Content
X

Create Account

Or log in with Facebook

X

Log in

Or log in with Facebook

Green and Bold: Checking on the Cap

By Category

Green and Bold: Checking on the Cap

512 games later, another NFL season is in the books and, once again, we find ourselves bracing for free agency.

For some teams, this is like Christmas Day, bringing new talent and promises of a competitive season. For the Packers, it's all about managing expectations and, usually, biding time until the NFL Draft. 

Per Spotrac, the Packers currently have the 12th most cap space in the league ahead of free agency, with $43.5 million to play with. This is due in part to their recent decision to release veteran cornerback Sam Shields, wiping a salary of $8 million off the books, though they'll still carry a cap charge of $3.125 million from his signing bonus. 

Green Bay has plenty of its own players set to become unrestricted free agents in March. The following is a list of them, as well as their average salary in 2016. Players who have already been released, such as Shields and James Starks, are not included. 

Player Position 2016 Avg. Salary
Julius Peppers OLB $8,666,667
T.J. Lang G $5,200,000
Nick Perry OLB $5,050,000
Jared Cook TE $2,750,000
Datone Jones OLB $1,929,147
Brett Goode LS $885,000
Eddie Lacy RB $848,103
Christine Michael RB $725,000
Don Barclay T $700,000
J.C. Tretter C $643,977
Micah Hyde DB $584,527

 

Re-Signing Priorities

Nick Perry

Perry didn't do enough for the Packers to execute the fifth-year option on his rookie contract, instead signing an additional one-year, $5,050,000 prove-it deal. 

And did he ever prove it. The former first-round pick finally lived up to his billing, emerging as the team's top pass-rusher in 2016 with 11 sacks and an interception in the regular season. 

Of course, now the problem for Ted Thompson and Russ Ball is that Perry is going to be looking for his big-money contract, which he's certainly earned. And given Peppers' status as a UFA as well as his age, as well as the fact that Clay Matthews continues to struggle with injuries and Datone Jones is also set to hit the market, the strength would seem to fall on Perry's side of the negotiating table. 

However, Thompson isn't known for overpaying no matter the exigency at the position. So what do the Packers do? It's unfathomable that they would let such a pass-rushing stud walk, especially given their struggles in that area this season. But just how much will Perry's reps be demanding? 

Spotrac uses comparative data from other players at Perry's position who have played for a similar amount of time, as well as statistical analysis, to calculate his approximate market value, which comes out to an $8.5 million average salary. Is a five-year, $42 million contract for Perry out of the question for Thompson and Ball, especially when you consider Perry's career as a whole rather than merely the 2016 season? We'll find out soon, but it's clear that the Packers would be worse off without him. And no one wants to see another Casey Hayward situation. 

 

Jared Cook

Cook has been waiting his whole career to play with a quarterback like Aaron Rodgers, and when he got healthy in 2016, he showed us just what he can do in an offense of this caliber. 

The Packers, meanwhile, have been missing an athletic pass-catcher to threaten the seam and move the chains, and at least this season, Cook filled that role nicely. 

This is an instance where Thompson's draft-and-develop strategy could afford a little bending.

This year's draft class is deep at tight end, from the top-billed prospects such as Alabama's O.J. Howard to mid-round players like Michigan's Jake Butt. But the Packers arguably have bigger needs that could use addressing in the early rounds. They could select a tight end in Rounds 3-5, but that would put a lot on Richard Rodgers' shoulders in 2017 and, given a larger sample size, it now seems that Rodgers is best used as a red-zone threat. Cook carried the load in terms of moving the chains, and the Packers offense could benefit from him being allowed to do the same in 2017.

Cook need not sign a five-year deal, but having him around for another two years could certainly help the Packers' Super Bowl aspirations. Spotrac puts his market value around $3.4 million per year; a two-year, $7 million contract seems reasonable given his production this year. 

 

Micah Hyde 

In 2016, Hyde proved himself to be the Packers' most versatile defender. Hyde played each position in the secondary as the Packers continued to lose cornerbacks to injury, despite having not played on the perimeter in years and only sparingly in the slot. 

Hyde finished the regular season with nine passes defensed, three interceptions and a sack, and added three passes defensed, an interception, and a sack in the playoffs. 

Now that Hyde's rookie contract is expiring, the Packers may find themselves with less leverage given the events of the past season. Hyde proved his worth and effectiveness in this system. Green Bay may be able to bank on the fact that other teams won't think Hyde's jack-of-all-trades skills translate to their schemes, but nevertheless the defensive back is in a more competitive position now. Hyde has never earned an average salary of more than $1 million; now he would be within his rights to expect a new deal averaging $5 million or more. 

 

T.J. Lang 

Does Lang count as a re-signing priority? There's no denying that, when healthy, he's one of the best guards in the league. In fact, Lang allowed just one sack throughout the entire 2016 season, per the Washington Post

However, the Packers have been mum on a new deal, as Lang revealed in an interview on SiriusXM NFL Radio on Monday:

Lang's recent hip surgery could give some teams pause, but his track record speaks for itself. The veteran guard is coming off his first Pro Bowl and while he and his reps may not see the full return on a contract that his market value suggests ($8.4 million annually, per Spotrac), it's likely some team out there is willing to pay more than the Packers, especially given how many other players the Packers have hitting unrestricted free agency this spring. 

NFL Categories: 
  • Like Like
  • 0 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (50) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

jeremyjjbrown's picture

Your probably right that Perry is going to get about 8 million a year. But I look for Thompson to try to do one one of those 3 year deals and amybe load it with some escalators. I admit that I worry about motivy a little bit with Perry. I think he has the skills and strength.

Jared Cook 2 years 7 million. Yes please.

I like Micah Hyde in the Curl to Flat roll but I wouldn't pay 5 million for that. I'd rather have someone else for that money.

Razer's picture

... Jared Cook 2 years 7 million. Yes please...

Who wouldn't like this deal? Jared Cook. He is looking for a retirement contract. A two year deal takes him to 32 and burns two of his prime years on the cheap.

Yes please but don't hold your breath.

Barfarn's picture

Perry @ 8.5M per might be pie in the sky thinking. 2 yrs ago Bears signed McPhee coming off no starts and 2 and 7.5 sacks in ’13 and ’14 respectively for 7.75M per; the cap is now 18% higher so that adjusts to 9.1M per. If a 4-3 team wants to pay a DE, Vernon coming off 11.5, 6.5 and 7.5 sacks from 2013-2015 respectively got 17M per. Though these players showed no indication they’re made of glass; still, IMHO, Perry’s gonna get an offer north of 10M per.

Strategy [not so great] Poem: Let’s grab the 3rd round comp pick, then sign Connor Barwin for five or six.

jeremyjjbrown's picture

Yeah you might be right.

Personally, if I was Perry or Jones I would move on unless the Packers offered really good money.

dobber's picture

If they don't lock up Perry prior to the opening of FA, he's not coming back. The market will drive him out of TTs price range. If that's the case, more power to him, but it creates an even bigger hole in the OLB rotation than what the Packers currently have. And, no, Taryn, Kyler Fackrell isn't going to be the player that fills that role.

I think Jones is back and fairly cheaply (relatively speaking). I don't anticipate much of a market for him and the Packers need some playable bodies at OLB. He's Mike Neal, only younger and without the PED controversy.

jeremyjjbrown's picture

Now, that you say it it wouldn't surprise me to see Perry walk and Jones resigned. I'm not arguing for it but that would be a TT move.

dobber's picture

I really believe that if Perry hits the market, he's a goner. I think Jones's best suitor will likely be the Packers.

On the other hand, I think the Packers are going to let Lang hit the market and let the market set his value.

Turophile's picture

Regarding the 'prove it' deal with Perry

Prove it deals are just another way of saying lowball offer.

If a team is not certain about the financial worth of keeping a player, then make a substantial part of the salary tied to reaching targets. In reality, this is also a prove it deal, but the choice of how you choose to represent that, makes a big difference.

Call the deal incentive laden, and talk up how the player can be well paid, if he meets several of the stated incentives. You might think how things are described makes little difference in the real world. If you think that, never try to be a salesman.

Nick Perry's picture

T.J. Lang for $8.4 million a year? I love Lang but that's a lot of money for a 29 year old player coming off surgery. Letting Tretter AND Lang walk would be dangerous IMO. Lang not having any talks yet doesn't sound very positive either.

Signing Cook is a no-brainer IMO. But sign him to a 2 or 3 year deal if possible and draft either Hodges, Everett, Leggett or even Butt to name a few. You might be able to get one of those guys in the 4th round or 3rd round for sure. Hodges looks intriguing at 6'6" or 6'7" depending where you look. Give the "New Guy" time to learn and not sacrifice anything while they learn. Cook brought back an element to the offense the Packers haven't had since Finley. It would be absolutely moronic to let that go. Plus Cook WANTS to be in GB.

Perry and Hyde are the only 2 players I'd like to see GB try and keep on Defense. Hyde is a player. He may not be "Great" at any one thing but he's "Good" at many things, something this defense sorely needs.

Signing Perry would be priority #1 for the Packers. Perry hasn't said a word about wanting to come back to GB and I suppose the doesn't mean anything, still it's something I would have liked to hear. A team that runs a 4-3 defense might drive up the price on Perry, like his hometown Detroit Lions for example. (ERRRRR) Perry just might want to go back to playing DE and he'd make a damn good one too. If the Packers could get him for $8.5 Million a year I say jump.

That would leave enough space for a few decent additions in Free Agency. Thompson can't for a second think he can sign a few of his players like the ones listed and then "Fill Out" the rest of the needs through the draft. Could the Packers afford say Mychal Kendricks and Gilmore for example? If so and they were able to sign Perry, Hyde, Cook, and either Lang (Preferred) or Tretter, hit on the first 3 or 4 picks and actually get help from them their rookie seasons, I have no doubt it would be enough.

jeremyjjbrown's picture

When is the last time they hit on their first 3 picks? I think that's hard for any team. only about 25% of those rookies pan out.

Nick Perry's picture

True but you can't blame me for wishful thinking. I'd actually settle for a starter in the first round and a few players who are situational players their rookie seasons in the 2nd and 3rd.

For example, the Packers might be able to draft a pass rusher or CB in round one who could contribute early and often, hopefully start!

Tundraboy's picture

NP. Throw in a couple of starting impact free agents, and you have a deal.

Bert's picture

Please Ted. Forget our immediate needs and just draft BPA! Drafting for need just isn't cutting it. The odds of getting an immediate (2017) impact pass rusher or CB at pick #29 are very slim. Been there done that. Just draft a guy with a high ceiling and build a quality roster. That's the intent of draft-and-develop which Ted started to stray from in 2011 and has lived to regret it.

dobber's picture

I flinch at $8.4M for Lang, too. There are positions that TT is willing to pay for, and positions he's not. Until Sitton/Lang, G was a rotating door position for the Packers in recent years. I would argue that Josh Sitton's situation--where TT/MM seemed more than willing to roll with a lesser player and didn't get burned--show that G is going to be a position where he won't pony up that kind of money. Would love to have Lang back on a team-friendly deal, but I don't see that in the cards...the fact that all has been cold on the Packers front is not, historically, a good sign for the player.

You point to Tretter later on in your post. I think he should be allowed to walk. I belong to the camp that doesn't see him as a G, and based on his injury track record, I only really like him back as a replacement for Barclay. I don't think he's going to accept that when he might be one of the top C prospects in FA. He's history, too.

Nick Perry's picture

I agree with you on Tretter about signing elsewhere as a Center. He's better than a lot of Centers in the NFL as long as he's healthy. 2 injuries where he lost all of one season and several last season might keep the cost down.

I'm curious why you don't think he'd make a good Guard? Too light? The guy is athletic as heck. Lang and Tretter walking really creates a lack of depth big time on the O-Line.

CB, OLB, OL, & RB, and even TE are all positions the Packers need help. CB and OLB they really need it. This is another reason I'd like to see Ted at least be somewhat active in FA. If he signs a few players that fill the needs maybe he gets back to drafting the BPA again. I know he says that's what he's doing, but I think many of the picks, especially the last few drafts in early rounds he's drafted for need, not necessarily the BPA.

dobber's picture

Yeah, I just don't see Tretter as stout enough to hold up to big DTs. At least at C, he's frequently going to get help. That and his injury history leads me to see him as being a utility player or a C. I agree: no Lang or Tretter makes for a tough situation on the OL, but some have speculated that Murphy could fill that role. Whatever the case, they're going to have to draft an OL.

croatpackfan's picture

If Lang and Tretter go, Bears OL - RT, Lang, Tretter, Sitton, LT...

cuervo's picture

Hyde for 5 mio/year.....you're nuts, no way, no how.

Lang, 8.5mio....again...no way, sorry to say.

Perry.....I'm just not sure about paying a lot of money to a guy who's had one decent year out of 5....maybe we have to, but I'd rather see them pay someone like Melvin Ingram 12 or 13 million... huge upgrade over anyone we've had on defense in the last several years. (assuming he does indeed hit free agency)

Pass rush will be easier to improve than our conerback situation in free agency....IF TT does anything.

Razer's picture

The hard part about our free agents is that you are pressed to find a true star in the mix. If we were talking about Jordy Nelson or Bakhtiari, these are no-brainer resignings. Too be fair some of our current players are good but do they warrant 5 year deals in the $40 million range.

I like TJ Lang, and he is good, but foot and hip surgery this off season. He may not even be ready for August. How many years can you give him - three?

Nick Perry played well but he was hurt AGAIN and it was one year in five. Unfortunately, he has the Packers over a barrel. Between Perry and Hyde you are forced to pay average players good money because that is all you have after five years of rebuilding this defense.

Even Jared Cook presents this dilemma. He is looking for his sunset contract. Are we going to commit 4 years on a good TE who had trouble staying healthy.

Lot of average guys, who if they walked would leave holes but how long until we were back up to average. Weigh this against getting stuck with another multi-year, multi-million dollar contract for a turnover part of your roster.

Razer's picture

Funny how few are really talking about Eddie Lacy. RB is a position of need yet we have discounted Lacy's value as a "must return" resigning. No doubt he could help our run game but there appears to be a mistrust of his motivation and durability. I would hate to have the Bears running Lacy at us as punishment. Then again, I might smile if he was eating up hot dogs and 4-5 million on someone else's roster. Tough call.

Tarynfor12's picture

" The hard part about our free agents is that you are pressed to find a true star in the mix."

Bingo!!!!....and Perry is the first to be checked off as not a true star. He is a product of others and doesn't change the game. His play doesn't get you more wins than any other grade C player which makes him replaceable and these guys don't get the millions some preach he deserves.

Razer's picture

... any other grade C player which makes him replaceable and these guys don't get the millions some preach he deserves....

And therein lies the problem. Let our average guy walk and pay someone else's average guy FA money, retrain them and hope that you get better results. Or, you rely on the draft and hope that you don't restock with too many more average talent. Truly a damned if you do - damned if you don't scenario.

dobber's picture

The sad part is, when I repeatedly hit the "thumbs up" it turns off the old one...

jeremyjjbrown's picture

"pay someone else's average guy FA money, retrain them and hope that you get better results."

It's worse, because they don't do that. Perry's Agent gets to say pay me or I'll leave and you know you won't sign someone so you'll be further constrained in the draft, or be left with UDFA rookies in starting roles. If I was Perry's Agent I'd say 5 years 50 millions (high guarantees) or hit the market with my player who told you he didn't want you to draft him and only take 110% of Perry's best offer from you afterwards. Have fun stopping the run with Fackrell as your starter.

Razer's picture

Yes the leverage is with Nick Perry and yes most in the business know that Green Bay doesn't want to play in the FA market. Given our tendencies and philosophies, we are most likely looking for refills in the draft and UDFAs.

... Have fun stopping the run with Fackrell as your starter...

Yeah, I think that Fackrell and Elliot setting the edge will give us a whole new level of concern on next year's defense.

dobber's picture

This is my frustration...you keep calling Perry a grade C player. He's NOT a grade C player. You keep saying his stats were a product of other players doing his dirty work...that's clearly not the case based on the fact that we all have observed and agree that the key players around him (Matthews and Peppers) have declined in the last couple years while Perry's numbers have not: they've moved up.

He's not a grade C player...note that not I, and not anyone else (except maybe Michelle), have labeled him a "star"
He plays a premium position and IS better than average.
He's not going to get paid by the Packers or anyone else as a grade C player.
Bottom line: you just don't like Nick Perry...the player, not the fellow CHTV poster. And that's fine. But your dislike for him has killed your objectivity.

Tarynfor12's picture

I haven't lost objectivity and I again say, as have since talking Fackrell predraft, that Fackrell is exactly the guy that can hold the door open so Perry can walk or run out of GB as quickly as possible. Do we still need to another outside linebacker this draft ..yes. Along with an inside linebacker and a corner that isn't a safety convert.
The objectivity is lost by some here and those are same that have convinced themselves to keep Perry as much as I have to let him go. One will be correct and I believe Perry's history is on my side as a whole in the thinking.

croatpackfan's picture

Well, that is why I'm waiting to see what objective person will say about every FA player from Packers roster - that person is TT...

J0hn Denver's Gavel's picture

"that Fackrell is exactly the guy that can hold the door open so Perry can walk or run out of GB as quickly as possible." - Taryn

Fackrell is WAY underweight. Just picture Mathews flying past the tackle on the other side, losing contain, like he does. Then look to the other side, Fackrell CANNOT hold contain, he might be tall, but he weighs NOTHING right now. He can pass rush a bit, but contain? I guess the often flagged "Dial-tone" Jones will stop the outside run and QB option as well as Perry has proven to? Truth is, with the roster, as is, we desperately need to resign Perry. We also need old man Fackrell to bulk up, if possible.

Tundraboy's picture

Perfectly stated. Perfectly. Except for Daniels this D has almost no toughness Except for Perry, there is nobody else who can rush and stop the run.

jeremyjjbrown's picture

Good agents must love having Packers FAs as clients.

Spock's picture

Razer,
I agree with just about everything in your post except this: "Even Jared Cook presents this dilemma. He is looking for his sunset contract. Are we going to commit 4 years on a good TE who had trouble staying healthy." Jared Cook does NOT have a history of being injured (in fact quite the opposite). Last year was the first real season he missed any amount of time! TT originally offered Cook a two year deal, but Cook wanted only one (I believe to see how well the "fit" would be for him in Green Bay). I think Cook would be a fairly safe bet on the "injury history" front. Doesn't mean he couldn't have future injuries, but odds are he would be healthy based on his past seasons with multiple teams.
Thanks.

dobber's picture

As I understood, Cook wanted a 1-yr deal so he could still parlay a big season with #12 into a bigger, long-term contract. After 2 years, he'd be 30 and played two seasons at the Packer-bargain rate. I think coaches and GMs start to look at players differently at the big 3-0, and he wanted to have his next chance to test the market when the first digit in his age was still a 2.

Savage57's picture

The Packers should sign their guys early.

The Packers should let the market set the price.

The bitch about free agency is neither course is ever the right one or the wrong one. Ted gets paid a lot of money to basically be a good guesser, but in the end they're still guesses. For every Finley and the cash fire he was, there's a Bahktiari to balance it out.

The only thing I know with any certainty is that I'd turn into a raging drunk for about 3 months a year during free agency and the draft if I was him and had to make these decisions.

GRB1531's picture

If TT doesn't pick up the phone and get a legitimate pass rusher it will be 2016 all over again Jones had 17 solo and I sack, Three more than Elliott who played a lot less snaps. Get rid of some of the deadwood and let Lowry and Clark get more reps. They are both young and have had time to improve their game.

Razer's picture

...it will be 2016 all over again Jones had 17 solo and I sack, Three more than Elliott who played a lot less snaps...

Hard to argue with this. So do we resign ourselves to another year of mid-level talent development and another year of defensive struggle? Jayrone Elliot has had time to develop yet he is more special teams than base/sub defense. There must be a reason considering that our defense is weak. All this discussion points us back to a repeat of defense for the past 5 years.

Since '61's picture

Out of the list presented in the article, I would resign Lang, Perry, Cook, Goode, and Hyde. Then try to resign Tretter for the right price. Keep the offense as intact as possible. First we need Cook at TE, otherwise we're back to R. Rodgers and a rookie at that position. Lang keeps us solid at guard and he can backup Center assuming that we finally chuck Barclay and lose Tretter to FA. Goode because we never hear his name called. Hyde because we need some experience in our DB and he shows up and make plays and can reliably return punts. Tretter because he can play multiple positions on the OL. Perry is a tough call for me. I like the idea of retaining his experience and he is currently our only semblance of a pass rush. However, price and length of contract are big ??? Suppose we lock him up for 3-4 seasons and he's back to being injured every season. Or his productivity returns to the mediocre levels of the past? I'd go with an incentive heavy contract and keep the guaranteed money as low as possible. With Sitton already in Chicago we could see him, Lang and Lacy all playing there in 2017. That could make for an alternate universe becoming a reality. Thanks, Since '61

mrtundra's picture

...it will be 2016 all over again Jones had 17 solo and I sack, Three more than Elliott who played a lot less snaps...

Whenever Elliott was on the field he made something happen. He never got the reps that Martinez, Jones or even Fackrell got. I'd like to see him back with a bigger role on Defense. Relegating him to play mostly Special Teams is a waste, IMO.

jeremyjjbrown's picture

The problem with Elliot is he sucks against the run.

dobber's picture

Two issues...
You're right: he's undisciplined. He even admits that he freelances and when he does he gets caught. Play within the system and he might be just fine.
He's also had injury issues. If you're a role player looking for a chance or to carve out a niche, you've got to be available. He's struggled there, too.

J0hn Denver's Gavel's picture

Bingo. If he sees the field, it should be on 3rd down only. Not stout or spot disciplined nearly enough to see the field on D until he proves so. Also, come to TC HEAVIER this year, Elliot, not lighter, like last year.

Lphill's picture

Cook, Lacy, Lang , Tretter are my picks to re-sign , Goode will probably take whatever is offered. I would not overpay for Hyde either.

ironman3169's picture

Did anyone else notice when Clay was out with a hamstring injury that Perry's production kind of disappeared? It was around mid season. Without someone else serious on the other side, he is not effective and therefore definitely not worth serious money.

Pack88's picture

One thing there are only 256 regular season games (32 teams *16/2=256) but I do agree about Perry, Hyde, Cook and Lang. I think Datone Julius and JC find other homes or go home!

MarkinMadison's picture

Sign Cook. Period. 2 years for $7M is way too low. He'll want at least 3, probably 4 years.

Let the market set the price for Lacy, Lang and Tretter.

Goode will be back.

I noticed that too Ironman, but is the same not true for most pass rushers? You need a guy on the other end of the donkey. And it does no good to go out and sign a pass rusher to replace Peppers if you let Perry walk. Perry is a real enigma. I don't envy TT having to make that decision.

porupack's picture

Seeing how many posters seem willing to let a lot of packer FA walk, I have to wonder whether there is a real belief in the 'draft and develop'. While DJones and NPerry aren't stars, and TLang might be pricey...I would rather bet on them improving than I would believe a rookie coming in is going to be a better replacement. Especially for all the impatient folks who say we're running out of ARogers best years. Keep as many FA as possible where you 1) need veteran smarts, 2) mature physical tools especially on the line; DJones, NPerry, TLang, JTretter, JCook and MHyde are worth keeping and even if they don't come cheap.

Draft and Develop, right?

Please draft a high pick for some offense: WR or TE in first, an RB in 4th

Then bunch of CBs, ILBs and OLBs often.

porupack's picture

Seeing how many posters seem willing to let a lot of packer FA walk, I have to wonder whether there is a real belief in the 'draft and develop'. While DJones and NPerry aren't stars, and TLang might be pricey...I would rather bet on them improving than I would believe a rookie coming in is going to be a better replacement. Especially for all the impatient folks who say we're running out of ARogers best years. Keep as many FA as possible where you 1) need veteran smarts, 2) mature physical tools especially on the line; DJones, NPerry, TLang, JTretter, JCook and MHyde are worth keeping and even if they don't come cheap.

Draft and Develop, right?

Please draft a high pick for some offense: WR or TE in first, an RB in 4th

Then bunch of CBs, ILBs and OLBs often.

stockholder's picture

I would like Cook Signed. But at 8 mil. Good Bye. This draft is deep with TEs. I see at least 2 on everyones draft for the Packers. If it came down to 5 mi. l I'd even let Cook Walk. (The WRs.& Rodgers can take the load.) Lang - I'd let him walk at 5 mil. too. These guys are 30 plus. I would sign Jones over Perry. He's cost friendly. How can you pay any of these guys the money if you wouldn't franchise them? Take the bargains here. Sign Tretter, Hyde, Jones. Micheal ,and I would go with Lacy instead of signing Lang. I think the packers should not draft a RB in the first 2 rounds. Id trade up both 1 and 2. Then I would take Howard TE in the first and Jackson cb second. This saves money and they get younger. And you can never have enough speed. Tramon Williams was drafted late, but was one of the fastest guys on the team. The money that that Packers will be spending, are for guys that only will get slower. My wants are for faster guys, especially seeing what the Atlanta Falcons did.

croatpackfan's picture

With your figures Michelle, I got 25 mil for suggested signing. That leave only 18 mil to sign draft class and some other FA, or UDFA. And to carry some money, for safety reasons, to 2017 season...
It will be tricky!

al bundy's picture

All of you made great points. The prblem, then like years past, ted does nothing like what was discussed here? I'v called it cheap ball mentality over the years. If that holds true this may be the outcome: bye to datone and perry and hyde. Possibly cook bolts for the big bucks as wel?
Lacy accepts a lo ball offer, peppers stays too same reason. Datone may not find interest and accepts scraps. Ted signs one of the better o linemen to a decent deal and maybe a second lo ball. Everything else draft and free agent wise is anyones guess. Better get some corner depth and running backs. Pass rush to and liside lbs.

Log in to comment, upload your game day photos and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.

Or log in with Facebook

 
 
 

Quote

"A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall. "
"I firmly believe that any man’s finest hour, the greatest fulfillment of all that he holds dear, is that moment when he has worked his heart out in a good cause and lies exhausted on the field of battle – victorious."
"The Bears still suck!"