Nick Collins Situation

[Joemailman]

It is widely anticipated that if Nick Collins does not get a contract extension in the next couple of days that the Packers will apply the 1st and 3rd tender on him. It also seems to be widely anticipated that TT would match any offer rather than lose Collins.

However...this is considered to be a very strong draft. If another team were to offer Collins a contract, is it possible that TT doesn't have Collins evaluated as high as most of us, and would take the picks, giving him 5 picks in the top 86?

Even if he would be inclined to match, is it possible that some team would make Collins an offer so big that TT would not have the resources to match? Perhaps even a poison pill? A team that is a Super Bowl contender, but could use a safety? Like Minnesota? They gave up a 1st and 2 3rds for Jared Allen. Who's to say they wouldn't give up a 1st and 3rd for Nick Collins?

Any thoughts? Perhaps TT will sign Collins in the next 48 hours and make this a moot point.

[mission]

I heard that we met with Collins' agent at the combine and contract talk progressed quite well according to the agent.

Can't remember now where I read that but it wasn't from Joe Arrigo or anything.

[SkinBasket]

At first, I think a 1st and a 3rd for Collins would be a slight win for us. But then I remember that after all these years, we had Atari Bigby starting at the other safety, and I recall just how hard it is to find adequate, much less a good/great safety. Keep him. Pass on the 1st and 3rd. It's close, but Atari, and all his predecessors, make a fine counterpoint with nothing more than their continued employment.

[Brandon494]

Collins is still young and a top 5 FS in the league. You have no way of knowing what you are going to get with that 1st and 3rd pick. Its not like its going to be a top 15 pick.

[RashanGary]

Collins is a legit top 5 safety in my opinion. He's not Troy Polamalu or Ed Reed though. He's not as consistent as the very best.


I'd be happy with a 5 year, 30 million with 20 guaranteed and another possible 5 million if he continues to perform at the very top level. That's a lot of money, but NC is worth a lot of money.


I'd pay him near the top, but not over the top.

[The Leaper]

You keep Collins, as long as he isn't demanding crazy money. Like others have mentioned...Collins is a known commodity. He's not an elite player, but he's a very good one. He'll look even better if we can bolster our pass rush during the offseason.

[red]

if we do tag him at the highest level i just can't see anyone giving up a 1st and a 3rd for nick collins

[Joemailman]

if we do tag him at the highest level i just can't see anyone giving up a 1st and a 3rd for nick collins

If Collins is worth more than a 1st and a 3rd to the Packers, as most here seem to feel, why wouldn't he be worth a 1st and a 3rd to some other team?

[ThunderDan]

Re: Nick Collins Situation

It is widely anticipated that if Nick Collins does not get a contract extension in the next couple of days that the Packers will apply the 1st and 3rd tender on him. It also seems to be widely anticipated that TT would match any offer rather than lose Collins.

However...this is considered to be a very strong draft. If another team were to offer Collins a contract, is it possible that TT doesn't have Collins evaluated as high as most of us, and would take the picks, giving him 5 picks in the top 86?

Even if he would be inclined to match, is it possible that some team would make Collins an offer so big that TT would not have the resources to match? Perhaps even a poison pill? A team that is a Super Bowl contender, but could use a safety? Like Minnesota? They gave up a 1st and 2 3rds for Jared Allen. Who's to say they wouldn't give up a 1st and 3rd for Nick Collins?

Any thoughts? Perhaps TT will sign Collins in the next 48 hours and make this a moot point.

That is a thought provoking question.

I think I would let a team take Nick Collins if it was a Tampa Bay, Washington, KC or other teams in that area. You would pretty much be assured of getting Eric Barry from Tenn and a high 3rd round pick.

I really like Collins but a 1 and a 3 high in the draft order would be damn hard to pass up in this draft.

[Fritz]

The problem also is one of timing. Your team just finished an 11-5 season and may be ready for a deep playoff push. If you give up Collins and get the 1 and 3, and even if you get an Eric Berry, he's still a rookie. He might be the best thing since sliced bread in two or three years, but if you think your team is primed right now for a Super Bowl run, do you put a rookie back there to run the show?

I dunno.

[Brandon494]

You really think someone with a top 5 or even top 15 pick when trade their 1st and 3rd for Nick Collins? Keep Dreaming....

[Brandon494]

PACKER UPDATE-

There’s absolutely no reason for Ted Thompson to offer safety Nick Collins a long-term contract. Why? Let another restricted free agent explain. “The teams have the leverage,” Giants defensive tackle Barry Cofield told the Newark Star-Ledger. “They have the opportunity to tender guys, keep them for cheap, and I expect them to do just that. They’re businessmen, this is a business, so that’s what I expect.” Granted, the former Northwestern star isn’t a two-time Pro Bowler, but he’s also not going to make over $3 million in 2010. “Look, the players agreed to this CBA in ‘06 and now they have to live with the ramifications,” opined an agent. “It’s easy to sympathize with the 212 players who will lose out on unrestricted free agency, but that’s life. The NFL isn’t a charity and its 32 teams are under no obligation to ‘make things right’ by handing out lucrative deals a year or two before they have to. In fact, they’d be downright foolish to do so.”

Thompson’s definitely no fool and that’s why very little progress has been made on a multi-year deal. It was never really about wanting to see how Collins played in the new defensive scheme. It was always more about the CBA. The Packers certainly aren’t a cheap organization, but they’re always well-aware of the bottom line. They have to be. That’s why Thompson tends to open up his wallet only when he absolutely has to or when a highly productive player is grossly underpaid. Otherwise, he prefers to sit back and let things work themselves out. That’s precisely the strategy he has been using when it comes to Collins and it’s the one that makes the most sense at this particular time.

Without a long-term contract in hand, there’s virtually no chance of seeing Collins at any of the offseason activities. In fact, he can’t participate in any of the mini-camps or OTAs without signing his tender – something he almost certainly isn’t going to do until training camp, if then. “This could get contentious, but the Packers and Collins won’t be the only team and restricted free agent engaged in this uncomfortable dance,” said the agent. “Similar situations will be happening all around the league. It’s just the way things are in 2010, and at some point, the players will have to accept that.” Perhaps, but few players are as enlightened as Cofield. Something tells us that Collins is going to create quite a stir in the weeks and months to come. And something tells us that Thompson won’t care

[ThunderDan]

You really think someone with a top 5 or even top 15 pick when trade their 1st and 3rd for Nick Collins? Keep Dreaming....

Why don't you re-read my post?

I didn't say anyone would do it. I said that is where I would deal Collins because then you can make sure you get his replacement.

[hoosier]

PACKER UPDATE-

There’s absolutely no reason for Ted Thompson to offer safety Nick Collins a long-term contract. Why? Let another restricted free agent explain. “The teams have the leverage,” Giants defensive tackle Barry Cofield told the Newark Star-Ledger. “They have the opportunity to tender guys, keep them for cheap, and I expect them to do just that. They’re businessmen, this is a business, so that’s what I expect.” Granted, the former Northwestern star isn’t a two-time Pro Bowler, but he’s also not going to make over $3 million in 2010. “Look, the players agreed to this CBA in ‘06 and now they have to live with the ramifications,” opined an agent. “It’s easy to sympathize with the 212 players who will lose out on unrestricted free agency, but that’s life. The NFL isn’t a charity and its 32 teams are under no obligation to ‘make things right’ by handing out lucrative deals a year or two before they have to. In fact, they’d be downright foolish to do so.”

Thompson’s definitely no fool and that’s why very little progress has been made on a multi-year deal. It was never really about wanting to see how Collins played in the new defensive scheme. It was always more about the CBA. The Packers certainly aren’t a cheap organization, but they’re always well-aware of the bottom line. They have to be. That’s why Thompson tends to open up his wallet only when he absolutely has to or when a highly productive player is grossly underpaid. Otherwise, he prefers to sit back and let things work themselves out. That’s precisely the strategy he has been using when it comes to Collins and it’s the one that makes the most sense at this particular time.

Without a long-term contract in hand, there’s virtually no chance of seeing Collins at any of the offseason activities. In fact, he can’t participate in any of the mini-camps or OTAs without signing his tender – something he almost certainly isn’t going to do until training camp, if then. “This could get contentious, but the Packers and Collins won’t be the only team and restricted free agent engaged in this uncomfortable dance,” said the agent. “Similar situations will be happening all around the league. It’s just the way things are in 2010, and at some point, the players will have to accept that.” Perhaps, but few players are as enlightened as Cofield. Something tells us that Collins is going to create quite a stir in the weeks and months to come. And something tells us that Thompson won’t care

That argument certainly makes sense from an economic perspective. But recent history suggests that TT pays attention to other considerations as well. He was under no obligation to redo Driver's contract or extend Harris's when he did. Those were gestures intended to show that the Packers value their core players. If Collins is part of that core, I expect TT will at some point soon make a similar gesture. It could also be argued that Collins is not significantly underpaid at this point in his career, as Driver and Harris were.

[ThunderDan]

The problem also is one of timing. Your team just finished an 11-5 season and may be ready for a deep playoff push. If you give up Collins and get the 1 and 3, and even if you get an Eric Berry, he's still a rookie. He might be the best thing since sliced bread in two or three years, but if you think your team is primed right now for a Super Bowl run, do you put a rookie back there to run the show?

I dunno.

That's a good point also.

On the flip side, if you find the next Ronnie Lott or Ed Reed the drop off may not be too steep and would be hardly noticable. Plus you get an extra 3rd that you can package and move up in the 1st round to get the OT you want instead of having to wait and see what is left at 23.

And before anyone goes crazy, this is what I would do. Not that the Packers are going to do it or are remotely thinking about it.