Packers 2020 team discussion

[HiAndTight]

I'm glad signing Jones isn't even an option. Removes the temptation to sign him if they had the cap space. RB is the easiest position to replace, and replace immediately. If they did have space, I would much rather use it on defense.

 

 

If signing Jones wasn't an option, the Packers likely wouldn't have spent most of the season negotiating with him.

 

I'm not sure that's a complete picture. As recently as a month ago, reports were that the Packers intended to let him walk. Around the time he changed agents a couple of weeks ago, there were report that the two sides had discussions, but that talks were stalled. For all we know, the discussions were, 'hey, would you re-sign a 2-year, back-loaded deal' and Jones said no way.

 

It's more of a complete picture than saying "signing Jones isn't even an option."

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

 

I don't think this is true. Williams was largely considered the more polished pass catcher coming out of college. Jones didn't do much receiving, and that part of his game was considered a work in progress. Williams was quite polished as a receiver coming out.

 

 

Are you sure you don't have that backward? Jones was a more established receiver and thought of as a 3rd down back...and used much more in the passing game than Williams. He had 30 receptions, 9 in 2 games as a redshirt Jr and then 28 as Sr.

 

Williams was more of a check-down guy and had 15 catches his final two years at BYU(though he was used more in that role early on).

 

I remember the main question about Jones was if he could be an every-down back or if he was more of a 3rd down back. I don't recall any questions about his receiving ability.

 

Williams got more run as a rookie, especially as a 3rd down back, due to his receiving prowess, along with his blitz pickup ability. He was definitely considered the better receiver of the two after their rookie season. Jones has improved greatly in that department, while Williams has always been a fine receiver.

[HiAndTight]

 

I don't think this is true. Williams was largely considered the more polished pass catcher coming out of college. Jones didn't do much receiving, and that part of his game was considered a work in progress. Williams was quite polished as a receiver coming out.

 

 

Are you sure you don't have that backward? Jones was a more established receiver and thought of as a 3rd down back...and used much more in the passing game than Williams. He had 30 receptions, 9 in 2 games as a redshirt Jr and then 28 as Sr.

 

Williams was more of a check-down guy and had 15 catches his final two years at BYU(though he was used more in that role early on).

 

I remember the main question about Jones was if he could be an every-down back or if he was more of a 3rd down back. I don't recall any questions about his receiving ability.

 

Williams got more run as a rookie, especially as a 3rd down back, due to his receiving prowess, along with his blitz pickup ability. He was definitely considered the better receiver of the two after their rookie season. Jones has improved greatly in that department, while Williams has always been a fine receiver.

 

 

I think we're talking about slightly different things. I was talking about their profiles coming out of college, not after a year in the NFL.

 

Williams was definitely very solid(especially for a young player) right out of the gate picking up the blitz...and he's gotten even better and that got him on the field. Jones was always productive, but McCarthy didn't seem to stick with him long. I don't recall there being questions about Jones ability to catch the ball at that point, but I'll take your word for it. But the scouting reports I can find and remember talk about Williams being a two-down back and Jones being a 3rd down back type.

 

While he can develop into a pass-catching back, teams will likely have their doubts as he did little of it in college. His pass-blocking was adequate, but not a strength. He attacks defenders and has good vision, but his technique will need to be improved. He may be viewed as a two-down power back and part of an NFL committee.

 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2706649-jamaal-williams-nfl-draft-2017-scouting-report-for-green-bay-packers-pick

 

One of the lesser-known strengths of Jones’ game is his receiving. He adjusts to the ball in the air with the skill of a wide receiver. He tracks the ball over his shoulder on the run and can turn and face the quarterback at the end of a vertical route to win the ball over coverage with a

leaping effort.

 

https://mattwaldmanrsp.com/2018/11/15/matt-waldmans-rsp-nfl-draft-scouting-report-rb-aaron-jones-packers/

[PeaveyFury]

It's more of a complete picture than saying "signing Jones isn't even an option."

 

From a salary cap standpoint, you may be incorrect.

[HiAndTight]

It's more of a complete picture than saying "signing Jones isn't even an option."

 

From a salary cap standpoint, you may be incorrect.

 

 

C'mon...we both know this isn't true.

[PeaveyFury]

It's more of a complete picture than saying "signing Jones isn't even an option."

 

From a salary cap standpoint, you may be incorrect.

 

 

C'mon...we both know this isn't true.

 

?? Looking at their cap situation, I'm not sure how the opposite can be stated with any degree of certainty. If you've figured out a way to navigate the cap for 2021 in a way that lets them bring Jones back, I'd love to see your math.

[Fear The Chorizo]

The reason many are projecting around a $175M cap for 2021 is that the current CBA prevents it from going even lower based on actual revenue shortfalls the pandemic has caused - so $175M is basically the lowest it could drop for next year. Based on 2020 league revenue shortfalls even with TV money, that's where it's going to be based on the current CBA for 2021. Once things hopefully normalize a bit next year and revenues get back to where things were, the cap isn't going to just rocket back up by $30-50M dollars in 2022 and beyond like 2020 never happened. There will be a bit of a lag in how quickly it rebounds even if revenues surge - just like dropping to $175M is sort of splitting the difference between where it would go if it's entirely revenue-based year over year.

 

IMO the league pushing forward to adding a 17th game for the 2021 season is financial insurance to avoid a 2022 cap drop that's untenable for how NFL contracts and rosters are currently constructed. A 2022 cap between $150-$160M would be a disaster for the league - I think a 17th regular season game does alot to prevent that from being a possibility even if gameday revenues are severely curtailed again next season.

[homer]

Packers claimed Snacks Harrison off waivers.

[adambr2]

Packers claimed Snacks Harrison off waivers.

 

He said he had no interest in being claimed off waivers, so we'll see where this goes. You would think we had spoken to his camp before making this move but we'll find out soon.

[PeaveyFury]

This has the potential to be a nothingburger move or a really nice get. Not sure which.

[pacopete4]

I almost don’t want him.

[adambr2]

I almost don’t want him.

 

It's hard to know what to think yet. This guy spurned us multiple times. What was the reasoning? Just that Seattle was a better fit at the time, or he has no interest in being here?

 

If its the former and he's excited to be a part of trying to win a championship, welcome to Green Bay. If it's the latter, I don't want him.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

I almost don’t want him.

 

It's hard to know what to think yet. This guy spurned us multiple times. What was the reasoning? Just that Seattle was a better fit at the time, or he has no interest in being here?

 

If its the former and he's excited to be a part of trying to win a championship, welcome to Green Bay. If it's the latter, I don't want him.

 

He seems to be indicating via Twitter that he wanted to go to Green Bay, so he's cool with the waiver claim.

[PeaveyFury]

I almost don’t want him.

 

It's hard to know what to think yet. This guy spurned us multiple times. What was the reasoning? Just that Seattle was a better fit at the time, or he has no interest in being here?

 

If its the former and he's excited to be a part of trying to win a championship, welcome to Green Bay. If it's the latter, I don't want him.

 

You'd have to think that at his age there'd HAVE to be some desire to win one, right?

 

Worth noting, per PFF, he graded VERY high in run defense in his limited Seattle time. He'd undeniably contribute here.

[HiAndTight]

?? Looking at their cap situation, I'm not sure how the opposite can be stated with any degree of certainty. If you've figured out a way to navigate the cap for 2021 in a way that lets them bring Jones back, I'd love to see your math.

 

 

Yeah, this is a totally ridiculous debate to engage in before we even have a clue what the cap is going to look like...which we don't right now, but even we assumed it was going to drop, even an NFL neophyte understands that there are a million and one ways to manipulate the cap, so obviously you do as well. You could sign Jones for a 5 year 75 million dollar deal and his cap hit could be less than 5 million for next year. They could create cap space a dozen different ways.

 

Or they could just tag him. Again, the fact that they were negotiating with him pretty much all season tells you it's OBVIOUSLY feasible even with all the unknowns.

 

 

But you want me to find a way to create cap space for 2021? Give Rodgers more guaranteed money and extend his contract for 2 or 3 more years. There...that could be 10+ million in cap room.

Cut Wagner, Kirksey, Turner, Smith....lots of cap room.

 

You want to argue it's not possible, again, I don't understand why because you know it's just plainly not true. You want to argue it's a bad idea, I'd probably agree with you depending on what he's actually asking for. Just as I stated before the season started that signing him was likely not worth it and after Cook and Kamara, two similar backs signed, I reiterated the same thing.

 

 

Again, 100 BILLION dollar TV deal being negotiated right now. The owners want more games to facilitate that deal. That'll require what two groups to come and meet? You think they juuuuust might have something to say about having a significant number of their veterans take a massive pay cut this season because of a fluke pandemic, or do you think they'll just be quiet and accept a massive reduction to the cap while the league signs the most lucrative TV contract ever signed by any entity?

[HiAndTight]

The reason many are projecting around a $175M cap for 2021 is that the current CBA prevents it from going even lower based on actual revenue shortfalls the pandemic has caused - so $175M is basically the lowest it could drop for next year. Based on 2020 league revenue shortfalls even with TV money, that's where it's going to be based on the current CBA for 2021. Once things hopefully normalize a bit next year and revenues get back to where things were, the cap isn't going to just rocket back up by $30-50M dollars in 2022 and beyond like 2020 never happened. There will be a bit of a lag in how quickly it rebounds even if revenues surge - just like dropping to $175M is sort of splitting the difference between where it would go if it's entirely revenue-based year over year.

 

IMO the league pushing forward to adding a 17th game for the 2021 season is financial insurance to avoid a 2022 cap drop that's untenable for how NFL contracts and rosters are currently constructed. A 2022 cap between $150-$160M would be a disaster for the league - I think a 17th regular season game does alot to prevent that from being a possibility even if gameday revenues are severely curtailed again next season.

 

 

That 175 million dollar floor wasn't built into the CBA before the NFL owners and NFLPA put it in before this season after they knew about Covid to give teams at least a worst-case scenario on where the cap would be. Otherwise even the big spenders like the Bengals were going to be in cap hell next year.

 

I think if the league tried to implement a 150 million dollar salary cap after signing a 100 billion dollar TV deal, you'd have a lockout and a pretty justifiable one.

 

I'd be shocked if the cap isn't closer to 240 by 2022 than 140.

[HiAndTight]

I almost don’t want him.

 

It's hard to know what to think yet. This guy spurned us multiple times. What was the reasoning? Just that Seattle was a better fit at the time, or he has no interest in being here?

 

If its the former and he's excited to be a part of trying to win a championship, welcome to Green Bay. If it's the latter, I don't want him.

 

He seems to be indicating via Twitter that he wanted to go to Green Bay, so he's cool with the waiver claim.

 

 

The Seattle move really made no sense to me. They didn't need him. They gave up a somewhat promising younger player in Rush(who we ended up with via waivers) to get him. He didn't help them out with their pass rush at all.

 

I welcome him in if he can help, but we seem to be in a pretty good place right now either way.

[pacopete4]

Snacks sounds like he’s in. He’s graded out well. Between adding Tavon Austin and Snacks, who needs a trade deadline!

[PeaveyFury]

But you want me to find a way to create cap space for 2021? Give Rodgers more guaranteed money and extend his contract for 2 or 3 more years. There...that could be 10+ million in cap room.

Cut Wagner, Kirksey, Turner, Smith....lots of cap room.

 

Most of the cap experts are now on board with assuming a $175 million salary cap. Yes, it's possible they're all wrong, but they're usually not. If they're right, your cuts above would give the Packers.... $800,000 in cap space. They're $21 million over a $175 million cap, and your cuts free up $21.8 million.

 

Perhaps to your point, I probably should have used the qualifier of 'realistic'. I.E., it's not realistic to assume they'll cut both of their viable options at RT to rely presumably on a draft pick to start there in a year they want to be competitive. You could also technically cut Amos and Davante Adams and free up cap space, but again, that's not realistic. You'd have to have significant other movement to re-sign or tag Jones and still have room to sign your draft picks, and there's not much left there. Possible? Yes. Realistically possible? Probably not.

 

Also potentially not realistic is another restructure of Rodgers. The Packers have managed to have a major out on his contract after next season, which logically corresponds with the time they presumably would look to move on from Rodgers and shift to Love. Could they push that out further? Sure. Would they, when things are already a bit dicey for them pending determination on the cap in 2022, and with your hand-picked guy likely ready to jump in at QB in that exact window? Possible, but I'm not sure it's realistic to think they want to do that with a 40-year old. This season may have completely changed their though process though, as I would bet he's surpassed even their expectations this season.

 

In the end, we're likely debating semantics. Is it possible that Jones would sign a deal with a $1million base for 2021 with only a $20million signing bonus and thus less guaranteed money than Kamara or Cook? Yes, it's possible. Is it realistic? Probably not. So, if your point is that it shouldn't have been called "not even an option" by the initial poster, you're probably right. But calling it infeasible, or unwise, or simply 'not going to happen because of their cap situation and the way the front office runs the team', that's extremely accurate, IMO.

 

And that doesn't even get into a debate about whether Jones is worth a 2nd contract or not....

 

Now watch them announce 9 restructures and an extension for Jones next week.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Bahktiari tears his ACL in a non-padded, non-contact practice, and is done for the year, and possibly the beginning of next year. Just brutal.

 

Now the question is whether they go with possibly the highest upside group of Jenkins at LT, Patrick/Runyan at LG, Linsley at C, Turner at RG and Wagner at RT, or move Wagner to LT, and put Turner at RT. This just sucks. Sure makes me glad that they decided to hang on to Wagner, though. He hasn't been spectacular, but he is a versatile veteran. Turner has also been much improved, too, and might actually be better at tacke than he is at guard.

[PeaveyFury]

Is Wagner even good to go with his injury from last week?

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Is Wagner even good to go with his injury from last week?

 

He practiced yesterday, and Lafleur indicated his injury wasn't serious.

[OldHeidelberg]

I thought it was odd the line shifted to the Bears by a point this morning and then just a few minutes ago thought I should check the injury report. This really sucks, we can survive it I guess but it's a big hit to our SB hopes for sure.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

I thought it was odd the line shifted to the Bears by a point this morning and then just a few minutes ago thought I should check the injury report. This really sucks, we can survive it I guess but it's a big hit to our SB hopes for sure.

 

It takes the Packers from having likely the best offensive line in football to probably middle of the pack. It is very fortunate that the offensive line depth is in a much better place this year than it's been in previous seasons. While we're going to see a fall-off going to a line of Turner-Jenkins -Linsley-Patrick-Wagner or Jenkins-Patrick-Linsley-Turner-Wagner, it isn't as bad as previous years when suffering an offensive line injury. Also, Lafleur's offense is generally much more apologetic to offensive linemen than McCarthy's was.

[PinaMadness]

I just knew things were going too well.