Create Account

Or log in with Facebook


Log in

Or log in with Facebook

Report: Randall Cobb Gets Four-Year, $40 Million Deal from Packers

By Category

Report: Randall Cobb Gets Four-Year, $40 Million Deal from Packers

Green Bay Packers wide receiver Randall Cobb—Chris Humphreys, USA TODAY Sports.

Green Bay Packers wide receiver Randall Cobb—Chris Humphreys, USA TODAY Sports.

Just three days short of free agency, wide receiver Randall Cobb has agreed to a contract extension with the Green Bay Packers, first reported by Adam Schefter of ESPN:

Official terms of the deal were not immediately available, although Ian Rapoport of the NFL Network had more to add via social media:

After being reported that Cobb was seeking a deal worth roughly $9 million per season before the NFL Combine and $12 million per year after the Combine, Cobb settled for somewhere in between.

It would appear that Cobb accepted less money than he would made on the open market to remain with a competitive football team, and probably more importantly, quarterback Aaron Rodgers.

At 24 years old, Cobb will reach a third opportunity at free agency at a relatively young 28.

Assuming reports are accurate and Cobb receives $10 million per year, he would become the Packers' highest-paid wide receiver ahead of teammate Jordy Nelson, who agreed to a deal averaging $9.76 million last season.

Now that Cobb's deal is done, the Packers can now focus on the rest of their free agent class numbering more than a dozen players.

The Packers have exclusive signing rights until the start of the new league year on Tuesday Mar. 10 at 3:00 p.m. CT.

Next in line could be offensive lineman Bryan Bulaga, who figures to be one of the top offensive linemen on the free-agent market.

NFL Categories: 
  • Like Like
  • 0 points

Fan friendly comments only: off Comments (79) This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.

Nick Perry's picture

You were right, 2 thumbs up!

jeremyjjbrown's picture

Thank God, now get Bulaga and Williams back.

MarkinMadison's picture

Agreed on the first two, not so sure about the third. My prediction is that Williams signs elsewhere, and by the end of the season, someone will feel they overpaid him. I could be wrong, but it feels like it is time to apply the mantra of, "better a year too early than a year too late." You can't sign everyone, and I think Williams is the one not coming back.

HankScorpio's picture

Silverstein is reporting Bulaga wants $7-$8 mil per and that Jax, TB and Washington are sniffing around him. It's unclear if any of those 3 (or someone else) will meet his demands but, according to Silverstein, the Packers will not.

I don't think Bulaga is worth that price. He's had problems staying healthy. He's not elite when he is healthy. I'd probably top out somewhere around $6 mil/yr. If the market is higher for him, they can always go with Barclay. He's not as good as Bulaga but he's acceptable until they find someone better....a search which should commence immediately.

dullgeek's picture

You're probably right. But man that O-line was an incredible luxury last year. Especially in pass protection. Can Barclay or Tretter step in and be as good?

4thand1's picture

The missed playing time will keep Bulaga's contract down. Didn't think he would finish last year after the start he got.

HankScorpio's picture

He still missed a game last season when he stayed relatively healthy. I would love to bring back the o-line intact but not if it takes what I would consider a bad deal to do it. Hopefully the market is a bit less robust that Bulaga and his agent would like and he comes back.

If not, I think it puts OT squarely in the mix for that #30 pick. They should not reach for one but they shouldn't pass one up that can play, either.

HankScorpio's picture

Great so instead of keeping one of the best RT in the NFL, we should let him leave in FA and draft a rookie and hope he plays 1/2 as well as the former RT? Are you really saying that?

Did you see those words under my post?

Maybe you can try re-reading it to see what I actually wrote. Because it is nothing like the words you put in my mouth.

HankScorpio's picture

Ok, so we both agree those were your words, not mine.

I'll take the common ground on that one point and move on to more interesting exchanges.

ben's picture

So your saying we should let Bulaga leave? then we should start a rookie that sucks? Are you saying that?

oh. No your not saying that. Well I'm going to pretend you did.

And now I'm going to pretend I'm a doctor/fortuneteller and let you all know that Bulaga's injuries were flukes and nothing more.

I'm danny, come join me in my own little world. I'm not dumb, your just crazy.

barutanseijin's picture

I agree with your assessment of Bulaga. He's good most of the time, not all of the time, and he gets hurt often.

I disagree about Barclay, though. He's a backup guy who has been bad in pass protection. Barclay allowed Shea McClellan through to break Rodgers' collarbone. I wouldn't want to see him starting.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

I would be surprised if TT is balking at paying Bulaga what I view as market rate. Bulaga is in the top 25% of all tackles and top 5 at RT. He is only 25 years old. Clearly his market is at, or is north of, $7 million per year. One deals with the injury history by limiting the guaranteed money to 30% or less. Bulaga is both our starting RT and our back-up LT. Without Bulaga GB has zilch behind Bakhtiari, and precious little at RT. Barclay is a back-up, not to mention that he too is coming off a season-ending injury, and he has not been tendered by GB. I see no evidence that Tretter can play ROT.

If TT lets Bulaga walk, GB will have to tender Barclay at $1.54 million, which is $500K to $700K more than Barclay is worth. So, just pay the market rate on Bulaga so we don't have to use our 1st rd. pick on a OT and overpay Barclay.

HankScorpio's picture

"Clearly his market is at, or is north of, $7 million per year. "

If Silverstein's reporting on Bulaga is correct, that is not quite so clear to the Packers. According to Silverstein, the Packers are 'deadset' against giving him that number.

We'll see how it works out. But I have a feeling a top of the market contract for Bulaga is one the Packers would be looking to get out of in a few years.

DrealynWilliams's picture

"So, just pay the market rate on Bulaga so we don't have to use our 1st rd. pick on a OT and overpay Barclay."

What's wrong with an OL in the 1st round though?

pooch's picture

Derrek Sheroud

pooch's picture

Derrek Sheroud

DrealynWilliams's picture

*face palm*


Every late first round OL is going to be Derrek Sherrod?

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Drealyn, there is nothing wrong with an OT in the first round. I just want that pick to be BPA and not a need, and not a player that needs to start day one. I strongly advocated drafting an ROT last year, perhaps in the 3rd rd., when that draft was just loaded with ROTs, (that is why I issued a rant against the selection of Thornton and Rodgers) and this years draft also is pretty deep for ROTs, and I think if things fall right, TT should consider an OT somewhere along the line. But if he has to start, then I can't see waiting until the 3rd or 4th round (Bakhtiari's don't come around every draft). Some are pointing at Newton's signing for $5.1 million per year, but the market is the market. $8 million per yr. for Bulaga wouldn't faze me, but guarantees in excess of 30% would scare me off.

DrealynWilliams's picture

I'm not hoping for a OT in the 1st round, but if things were to play out that way and he's rated too high to pass - then fine. You can not forget priority #1.

Protect Aaron Rodgers.

ES 1957's picture

I was worried about Cobb's agent and the rumors that other teams would offer crazy money, but Thompson always seems to get the job done.

lou's picture

What everyone forgets and needs to be reminded is that the Agent works for the Player. Fortunately their are still some class players that take a broad look at their options and based on their due dilligence select an option for less money. Per most sources Davon House appears to favor a similar scenario.

ES 1957's picture

So much for Jason Lacanforas credibility.

4thand1's picture

Ted the ice man. I starting to think he likes watching fans sweat.

The TKstinator's picture

Nah. He just goes about his job. I don't think he has an ounce of "show biz" in him.

Tundraboy's picture

Another yeah, Everything is falling into place nicely thus far

Doug_In_Sandpoint's picture

We're getting the band back together. We're on a mission from God.

ballark's picture

Blue Lou-laga!!!!

slit's picture

Good move for both sides. Randall chose winning, over the money. Exactly the type of player that belongs in Green & Gold!

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Not even sure of the less money for now angle. Cobb & Co. has constructed a great storyline here. It should be worth a few commercials. I wonder just exactly how much money he left on the table? Probably never know. I am glad he is back even if I find him a bit pricey.

Nick Perry's picture

Actually I have to agree with Danny here. He'll hit FA again and be 28 years old and assuming he stays healthy, he'll have put up some pretty gaudy numbers and hopefully a SB title or 2. I think you're right about the commercials though, Cobbs a good looking well spoken marketable kid, endorsements should be coming soon, especially after they win SB 50.

slit's picture

DannyDS, although I agree with your statement above, that he will make more money in the long run, you have to factor in health. You can't just assume that he'll be healthy, not only for the entirety of the contract, but when he actually hits the free agent market again. There's absolutely no guarantee, of anything, when dealing with injuries/health in the NFL.

slit's picture

I agree that having Rodgers throwing him the ball will help with having to go over the middle. The elusiveness argument is laughable - every slot receiver in the NFL has a level of elusiveness to his game. Your argument doesn't take into account what percentage of injury is pure randomness. Not to mention, a ton of injures (ie Victor Cruz last year) are non-contact; playing in GB plays no factor into that. The bottom line is Cobb gave up 8-10 mil, which is nearly 20% of his total contract, to play in GB. Says something about the organization he chose to stay with, but even more about Cobb himself. Go Pack!

Allan Murphy's picture

good deal for both .

Big Moe's picture

So glad I logged on tonight, I'm going to sleep with a smile now, next Bulaga Go Pack!!!

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

I had Cobb at 4 yrs./$37 million with a guarantee of $18.5 million (50%). I can live with Cobb getting $3 mill more in total money and $1.5 million less in guaranteed money. Still seems high for a slot receiver.

MarkinMadison's picture

Agree that it feels a little high for a slot receiver but 1) cap just bumped up another $10M 2) there were a lot of dollars chasing a limited number of productive veteran receivers at that point and 3) go back and look at those playoff games and the last game or two of the season - when the offense looked stagnant he gave them a spark. The contract was not quite as rich as I feared.

Nick Perry's picture

Hey Reynoldo, this was from another site I visit (Sorry Brian) and thought this was a pretty interesting breakdown of Cobb's season in 2014 and where he ranked with other Wide Receivers. Damn I'm glad he's back!!!

Cobb, 24, finished tied for ninth with 91 receptions, 11th with 1,287 yards and tied for fourth with 12 touchdowns. According to’s slot-receiving numbers, his 75 receptions were 11 more than the Eagles’ Jordan Matthews, his 1,067 yards were 232 yards more than Matthews and his 12 touchdowns were almost as many as the next two players combined (Matthews, eight; Kendall Wright, five).
Among all wide receivers with at least 50 catches, Cobb ranked second with 618 yards after the catch (according to STATS) and third with an average of 6.6 YAC (according to PFF). He also ranked third with 12 receptions of 25-plus yards, tied for second with 24 third-down receptions that he turned into first downs, tied for first with 16 receptions in the red zone and first with 10 red-zone touchdowns, according to STATS. He also was a fearless blocker.

One other tidbit, Cobb has the highest Catch % for all WR since 2011, pretty impressive overall.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Thanks for the stats. It does make me feel a little better about the price tag. I've several times noted the reception percentage of various receivers and knew that Cobb was usually over 70%, which is excellent (72% last yr). Jordy's is usually 63 to 65% or so, which is also good for an outside WR.

ben's picture

The only way I like this move is if we trade the over-rated Davonte Adams. Janis and Abbrederis need to see the field this year.

I wasn't necessarily for keeping Cobb. But Jordy, Cobb, Janis, Abbrederis, Boykin, and possibly a late round draft pick is the IDEAL receiving core. Like WR, OL is very good and very deep. The Packers can afford to take "losses' at these positions and in turn make investments at positions of real need like DT & ILB. I'm a Don Barclay and he can step right in at RT. Tretter may also be able to compete there. And I know your not ready for it, but Jeremy Vujnovich could be the Packer's starting RT this year. Vujnovich is a future starting Tackle in this league. That's right, you heard me, a starting OT, and a possible franchise left tackle.

Now that we resigned cobb, I hope bulaga is gone. Either Cobb or Bulaga had to be let go to make room for maybe thee most dominant defensive lineman to ever play the game. Ndamukong Suh at DE & NT would finally fortify the year in and year out greatest weakness of the Greenbay Packer's, their defensive middle and run defense. He would also bring an attitude and killer instinct the Packers absolutely do not have.

Irish_Cheesehead's picture

You like the idea of keeping Boykin over Adams???????????

Big Moe's picture

Agreed, Adams is a 2nd rd pick and so far TT has been spot on with second rd receivers and Boykin took big steps in the wrong direction last season, I just do not see that scenario happening. And unless some magic puts Reggie Whites spirit in Suhs body thanks but no thanks let the head case be another teams problem.

ben's picture

I like the idea of keeping boykin as a #5 receiver more than Adams as a #2/#3 receiver.

By trading Davonte the Packers could use his perceived value to improve the real deficiencies that continue to hinder Packer success year after year.

Also, as is, it appears more gifted receivers in Jeff Janis and Jared Abbrederis won't get the opportunities they should.

ben's picture

No danny, you don't necessarily keep the best players period. Did we keep Greg Jennings, did the Lions keep Suh? It is a little more complex than just keep your best players period. But being the mental midget you are, I wouldn't expect you to grasp the idea. If only you tried reasoning with what comes out of your mouth you may not be as consistently wrong as you are.

And what's with you putting words in people mouths. You say Boykin isn't better than Adams, Abbrederis, or Janis like I just said he was. I just wrote "I prefer Boykin as a #5 receiver" behind Abbrederis, Janis, and if we have to keep him, Adams too.

Knock it off.

Danny, just yesterday you said, and I quote " Boykin was GREAT in '13, w/ a lot of production coming while Flynn was the QB." (and you would have said that less than 1 year ago) But because of 3 dropped passes (no not "more passes dropped than he caught") , it's now "I Can't see how anyone can think Boykin is a good WR anymore" & "Boykin needs to be done in GB."

That is crazy

ben's picture

"Jennings.........blah blah blah...."

(what's your point?)

Danny, you are comparing apples and oranges, I'm talking football. I'm talking about just because somebody is one of your best players doesn't mean you should resign them. And also just because you can resign them doesn't mean you just said "you sign your best players. PERIOD," which is incorrect. .........Just agree with me and shut-up already

Your junk about Jennings having his chance and how much adams and others are getting paid and what Det can afford is DRIBBLE.

Boykin wasn't just "very good in 13", you said "Great" with a backup at QB even.

The only real chance to step up Boykin has had was when Cobb went down and Boykin had 49 catch, 681 yard, 3 TD, averaging 14 yards/ catch. So Boykin was given the opportunity to step up and he stepped up and, according you DANNYBS was "GREAT." (& we're not talking about 5 -10 years ago, we're talking about less than a year ago)

But "what's the point in keeping a player that failed you when you gave him a chance?" ??? Because in reality when you gave him legit chance to perform under difficult circumstances he was "GREAT." Not to mention he's under contract.

"he took a HUGE, and I mean HUGE step back. He failed!" ( danny, he dropped 3 passes. THREE PASSES. 1..2..3 drops, you're a failure?)

(I scratch and shake my head, I step back from my computer)

HankScorpio's picture

No doubt that the salary cap impacts who to sign and who to not sign. It is not as easy as keeping your best players using whatever space is available at the time. Because there is always another good player that will be due for another contract soon. I'm not sure who all is FA after this upcoming season but I know Mike Daniels is one. He'll take big money to re-sign and it would hurt to see him go.

And lets not forget that the the draft that brought Cobb to GB was the first of two straight awful drafts. So the currently expiring rookie contracts are fewer in number and importance. That means bad contracts now in the large amount of cap space will be hitting their big money years when more rookie contracts with greater importance begin to expire. It's like navigating a minefield. You give yourself the best chance of doing so successfully through assigning a fiscally responsible value to each player and sticking to that. If the market is higher than your number, take your comp picks and move on.

L's picture

In this particular battle of Danny vs Ben (Keep Boykin; trade Adams): Danny is the clear winner.

Evan's picture

But, in reality, none of us are.

ballark's picture


MarkinMadison's picture

"Either Cobb or Bulaga had to be let go to make room for maybe thee most dominant defensive lineman to ever play the game. Ndamukong Suh at DE & NT..."

I scratch my head. I shake my head. I sigh. I step away from my computer.

Big Moe's picture

"I scratch my head. I shake my head. I sigh. I step away from my computer."

LOL, you are not the only one. to much beer cheese soup maybe.

4thand1's picture

'Ol crazy ass ben gets the most replies. He thinks he's a super genius GM or He's just plain crazy. I'll go with the latter. Also he just might be cow, loves the attention. Suh-long.

badaxed's picture


J0hn Denver's Gavel's picture

Ben is sooooo stupid.

ben's picture

I'm going to pretend Suh isn't one of the most dominant defensive lineman I've ever seen.

I'm going to pretend the notion he is, is crazy. So crazy in fact that I scratch and shake my head then have to step away from my computer. I'm also going to pretend that me doing so is funny in some way.

Now I'm going to wait for my homer blog buddies to pretend with me.

"Hey danny, hi 4th and 1. Remember when we had the Best Quaterback to ever play the game for over a decade and won that 1 superbowl? That was awesome, couldn't have went any better.........I lover our own little world, right danny?"

ben's picture

for future reference, Could you put quotes around what I or anybody else "is saying?"

no? you can't?

well you could if
a) you dealt in the realm of reality
b) were not a liar

4thand1's picture

"Oh benny benny benny", you should have thicker skin if you're going to make outlandish assumptions like the Packers should give up some of their own, and spread the cap to thin on a guy like Suh. Like the other day when you gave yourself credit for the Packers moving Matthews to ILB. Almost everyone was bringing it up at the time. And it wasn't breaking news how they planned on using Peppers. So, step away, pat yourself on the back, and let some of the air out of your head.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

I didn't really think much about Suh when someone suggested he might get $12 million per yr. But 6 yrs, $114 million ($19 million/yr), with $60 million guaranteed is mind boggling for a DT. Miami is not even much under the cap. Did I miss Miami cutting/trading Mike Wallace?

HankScorpio's picture

$12 mil/yr was way low-balling the market for Suh. It was unrealistic to begin with. He was always going to explode the market for DTs and approach highest paid defender in the NFL, which he ultimately became. The only flaw in his game is a penchant for letting his emotions get away from him on the field, resulting in ridiculous PFs, fines and suspensions but you knew there were teams out there thinking "We can change him". He turned down $104 mil with $58 mil in guarantees from Detroit.

As for the Dolphins, they cut Dannell Ellerbe, Brian Hartline, Phillip Wheeler and Brandon Gibson already. All 4 were in the ridiculously over-inflated speeding spree of 2013 FA period by the Dolphins. Wallace is not gone yet but he's expected to go soon.

MikeHoncho's picture

I don't understand why people are going bonkers over Janis and Abbrederis when they haven't played one stinking down in a meaningful NFL game. They are being anointed as starters and great receivers with absolutely zero NFL game experience.

DrealynWilliams's picture

First off, thank you Aaron Rodgers.

I kinda found out by Twitter. I woke up to Cobb being a trending topic on Twitter and my heart began to race. I hurried here to find out he would be staying. Whew!

I don't mind Cobb getting paid slightly more than Nelson. He's not a better overall WR, but he does more and shows up in crunch time.

ChicagoPackerFan12's picture

Bingo. He does more and last year I would even say he was more valuable.

There were times Jordy disappeared and it was Cobb coming through.

Great move for both sides and now time to get Bulaga.

DrealynWilliams's picture


Bills game?

DrealynWilliams's picture

" He (Jordy) also takes the opponents #1 CB every week, allowing Cobb to get a more favorable matchup."

Not always true. But I agree -- to a degree.

If every team the Packers played against had a Revis and a Browner they'd keep Revis on Cobb and Browner on Nelson. Unless, of course - Cobb is coming out of the backfield.

Devin Tubania's picture

how much cap space do we have now?

PackerAaron's picture

No way of really knowing until contract details come out. There are all sorts of ways it could be structured which would determine the size of the cap hit.

4thand1's picture

The cap hit won't be to significant for a player of Cobb's ability.

Thegreatreynoldo's picture

Sometimes yes, sometimes no, Danny. Nelson's cap hit last year was $5.925 million and this year it is only $4.6 million. Goes up to $8.8 in 2016, up to $11.55 in 2017. The uptick in 2014 was due to the prorated signing bonus from his earlier deal having to be added to the extension. Shields' cap hits were $5.56 (2014), $9.125 (2015), $12.125 million for 2016 and again in 2017.

OTOH, Rodgers, CM3, Sitton and Lang for example all have cap numbers that stay relatively even. Cobb's cap hit for 2015 could be as low as roughly $4.5 million, or it could be front loaded and be much higher.

Irish_Cheesehead's picture

Great news! I really thought Cobb was gone.

Hegatron's picture

Mike Florio can eat it as well. He was adamant all week that Cobb would leave. I will say, that PFT TV show has been more informative than NFL network lately. Same "Breaking News" for 8 hours..

FITZCORE1252's picture

Agreed. As much as i dislike Florio, I'll take PFT over NFLTA any day. It's almost unbearable to watch. It's like they think they can prop any washed up, bumbling, ex player on their and we're just gonna eat it up. F that.

Oh, and welcome back Randall!! Woot

HankScorpio's picture

Tolzien is signed for 1 yr, $1.35 mil according to @PackerReporter on twitter.

Also Suh is going to Miami for an absolutely monstrous deal according to Chris Mortensen. Assuming the deal below is 7 yr, that is $16.3 mil/yr

@mortreport: Ndamukong Suh will sign w/Dolphins Tues. parameters around $114 million and $60 million guaranteed.

HankScorpio's picture

Incorrect assumption on the length of Suh's is 6 yrs, not 7 yr. He'll be the highest paid defender in the NFL, ahead of JJ Watt. Not really hard to see that one coming. Talent like his does not hit unrestricted FA all that often.

Of course, the Dolphins were not mentioned among his suitors that often. They cleared away the massive over-spending of the 2013 FA season to make the room for Suh. I wonder if they'll want out of this deal by 2017.

Nick Perry's picture

Miami is a good place for Suh. Now we only have to worry about our players body parts being stomped on or kicked every 4 years. If Fairly leaves that leaves the Lions thin in the middle of that defense on the DL.

HankScorpio's picture

Yeah, it's always nice to see a talented NFC North rival move to the AFC.

I have to think the Lions will push hard to retain Fairly now. Losing both of the best DT duo in the game in one offseason is a killer blow to a defense that finally played well after sucking for so many year. I hope they push so hard they overpay by a lot. Fairly was definitely Robin to Suh's Batman.

egbertsouse's picture

It is being reported that the Vikings are interested in AJ Hawk. Raise your hand if you didn't see this coming.....

HankScorpio's picture

The path of exiting the NFL from Green Bay does seem to travel through Minneapolis quite a bit.

ballark's picture

Even though we'll still do it, it's pretty pointless to compare the Cobb and Nelson contracts. The salary cap went up, and the salaries go up every year. Cobb is 24, so that gets factored, I'm sure. To quote the Dude there's, you know, a lotta ins, lotta outs, lotta what-have-you's.

DrealynWilliams's picture

"The Chargers, Packers and Patriots are considered contenders for Harvin. " - CBS

Uhhh, what is this nonsense they speak of?

Imma Fubared's picture

First I'm not buying it. Teams interested in Cobb, if any would have talked only ball park numbers with him and not made him a hard offer. Why? Do you pay for a car based on the sticker or do you try and get it at your price, a price your comfortable with?
Most teams would have 'inkled' on the possible money not made an absoluted hard here's what we will give you to come here.
No he fandangled Ted into another 1.5 million more per year than was offered. It was always about da mooney and not loyalty to packer fans.

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



"The Bears still suck!"
"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."