-and-warm or Green Bay, dome or Green Bay, winning-record or Green Bay, metropolitan-area or Green Bay? hey, i love Green Bay, the town i grew up in is just like it. i have a great time when i'm in Green Bay...but money talks with professional athletes. TT has to be willing to give Green Bay an edge over the competition and money is it at the moment.

I really don't want guys that need extra $$ to play for GB than other teams to be on the team. I don't think that TT does either. Why sign guys that don't want to be there.

+1

[Bretsky]

A good point Waldo

Also the reason we won't win the top tier Free Agents even if we do want them

I think we have to pay more

I've never had an issue with overpaying; if you choose the "right" guy to overpay in this market it doesn't hurt you much

If you choose the wrong guy it turns out terrible though

[GrnBay007]

Re: FA's

we keep barely missing signing this guy and that guy (supposedly). ted's gonna have to realize (especially now that Brett's gone) that he's going to have to pay a little more to get people to play in that "tiny hamlet in eastern wisconsin".

There's no doubt having Favre on the team was a draw for some guys to come to GB. It will be interesting to see what happens the next several years w/ FA. At this particular moment is there anything in GB that is an extra draw to bring an FA in? ....really young team with a QB with 1 year under his belt. ...and a GM that doesn't appear to be lighting any fires out there.

[Lurker64]

Re: FA's

There's no doubt having Favre on the team was a draw for some guys to come to GB. It will be interesting to see what happens the next several years w/ FA. At this particular moment is there anything in GB that is an extra draw to bring an FA in? ....really young team with a QB with 1 year under his belt. ...and a GM that doesn't appear to be lighting any fires out there.

There's also no doubt that towards the end having Favre on the team was a turn-off for some potential free agents, since he could retire at any time and who knows what the team is going to be like after them. After all, the track record isn't exactly good for teams replacing Hall of Fame QBs.

Didn't Jason Taylor go on the record to say that he wouldn't come to Green Bay, since he was in Miami after they replaced Marino and he never wanted to go through something like that again?

I'd think that having a starter who's one of the better QBs in the NFL and is almost assured to be there for the duration of any FA contract would be a load off those who were worried that the team might have to find a new QB one or two years into their contract.

In the end, I would call it a push.

[GrnBay007]

Re: FA's

There's also no doubt that towards the end having Favre on the team was a turn-off for some potential free agents, since he could retire at any time and who knows what the team is going to be like after them. After all, the track record isn't exactly good for teams replacing Hall of Fame QBs.
.

I think toward the end of Favre's career any high quality FA's would be looking more at a big push for the SB and not so much what would be happening in the next 2-3 years and that would have been a + to come to GB....more so than now.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Re: FA's

I think toward the end of Favre's career any high quality FA's would be looking more at a big push for the SB and not so much what would be happening in the next 2-3 years and that would have been a + to come to GB....more so than now.

Maybe old FAs at the tail-end of their careers. I'd think the situation now is more attractive to any FA with more than a couple of years left in their career.

[gbgary]

Re: FA's

Is'nt that the whole purpose to all this? You do what it takes (spending money) and assemble the best team you can. Yes, it's inevitable that you can't sign everyone and you will lose good players at some point. Again though, you at least take your best shot at a championship. If you sign the right guys and have developed some form of depth and IF things go your way, you win a SB. Then, you re-tool-re-build or whatever and make another run a few years down the line. THAT is the NFL cycle.

How come some teams manage to put good teams on the field every year? Are they awesome at signing free agents? You are right about one thing though, you've got to put a good team on the field and hope things go your way.

we keep barely missing signing this guy and that guy (supposedly). ted's gonna have to realize (especially now that Brett's gone) that he's going to have to pay a little more to get people to play in that "tiny hamlet in eastern wisconsin".

Why sign guys that need more $$ to convince them to play for GB.

to win. hypothetical...equal money ** sunny-and-warm or Green Bay, dome or Green Bay, winning-record or Green Bay, metropolitan-area or Green Bay? hey, i love Green Bay, the town i grew up in is just like it. i have a great time when i'm in Green Bay...but money talks with professional athletes. TT has to be willing to give Green Bay an edge over the competition and money is it at the moment.

I really don't want guys that need extra $$ to play for GB than other teams to be on the team. I don't think that TT does either. Why sign guys that don't want to be there.

we're not talking about guys that don't want to be here. they've clearly narrowed it down to two or three clubs they'd be happy to play for. now...don't take no for an answer. close the deal!! .

[SnakeLH2006]

Go back and read this thread for example, written about a week into FA two years ago.

We sure did miss out on not signing Justin Griffith, didn't we?

So far we've only missed out on three guys I would have wanted on the roster in the first place.

I mean, a few guys I was interested in are off the market: Canty, Stinchcomb, Brown. But there's a lot of guys out there that are still available, get Olshansky or Haye and one of the safeties (I think Sensebaugh, Smith, and Phillips are all still available). Hell, Julius Peppers is still on the trading block.

It's too early to call the offseason over after the first weekend of free agency.

I wanted Brown too, but he's been kinda foul, calling out his ex-team and teammates lately. Doesn't seem like the most mature fellow.

Stinchomb was real high on my list as well. Without knowing MM's plan for the line it's hard to say whether we would have had any interest. MM could be moving DC to T to pay the boy, and TT planning on drafting another T to start out at G. Stinch stayed home anyway, can't really compete with that.

Aside from having an experienced guy, I'm not real sure why we had any interest in Canty. He's good and all, but that is a lot of $$ to commit to a DL, so much that the guy becomes irreplaceable by contract (a player develops, so what, he can't beat out a guy that makes 7M a year). I'd much rather sign a mid level guy and push him with a higher draft pick (which we qalready have in Harrell, but could use another). Signing Canty is essentially giving up on Harrell for good, he has no chance ever to start in GB barring injury. Not sure I entirely agree with that. Igor or the other guys would be a different story, where they could be beat out by a superior player.

Phillis has been silent thus far. I wonder why. I surely wouldn't mind pursuing him. Leonard wasn't signed by the NYJ and is still on the market.

Peppers by far would be the best move we could make, if we could get him for less than #9. For a 2nd and 3rd I'd be all over it. For a 2nd and both our 3rds, I'd strongly consider.

I'm not entirely sold on Jolly being a bad DE. He sucked last year, but two years ago he beat out Cole, Williams, and Harrell, and dominated at times. What the heck happened? We've seen him do it. That boy needs coaching, bad, and an attitude readjustment, but his problems are not physical, which would always lead me to assume that they are correctable given the right environment.

Are you still on that kick bro? Seriously, I'd question giving Peppers that money EVER, but to think we'd throw in a 2 and a 3?

Nope...Snake does not approve.

As far as TT in FA? Who thought it'd be different? Yeah, Shermy sucked at GM, but was damn entertaining though in FA. Most of us were happy when he inked Joe Johnson..That didn't go so well.

The Snake is happy TT is not going overboard as we have TONS of guys to ink in the next year...Bart Scott/Big AH?? Nice players....shitty contracts. I'd just resign the dudes to deece deals we have. So if we go for broke with the FA retreads and can't give Jennings $9 or $10 million long term like he will get, would it be worth it? Nope.

Snake definitely likes some action. just not from TT. We are all used to this shit, as it gives us the ability to let TT resign our own. When's the last time TT let a major talent go of our own in FA? Sorry, forgot about Cole. But seriously, we have to resign our own, and giving Peppers prob. $15 million a year over long term is just gonna fuck it all up.