Willis Value

[CaptainKickass]

Well slap my grandma and bake me a poisoned apple pie!

I FINALLY got in through the "TOO MANY REQUESTS"! stupid ass bullshit. Can't hardly even read here much less log in anymore.

Hopefully this actually posts.

Just a little more trivia that most certainly adds to Willis value to any team:

Willis accomplished a feat never reached by Brett Favre, Aaron Rodgers, or Jordan Love, as he became the first Packers quarterback since Don Majkowski in 1990 with at least 285 passing yards and 60 rushing yards in the same game.

Willis also became the first quarterback to complete every pass, throw for 100 yards, and record both a passing touchdown and a rushing touchdown in the first half of a game since Michael Vick did so for the Atlanta Falcons in 2002 against none other than the Packers at Lambeau Field.

[bobblehead]

Now that's funny. pb quoted apb so I see his admission that he is a losing poker player, but somehow thinks that merits sponsorship. I once staked Mike the mouth Matusow. He was annoying to be around for too long but at least he doubled my money in about 20 hours.

[Fritz]

I’m still seeing Willis talked about as a low-end “bridge” starter for an NFL team. I’m hearing “only” 15 - 20 mill a year.

I don’t get it. Seems like the sky’s the limit with him. His decision-making - maybe his weakest area - will improve with experience. And the Ravens had a week to prep for him and he still balled out.

[texaspackerbacker]

I agree about what the price is likely to be, and I'm hoping the Packers decide to pay that price. $15-20 million certainly doesn't mean a $15-20 million cap hit, not even close if you do it right.

[bobblehead]

I’m still seeing Willis talked about as a low-end “bridge” starter for an NFL team. I’m hearing “only” 15 - 20 mill a year.

I don’t get it. Seems like the sky’s the limit with him. His decision-making - maybe his weakest area - will improve with experience. And the Ravens had a week to prep for him and he still balled out.

They are saying "too small of a sample" and acting like he deserves contracts similar to Winston and Daniel Jones. I don't think comparing him to guys who failed as starters is fair, but I'm not as smart as an NFL GM. The smartest argument I saw was that other teams aren't set up in the coaching department as the packers are and Willis may not be nearly as successful outside GB.....then I read that MiLF needs to be fired and Love totally deserves $55 million a year. Bottom line is that in the same environment Willis has impressed me as much as the current version of Love and much more than Love at a similar point. Kid makes every throw, runs play action, has serious mobility and hasn't made boneheaded decisions. He not only was great against the Ravens but he did so without a running game.

[Fritz]

They are saying "too small of a sample" and acting like he deserves contracts similar to Winston and Daniel Jones. I don't think comparing him to guys who failed as starters is fair, but I'm not as smart as an NFL GM. The smartest argument I saw was that other teams aren't set up in the coaching department as the packers are and Willis may not be nearly as successful outside GB.....then I read that MiLF needs to be fired and Love totally deserves $55 million a year. Bottom line is that in the same environment Willis has impressed me as much as the current version of Love and much more than Love at a similar point. Kid makes every throw, runs play action, has serious mobility and hasn't made boneheaded decisions. He not only was great against the Ravens but he did so without a running game.

To me, he carried that entire offense on his back on that first drive of the third quarter. Bailed them out of crappy blocking, bailed them out of runs that gained zero yards. Just took them down the field. I like Love just fine, don't get me wrong, but I think Willis seems to me to be a more dynamic QB.

My guess is that the Packers couldn't trade Love even if they wanted to, due to sal cap considerations. I don't understand the cap very well, but I think that's probably one reason they can't trade Love. But if they could, and get back that draft capital . . .

[texaspackerbacker]

In summary, Willis is damn good ........ but LOVE IS BETTER. Don't even think about trading him, or Willis for that matter, unless it's for at least a first rounder - which yeah, I know, isn't happening. Just re-sign Willis, don't worry about the damn cap, and keep both, just in case.

Breaking news: the Packers just signed Desmond Ridder to the practice squad. He used to be pretty good as I recall.

[Teamcheez1]

Willis is gone at the end of the year.
He will get more money and a starting opportunity elsewhere.
Good for him, he’s earned it.
No hard feelings that we helped him advance his career.

[bobblehead]

Willis is gone at the end of the year.
He will get more money and a starting opportunity elsewhere.
Good for him, he’s earned it.
No hard feelings that we helped him advance his career.

I'm glad for him. I just think we are making a mistake on roster building.....but its not the first in recent history. I also wanted to trade Jaire when he was healthy a year earlier than when we cut him for zero. And don't get me started on wanting to dish Bak each spring when he was "ready to get back to business". You trade guys like this when they have value, but our GM keeps them past the sell by date and gets nothing.

[ThunderDan]

In summary, Willis is damn good ........ but LOVE IS BETTER. Don't even think about trading him, or Willis for that matter, unless it's for at least a first rounder - which yeah, I know, isn't happening. Just re-sign Willis, don't worry about the damn cap, and keep both, just in case.

Breaking news: the Packers just signed Desmond Ridder to the practice squad. He used to be pretty good as I recall.

We cannot trade Willis. No matter how many times you post it , it can't be done.

We could trade him next year if we resign him. His contract is over at the end of the season.

[Teamcheez1]

I'm glad for him. I just think we are making a mistake on roster building.....but its not the first in recent history. I also wanted to trade Jaire when he was healthy a year earlier than when we cut him for zero. And don't get me started on wanting to dish Bak each spring when he was "ready to get back to business". You trade guys like this when they have value, but our GM keeps them past the sell by date and gets nothing.

You’re 100% correct.
Bakh was a bad decision from the start, and others were kept too long.
I think the decision-makers are too often wringing their hands about getting rid of players early.
They are like “How will we replace them?”

Speaking of which, they should have also traded Rodgers a year earlier.

[falco]

We cannot trade Willis. No matter how many times you post it , it can't be done.

We could trade him next year if we resign him. His contract is over at the end of the season.

Is there any reason we couldn't tag him and trade him to someone willing to give him a long term deal?

[Joemailman]

Is there any reason we couldn't tag him and trade him to someone willing to give him a long term deal?

That would take at least 40 million. They'd have some work to do clear that much cap space. And they'd need to be sure some team wants to pay him that much.

[texaspackerbacker]

We cannot trade Willis. No matter how many times you post it , it can't be done.

We could trade him next year if we resign him. His contract is over at the end of the season.

Didn't I just say that? What part of "isn't happening" are you too dense to understand? "can't be done"? Why the hell not? Sign him then trade him? Not a good idea, but certainly not impossible. Is anybody's contract "over at the end of the season"? I thought there was some kind of date - March 1 or whatever - when the old NFL year ended and the new one began.

Much as I hope the Packers re-sign Willis and am thoroughly confident that they could cap-wise, this signing of Ridder might make it a little less likely, as Ridder is a similar player who would be a lot cheaper as a backup.

[falco]

That would take at least 40 million. They'd have some work to do clear that much cap space. And they'd need to be sure some team wants to pay him that much.

I see. If we pull it off, there is no impact, right? But the tag itself has a cap cost once he signs it, until he is traded? And to your point, he'd need an attractive enough offer to justify not taking the one year deal