Which veterans will not make final squad?

[Mike McCarthy]

Then we continue with the status quo, being afraid to make a move on issues like this is what keeps this team from getting over the hump.

 

[XPack]

There's ZERO chance Cobb or Clay will get cut this year. I mean, what for? It's not like they give out SBs for cap space. Makes no sense. I predict Clay to have a big year this season.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Then we continue with the status quo, being afraid to make a move on issues like this is what keeps this team from getting over the hump.

The Packers first have to make moves to assemble a viable backup plan before being able to release two starters at positions lacking experienced depth.

 

[Mike McCarthy]

The Packers first have to make moves to assemble a viable backup plan before being able to release two starters at positions lacking experienced depth.

I'm not disagreeing with you there but to not make the decisions and make some moves and stick with the same guys because they are "your guys" and expect different results is foolish. I certainly hope Matthews proves me wrong, but it would appear that ship has sailed, and to just continue to hang on year after year giving him another year, just 1 more shot, to prove he's worth the big money is absurd. Arod won't be around forever and hanging on to this lackluster supporting cast will be looked back on for years to come with regret and disappointment. There's a reason we get lit up in the playoffs fellas. LOFT

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I'm not disagreeing with you there but to not make the decisions and make some moves and stick with the same guys because they are "your guys" and expect different results is foolish. I certainly hope Matthews proves me wrong, but it would appear that ship has sailed, and to just continue to hang on year after year giving him another year, just 1 more shot, to prove he's worth the big money is absurd. Arod won't be around forever and hanging on to this lackluster supporting cast will be looked back on for years to come with regret and disappointment. There's a reason we get lit up in the playoffs fellas. LOFT

Don't get me wrong I'm not excited about the Packers lacking quality depth to at least be able to force Matthews and Cobb to renegotiate their deals but unfortunately that is the state the Packers are currently in.

 

[Dantés]

So the key to getting over the hump is to cut Clay Matthews in May?

 

[Half Empty]

So the key to getting over the hump is to cut Clay Matthews in May?

And here I thought we were just fans talking about potential future moves.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

So the key to getting over the hump is to cut Clay Matthews in May?

At this point there is no reason to cut Matthews (before the final cuts) for a number of reasons.

1. I assume he has already earned is $375K workout bonus.
2. No more contractual money is due until he makes the final 53. At which point he would earn his roster bonus of $500K, as well as his non-dead cap salary of $10.1 M.
3. The Packers are thin with proven talent at OLB. At least 1, if not 2 OLB's not named Perry, would have to improve and make Clay expendable.

Unless the Packers find someone to replace Clay, they are kind of stuck having to pay him in 2017. However, between not and the final cutdown to 53, that isn't improbable.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

No more contractual money is due until he makes the final 53. At which point he would earn his roster bonus of $500K, as well as his non-dead cap salary of $10.1 M.

FYI the $500K roster bonus is paid in installments of $31,250 for every game Matthews is active.

 

[Dantés]

At this point there is no reason to cut Matthews (before the final cuts) for a number of reasons.

1. I assume he has already earned is $375K workout bonus.
2. No more contractual money is due until he makes the final 53. At which point he would earn his roster bonus of $500K, as well as his non-dead cap salary of $10.1 M.
3. The Packers are thin with proven talent at OLB. At least 1, if not 2 OLB's not named Perry, would have to improve and make Clay expendable.

Unless the Packers find someone to replace Clay, they are kind of stuck having to pay him in 2017. However, between not and the final cutdown to 53, that isn't improbable.

Yeah, there's no reason at all to cut him now. If you wanted to do something with his cap number and cut him before FA, then I get it. But at this point, even if he's overpaid, he does far more good on the team than off of it. But it was suggested that the reason the Packers aren't getting over the hump is because they're unwilling to cut players like CMIII. That seems... wrong.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

But it was suggested that the reason the Packers aren't getting over the hump is because they're unwilling to cut players like CMIII. That seems... wrong.

There's no doubt it's wrong considering the situation the Packers are currently in. It would only make sense to suggest the team should release Matthews if there was an adequate replacement on the roster who would come significantly cheaper than him.

 

[Dantés]

There's no doubt it's wrong considering the situation the Packers are currently in. It would only make sense to suggest the team should release Matthews if there was an adequate replacement on the roster who would come significantly cheaper than him.

And something to do with the cap space that the move would yield.

 

[RRyder]

Then we continue with the status quo, being afraid to make a move on issues like this is what keeps this team from getting over the hump.

What "issue" are we addressing by releasing Cobb and Mathews right now?

Outside of creating holes that need to be filled by less experienced/proven players?

 

[Zartan]

Janis would still make it as Special Team if he still has the speed.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

What "issue" are we addressing by releasing Cobb and Mathews right now?

Outside of creating holes that need to be filled by less experienced/proven players?

I understand what you are saying and as of today, releasing either would probably create talent issues that don't warrant the caps savings by doing so at this time. However, if equal replacements for either player were either in place or develop before the final cuts, I wouldn't have a problem seeing either cut, with Matthews being more likely based on the savings of doing so. This isn't much different of a situation than the release of Josh Sitton (rumored locker room issues aside). The Packers felt Lane Taylor was ready to step in and start at LG and released Sition, saving themselves $6.85 M.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I understand what you are saying and as of today, releasing either would probably create talent issues that don't warrant the caps savings by doing so at this time. However, if equal replacements for either player were either in place or develop before the final cuts, I wouldn't have a problem seeing either cut, with Matthews being more likely based on the savings of doing so. This isn't much different of a situation than the release of Josh Sitton (rumored locker room issues aside). The Packers felt Lane Taylor was ready to step in and start at LG and released Sition, saving themselves $6.85 M.

I think the Packers releasing Matthews before the start of this season would be vastly different than the team cutting Sitton last year as outside linebacker is a premier position in a 3-4 scheme while guards don't have nearly as much value.

 

[XPack]

However, if equal replacements for either player were either in place or develop before the final cuts, I wouldn't have a problem seeing either cut, with Matthews being more likely based on the savings of doing so.

Even if equal replacements were there, I still don't see the value or necessity, unless we can trade them for better prospects.

We'll just keep adding more cap space which TT will anyway never utilize. I'd rather have Clay than Capspace. A bird in hand is worth... and all that.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Even if equal replacements were there, I still don't see the value or necessity, unless we can trade them for better prospects.

We'll just keep adding more cap space which TT will anyway never utilize. I'd rather have Clay than Capspace. A bird in hand is worth... and all that.

There's no doubt Thompson would have to use the cap space saved by releasing either Matthews or Cobb. Otherwise it wouldn't make any sense.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I think the Packers releasing Matthews before the start of this season would be vastly different than the team cutting Sitton last year as outside linebacker is a premier position in a 3-4 scheme while guards don't have nearly as much value.

While I agree with your viewpoint that OLB is more important than G, I think one would look at it from a different perspective if it was certain that Matthews wouldn't perform any better than he did the last 2 years AND the Packers had quality depth behind him that could play better than Clay. Given that neither of those situations currently exist, I don't expect Matthews to be cut. But I don't think the importance of the position is the driving force, only the importance of not being 100 % sure that you would improve the position/team to justify the cap savings. Look at it this way, when the Packers were pretty sure they had a very capable QB in Aaron Rodgers, even as important as the QB position is, trading Brett Favre was possible. I do realize there was more to that decision than just saving money.

Clay Matthews wouldn't be the first OLB or a player at an important position ever released due to his production not meeting his contract, it just happens that the Packers don't currently have a player(s) that they probably feel can play at Clay's level, whatever that ends up being.

 

[XPack]

There's no doubt Thompson would have to use the cap space saved by releasing either Matthews or Cobb. Otherwise it wouldn't make any sense.

Knowing TT, would you bet on it?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Knowing TT, would you bet on it?

Well, first and foremost knowing Thompson I believe he doesn't consider releasing Matthews. He would probably use some of the saved cap space on extending some of the team's own players.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Personally, I think Matthews has to be on TT's radar, but that doesn't mean he will release him, mainly due to the things already discussed as well as a huge unknown; "What Clay Matthews will the Packers see in 2017?" I think the Packers are optimistic that he will play better, especially if he doesn't get injured. Just how much better, nobody knows. The final thing with Clay to consider is just who he is. Clay has been the National "Face" of the Packers and their defense for many years. Couple that with the fact that he appears to be well liked by his teammates and it adds another difficult piece to a business decision.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The final thing with Clay to consider is just who he is. Clay has been the National "Face" of the Packers and their defense for many years. Couple that with the fact that he appears to be well liked by his teammates and it adds another difficult piece to a business decision.

Another thing to consider is that Matthews has never publically complained about the Packers scheme unlike Woodson, Sitton and Lang did before either getting released or not re-signed.

 

[texaspackerbacker]

Matthews is like a quality defensive shortstop in baseball who gets older and moves to first base where still is athletic enough excel. In addition to still being our best OLB, he also plays better at ILB than anybody else we have. I disagree about lack of depth at OLB. Yeah, I know whoever said "proven" depth, but between Perry, Fackrell, (my favorite) Jayrone Elliot, and now Biegel, I'd say we are damn near loaded at OLB. No way he should get cut; No way he will get cut.

 

[Zartan]

Mathews needs to get his grove back. He isnt performing nearly as well has his contract would let on. If Mathews can get back on track we be great then.