Saturday to retire after the Pro Bowl

[Patler]

According to one site, Saturday had no signing bonus. Instead, there were roster bonus of $2.9 million in 2012 and $2.4 in 2013, with salaries of $1.1 and $1.35, respectively.

If that is true, there is no dead money for him in 2013.

[Guiness]

Nice, the roster bonus obviously won't occur. Have to wonder though why he would negotiate something like this, seems like an overly confident move. Of course, before this year, he had no reason to doubt his abilities, seems like he fell off pretty quickly. This seems to be a case of signing some else's declining player, but the Pack protected themselves well.

[smuggler]

It's nice to have that 3.75 million off the books in 2013. It won't let us keep Jennings, but it might help us lock up Matthews.

[Rutnstrut]

It looked like he retired early the way he played this year, if only someone had called that, oh I DID. Last year when they signed the bum.

[woodbuck27]

But I'm glad he was a Packer. I don't doubt he helped EDS at practice and in games on the sidelines after he got benched.

Worth every penny then.

[Rutnstrut]

It looked like he retired early the way he played this year, if only someone had called that, oh I DID. Last year when they signed the bum.

So they used a roster spot for a consultant? Yeah that's a savvy football move.

[pbmax]

So they used a roster spot for a consultant? Yeah that's a savvy football move.

The Rams are paying their consultant much more. Who made the wiser decision?

[Rutnstrut]

The Rams are paying their consultant much more. Who made the wiser decision?

The Rams can still get some of their investment out of Wells, the Packers get nothing out of Saturday. Did the Rams over pay, certainly. But I think the Packers could have worked a little harder to keep Wells. I will admit though I don't know that as I wasn't sitting in on the talks.

[Patler]

The Rams can still get some of their investment out of Wells, the Packers get nothing out of Saturday. Did the Rams over pay, certainly. But I think the Packers could have worked a little harder to keep Wells. I will admit though I don't know that as I wasn't sitting in on the talks.

Ya, it's impossible for us to know what the team was thinking, or what they offered, if anything. Maybe they wanted him back at or below a certain price, maybe they decided it was time to move on regardless.

That said, I have no problem with a philosophy that has them setting a limit for each player, and refusing to exceed the limit they set. At times it may be that expectations are so different that the player leaves without any negotiations with the Packers, because the player is able to get much, much more than the Packers were willing to pay. This appears to have happened with Wells. In other situations, again there may be little discussion, but at the last minute the player returns because the market wasn't what he hoped. This seems to have happened with Jones.

They have a lot of contracts to deal with, and overpaying any can have a snowball effect.

[mraynrand]

That said, I have no problem with a philosophy that has them setting a limit for each player, and refusing to exceed the limit they set....They have a lot of contracts to deal with, and overpaying any can have a snowball effect.

I think this is spot on - the Packers are like the best used car buyers - if you set a limit, there's no way you can get ripped off. You may have some regrets from time to time, but you don't go broke.