Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

RBM

Finley re-signs with Packers

67 posts in this topic

2 years, 15 million

Seems weird

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good to see this get done. This will allow them to franchise and trade Matt Flynn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1329960941' post='14125920']Good to see this get done. This will allow them to franchise and trade Matt Flynn.

a bit risky but would be shrewd if they can pull it off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My link

Packers and Finley compromise on a two-year deal

By Tom Silverstein of the Journal Sentinel

Feb. 22, 2012 7:36 p.m. |(0) Comments

Green Bay - Rather than get caught up in a long, drawn-out struggle to get a long-term deal done, the Packers and tight end Jermichael Finley have agreed on a two-year deal, the tight end confirmed Wednesday night.

The two sides were facing the possibility of going to arbitration over a franchise designation and a possible long holdout during the off-season until a shift in negotiations occured and Finley agreed to go for a short-term deal that will allow him another bite at free agency at age 26.

Finley's agent, Blake Baratz, presented the Packers with a compromise deal Tuesday, according to an NFL source familiar with the negotiations, and that got the wheels in motion for a new agreement. The deal was believed to split the difference between the $5 million a year Finley would have gotten as a franchise tight end and the $9 million he would have gotten as a franchise wide receiver.

Finley was prepared to argue that he was more of a wide receiver than a tight end in arbitration if the Packers made him their franchise player. Instead, he'll get paid as a top 10 tight end for two years and then have a second shot at free agency.

The problem with that is if Finley suffers a serious injury or his play suffers over the next two years, he will have left a lot of money on the table. He and Baratz are obviously banking that he'll flourish over the next two seasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where did you hear the news? Have a link? I live within a 30 minute drive of Green Bay, and I checked the Packers website along with local news websites, and nothing.

I am not saying it didn't happen, but if he did sign, I just find it funny it's not in the local news. All packer stuff is always in the local news where I live.

Anyone have a link?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1329960941' post='14125920']Good to see this get done. This will allow them to franchise and trade Matt Flynn.

a bit risky but would be shrewd if they can pull it off.
Risky? Yes. But I would think they have a deal in place before they use the franchise tag on him. I don't think TT lets him walk for nothing. Thompson likes his draft picks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where did you hear the news? Have a link? I live within a 30 minute drive of Green Bay, and I checked the Packers website along with local news websites, and nothing.I am not saying it didn't happen, but if he did sign, I just find it funny it's not in the local news. All packer stuff is always in the local news where I live.Anyone have a link?

Thanks for the link!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as a dynasty owner I am not sure if this is good for him or not...they spread the wealth so much in Green Bay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where did you hear the news? Have a link? I live within a 30 minute drive of Green Bay, and I checked the Packers website along with local news websites, and nothing.I am not saying it didn't happen, but if he did sign, I just find it funny it's not in the local news. All packer stuff is always in the local news where I live.Anyone have a link?

See above. JS just posted it. Finley confirmed it on twitter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1329960941' post='14125920']Good to see this get done. This will allow them to franchise and trade Matt Flynn.

a bit risky but would be shrewd if they can pull it off.
Risky? Yes. But I would think they have a deal in place before they use the franchise tag on him. I don't think TT lets him walk for nothing. Thompson likes his draft picks.
And if they can't trade him for a kings ransom?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1329960941' post='14125920']Good to see this get done. This will allow them to franchise and trade Matt Flynn.

a bit risky but would be shrewd if they can pull it off.
Risky? Yes. But I would think they have a deal in place before they use the franchise tag on him. I don't think TT lets him walk for nothing. Thompson likes his draft picks.
And if they can't trade him for a kings ransom?
Who says they need a king's ransom? If they lose him via free agency they would get a late 3rd rounder as compensation. Anything better then that is icing. I would think they can get at least a second rounder from Cleveland, Miami, Seattle, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1329960941' post='14125920']Good to see this get done. This will allow them to franchise and trade Matt Flynn.

a bit risky but would be shrewd if they can pull it off.
Risky? Yes. But I would think they have a deal in place before they use the franchise tag on him. I don't think TT lets him walk for nothing. Thompson likes his draft picks.
And if they can't trade him for a kings ransom?
Who says they need a king's ransom? If they lose him via free agency they would get a late 3rd rounder as compensation. Anything better then that is icing. I would think they can get at least a second rounder from Cleveland, Miami, Seattle, etc.
If the NFL plays the Chicken, then the Packers waste $15 Million(don't remember the specific #) on a backup QB that everyone knows they have to trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1329960941' post='14125920']

Good to see this get done. This will allow them to franchise and trade Matt Flynn.

a bit risky but would be shrewd if they can pull it off.
Risky? Yes. But I would think they have a deal in place before they use the franchise tag on him. I don't think TT lets him walk for nothing. Thompson likes his draft picks.
And if they can't trade him for a kings ransom?
Who says they need a king's ransom? If they lose him via free agency they would get a late 3rd rounder as compensation. Anything better then that is icing. I would think they can get at least a second rounder from Cleveland, Miami, Seattle, etc.
If the NFL plays the Chicken, then the Packers waste $15 Million(don't remember the specific #) on a backup QB that everyone knows they have to trade.
Hence the bolded part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are not going to franchise Flynn...the risk is too high...and I believe I read where the NFLPA really hates the tag and trade thing and pushes teams not to do it and the Packers are not likely to flirt with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are not going to franchise Flynn...the risk is too high...and I believe I read where the NFLPA really hates the tag and trade thing and pushes teams not to do it and the Packers are not likely to flirt with that.

If they franchise Flynn they will already have a deal in place. The Packers franchised Corey Williams and traded him to Cleveland in 2008. Why wouldn't they do it now if they already have a deal in place?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1329963869' post='14126052']They are not going to franchise Flynn...the risk is too high...and I believe I read where the NFLPA really hates the tag and trade thing and pushes teams not to do it and the Packers are not likely to flirt with that.

I doubt that the big bad NFLPA would be any part of why they should/shouldn't make the attempt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like those hoping to hit the jackpot with D J Williams will have to wait 2 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the part that doesn't make sense. The Packers have 5 TE's now signed for 2012 and I thought that was a signal that Finley was going to leave. 7.66 tied up in base salaries just at TE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't they also withdraw the tag at any point, making Flynn a free agent?

Not if he signs the offer sheet, I believe. Then its official.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flynn will be franchised. And some team will pay the price (think Kolb/Cassel compensation)

Nice resigning by Pack.

And if they don't?

Drafting Luck, RGIII, Tannehill, trading for Peyton, signing Orton is less risky than trading a 1st rounder or more + paying someone starting money with 2 career starts.

Trade 3rd rounder=Peyton

Sign Orton, draft Tannehill in the second round, spend 1st rounder on a need

ETA:

How have those teams performed post Kolb/Cassel trades?

Chiefs 21-27 and a QB rating in the 80's

Cardinals 3-6 and a QB rating of 81

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flynn will be franchised. And some team will pay the price (think Kolb/Cassel compensation)

Nice resigning by Pack.

And if they don't?

Drafting Luck, RGIII, Tannehill, trading for Peyton, signing Orton is less risky than trading a 1st rounder or more + paying someone starting money with 2 career starts.

Trade 3rd rounder=Peyton

Sign Orton, draft Tannehill in the second round, spend 1st rounder on a need

ETA:

How have those teams performed post Kolb/Cassel trades?

Chiefs 21-27 and a QB rating in the 80's

Cardinals 3-6 and a QB rating of 81

I will play devils advocate here. What if the price for Flynn is a second rounder with the franchise tag applied? Luck and RGIII will be long gone. Peyton's health is a huge question mark and you can't trade for him with his current contract. No guantees that Tannehill will even make it to the second round. For a team like Miami, it becomes a question of whether Flynn will be better than Orton and the other free agent QBs. Philbin might want a QB who's skills he is already familiar with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tom Silverstein just tweeted:

I anticipate the #Packers using the franchise tag on Flynn now. They'll take the $14 million cap hit and then deal him to somebody.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flynn will be franchised. And some team will pay the price (think Kolb/Cassel compensation)

Nice resigning by Pack.

And if they don't?

Drafting Luck, RGIII, Tannehill, trading for Peyton, signing Orton is less risky than trading a 1st rounder or more + paying someone starting money with 2 career starts.

Trade 3rd rounder=Peyton

Sign Orton, draft Tannehill in the second round, spend 1st rounder on a need

ETA:

How have those teams performed post Kolb/Cassel trades?

Chiefs 21-27 and a QB rating in the 80's

Cardinals 3-6 and a QB rating of 81

I will play devils advocate here. What if the price for Flynn is a second rounder with the franchise tag applied? Luck and RGIII will be long gone. Peyton's health is a huge question mark and you can't trade for him with his current contract. No guantees that Tannehill will even make it to the second round. For a team like Miami, it becomes a question of whether Flynn will be better than Orton and the other free agent QBs. Philbin might want a QB who's skills he is already familiar with.
:goodposting:

Hit the nail on the head with everything I was going to post.

I don't think Tannehill makes it to 2nd. Brandon Weeden might due to his age (29 this October). So the real decision IMO is him against Matt Flynn. Worst case is getting a 2nd for Flynn. And given the overall history of 2nd round QB picks drafted.....that's not a bad price at all if you feel he's starting QB in the league.

You have a # of QB needy teams in the league: Seattle, Washington, Cleveland, Miami, Jets, Arizona, Jacksonville, Indy. [Manning is going to be a wildcard -- which is why I threw the Jets in]

There's going to be a market for Flynn. Franchising is the no brainer here. (Was surprised there was any previous thoughts of not doing so).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flynn will be franchised. And some team will pay the price (think Kolb/Cassel compensation)

Nice resigning by Pack.

And if they don't?

Drafting Luck, RGIII, Tannehill, trading for Peyton, signing Orton is less risky than trading a 1st rounder or more + paying someone starting money with 2 career starts.

Trade 3rd rounder=Peyton

Sign Orton, draft Tannehill in the second round, spend 1st rounder on a need

ETA:

How have those teams performed post Kolb/Cassel trades?

Chiefs 21-27 and a QB rating in the 80's

Cardinals 3-6 and a QB rating of 81

I will play devils advocate here. What if the price for Flynn is a second rounder with the franchise tag applied? Luck and RGIII will be long gone. Peyton's health is a huge question mark and you can't trade for him with his current contract. No guantees that Tannehill will even make it to the second round. For a team like Miami, it becomes a question of whether Flynn will be better than Orton and the other free agent QBs. Philbin might want a QB who's skills he is already familiar with.
:goodposting:

Hit the nail on the head with everything I was going to post.

I don't think Tannehill makes it to 2nd. Brandon Weeden might due to his age (29 this October). So the real decision IMO is him against Matt Flynn. Worst case is getting a 2nd for Flynn. And given the overall history of 2nd round QB picks drafted.....that's not a bad price at all if you feel he's starting QB in the league.

You have a # of QB needy teams in the league: Seattle, Washington, Cleveland, Miami, Jets, Arizona, Jacksonville, Indy. [Manning is going to be a wildcard -- which is why I threw the Jets in]

There's going to be a market for Flynn. Franchising is the no brainer here. (Was surprised there was any previous thoughts of not doing so).

3 of those teams you mentioned also have connections to Green Bay. The Packers have a number of holes to fill on defense and getting a 2nd rounder for Flynn would possibly help fill one of those.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flynn will be franchised. And some team will pay the price (think Kolb/Cassel compensation)

Nice resigning by Pack.

And if they don't?

Drafting Luck, RGIII, Tannehill, trading for Peyton, signing Orton is less risky than trading a 1st rounder or more + paying someone starting money with 2 career starts.

Trade 3rd rounder=Peyton

Sign Orton, draft Tannehill in the second round, spend 1st rounder on a need

ETA:

How have those teams performed post Kolb/Cassel trades?

Chiefs 21-27 and a QB rating in the 80's

Cardinals 3-6 and a QB rating of 81

I will play devils advocate here. What if the price for Flynn is a second rounder with the franchise tag applied? Luck and RGIII will be long gone. Peyton's health is a huge question mark and you can't trade for him with his current contract. No guantees that Tannehill will even make it to the second round. For a team like Miami, it becomes a question of whether Flynn will be better than Orton and the other free agent QBs. Philbin might want a QB who's skills he is already familiar with.
:goodposting:

Hit the nail on the head with everything I was going to post.

I don't think Tannehill makes it to 2nd. Brandon Weeden might due to his age (29 this October). So the real decision IMO is him against Matt Flynn. Worst case is getting a 2nd for Flynn. And given the overall history of 2nd round QB picks drafted.....that's not a bad price at all if you feel he's starting QB in the league.

You have a # of QB needy teams in the league: Seattle, Washington, Cleveland, Miami, Jets, Arizona, Jacksonville, Indy. [Manning is going to be a wildcard -- which is why I threw the Jets in]

There's going to be a market for Flynn. Franchising is the no brainer here. (Was surprised there was any previous thoughts of not doing so).

Re: Tannehill, he'll be gone by the mid point of the 1st at the latest.

Demand>supply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the part that doesn't make sense. The Packers have 5 TE's now signed for 2012 and I thought that was a signal that Finley was going to leave. 7.66 tied up in base salaries just at TE.

I think its a sign they feel he is more of a WR too.Didn't want to fight it out in arbitration over the tag designation.IMO...Driver could be out.Teams using TEs differently. Finley the vertical type TE...they have Crabtree as their blocker. Quarless as the Finley type if he can stay healthy and develop.Then the 2 youngsters (Taylor was more of a special teamer and a good one at that).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tom Silverstein just tweeted:

I anticipate the #Packers using the franchise tag on Flynn now. They'll take the $14 million cap hit and then deal him to somebody.

Id love to be wrong and have this be right here and get more for him...will gladly eat that crow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the part that doesn't make sense. The Packers have 5 TE's now signed for 2012 and I thought that was a signal that Finley was going to leave. 7.66 tied up in base salaries just at TE.

I think its a sign they feel he is more of a WR too.Didn't want to fight it out in arbitration over the tag designation.IMO...Driver could be out.Teams using TEs differently. Finley the vertical type TE...they have Crabtree as their blocker. Quarless as the Finley type if he can stay healthy and develop.Then the 2 youngsters (Taylor was more of a special teamer and a good one at that).
I can see that because Driver holds a one year price tag at 5 million I believe.That makes sense, just a lot of coin for a normally non-important position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flynn will be franchised. And some team will pay the price (think Kolb/Cassel compensation)

Nice resigning by Pack.

And if they don't?

Drafting Luck, RGIII, Tannehill, trading for Peyton, signing Orton is less risky than trading a 1st rounder or more + paying someone starting money with 2 career starts.

Trade 3rd rounder=Peyton

Sign Orton, draft Tannehill in the second round, spend 1st rounder on a need

ETA:

How have those teams performed post Kolb/Cassel trades?

Chiefs 21-27 and a QB rating in the 80's

Cardinals 3-6 and a QB rating of 81

I will play devils advocate here. What if the price for Flynn is a second rounder with the franchise tag applied? Luck and RGIII will be long gone. Peyton's health is a huge question mark and you can't trade for him with his current contract. No guantees that Tannehill will even make it to the second round. For a team like Miami, it becomes a question of whether Flynn will be better than Orton and the other free agent QBs. Philbin might want a QB who's skills he is already familiar with.
If it's a 2nd, then it's not in the Kolb/Cassel range.

Now, going along the same scenario you gave...you also have to add in the contract. Kolb signed a 6 year 65 million with a $10 million signing bonus.

So is Flynn worth the draft picks(probably going to be more than a 2nd) + contract versus Orton and/or Tannehill/Foles/etc?

I understand the Philbin argument and it's valid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody else think 7.5 mil is way too high for Finley.

Based on his performance last year...yes. However he was coming back from a season ending injury in 2010. In 2009 he was great the 2nd half of the season. He's still young and has alot of upside. While 7.5 per year seems like a lot it's only 2 years. So if he doesn't pan out they can let him walk when his contract expires. Hell plenty of mediocre to poor players make over 4 million per year (See AJ Hawk).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the part that doesn't make sense. The Packers have 5 TE's now signed for 2012 and I thought that was a signal that Finley was going to leave. 7.66 tied up in base salaries just at TE.

Most of those guys are just special team fodder and Quarles (Their 2nd best receiving option) had a major knee injury at the end of the year. Most likely will not be ready for the start of the season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flynn will be franchised. And some team will pay the price (think Kolb/Cassel compensation)

Nice resigning by Pack.

And if they don't?

Drafting Luck, RGIII, Tannehill, trading for Peyton, signing Orton is less risky than trading a 1st rounder or more + paying someone starting money with 2 career starts.

Trade 3rd rounder=Peyton

Sign Orton, draft Tannehill in the second round, spend 1st rounder on a need

ETA:

How have those teams performed post Kolb/Cassel trades?

Chiefs 21-27 and a QB rating in the 80's

Cardinals 3-6 and a QB rating of 81

I will play devils advocate here. What if the price for Flynn is a second rounder with the franchise tag applied? Luck and RGIII will be long gone. Peyton's health is a huge question mark and you can't trade for him with his current contract. No guantees that Tannehill will even make it to the second round. For a team like Miami, it becomes a question of whether Flynn will be better than Orton and the other free agent QBs. Philbin might want a QB who's skills he is already familiar with.
:goodposting:

Hit the nail on the head with everything I was going to post.

I don't think Tannehill makes it to 2nd. Brandon Weeden might due to his age (29 this October). So the real decision IMO is him against Matt Flynn. Worst case is getting a 2nd for Flynn. And given the overall history of 2nd round QB picks drafted.....that's not a bad price at all if you feel he's starting QB in the league.

You have a # of QB needy teams in the league: Seattle, Washington, Cleveland, Miami, Jets, Arizona, Jacksonville, Indy. [Manning is going to be a wildcard -- which is why I threw the Jets in]

There's going to be a market for Flynn. Franchising is the no brainer here. (Was surprised there was any previous thoughts of not doing so).

NYJ-Sanchez will get at least one more year

Jacksonville- Gabbert is 22 years old, give him more than one year to show he isn't a startable QB

Indy- They're taking Luck

Arizona- They're not giving up on Kolb after one year and then trading for + giving a contract to another Kolb type of player.

That leaves Seattle, Washington, Cleveland:

Seattle-Seahawks GM John Schneider insists he won't make a "panic" move at quarterback because "it can set the organization back."

"That may disappoint fans, because they want to see an instant guy and have that instant success," Schneider said. "But really, you're better off continuing to build your team." Schneider's comments suggest the Seahawks will be reluctant to overpay for free agent Matt Flynn or reach for Texas A&M's Ryan Tannehill at No. 12 overall.

Washington/Miami/Cleveland- RGIII will go to one of these teams, Ryan Tannehill is available, Peyton Manning, Kyle Orton, etc.

I could actually see Cleveland not addressing QB or just signing Orton. They seem to be going the Seattle route of ball control offense.

Why would a team pay anything extra for Flynn when I don't see a bidding war for him? It's kind of like having a FF owner putting a veteran on the block when they're in rebuild mode. Why would you overpay when you know they have to get rid of them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My link

Packers and Finley compromise on a two-year deal

By Tom Silverstein of the Journal Sentinel

Feb. 22, 2012 7:36 p.m. |(0) Comments

Green Bay - Rather than get caught up in a long, drawn-out struggle to get a long-term deal done, the Packers and tight end Jermichael Finley have agreed on a two-year deal, the tight end confirmed Wednesday night.

The two sides were facing the possibility of going to arbitration over a franchise designation and a possible long holdout during the off-season until a shift in negotiations occured and Finley agreed to go for a short-term deal that will allow him another bite at free agency at age 26.

Finley's agent, Blake Baratz, presented the Packers with a compromise deal Tuesday, according to an NFL source familiar with the negotiations, and that got the wheels in motion for a new agreement. The deal was believed to split the difference between the $5 million a year Finley would have gotten as a franchise tight end and the $9 million he would have gotten as a franchise wide receiver.

Finley was prepared to argue that he was more of a wide receiver than a tight end in arbitration if the Packers made him their franchise player. Instead, he'll get paid as a top 10 tight end for two years and then have a second shot at free agency.

The problem with that is if Finley suffers a serious injury or his play suffers over the next two years, he will have left a lot of money on the table. He and Baratz are obviously banking that he'll flourish over the next two seasons.

It's true what they say about Finley taking on the risk of being injured or performance dropping off and losing money as a result.

There's another side of it though also, where a 2 year contract means that Finley will be seeking a new contract in 2014. That's when the new TV contract money kicks in and teams will have a sudden jump in salary cap and so will need to spend more to meet the salary floor. So if he does play well and isn't injured, he could come out way ahead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flynn will be franchised. And some team will pay the price (think Kolb/Cassel compensation)

Nice resigning by Pack.

And if they don't?

Drafting Luck, RGIII, Tannehill, trading for Peyton, signing Orton is less risky than trading a 1st rounder or more + paying someone starting money with 2 career starts.

Trade 3rd rounder=Peyton

Sign Orton, draft Tannehill in the second round, spend 1st rounder on a need

ETA:

How have those teams performed post Kolb/Cassel trades?

Chiefs 21-27 and a QB rating in the 80's

Cardinals 3-6 and a QB rating of 81

I will play devils advocate here. What if the price for Flynn is a second rounder with the franchise tag applied? Luck and RGIII will be long gone. Peyton's health is a huge question mark and you can't trade for him with his current contract. No guantees that Tannehill will even make it to the second round. For a team like Miami, it becomes a question of whether Flynn will be better than Orton and the other free agent QBs. Philbin might want a QB who's skills he is already familiar with.
:goodposting:

Hit the nail on the head with everything I was going to post.

I don't think Tannehill makes it to 2nd. Brandon Weeden might due to his age (29 this October). So the real decision IMO is him against Matt Flynn. Worst case is getting a 2nd for Flynn. And given the overall history of 2nd round QB picks drafted.....that's not a bad price at all if you feel he's starting QB in the league.

You have a # of QB needy teams in the league: Seattle, Washington, Cleveland, Miami, Jets, Arizona, Jacksonville, Indy. [Manning is going to be a wildcard -- which is why I threw the Jets in]

There's going to be a market for Flynn. Franchising is the no brainer here. (Was surprised there was any previous thoughts of not doing so).

NYJ-Sanchez will get at least one more year

Jacksonville- Gabbert is 22 years old, give him more than one year to show he isn't a startable QB

Indy- They're taking Luck

Arizona- They're not giving up on Kolb after one year and then trading for + giving a contract to another Kolb type of player.

That leaves Seattle, Washington, Cleveland:

Seattle-Seahawks GM John Schneider insists he won't make a "panic" move at quarterback because "it can set the organization back."

"That may disappoint fans, because they want to see an instant guy and have that instant success," Schneider said. "But really, you're better off continuing to build your team." Schneider's comments suggest the Seahawks will be reluctant to overpay for free agent Matt Flynn or reach for Texas A&M's Ryan Tannehill at No. 12 overall.

Washington/Miami/Cleveland- RGIII will go to one of these teams, Ryan Tannehill is available, Peyton Manning, Kyle Orton, etc.

I could actually see Cleveland not addressing QB or just signing Orton. They seem to be going the Seattle route of ball control offense.

Why would a team pay anything extra for Flynn when I don't see a bidding war for him? It's kind of like having a FF owner putting a veteran on the block when they're in rebuild mode. Why would you overpay when you know they have to get rid of them?

At the end of the day, all that matters is that a team ends up getting the right QB. If Flynn ends up being a very good starter, giving up a 1st or 2nd and a Kolb type contract will look like a major bargain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flynn will be franchised. And some team will pay the price (think Kolb/Cassel compensation)

Nice resigning by Pack.

And if they don't?

Drafting Luck, RGIII, Tannehill, trading for Peyton, signing Orton is less risky than trading a 1st rounder or more + paying someone starting money with 2 career starts.

Trade 3rd rounder=Peyton

Sign Orton, draft Tannehill in the second round, spend 1st rounder on a need

ETA:

How have those teams performed post Kolb/Cassel trades?

Chiefs 21-27 and a QB rating in the 80's

Cardinals 3-6 and a QB rating of 81

I will play devils advocate here. What if the price for Flynn is a second rounder with the franchise tag applied? Luck and RGIII will be long gone. Peyton's health is a huge question mark and you can't trade for him with his current contract. No guantees that Tannehill will even make it to the second round. For a team like Miami, it becomes a question of whether Flynn will be better than Orton and the other free agent QBs. Philbin might want a QB who's skills he is already familiar with.
:goodposting:

Hit the nail on the head with everything I was going to post.

I don't think Tannehill makes it to 2nd. Brandon Weeden might due to his age (29 this October). So the real decision IMO is him against Matt Flynn. Worst case is getting a 2nd for Flynn. And given the overall history of 2nd round QB picks drafted.....that's not a bad price at all if you feel he's starting QB in the league.

You have a # of QB needy teams in the league: Seattle, Washington, Cleveland, Miami, Jets, Arizona, Jacksonville, Indy. [Manning is going to be a wildcard -- which is why I threw the Jets in]

There's going to be a market for Flynn. Franchising is the no brainer here. (Was surprised there was any previous thoughts of not doing so).

NYJ-Sanchez will get at least one more year

Jacksonville- Gabbert is 22 years old, give him more than one year to show he isn't a startable QB

Indy- They're taking Luck

Arizona- They're not giving up on Kolb after one year and then trading for + giving a contract to another Kolb type of player.

That leaves Seattle, Washington, Cleveland:

Seattle-Seahawks GM John Schneider insists he won't make a "panic" move at quarterback because "it can set the organization back."

"That may disappoint fans, because they want to see an instant guy and have that instant success," Schneider said. "But really, you're better off continuing to build your team." Schneider's comments suggest the Seahawks will be reluctant to overpay for free agent Matt Flynn or reach for Texas A&M's Ryan Tannehill at No. 12 overall.

Washington/Miami/Cleveland- RGIII will go to one of these teams, Ryan Tannehill is available, Peyton Manning, Kyle Orton, etc.

I could actually see Cleveland not addressing QB or just signing Orton. They seem to be going the Seattle route of ball control offense.

Why would a team pay anything extra for Flynn when I don't see a bidding war for him? It's kind of like having a FF owner putting a veteran on the block when they're in rebuild mode. Why would you overpay when you know they have to get rid of them?

Jason Campbell is also available. So that's another veteran QB that a team can pick up and not break the bank to pick up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.