Well, if Rodgers actually asked to re-sign Cobb?

[brandon2348]

Of course it does. Because he's not a top corner. You're showing me a link proving Shields is the 7th highest paid corner in the NFL on a per year basis and you're still claiming he could have done better in FA?



I don't know if you know more about Verner than what you can pull off a stat sheet or not, but you'd be thrilled with his production for what the Bucs signed him for in free agency, and all-around, when considering all aspects of corner skills, he isn't a second rate corner to Shields. He's younger, he's been more durable in his career and equally as productive.

Shields is not a top 5 in the NFL cover corner. He's probably the best pure cover corner on the team, but I wouldn't find it ridiculous to argue that Tramon is better. I'm even giving him the benefit of the doubt as he hasn't had a real great season. I actually like Shields but I can't believe anyone would argue he's bigger than a 4/39 guy in FA. I'm not sure if anyone here was saying we got a bargain when it was signed, but I'm sure it wasn't the consensus. As I recall most were glad to have him back but thought we paid a pretty heavy price to do so.

Tramon is a having a good year but is a boundary corner. We Already got a taller guy in House. In the defensive scheme we run you gotta have a lock down "cover guy" that can go man to man all over the field which Shields can do. IMO he is bargain because there aren't too many guys like that around.

I suppose you could call him a "poor man's Patrick Peterson"

Shields is a stud and far fom overrated.

 

[RRyder]

Shields isn't Deion Sanders material no but he is a top 5 "cover corner" in this league as he can play man to man. You can keep Verner.

Uhmm I like Shields but how the hell can anyone say he's a top 5 cover corner in this league???? Hell just off the top of my head Haden, Peterson, Revis, Sherman and Talib. Theres other corners Im not going to take the time to list but to say Shields is better then any of those guys or even close to them is just wrong

 

[brandon2348]

Uhmm I like Shields but how the hell can anyone say he's a top 5 cover corner in this league???? Hell just off the top of my head Haden, Peterson, Revis, Sherman and Talib. Theres other corners Im not going to take the time to list but to say Shields is better then any of those guys or even close to them is just wrong

He is a top 5 guy at what he asked to do which is line up and play man to man on an island all over the field as a true "cover corner". Just like Richard Sherman is top 5 at what he is asked to do which is play deep cover 3 and disrupt throwing lanes. Its all about what your looking for.

Richard Sherman would get so exposed trying to do on our defense what Sam Shields is asked to do. It wouldn't be pretty

 

[brandon2348]

Sam Shields does the dirty work and doesn't get the praise of a Sherman cause the only time you see him with what he is asked to do is when he gets beat. He isn't sitting back in a cover 3 playing the ball and space. He is playing with his back to the QB most of the time trying to keep up with the other teams best WR.

Our defense doesn't click without him and to think he is overrated is ridiculous..
This weekend he will have the task of covering "megatron"

 

[sschind]

I'm inclined to think some other team will be willing to put up a significant amount of GARAUNTEED money above what GB will pony up. Cobb would be foolish not to take the biggest garaunteed deal

Depends on the team making the offer. Would he be foolish to take 20 million guaranteed from the Packers where he would continue to have one of the best if not the best QBs in the league throwing him the ball and where he would, in all likelihood, continue to be in the hunt for a SB ring every year as opposed to taking 25 million from ... oh lets say the Jets... where he will have Geno Smith, maybe, trying to throw him the ball and he will not sniff the playoffs, let alone the SB for the remainder of his next deal? I don't think so.

Foolish and stupid are two different things.

Two things, first the 20 and 25 million dollar figures I used above were for illustrative purposes only and in no way reflect a reasonable offer. Second if a team like the Seahawks or the Patriots offer him more money then yes he might be foolish not to take it.

 

[brandon2348]

Depends on the team making the offer. Would he be foolish to take 20 million guaranteed from the Packers where he would continue to have one of the best if not the best QBs in the league throwing him the ball and where he would, in all likelihood, continue to be in the hunt for a SB ring every year as opposed to taking 25 million from ... oh lets say the Jets... where he will have Geno Smith, maybe, trying to throw him the ball and he will not sniff the playoffs, let alone the SB for the remainder of his next deal? I don't think so.

Foolish and stupid are two different things.

Two things, first the 20 and 25 million dollar figures I used above were for illustrative purposes only and in no way reflect a reasonable offer. Second if a team like the Seahawks or the Patriots offer him more money then yes he might be foolish not to take it.

Exactly, there are several factors involved.

Also I am pretty sure you can take Seattle off the table as they look to extend Wilson and re-sign Wagner.

 

[sschind]

Exactly, there are several factors involved.

But you just said he would be foolish not to take the highest guarantee regardless of those factors.

There are several ways in which Cobb's situation is different than the Packers FA WRs in recent years.

1) Nelsons second deal. We are talking a significant increase in "value" for a WR of Cobbs abilities than when Nelson signed his second contract. Plus Cobb is much more a part of the offense than Nelson was at the time. He holds more cards.

2) Greg Jennings deal with the vikings. We had Nelson, Jones and Cobb at the time. Jennings was seen as expendable.

3) James Jones deal with the Raiders. We had Nelson and Cobb at the time. Jones was seen as expendable.

If we let Cobb walk we have Nelson. Adams has shown flashes but nothing yet that I would be comfortable banking on as a #2 WR. Boykin could have a resurgence but even so, he wasn't anything more last year than Adams was this year. Janis and Abrederis are complete unknowns. To those of you who say TT is a genius at drafting and developing WRs that may be so but he hasn't been so good at maintaining a WR corps. From top to bottom talent I would say our WR corps has decreased every year since Jennings left. There is a good chance we can reverse the trend if we keep Cobb otherwise I would say we get worse once again.

Right now we have one of the top WR duos in the league and I think its more than just because we have Rodgers throwing them the ball. Obviously a great QB will boost the status of his WRs but I think Nelson and Cobb go above and beyond good because of Rodgers. If we lose Cobb we have a top 10 (maybe top 5 WR) and that's it. Detroit ha had Megatron for so long but I think their offense has improved considerably with the addition of Tate.

I also think that TT knows this. So many people think TT is a cheapskate but the truth is he is not afraid to pay people he thinks are worth it. I think he knows Cobb is worth it. Cobb may be able to get more as a FA but I don't think it would be a significant amount more because I don't think TT will lowball him.

 

[brandon2348]

But you just said he would be foolish not to take the highest guarantee regardless of those factors.

There are several ways in which Cobb's situation is different than the Packers FA WRs in recent years.

1) Nelsons second deal. We are talking a significant increase in "value" for a WR of Cobbs abilities than when Nelson signed his second contract. Plus Cobb is much more a part of the offense than Nelson was at the time. He holds more cards.

2) Greg Jennings deal with the vikings. We had Nelson, Jones and Cobb at the time. Jennings was seen as expendable.

3) James Jones deal with the Raiders. We had Nelson and Cobb at the time. Jones was seen as expendable.

If we let Cobb walk we have Nelson. Adams has shown flashes but nothing yet that I would be comfortable banking on as a #2 WR. Boykin could have a resurgence but even so, he wasn't anything more last year than Adams was this year. Janis and Abrederis are complete unknowns.

Right now we have one of the top WR duos in the league and I think its more than just because we have Rodgers throwing them the ball. Obviously a great QB will boost the status of his WRs but I think Nelson and Cobb go above and beyond good because of Rodgers. If we lose Cobb we have a top 10 (maybe top 5 WR) and that's it. Detroit ha had Megatron for so long but I think their offense has improved considerably with the addition of Tate.

I also think that TT knows this. So many people think TT is a cheapskate but the truth is he is not afraid to pay people he thinks are worth it. I think he knows Cobb is worth it. Cobb may be able to get more as a FA but I don't think it would be a significant amount more because I don't think TT will lowball him.

I never said he would be foolish not to take the highest guaranteed offer. I have written 6-7 posts about this and nowhere does it say he should take the highest guaranteed offer regardless of situation.

I simply agreed that in a scenario where he gets more money to go to a loser and a loser situation over taking less money to be in a better situation would be foolish.

 

[longtimefan]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...ike-theres-a-chance-hell-return-to-green-bay/

Jones’ agent Frank Bauer’s belief that Packers General Manager Ted Thompson wants to move on without the wideout and try to extend the contracts of Jordy Nelson and Randall Cobb instead

Nelson average 9.75 mill a year and had a 11.5 mill signing bonus.

I said it last year...I am pretty confident Cobb will receive a contract from the Packers from 6-8 mill per..But the signing bonus will be the biggest part...I could see Cobb getting 11 mill signing bonus.

 

[brandon2348]

Yup that is how TT has been doing it recently with the big signing bonuses.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Of course it does. Because he's not a top corner. You're showing me a link proving Shields is the 7th highest paid corner in the NFL on a per year basis and you're still claiming he could have done better in FA?

I don't know if you know more about Verner than what you can pull off a stat sheet or not, but you'd be thrilled with his production for what the Bucs signed him for in free agency, and all-around, when considering all aspects of corner skills, he isn't a second rate corner to Shields. He's younger, he's been more durable in his career and equally as productive.

Shields is not a top 5 in the NFL cover corner. He's probably the best pure cover corner on the team, but I wouldn't find it ridiculous to argue that Tramon is better. I'm even giving him the benefit of the doubt as he hasn't had a real great season. I actually like Shields but I can't believe anyone would argue he's bigger than a 4/39 guy in FA. I'm not sure if anyone here was saying we got a bargain when it was signed, but I'm sure it wasn't the consensus. As I recall most were glad to have him back but thought we paid a pretty heavy price to do so.

I think you're forgetting that the Packers paid Shields more because it was a team friendly deal that allows the Packers to cut ties with Shields after year two (I believe) with virtually no cap ramifications. So basically Shields has a two year deal. Players will always demand more money to take such a short deal.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Depends on the team making the offer. Would he be foolish to take 20 million guaranteed from the Packers where he would continue to have one of the best if not the best QBs in the league throwing him the ball and where he would, in all likelihood, continue to be in the hunt for a SB ring every year as opposed to taking 25 million from ... oh lets say the Jets... where he will have Geno Smith, maybe, trying to throw him the ball and he will not sniff the playoffs, let alone the SB for the remainder of his next deal? I don't think so.

Foolish and stupid are two different things.

Two things, first the 20 and 25 million dollar figures I used above were for illustrative purposes only and in no way reflect a reasonable offer. Second if a team like the Seahawks or the Patriots offer him more money then yes he might be foolish not to take it.

He'd be foolish, by most rational standards, not to take the deal that pays him $5m more. Cobb has never had a big money deal and this is the only contract he can be certain of ever getting in a violent game like the NFL. Again, it's real easy for fans to say playing with Rodgers is worth $5 million when they're talking about imaginary money. I sort of think the tune would chance if somone actually plunked $5 million down in front of them.

The median US household makes $51,000 per year. It wouls take an average US household 98 YEARS to make $5 million. How can anyone say it's foolish/stupid/dumb/etc to get that much money for doing the exact same job elsewhere?

 

[Mondio]

Proportionally speaking, i've turned down jobs paying salary close to 40% higher than the current one for various reasons. Location, work atmosphere, etc. People do it all the time. I can't say my life has suffered, we're actually quite happy. 10 years ago my wife turned down a 6 figure position in another city, for a much smaller guaranteed salary, with potential bonus structure, but much better living environment, by our standards anyway. I don't really care who thinks our decisions were wise, foolish or anything else. Life is good

 

[brandon2348]

I think you're forgetting that the Packers paid Shields more because it was a team friendly deal that allows the Packers to cut ties with Shields after year two (I believe) with virtually no cap ramifications. So basically Shields has a two year deal. Players will always demand more money to take such a short deal.

Yup, They can get out in two.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Proportionally speaking, i've turned down jobs paying salary close to 40% higher than the current one for various reasons. Location, work atmosphere, etc. People do it all the time. I can't say my life has suffered, we're actually quite happy. 10 years ago my wife turned down a 6 figure position in another city, for a much smaller guaranteed salary, with potential bonus structure, but much better living environment, by our standards anyway. I don't really care who thinks our decisions were wise, foolish or anything else. Life is good

Relativity is nice but at some point absolute value comes into play...I doubt that 40% difference was over $2 million. Not because I don't think you're worth it (you seem like a swell fella) but because there are very few people in the world making that kind of money.

 

[Pkrjones]

Relativity is nice but at some point absolute value comes into play...

Using post #55 from sschind's example I don't think the 20% difference in SB would matter to Cobb. Yes, this is a violent game and at age 25 Cobb may or may not see another contract offer... but when faced with a possible decision of #1: 4 more years of yearly playoff contention and AR throwing the ball or #2: 4 years of Geno Smith, EJ Manuel, Jay Cutler, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Josh McCown, or Brian Hoyer throwing the ball the choice seems pretty obvious - that $5Mil isn't worth sucking for the next 4 years when you've already banked $25-$35Mil.

 

[TJV]

I don't really care who thinks our decisions were wise, foolish or anything else.

It's one thing to make that decision for yourself, it's quite another to "make" it for someone else. (I'm not saying you were doing that.) And as Sunshinepacker posted, your decisions probably didn't involve millions of dollars and you probably don't collide with world class athletes for a living.

If he hits free agency, Cobb's choice may not be signing with the Packers or signing and playing with a crappy QB and/or team. It's feasible a good team with a good QB would also be in the running. I expect Thompson to sign him for slightly less than Nelson's deal before he hits free agency.

 

[sschind]

I never said he would be foolish not to take the highest guaranteed offer. I have written 6-7 posts about this and nowhere does it say he should take the highest guaranteed offer regardless of situation.

I simply agreed that in a scenario where he gets more money to go to a loser and a loser situation over taking less money to be in a better situation would be foolish.

My apologies Brandon, I lost track of the posts. It was AKCheese who said he should take the highest guaranteed offer. I responded to him and you responded to me. I was so used to reading your posts in this thread that for some reason I thought my initial response was to one of your posts and when I read your response to me I thought you were contradicting yourself. I'm new here and I'm still trying to get the hang of this forum, navigation seems a bit weird to me but the conversation seems fun so I may just stick around.

It would appear that for the most part you and I are on the same page with this subject.

Again, sorry for the confusion and the accusation. I guess I was kind of excited thinking I had caught someone flip flopping.

 

[sschind]

Relativity is nice but at some point absolute value comes into play...I doubt that 40% difference was over $2 million. Not because I don't think you're worth it (you seem like a swell fella) but because there are very few people in the world making that kind of money.

I think its just the opposite. I think it was a much bigger sacrifice for Mondio and his wife to turn down the higher offers they received. I know if I was making 50 grand and someone offered me 70 I'd think a lot harder about it than if I were making 10 million and someone offered me 14. The extra 20 grand in the first instance might make a big difference in my standard of living but I doubt the extra 4 million on top of the 10 I was already making would make much of a difference. Especially if taking the extra 4 million means I might really be limiting my potential for whatever reason.

Of course like I said earlier and ThxJackVainisi reiterated it may not come down to the choice between more money and a good team. A good team might offer him more money. In that case I would still think Cobb would be foolish to leave even if it were for the Patriots or Seahawks. I'd play for the Packers for A LOT less than I would for any other team but then I am rather biased towards the Packers. It's quite probable that Cobb does not have that same kind of bias.

 

[sschind]

He'd be foolish, by most rational standards, not to take the deal that pays him $5m more. Cobb has never had a big money deal and this is the only contract he can be certain of ever getting in a violent game like the NFL. Again, it's real easy for fans to say playing with Rodgers is worth $5 million when they're talking about imaginary money. I sort of think the tune would chance if somone actually plunked $5 million down in front of them.

The median US household makes $51,000 per year. It wouls take an average US household 98 YEARS to make $5 million. How can anyone say it's foolish/stupid/dumb/etc to get that much money for doing the exact same job elsewhere?

Again, I disagree. He would be foolish if making the most money possible was his main goal. If other things were more important to him (stats, potential for championships etc) he might be foolish to leave. You talk as if it is 5 million or nothing when in reality it would not be 5 million or nothing it would be 25 million or 20 million. If I had to choose between 5 million and nothing I'd most likely take the money. If I had to choose between 20 million and 25 million the money would be far less important.

You do bring up a valid point about the imaginary money however. For most of us we can't imagine having to make a choice involving such large sums of money so it is easy for us to say we would take the lesser amount simply because we can't fathom why we would need more.

I will say this, besides stories like Menelik Watson donating a game check to help sick child and her family, the ones I like to hear most are those of players who take less money to play for a team they really want to play for. Whether its to stay with their current team or to go to another it shows that its more about the game (yes winning a ring is a big part of the game) than it is about the money.

 

[adambr2]

I think you're forgetting that the Packers paid Shields more because it was a team friendly deal that allows the Packers to cut ties with Shields after year two (I believe) with virtually no cap ramifications. So basically Shields has a two year deal. Players will always demand more money to take such a short deal.

The Packers will take a $6.25M cap hit if they cut Shields after 2 years. That is not "virtually no cap ramifications."

 

[Vrill]

You know what both sides are thinking ?

Its common sense. We'll be way under the cap. We have to spend some money somehow, so why not lock Cobb up? Besides, we have been letting other WRs go lately. Jennings and Jones for example. I seriously doubt we let Cobb walk too.

 

[PikeBadger]

Its common sense. We'll be way under the cap. We have to spend some money somehow, so why not lock Cobb up? Besides, we have been letting other WRs go lately. Jennings and Jones for example. I seriously doubt we let Cobb walk too.

You know what Cobb and his agent are thinking?

 

[PikeBadger]

Yup that is how TT has been doing it recently with the big signing bonuses.

Take a look around. Other than Rodgers and Matthews, the signing bonus's are generally smaller in Green Bay than we are seeing most other teams signing free agents to.

 

[brandon2348]

Take a look around. Other than Rodgers and Matthews, the signing bonus's are generally smaller in Green Bay than we are seeing most other teams signing free agents to.

I stand corrected.