Packers notes

[adambr2]

According to Silverstein, Richardson led the NFL with 17 special teams tackles.

Same amount as Raji playing defense in 2013.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Donny Barclay resigned.

Back down to 29 roster openings.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Same amount as Raji playing defense in 2013.

Maybe , perhaps , but certainly not .

 

[HardRightEdge]

...his per year average of 1.75M is quite a bit less than 2.55M.

The difference is 1/180 of the salary cap.

As for the guarantee, Oakland is struggling to make the 89%-of-cap cash payouts over the prescribed 4 year periods as dictated by the CBA. This is one way to put a couple of bucks in the bucket.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ending-union-nflpa-raiders-patriots/23522207/

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Packers preseason opponents, possible dates: at Patriots (8/13-17), at Steelers (8/20-24), vs. Eagles (8/27-30), vs. Saints (9/3-4).

 

[adambr2]

The difference is 1/180 of the salary cap.

As for the guarantee, Oakland is struggling to make the 89%-of-cap cash payouts over the prescribed 4 year periods as dictated by the CBA. This is one way to put a couple of bucks in the bucket.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ending-union-nflpa-raiders-patriots/23522207/

It may be 1/180th of the salary cap, but it's a 50% raise from $1.75M, so to me it's fairly significant in terms of real dollars. If the Raiders had tendered Richardson at $1.75M, I think you could make a reasonable argument for matching it.

I'm not saying that we can't afford it under the cap. I'm saying we shouldn't engage in the practice of clearly overspending to keep our own in most cases, even if we have in the past. There will be times in certain situations where you end up overpaying for a guy because you see upside and it turns out not to come to fruition. That looked like the case with Burnett a year ago. Now, the Burnett contract looks like a good deal. In most cases, it's paid off (Lang, Nelson, etc)

If we had a situation where MD Jennings and Jerron McMillian were competing for starting spots at safety, I could see matching Richardson to get him in the mix and take a chance on the upside. With our two safety spots pretty well locked down for the foreseeable future, I can't see the point to overpay Richardson on a 1 year deal to be our 4th safety.

 

[HardRightEdge]

It may be 1/180th of the salary cap, but it's a 50% raise from $1.75M, so to me it's fairly significant in terms of real dollars. If the Raiders had tendered Richardson at $1.75M, I think you could make a reasonable argument for matching it.

I'm not saying that we can't afford it under the cap. I'm saying we shouldn't engage in the practice of clearly overspending to keep our own in most cases, even if we have in the past. There will be times in certain situations where you end up overpaying for a guy because you see upside and it turns out not to come to fruition. That looked like the case with Burnett a year ago. Now, the Burnett contract looks like a good deal. In most cases, it's paid off (Lang, Nelson, etc)

If we had a situation where MD Jennings and Jerron McMillian were competing for starting spots at safety, I could see matching Richardson to get him in the mix and take a chance on the upside. With our two safety spots pretty well locked down for the foreseeable future, I can't see the point to overpay Richardson on a 1 year deal to be our 4th safety.

Did I suggest the Raider's tender should be matched? I think not. I simply argued that it is not an "absurd" contract and that he just might earn it with Raiders.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Jarrett Bush signed a $5.25 mil / 3 year deal with no expectation he'd be anything more than a core special teams player, dime back, and emergency safety. He could not even bounce M.D. Jennings out of the starting line-up.

Oakland probably likes him as a sub-package box safety, dime safety, and core special teams player. A little pricey? Sure. Insane? No.

Bush got only $1 million guaranteed on a three-year deal while all of Richardson's offer sheet is guaranteed (assuming he will make it to camp). I don't consider that a smart deal.

The difference is 1/180 of the salary cap.

As for the guarantee, Oakland is struggling to make the 89%-of-cap cash payouts over the prescribed 4 year periods as dictated by the CBA. This is one way to put a couple of bucks in the bucket.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ending-union-nflpa-raiders-patriots/23522207/

I don't think that played a major role as Richardson's contract won't affect that percentage significantly.

 

[Vrill]

Meanwhile, Brandon Spikes is still available. Interesting.

 

[PikeBadger]

Meanwhile, Brandon Spikes is still available. Interesting.

And his price tag gets lower as each day passes.

 

[HardRightEdge]

And his price tag gets lower as each day passes.

Not necessarily. Teams that come out of the draft without the ILB they were looking for might come a knockin'.

 

[bubba]

Week 17 is probably at Minnesota. Last year home against Detroit the year before at Bears. Think they do last game on a rotating division basis.

 

[PikeBadger]

Not necessarily. Teams that come out of the draft without the ILB they were looking for might come a knockin'.

But they will pay their value price, not Spikes.

 

[Poppa San]

Week 17 is probably at Minnesota. Last year home against Detroit the year before at Bears. Think they do last game on a rotating division basis.

They also flip flop away and home for each div opponent every year which overrides the pattern you stated. 2014 was home then away for Minn so this season will be away then home to close the season.

EDIT: I meant regular season as the next few games after will also be at home before a road trip to the SB.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Tom Silverstein brings up some reasons for the Packers to match the Raiders´ offer sheet for Richardson.

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/299512781.html

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Packers have matched Raiders' offer sheet to Sean Richardson.

 

[Ace]

Packers have matched Raiders' offer sheet to Sean Richardson.

Just saw that, man that's alot of money but I won't argue with keeping young talent especially when we have the cap space we do.

 

[tynimiller]

Just saw that, man that's alot of money but I won't argue with keeping young talent especially when we have the cap space we do.

I agree....surprised by the money we're spending on him as a back up...but tells me he is seen as our truest and most capable should either starter go down. Also tells me Hyde discussion at S is merely emergency only which would elude to even more so the thought Hyde in slot while Hayward most likely given shot at #2 CB.

 

[tynimiller]

At the worst Richardson is shaping up to be our next J. Bush on STs.

 

[TJV]

Not sure if this belongs here or in the Richardson thread. I'm still not certain if Richardson would take a safety spot over Hyde if Burnett or HHCD went down for an extended period of time: Richardson is stout vs. the run but he's not great in coverage. My guess is McCarthy's emphasis on improved STs had more to do with matching the offer than Richardson's role as backup S. Hindsight being 20/20 it would have been better to tender Richardson the $2.356 million that would have kept other teams away (because of the compensation of a second rounder). Since Thompson went with the lower tender no doubt had something to do with the amount of McKenzie's offer. Obviously the gamble was Richardson wouldn't receive an offer. Better than offering a second round tender amount, I wonder what it would have taken to get Richardson to sign a three-year deal.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Like I said...the Raiders' offer was not absurd.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Packers have re-signed John Kuhn. Deal is veteran's minimum of $870,000, but includes workout and Pro Bowl bonus.

The numbers of the bonuses aren't out yet, but it's possible the Packers exercised the veteran's minimum benefit on Kuhn, meaning the cap hit for his base salary would only be $585,000.

 

[HardRightEdge]

Packers have re-signed John Kuhn. Deal is veteran's minimum of $870,000, but includes workout and Pro Bowl bonus.

The numbers of the bonuses aren't out yet, but it's possible the Packers exercised the veteran's minimum benefit on Kuhn, meaning the cap hit for his base salary would only be $585,000.

That's a good value signing.

 

[I asked LT to delete my acct]

That's great news. KUUUUUUUUUUHN

 

[HardRightEdge]

I'm still not certain if Richardson would take a safety spot over Hyde if Burnett or HHCD went down for an extended period of time: Richardson is stout vs. the run but he's not great in coverage.

It would probably depend on situations, match-ups and what emerges in the draft and up to opening day.

But it's helpful to be reminded that the Packers run nickel/dime close to 70% of the time. That means you need 5 "starting" DBs.

The current roster affords the following:

cover corner: Shields, Hayward
nickel: Hyde
safety: Burnett, Dix
bench: Richardson, Goodson, Glover-Wright, Sebatic, Fanor

With Hayward the presumptive Williams replacement, Hyde is the default nickel corner with no proven alternative. Given the current roster, Richardson is the next man up in the event of either safety being injured, with Burnett taking on the single-high safety duties, or "free safety" in the old school lexicon, in the event of a Dix injury.

I think it's a given the Packers need a 3rd. cover corner. Beside the fact Hayward is not proven at the position, having a 3rd. guy who could step in with Hayward capable of playing nickel affords a lot more flexibility with respect to Hyde in the event of an injury to one of the starting safeties.

Since Thompson has gone some ways in bringing the band back together, Bush's return remains a possibility, but I think the Richardson signing might be the end of the line on that score.