F/A JENKINS UPDATE

[wist43]

In the 3 years he has been in a Packer uniform, what has has he done that would give you the slightest hint that he could be cut???

Everything points to paying this guy... and, as we've been saying, it's not like we're looking at a high end contract. You said you thought we were looking at $5 + million... I doubt we're talking that kind of money.

3-4 is much more likely, and at that number, I have no problem... 5-6??? Yes, that's too much for now... but, if he comes out gang busters, and we don't pay him now, then yes, we're probably looking at 5-6.

[HarveyWallbangers]

If the price is too high, tag him at a first round tender. If it's in the $10M guaranteed range, sign him long-term. Like others have said, this guy isn't a 4 game wonder. That's just when they decided to move him to DE, and he really took off, but he was a solid pass rusher at DT (our best pass rushing DT) for the last couple of years.

[Fosco33]

If the price is too high, tag him at a first round tender. If it's in the $10M guaranteed range, sign him long-term. Like others have said, this guy isn't a 4 game wonder. That's just when they decided to move him to DE, and he really took off, but he was a solid pass rusher at DT (our best pass rushing DT) for the last couple of years.

Damn right!

[pbmax]

I can't see Jenkins as a starter on a quality D line, unless the other three were world beaters.

I love his pass rush on the inside and his motor. He made KGB look pitiful with the way he held up to the run after moving to end. And it looked like he had the moves for a decent pass rush off the corner.

But on a number of occasions he just got steamrolled by the tackle in run D. And his pass rush seemed less effective after the first two weeks at end.

I would prefer him not to get starter money. But he is consistent, versatile and hustles. At tackle, his pass rush is the best on the Pack. I would understand if he got a long term deal with near starter money. The cap takes another huge jump next year so, like Kampman's deal, it might look like a steal after a year.

[RashanGary]

I'd put the 2nd round tender on him and see how it plays out. One of four things could happen.

1. Teams could offer decent deals but nothing over the top becuase they know they are already giving up a valuable pick and likely core player along with the big contract. In that case, Jenkins takes the best low ball offer and we match it.

2. Some team gives up a butt load for him and throws in a poison pill. We take the 2nd round pick and go forward.

3. Nobody bites and Jenkins realizes his value is lower than he thought and we sign a long term really good deal.

4. Nobody jumps and Jenkins stays patient and plays out his tender, risking injury but taking a chance he makes alot more in the UFA market.

[RashanGary]

When it's all said and done I'd expect 5 years 20 million with 9 up front.

[Patler]

Wow. All I can say is "wow"!

12 months ago half the people here thought it was crazy if Kampman was offered more than $2 million/year. Now they want to give Jenkins 4- 5 million.

Jenkins has shown FLASHES, not consistency at all. He was considered a liability at DT in the run game, which is why he never got more playing time than he did. Yes, he looked like he was better then KGB those last four games at DE, BUT it was only four games. His career stats look like Kampman's for 2005 alone, the year before he signed.

Kampman showed much, much more in potential and actual production in his first three years than Jenkins has, yet Kampman was tendered for his 4th year and was still signed longterm for his 5th. GB should do the same thing with Jenkins.

Jenkin's value is what it was December 1. Four games didn't make it go up by a factor of three.

What the tender cost is doesn't really matter for 2007. GB can afford it. What they can't afford is having him be in 2009 what KGB is now.

[Bretsky]

Re: F/A JENKINS UPDATE

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070222/PKR01/702220584/1058&located=RSS


Packers to talk with Jenkins today about deal BY Pete Dougherty

The Green Bay Packers have until March 1 to tender restricted free-agent Cullen Jenkins a contract offer but are continuing negotiations this week to sign the valuable fourth-year player to a long-term deal before then. One of Jenkins' agents, Brian Levy, said Wednesday the Packers haven't told him what restricted contract tender they will make, though it's almost a given it will be either the new second-round tender or a first-round tender. Levy probably won't find out until next week, but he's scheduled to meet with Andrew Brandt, the team's vice president of player finance, at the NFL scouting combine in Indianapolis this week to continue discussing a long-term deal. "We're going to sit down with them (today)," Levy said. Jenkins is a restricted free agent whose move to defensive end for the last four games last year was a significant factor in the Packers' defensive improvement in the season's final month. That, plus his ability to move to defensive tackle on passing downs, has made him an offseason signing priority for the Packers. Jenkins finished last season with 6½ sacks and 48 tackles, splitting time at defensive tackle and end, and if the Packers put the minimum tender of $850,000 on him, he'd draw great interest in restricted free agency. That tender would allow the Packers to match any offer he signed with another team or receive a draft pick in the round he was selected as compensation. But Jenkins was undrafted, so the Packers would get nothing in return. Last year, Minnesota found a loophole in such signings that makes it almost impossible for the original club to match an offer. A team can include a clause, for instance, that would guarantee Jenkins' entire contract if he played, say, four games at Lambeau Field in the first season of the deal. If the Packers matched that, they'd then have to guarantee Jenkins' entire contract if he played four games at home that season. That's why the Packers surely are debating whether to put a second-round or first-round tender on Jenkins. The second-round tender, which was added as part of the NFL's collective-bargaining agreement extension from last year, is cheaper for the Packers than the first-round tender — it guarantees Jenkins a $1.3 million salary for 2007 — and would force another team to give up a second-round draft pick to sign him. The first-round tender is more costly ($1.85 million) but would land them a first-round draft pick if he signed with another club. Both tenders' draft-pick compensation might be costly enough to dissuade another team from signing Jenkins, so the second-round tag appears more likely, but Jenkins' strong play late last year might intrigue a team or two to consider parting with a second-round pick for him. In the meantime, the Packers and Levy are expected to continue negotiating a possible long-term contract, for which the Packers are well positioned to do with almost $25 million in salary-cap space. Two defensive ends who like Jenkins just finished their third seasons in the NFL recently signed lucrative long-term deals, though that doesn't mean Jenkins is in line for contracts at their level, because both are better pure outside pass rushers, which is a more highly valued skill.


VIEW: "It looks like he should get between $8 million and $11 million in guaranteed money, over the course of about a 6-year deal. Here are some facts on the TENDER rules, and i would say put a 1st rd tender on him for $1.85 million. that's less than some stiffs on our team will make, plus it will make him work and play hard again to cash in: THE Packers surely are debating whether to put a second-round or first-round tender on Jenkins. The second-round tender, which was added as part of the NFL's collective-bargaining agreement extension from last year, is cheaper for the Packers than the first-round tender — it guarantees Jenkins a $1.3 million salary for 2007 — and would force another team to give up a second-round draft pick to sign him. The first-round tender is more costly ($1.85 million) but would land them a first-round draft pick if he signed with another club. Both tenders' draft-pick compensation might be costly enough to dissuade another team from signing Jenkins, so the second-round tag appears more likely, but Jenkins' strong play late last year might intrigue a team or two to consider parting with a second-round pick for him."

Great stuff; thanks for posting.

I've noted this before and I'll note it again. I think it would be idiotic to tender him for anything less than a first. We have the extra money; so make sure another team doesn't run his cost up. If I was one of the best teams in the NFL I might make a run at Jenkins for a late 2nd round draft pick. We do not want that to occur; that's why you tender him with a 1st

[Bretsky]

Wow. All I can say is "wow"!

12 months ago half the people here thought it was crazy if Kampman was offered more than $2 million/year. Now they want to give Jenkins 4- 5 million.

Jenkins has shown FLASHES, not consistency at all. He was considered a liability at DT in the run game, which is why he never got more playing time than he did. Yes, he looked like he was better then KGB those last four games at DE, BUT it was only four games. His career stats look like Kampman's for 2005 alone, the year before he signed.

Kampman showed much, much more in potential and actual production in his first three years than Jenkins has, yet Kampman was tendered for his 4th year and was still signed longterm for his 5th. GB should do the same thing with Jenkins.

Jenkin's value is what it was December 1. Four games didn't make it go up by a factor of three.

What the tender cost is doesn't really matter for 2007. GB can afford it. What they can't afford is having him be in 2009 what KGB is now.

For the record I was all for the Kampman Deal.

And I'd be all for the Jenkins deal if TT and the coaches feel his value is there. Jenkins is not a Cledius Hunt; he's a hard worker and high effort guy.

That being said, I'd think his value would fall in the 3.5 Million-4 Million a Year Range at this point

[Patler]

I agree they should tender him at the first round level. The difference in cost is peanuts with the salary cap where it is. Heck, it they are really confident in him, show an act of faith and give him the 1st and 2nd round tender. It would make him happy, still protect the Packers and be a nice prelude to a longterm deal, IF he proves to be worth it.

[RashanGary]

Wow. All I can say is "wow"!

12 months ago half the people here thought it was crazy if Kampman was offered more than $2 million/year. Now they want to give Jenkins 4- 5 million.

Jenkins has shown FLASHES, not consistency at all. He was considered a liability at DT in the run game, which is why he never got more playing time than he did. Yes, he looked like he was better then KGB those last four games at DE, BUT it was only four games. His career stats look like Kampman's for 2005 alone, the year before he signed.

Kampman showed much, much more in potential and actual production in his first three years than Jenkins has, yet Kampman was tendered for his 4th year and was still signed longterm for his 5th. GB should do the same thing with Jenkins.

Jenkin's value is what it was December 1. Four games didn't make it go up by a factor of three.

What the tender cost is doesn't really matter for 2007. GB can afford it. What they can't afford is having him be in 2009 what KGB is now.

Good point. If you throw the 1st on him then nobody jumps and Jenkins either takes a long term discounted deal or plays it out till he gets to UFA.

I'm sort of a risk taker, so I want to put he 2nd on him and hope teams low ball him. If they don't low ball him and they give him a butt load then you take the 2nd.

Either way works. Worste case scenario is going balls out to make sure this guy is a Packer for life. Good grief. It's Cullen Jenkins. A 2nd round pick is fair strait up and that's not taking into consideration the cap relief if he really did get an offer big enough that we won't match.

[Patler]

I'm all in favor of making him play for the tender, even the top tender. Postpone the risk for another year.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

Jenkins has had many GOOD games, but only 4 GREAT games. Those games came against 3 of the worst offenses in the league and one that wasn't trying. Yep pay the guy 30 million.

[Cheesehead Craig]

I'm with Wist and Partial on this one. Jenkins is clearly on the upswing and keeping him on the team is a necessity at this point.

His signing really poses minimal risk from a financial standpoint. Take a look at the Packers cap situation. They are swimming in cap room, not just this year, but they are set for years to come. Where is the big financial risk here? He's clearly shown he's better than KGB and if we can keep him for less than we paid KGB, it only makes sense.

Lock him up for 5-6 years, so the kid you have confidence in him, watch him succeed.

[Patler]

Lock him up for 5-6 years, so the kid you have confidence in him, watch him succeed.

How did that work with KGB? He showed much more value than Jenkins when he signed his contract.

How much would you have been willing to pay Jenkins on December 9, 2006?