Jennings - Last Season with the Pack

[Joemailman]

I was guaranteeing Collins got signed, for the record.

I guess I'll go on the record and guarantee Greg Jennings will get signed.

So if you are as prescient as Justin, Jennings is about to get a contract extension, the Packers will win the Super Bowl, and next year Jennings will suffer a career-ending injury.

[MJZiggy]

I follow Jennings on FB and he seems a lot more interested in asking the fans who he should start for fantasy football than what's going on with his agent. No bluster at all. No talk about it.

[pbmax]

So if you are as prescient as Justin, Jennings is about to get a contract extension, the Packers will win the Super Bowl, and next year Jennings will suffer a career-ending injury.

Tempting ....

[RashanGary]

Just listened to Jennings. He sounds so different in person than the writing. He's the same, happy, cool guy. Zero. . . ZERO animosity in his voice. Said he loves it here, wants to be at that locker until the day he retires. Completely happy, completely genuine. . . . .

That said, it's just a tough situation. We could lose anyone coming up. We really could. You look at it, how the fuck are we keeping AJ Hawk around?

I hope he stays. He's a cool guy, a great player, and better than people around the league realize.

[esoxx]

What's with Greg talking in the 3rd person? esoxx doesn't care for that.

[King Friday]

Makes too much sense really. What good is draft and develop if you don't secure?

Because you've drafted and developed other players at positions of greater importance (and harder to draft future talent) that you'd rather keep over a WR. Rodgers alone will make most decent WRs look good (see Nelson) so why pay top money for a receiver?

That said, I think Green Bay will try to make a fair offer to keep Jennings...but I'm sure other teams will offer him more. It will come down to Jennings as to whether or not he stays.

[George Cumby]

What's with Greg talking in the 3rd person? esoxx doesn't care for that.

the george cumby agrees

[VegasPackFan]

Typically a deal given to a 29-30 yr old receiver or running back is really the team back-compensating for the performance they already received from the player. The economics of the game would dictate that you let someone else pay for that performance while you retain players still in their prime. That's the business end of this thing.

[rbaloha1]

I guess I'll go on the record and guarantee Greg Jennings will get signed.

Ditto

[Fritz]

Fritz thinks that at the end of the day, the Packers will not keep Jennings. He wants to make his money when he can - which I think is fitting, but with Rodgers, Matthews, and Raji coming due, there's no way to fit that all in plus Jennings. The numbers just aren't there. And the cap's not going up from what I've read - it's going to be fairly stagnant over the next few years.

And Ted reads Cold, Hard, Football Facts, and he knows that wide receivers are the "hood ornaments" of the offense. It just doesn't make sense to spend top, top dollar on that position. That, however, is mitigated to some degree when you've got a top-flight QB like Green Bay does.

Having said all that, I think Greg Jennings is a superb receiver, and I would be happy if he's re-signed and somehow it doesn't cost the team Rodgers or Raji or Matthews.

[Brandon494]

You guys keep saying we don't have the cap like Jennings is still on his rookie contract and we don't have aging players who have high cap numbers. They need to be let go before we let Jennings walk in his prime. The new rookie salary scale should also help with cap relief. If TT can resign Hawk to a big deal he damn better be ready to do the same for Greg Jennings or my head my freaking explode.

[Fritz]

You guys keep acting like Greg Jennings is a Packer fan and not a player, and like he doesn't face a short career compared to other working people, and like there is no salary cap. In your world, how do you keep Greg Jennings AND Aaron Rodgers AND Clay Matthews AND BJ Raji when the salary cap is going to remain stagnant, and as you point out you don't have any aging and overpaid players to cut (well, maybe AJ Hawk)?

[Brandon494]

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/138820739.html

Link to Packers salary, look at guys like Woodson, Hawk, Pickett, Saturday, and Driver. Those guys will not be on this roster within the two years IMO and that makes up for 30M in cap right there. You also see that guys like Rodgers, Jennings, and Raji are already making good money, Clay is the only one making dog shit. Its not going to be as hard to resign those guys as some of you think.

[Fritz]

I do like it when someone comes back with some numbers and an idea that is supported. I might not agree, but I respect the debate.

And besides, I want you to be right!

[LegandofthePack15]

In your world, how do you keep Greg Jennings AND Aaron Rodgers AND Clay Matthews AND BJ Raji?

Easy. Force the Networks to pay up, which they will in 2014.

The last time the Networks paid up, the Packers went from something like 5 million dough under the moon to something like 30 million.

The cap is not going to be a constraint. It will come down to how much the players are asking and how much the Packers are willing to pay.

The Packers could pay Jennings Calvin Johnson money and they would still have money leftover to sign the other guys. The question is, does Thompson think Jennings is worth Calvin Johnson money?

Players like Wahle, Rivera, Colledge and Wells were not resigned NOT b/c the Packers couldn't fit them under the cap. They're no longer Packers b/c Thompson didn't think they're worth what they were getting from other teams.