The Cullen Jenkins Mistake

[mraynrand]

This thread is tiresome.

[LegandofthePack15]

The $29 million and $5 million figures are taken directly from what was the then most accurate source of Packer cap information that I knew of. I have printed copies. Be advised, - I make up NOTHING when I post. When I do not have support for facts that I offer, I will precede it with a qualifier, such as; "per my recollection", "as I recall", etc.

Lemme guess, you work or worked for the Packers? That's the only explanation I can think of for why you had access to "accurate" Packer cap data.

Me? I'm just a lowly fan who read the MJS. Guys like Silverstien and McGinn, they're not credible. They reported that in 2005 the Packers were about $7.5 M under after they cut Wahle and Sharper, among others. They reported that the next season the Packers, along with the rest of the NFL, gained significant cap space due to the new tv deal; the Packers at one point were around $35 M under.

NFL TV deal -2006–2013: CBS ($622.5 million/yr), Fox ($712.5 million/yr), NBC ($650 million/yr)m, ESPN/ESPN Deportes ($1.1 billion/yr).

Total amount: $3.085 billion/yr

PS: I rest my case. This will be my last reply in this thread.

[BobDobbs]

I've clearly been drinking if I'm responding to this thread, but at least I've been out supporting our economy.

The whole problem with the arguments here is that they are not taking into account the fact that the GM must think long term. TT saw that Sherman had made a play to win a championship by paying veterans. That didn't work and we were aging and up against the cap. TT wants to draft young talent, identify stars and then keep replenishing the roster with cheap young talent. It is a recipe for success. He had the opportunity to overhaul the roster with no repercussions because it was his first year. Foolish to pass that up.

We had to gain cap flexibility. Rivera was too old. TT felt that Sharper was overpaid. Sharper felt otherwise and was able to get his money. Wahle would have been great, but received top money for a guard. TT definitely undervalued guards at the start of his tenure, but he gained flexibility, replenished youth on the roster, and reloaded our team. He was thinking long term and it worked. That should count for something.

Now, to bring it back on topic. Jenkins is the perfect example of a good player that you give up a year to early instead of too late. He would definitely have helped us last year. He was a better player than Neal has shown thus far. But, his second contract spanned for age 26 to 30. He was unavalilable for 25 percent of those games and ineffective for many more. There is no reason to suspect that he would be healthier from age 31 to 35. It's a hard call, but we will come up against the cap when we resign Rodgers, Matthews, and Raji. So you take a hit. You have to gamble on some spots in the salary cap era.

All of those decisions have played out well in the long term. And if you are going to completely overhaul a roster you might as well do it in your first year as GM. TT is a far better roster builder than Sherman and he had to set us up for long term success.

[Pugger]

I think the verdict is still out on Neal. If the young man can stay healthy I think he'll be just as good if not better than Jenkins was. Unfortunately last year Neal couldn't stay on the field and our defense suffered because of it. It also didn't help to lose an All-Pro safety who was one of our defensive leaders.

[Teamcheez1]

In hindsight, we gave up on Jenkins at the right time. Except for the first few games the next year, he has been mediocre at best.

Our downfall was not having an adequate replacement.

[ThunderDan]

Lemme guess, you work or worked for the Packers? That's the only explanation I can think of for why you had access to "accurate" Packer cap data.

Me? I'm just a lowly fan who read the MJS. Guys like Silverstien and McGinn, they're not credible. They reported that in 2005 the Packers were about $7.5 M under after they cut Wahle and Sharper, among others. They reported that the next season the Packers, along with the rest of the NFL, gained significant cap space due to the new tv deal; the Packers at one point were around $35 M under.

NFL TV deal -2006–2013: CBS ($622.5 million/yr), Fox ($712.5 million/yr), NBC ($650 million/yr)m, ESPN/ESPN Deportes ($1.1 billion/yr).

Total amount: $3.085 billion/yr

PS: I rest my case. This will be my last reply in this thread.

You do realize the Packers saved something like $11M against the cap by cutting Wahle alone that year!?!

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=2004296

[Fritz]

Lemme guess, you work or worked for the Packers? That's the only explanation I can think of for why you had access to "accurate" Packer cap data.

Me? I'm just a lowly fan who read the MJS. Guys like Silverstien and McGinn, they're not credible. They reported that in 2005 the Packers were about $7.5 M under after they cut Wahle and Sharper, among others. They reported that the next season the Packers, along with the rest of the NFL, gained significant cap space due to the new tv deal; the Packers at one point were around $35 M under.

NFL TV deal -2006–2013: CBS ($622.5 million/yr), Fox ($712.5 million/yr), NBC ($650 million/yr)m, ESPN/ESPN Deportes ($1.1 billion/yr).

Total amount: $3.085 billion/yr

PS: I rest my case. This will be my last reply in this thread.

I enjoy Patler's posts because he uses facts and does his homework, and if there is a disagreement about what the facts are, he tries to account for his sources and is willing to consider other sources as well, and so he does not have to stoop to cheap sarcasm.

[Patler]

Lemme guess, you work or worked for the Packers? That's the only explanation I can think of for why you had access to "accurate" Packer cap data.

Me? I'm just a lowly fan who read the MJS. Guys like Silverstien and McGinn, they're not credible. They reported that in 2005 the Packers were about $7.5 M under after they cut Wahle and Sharper, among others. They reported that the next season the Packers, along with the rest of the NFL, gained significant cap space due to the new tv deal; the Packers at one point were around $35 M under.

NFL TV deal -2006–2013: CBS ($622.5 million/yr), Fox ($712.5 million/yr), NBC ($650 million/yr)m, ESPN/ESPN Deportes ($1.1 billion/yr).

Total amount: $3.085 billion/yr

PS: I rest my case. This will be my last reply in this thread.

I am beginning to question your ability to read and comprehend. What I stated was:

The $29 million and $5 million figures are taken directly from what was the then most accurate source of Packer cap information that I knew of.

Note that I said , "the then most accurate source of cap information that I knew of" (Emphasis added.)

I simply try to find available sources that are the most accurate. SOMETIMES, that is JSO, sometimes not. Sometimes it is GBPG, sometimes not. The two newspapers often have different "facts" about the cap numbers and contract details. How do you explain that?

Quite frankly, neither the JSO nor the GBPG did a particularly good job keeping up with the Packers salary cap in those years, and an article about the available cap would often be followed with another article modifying or correcting it. Up until the uncapped year, there was a guy who was linked on a number of sites who had maintained an extremely accurate accumulation of data that he revised as the details of each new contract became available. He maintained this file for many years, and I found it extremely accurate. In footnotes he would acknowledge discrepencies between his information and what various news sources provided, and in later footnotes he would resolve the differences. More often than not, he was ultimately shown to be correct, or at least more accurate than the newspapers were.

Consequently, at that time I relied on him and the information that the NFLPA posted about contracts as being more accurate than either of the newspapers.

Unfortunately, the uncapped year was a time when player contracts were not well-reported, and the NFLPA virtually stopped posting their information about that time. I have been lamenting the fact for several years that there is not now any source that is as reliable about the salary cap information as there was before the uncapped year. Now I generally look at the GBPG and JSO data, but take it with a grain of salt.

A lot of your post confuses me, because it does not support statements you have made and does not address questions referred to you. If I have a chance, I will address those later, but I am extremely busy today and do not have the time to parse your response as I would like to. Maybe later.

[Zool]

Best to let this one go Patler. He's baiting you.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Hey Patler, I believe this is the site that you were referring to. Here's the 2005 link after Sharper and Wahle were cut. This guy was pretty on top of his stuff as I recall.

http://sports-boards.net/reports/packsalarycap.htm

[Cheesehead Craig]

Here's another link for the Wahle, Sharper and Hunt cap numbers. It's on a forum but it's cut from an article from PackerNews. It seems to me their combined cap number was 23.4/m

http://sports-boards.net/forums/show...ecent-article)

[red]

this is great. we finally get everyones favorite poster back, and now some new asshat with the gayest avatar on the site is gonna piss him off and run him off again

[ThunderDan]

this is great. we finally get everyones favorite poster back, and now some new asshat with the gayest avatar on the site is gonna piss him off and run him off again

It's PacoPete back again.

[ThunderDan]

Hey Patler, I believe this is the site that you were referring to. Here's the 2005 link after Sharper and Wahle were cut. This guy was pretty on top of his stuff as I recall.

http://sports-boards.net/reports/packsalarycap.htm

My favorite part of that website.

Cheech Hunt's $1 million roster bonus was reduced to $750k because he was lazy in 2004.

[Patler]

Hey Patler, I believe this is the site that you were referring to. Here's the 2005 link after Sharper and Wahle were cut. This guy was pretty on top of his stuff as I recall.

http://sports-boards.net/reports/packsalarycap.htm

Ya, that is the guy I use. I have that one for 2005 and several updates after that including after the season started.

I really don't get "Legands" point, if he even has one. I never disputed the amount of cap space after all three were let go. But that does not support his premise, because:

- Any cap savings from the release of Sharper was not available to sign Wahle or Rivera. Both had signed with their new teams already before Sharper was even released. Sharper's bonus wasn't due until the following week, and the Packers continued to negotiate with him in an attempt to keep him. In the mean time both Wahle and Rivera left, and Sharper refused acceptable concessions, so he was released the following week.

- More importantly, the available cap space in early March did not take into consideration what would be required for the rookie pool allocation, which isn't assigned to the teams until draft time. I don't know what their actual number was in April, but I am guessing that it had to be somewhere in the neighborhood of $4-5 million, because I believe the contracts signed by the 2005 rookies came close to that in 1st year cap impact. In short, there really wasn't a lot of the $7 million cap space that was really available for veteran signings during that off season.