Sharper's Take

[MJZiggy]

The Packers 2005 Roster (it was soon realized) would be absent both of it's guards on one of the TOP OL's in the NFL as they were not retained by GM Ted Thompson and thus both departed via FA?

I would like to study the timing here but T2 asked S Darren Sharper to take a $4 Million reduction in Pay fr. $6 M - $2 M. He balked and left for "the Vikings" for the 2005 Season, for which his outstanding play (and that is still reported to be just that) in 2005 rewarded him with a PRO BOWL selection.

Hmmm...Yes, let's look at this timing. WHY did TT want Sharper to take that pay cut? Any possibility that he was working on finding ways to keep a certain guard?

And as to the Rocky Horror bit, I included it because it is the FUNNIEST parody of a horror flick that I've ever seen in my life and was ragingly popular as you yourself brought up.

[BobDobbs]

I'm not sure if this thread is still about Sharper or if we've moved on to TT.

As far as D-Sharp. I did always like him, but I've got a soft spot for flamboyant players. As far as his play on the field he would gamble, but for the most part helped to defense greatly and provided big plays. The last year that he was here the defense and particularly the backfield was a disorganized nightmare. This was thanks to Slowik and our very own coach shotty. He was definitely injured after the hit in the Buffalo game and it showed. His already limited lateral quickness diminished and it hurt, especially because they insisted on playing him on slot receivers instead of in back. He had 3 TDS on defense that year (pretty decent for a guy playing terrible).
The Packers said you have to take a 4 million dollar paycut. He said no way if you want to reduce my cap number I'll restructure my contract, but I'm worthy of the money. They said you're fired. He goes out and gets paid about what we were going to pay him, produces 9 or 10 INTS. We fans get to watch Antonio Freeman, Mark Roman, and Manuel play ugly ball. Our safeties should be Sharper and Collins right now. That would be alot more fun to watch.

One more thing. Blaming Sharper for the 49er playoff loss? Young threw the ball through the whole defense. TO had basically been shut out that game. He had some fault, but no one was going to knock the ball out of TO's hands after he had it in the endzone.
In the Philly game his coverage was definitely too deep. One of those safeties has to be in front of the first down marker. Barnett was way out of position on that play. Donnatell called a bad play. Not to mention punt on 4th and 1. Or that horrible decision in OT by Farve to pass the ball to Dawkins.
My point is: If you would rather have a hard hitter like Chuck Cecil say it. If you don't like him personally because he signed with the vikings or your girlfriend thought he was hot that's ok too. But, blaming him for two of the biggest losses in Packer playoff history simply does not stand up to the tests of logic or perception.

[MJZiggy]

Thanks, BobDobbs, you gave me just the piece of information I was looking for.

[Terry]

Walker is also a bit odd. Perhaps too much TO influence. I will always feel that had he not been injured, at some point GB would have tried to work out an extension toward the end of 2005. Once the season was over, Walker seemed to take a McKenzie stance, and again the Packers did not have much choice. At least TT parlayed the situation into a bunch of draft picks.

Absolutely. Well said. Sometimes events just converge certain ways and things go very wrong. Thompson made what he could out of it and moved on.

I'm trying to imagine how fans felt when Elway insisted on moving out to another team.

In the Philly game his coverage was definitely too deep. One of those safeties has to be in front of the first down marker. Barnett was way out of position on that play. Donnatell called a bad play. Not to mention punt on 4th and 1. Or that horrible decision in OT by Favre to pass the ball to Dawkins.

What are you talking about? What bad play? Some players were out of position, how was that Donatel's fault? The players are supposed to know where the first down marker is.

[Bretsky]

The Packers 2005 Roster (it was soon realized) would be absent both of it's guards on one of the TOP OL's in the NFL as they were not retained by GM Ted Thompson and thus both departed via FA?

I would like to study the timing here but T2 asked S Darren Sharper to take a $4 Million reduction in Pay fr. $6 M - $2 M. He balked and left for "the Vikings" for the 2005 Season, for which his outstanding play (and that is still reported to be just that) in 2005 rewarded him with a PRO BOWL selection.

Hmmm...Yes, let's look at this timing. WHY did TT want Sharper to take that pay cut? Any possibility that he was working on finding ways to keep a certain guard?

And as to the Rocky Horror bit, I included it because it is the FUNNIEST parody of a horror flick that I've ever seen in my life and was ragingly popular as you yourself brought up.

Getting in on this late; but honestly I don't think TT gave any indication he intended to make an effort for Rivera or Wahle so I don't think asking Sharper to take the pay cut had any relation to them. I liked Sharper as a player. I wish TT would have been a little less aggressive with the pay cut request and worked something out; but bygones it is.

I don't have any problems with Sharper saying what he did.

It's the truth.
B

[Patler]

Getting in on this late; but honestly I don't think TT gave any indication he intended to make an effort for Rivera or Wahle so I don't think asking Sharper to take the pay cut had any relation to them.
B

Of course they tried to resign BOTH players. From JSO:

"On Tuesday, the Packers cut their starting left guard, releasing him to the free-agent market where in a very short while he'll be a man of many riches. After discussing several deals of varying lengths and value, Wahle and the Packers were unable to agree on a renegotiated contract that would reduce his salary cap number of $11.375 million.

"We spent the past couple of weeks in talks that intensified this weekend, and we'll continue to talk," said Neil Cornrich, Wahle's agent. "Regardless of his status, we'll still talk."

"The club negotiated with guard Marco Rivera through the day Tuesday, but was unable to reach a contract agreement before the start of free agency. Though Rivera became an unrestricted free agent at midnight, the Packers are very interested in re-signing him and are expected to continue negotiations today.

"The Packers apparently decided they were going to let the market dictate Rivera's worth and weren't going to make the same mistake they made two years ago when they overestimated the interest in defensive tackle Cletidus Hunt before the start of free agency."

"If the Packers are able to sign Wahle or Rivera, they will have to create salary-cap room to accommodate their new contracts. The Packers are ready to cut safety Darren Sharper if he doesn't accept a major pay cut, a move that would create more than $3 million of room.

"The Packers owe Sharper a roster bonus of $2.6 million on March 12, so they don't have to make a decision on his status until then. '


It was very obvious at the time that getting Sharper to reduce his cap number was the ONLY significant area to gain cap space to sign either Rivera or Wahle. I have been trying to point that out for over a year. The Packers salary cap in March, 2005 was heavily weighted toward a few players, several of whom were not even elligible for renegotiation, Favre being one of them. Sharper was about it. Cutting Hunt in March would have INCREASED his cap number.

The Packers salary cap had gotten out of wack by 2005. It happens. Several in the Packer front office had implied that they figured they could maybe keep either Wahle or Rivera, and they figured Rivera would be the cheaper one. It seems that even that would have required getting Sharper to reduce or releasing him. They never intended to lose both guards, but when Dallas went nuts with the offer for Rivera, it made no sense to compete.

The part that was mildly surprising to me was that after losing both guards, they still released Sharper. His bonus wasn't due until mid-March, so the situation with the guards was done and over with when they released Sharper anyway.

[mraynrand]

Patler wrote:

"Every team loses players they would prefer to keep if they could."

This is true, but you can't afford to lose your nest players if you have nothing to replace them with. Walker was arguably the best player on the team. Wahle was the best O-lineman (at least he is now with their new scheme)

Wahle
Sharper
Walker

Hindsight is 20/20, but these three were part of a very good Packer core - teams that routinely won 10+ games a year. The Packers have needlessly spiraled into ruin mostly because these guys were let go.

[Tarlam!]

Hurumph. Ho-hum!

We can spew all day about our lost players. Or, we can wish our team the very best of luck.

Those players pulling on the famous Green and Gold are playing their hearts out for us.

We're losing, but, not because we lack passion.

[Patler]

Wahle
Sharper
Walker

Hindsight is 20/20, but these three were part of a very good Packer core - teams that routinely won 10+ games a year. The Packers have needlessly spiraled into ruin mostly because these guys were let go.

"...these guys were let go." you make it sound like the Packers didn't want them. My take is much different. They couldn't afford to keep Wahle. Instead of saying "woulda, coulda, shoulda" I wish someone would give a reasonable explaination of how they could have kept Wahle, using the contract numbers available in March 2005. In one post (perhaps at JSO, it was a while ago) I explained every single 2005 bonus that was due in 2005, for all players, and what could have been done with it. I also discussed the highest player salaries that were due, and what maybe could be expected to do with those.

No matter how you look at it, the Packers had very little room to generate cap space. In March before relaesing Wahle, on paper they had over $40 million of the 2005 cap tied up in Favre, who couldn't renegotiate, Sharper who wouldn't renegotiate, players long gone like Johnson & Reynolds whose numbers can't change, Hunt whose cap number would have gone up if he was cut before June, KGB who had only a $1 million roster bonus that could have been tinkered with and was so early in his contract that his original signing bonus yet to amortize would kill any renegotiation, Green who was in the last year of his contract with significant fresh cash due him in 2005, and lastly Wahle who anticipated a significant cash payment from someone. In that scenario, just where are you going to generate any significant cap space?

Walker threw a hissy fit when GB didn't give him money before the 2005 season that they didn't have to give, and never gave the Packers a chance after that. You can't force a player to stay. AT least GB got something in return.

Sharper you might argue that the Packers "let go". They simply didn't want to pay him what his contract required. Would he have helped last year? Yes. In 2006? Maybe, its hard to say if his injury history will recur or not, he was hurt some last year too. They always say it is better to let a player go two years too early than two years too late, unless you are on the verge of challenging for the Super Bowl. I suspect Sharper fits nicely into the "two years too early" category, and at this stage, so what?

[Scott Campbell]

I think too many blame Thompson for losing Wahle. He was only on the job for a short bit before Wahle left. Sherman had years to figure out how to get out of that balloon payment and extend the guy.

[Patler]

I think too many blame Thompson for losing Wahle. He was only on the job for a short bit before Wahle left. Sherman had years to figure out how to get out of that balloon payment and extend the guy.

Exactly. The time to do something about it was a year earlier, when Wahle still had to weigh the risk of an injury before he would see his big money. Once he made it through 2004 in perfect health, he knew a huge amount of cash was coming his way from someone. Either the Packers would pay the balloon, or somone would pay even more in guaranteed money for a long term deal. The balloon payment from GB was the lowest amount of guaranteed cash he could expect. He was in a perfect situation, because the Packers could not tender him, just pay him and for only a short term at that..

[Tarlam!]

Wahle, as I recall, had no intention of remaining. None. No money we could have thrown at him would have been enough. As I recall.

[Patler]

Wahle, as I recall, had no intention of remaining. None. No money we could have thrown at him would have been enough. As I recall.

It's hard to say. Wahle certainly made enough comments that seemed like he was not interested in staying, but he also made a few that sounded like he would stay. All in all, my impression is that all things being equal, he wanted a fresh start and a chance to step out of the shadows of the other O-linmen.

[Scott Campbell]

I think you're right. They had to get it done a year ealier while the risk of attaining the big payday was still valid.

I don't think Wahle wanted to be a Packer. He lives in Vegas if I remember correcly, and I don't think Green Bay is his kind of town.

[Tarlam!]

Point is, TT is blameless on Wahle and made a call on Marco R. Think back, Marco had back surgery in Dallas before taking the field and offered to pay back his boni.

TT said guards are a dime a dozen when he was fresh, but not even TT believed that! He wasn't used to making nationwide news breaking statements when he said that!