**The Official Randall 'touchdown robber' Cobber Bandwagon** (1 Viewer)

[MAC_32]

Pay that man his money

http://overthecap.com/salary-cap-spaceAccording to overthecap, they have $25 million+ in cap space. Not sure how many current starters are not under contract for 2015. They have been good at drafting and replacing free agents with previously drafted players in the past. Doubt if he would do as well elsewhere.

Looks like they'd have to cut some guys like maybe Brad Jones and Crosby and even then it's going to be tight. I think they let him walk and recoup the comp pick. Adams is the new number two, they draft another wr to compete with Abbrederis and Janis for the three.

 

[sho nuff]

Again...letting him go would be a mistake IMO

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

FOX Sports' Jay Glazer reports Randall Cobb (illness) spent three hours in the hospital Saturday night.

Cobb is active and will play against the Seahawks, but he was feeling so ill that the team thought he may have had appendicitis. We wouldn't downgrade him much fantasy-wise. He'll run most of his routes against Seahawks SCB Jeremy Lane. Cobb has the most favorable matchup among Packers receivers.

Jan 18 - 2:55 PM

 

[cstu]

Rotoworld:

FOX Sports' Jay Glazer reports Randall Cobb (illness) spent three hours in the hospital Saturday night.

Cobb is active and will play against the Seahawks, but he was feeling so ill that the team thought he may have had appendicitis. We wouldn't downgrade him much fantasy-wise. He'll run most of his routes against Seahawks SCB Jeremy Lane. Cobb has the most favorable matchup among Packers receivers.

Jan 18 - 2:55 PM

Pay that man his money.

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

Randall Cobb caught 7-of-10 targets for 62 yards and a touchdown in the Packers' NFC Championship Game loss.

Cobb was no worse for the wear after spending some time in the hospital Saturday evening, routinely finding space over the middle of the field. He could have had a bigger day had Aaron Rodgers not missed what would have been a wide open 20-30 yard gainer. Cobb's score was the result of a "natural" pick play in the red zone. Cobb now heads to free agency, where he'll be a fascinating case. A slot man who missed 12 games through his first three NFL seasons, Cobb offers more playmaking ability than your standard Julian Edelman. He's a versatile talent who often lines up in the backfield. Cobb set new career highs across the board this season, catching 91 passes for 1,287 yards and 12 touchdowns. Teams will view his slight frame and departure from Aaron Rodgers as concerns, however. It's possible Cobb ends up back in Green Bay, but the Pack already have his heir apparent in Davante Adams.

Jan 18 - 7:18 PM

 

[mr roboto]

Typical Rotoworld hyperbolic spin. Adams is a nice player but not yet Cobb's 'heir apparent'.

 

[Faust]

Randall Cobb hopes to re-sign with Green Bay Packers:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000460817/article/randall-cobb-hopes-to-resign-with-green-bay-packers

 

[Sabertooth]

Sure hope they can resign him. I think they do, but let Bulaga walk.

 

[TDorBust]

Gotta resign him and let Adams develop more, hopefully we can get back to 5 legitimate receiving threats with those three, Rodgers coming along at TE, and Lacy out of the backfield.

 

[msudaisy26]

Am I the only one that thinks Adams is the heir to Jordy? Cobb and Adams are different players

 

[The Man With No Name]

Am I the only one that thinks Adams is the heir to Jordy? Cobb and Adams are different players

They are both signed through 2017

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

Randall Cobb - WR - Packers

According to ESPN Packers reporter Rob Demovsky, indications are free agent Randall Cobb is seeking a contract that averages $9M per season.

The extension Jordy Nelson signed with the Packers last season averaged $9.75M, comparable Victor Cruz is making $7.64M and last year's No. 1 free agent wideout DeSean Jackson got $8M annually. Cobb's demands could very well be met on the open market come March, as he's just 24 years old and uniquely explosive out of the slot. And we don't doubt that the Packers, who are scheduled to have nearly $23M in cap space, want him back. But it's unclear if GM Ted Thompson wants to dump all this cash on Cobb, especially with intriguing cheap youngsters like Davante Adams and Jeff Janis on the roster.

Source: ESPN.com

Feb 16 - 12:39 PM

 

[Jeremy]

If that's what he's seeking I don't see the Packers losing him. It's not like Greg Jennings asking for $15 million the year before he was to become a free agent. That's a reasonable number. If they Packers were more in the $7-8 million range, they won't lose him over a million or 2 annually with the cap growing as it is.

 

[Phenomena]

If that's what he's seeking I don't see the Packers losing him. It's not like Greg Jennings asking for $15 million the year before he was to become a free agent. That's a reasonable number. If they Packers were more in the $7-8 million range, they won't lose him over a million or 2 annually with the cap growing as it is.

I would be apoplectic if they dropped $9M/year on a second WR. Sign any podunk $4-5M/year WR in free agency and see little drop off. Rodgers is what makes the offense hum - his ability to extend plays through varying protections at the line and his legs scrambling is what makes the offense great.

Every casual fan gets WR fever and demands the best free agent WR to be signed to big bucks - but they have much less impact on the game than people think.

Brady just won the Super Bowl with his leading receiver being a 5'10" 200 lb 7th round nobody making less than $5M per year.

How? Because he's Tom "motherf**king" Brady. Rodgers doesn't need two $9M WRs. any more than Brady needed a single one.

Go back the last five years. Flacco won a Super Bowl with who? Wilson won a Super Bowl with who? The Giants won the Super Bowl with who? Nobody. That's who. None of those teams had a top flight WR making $9M+ per year. You don't need them. You need a QB. Save the money for the big boys - lock up Bulaga.

 

[sho nuff]

If that's what he's seeking I don't see the Packers losing him. It's not like Greg Jennings asking for $15 million the year before he was to become a free agent. That's a reasonable number. If they Packers were more in the $7-8 million range, they won't lose him over a million or 2 annually with the cap growing as it is.

I would be apoplectic if they dropped $9M/year on a second WR. Sign any podunk $4-5M/year WR in free agency and see little drop off. Rodgers is what makes the offense hum - his ability to extend plays through varying protections at the line and his legs scrambling is what makes the offense great.

Every casual fan gets WR fever and demands the best free agent WR to be signed to big bucks - but they have much less impact on the game than people think.

Brady just won the Super Bowl with his leading receiver being a 5'10" 200 lb 7th round nobody making less than $5M per year.

How? Because he's Tom "motherf**king" Brady. Rodgers doesn't need two $9M WRs. any more than Brady needed a single one.

Go back the last five years. Flacco won a Super Bowl with who? Wilson won a Super Bowl with who? The Giants won the Super Bowl with who? Nobody. That's who. None of those teams had a top flight WR making $9M+ per year. You don't need them. You need a QB. Save the money for the big boys - lock up Bulaga.

What 4-5 mil WR is no small dropoff from Cobb?

Edelman is pretty darn good WR...not getting a guy like him off the FA market for 4 mil...and you forget they had Gronk too.

Flacco had a better defense than we have...so did Wilson.

Giants had Plaxico and a hell of a defense.

Again...I go back to what Ron Wolf said his regret was with not getting Favre enough weapons...I don't think TT makes that mistake and would rather patch together the defense than to let the offense suffer from a loss like Cobb.

He does not want anything extremely huge. Saying he wants to average 9mil seems like a good sign they can get this one done.

 

[Jeremy]

If that's what he's seeking I don't see the Packers losing him. It's not like Greg Jennings asking for $15 million the year before he was to become a free agent. That's a reasonable number. If they Packers were more in the $7-8 million range, they won't lose him over a million or 2 annually with the cap growing as it is.

I would be apoplectic if they dropped $9M/year on a second WR. Sign any podunk $4-5M/year WR in free agency and see little drop off. Rodgers is what makes the offense hum - his ability to extend plays through varying protections at the line and his legs scrambling is what makes the offense great.

Every casual fan gets WR fever and demands the best free agent WR to be signed to big bucks - but they have much less impact on the game than people think.

Brady just won the Super Bowl with his leading receiver being a 5'10" 200 lb 7th round nobody making less than $5M per year.

How? Because he's Tom "motherf**king" Brady. Rodgers doesn't need two $9M WRs. any more than Brady needed a single one.

Go back the last five years. Flacco won a Super Bowl with who? Wilson won a Super Bowl with who? The Giants won the Super Bowl with who? Nobody. That's who. None of those teams had a top flight WR making $9M+ per year. You don't need them. You need a QB. Save the money for the big boys - lock up Bulaga.

Tom Brady didn't look nearly as good before Gronk shook off the rust last year and in the 2 games Edelman missed at the end of year Brady had a passer rating of 76.1 and 64.6. It matters. Rodgers has good chemistry with Cobb, who is young and talented. Without him they've got Jordy, a still green Davante Adams, underwhelming TEs and a couple of late round rookies who have a handful of regular snaps between them.

Putting together a defense that allows you to win with 200 yards passing and scoring 20 points every game is a lot easier said than done, especially when you're drafting at the end of every round.

They will not be letting Cobb go.

 

[Phenomena]

If that's what he's seeking I don't see the Packers losing him. It's not like Greg Jennings asking for $15 million the year before he was to become a free agent. That's a reasonable number. If they Packers were more in the $7-8 million range, they won't lose him over a million or 2 annually with the cap growing as it is.

I would be apoplectic if they dropped $9M/year on a second WR. Sign any podunk $4-5M/year WR in free agency and see little drop off. Rodgers is what makes the offense hum - his ability to extend plays through varying protections at the line and his legs scrambling is what makes the offense great.

Every casual fan gets WR fever and demands the best free agent WR to be signed to big bucks - but they have much less impact on the game than people think.

Brady just won the Super Bowl with his leading receiver being a 5'10" 200 lb 7th round nobody making less than $5M per year.

How? Because he's Tom "motherf**king" Brady. Rodgers doesn't need two $9M WRs. any more than Brady needed a single one.

Go back the last five years. Flacco won a Super Bowl with who? Wilson won a Super Bowl with who? The Giants won the Super Bowl with who? Nobody. That's who. None of those teams had a top flight WR making $9M+ per year. You don't need them. You need a QB. Save the money for the big boys - lock up Bulaga.

Tom Brady didn't look nearly as good before Gronk shook off the rust last year and in the 2 games Edelman missed at the end of year Brady had a passer rating of 76.1 and 64.6. It matters. Rodgers has good chemistry with Cobb, who is young and talented. Without him they've got Jordy, a still green Davante Adams, underwhelming TEs and a couple of late round rookies who have a handful of regular snaps between them.

Putting together a defense that allows you to win with 200 yards passing and scoring 20 points every game is a lot easier said than done, especially when you're drafting at the end of every round.

They will not be letting Cobb go.

I'd like to wager with someone that they do not retain Cobb for north of $9M per year. That's absurd for a #2 WR. Only three teams have two WRs counting $7M+ ... I don't think any team has two WRs both making $9M+. You're talking about locking up ~15% of your cap for two players playing non-core positions. That's just absurd. I don't think Ted will do that. The core positions are QB, CB, left tackle, and pass rusher. That's where you spend the bulk of your cap if you want the best bang for your buck.

Last week I was thinking the Packers would offer him something in the $7M range (which is still a very high amount for a second WR) and I stand by that. Ted doesn't overpay guys and he's not going to overpay for a wide receiver.

Bulaga, even at right tackle, is more important to the success of the 2015 Packers than Randall Cobb. I would rather pay $8M to retain Bulaga than $8M for Randall Cobb. That would be a wonderfully talented front-line depth should anything happen to the other lineman and allows for both line continuity and right-side domination.

Hopefully Bulaga won't cost that much, though. The highest paid RT is getting $7M/year. It depends on whether he thinks he'll get paid LT money on the open market. Albert signed a $9.4M/year deal as the best free agent left tackle last year. It might actually take $8M/year to keep Bulaga.

 

[mr roboto]

Yeah what did Harrison and Wayne get Manning amiright?????

 

[The Kerminator]

If that's what he's seeking I don't see the Packers losing him. It's not like Greg Jennings asking for $15 million the year before he was to become a free agent. That's a reasonable number. If they Packers were more in the $7-8 million range, they won't lose him over a million or 2 annually with the cap growing as it is.

I agree. I think the Packer's last offer to Jennings IIRC was somewhere around the $9 mil range. They'll get it done with Cobb. Just a matter of how it's structured

 

[The Kerminator]

If that's what he's seeking I don't see the Packers losing him. It's not like Greg Jennings asking for $15 million the year before he was to become a free agent. That's a reasonable number. If they Packers were more in the $7-8 million range, they won't lose him over a million or 2 annually with the cap growing as it is.

I would be apoplectic if they dropped $9M/year on a second WR. Sign any podunk $4-5M/year WR in free agency and see little drop off. Rodgers is what makes the offense hum - his ability to extend plays through varying protections at the line and his legs scrambling is what makes the offense great.

Every casual fan gets WR fever and demands the best free agent WR to be signed to big bucks - but they have much less impact on the game than people think.

Brady just won the Super Bowl with his leading receiver being a 5'10" 200 lb 7th round nobody making less than $5M per year.

How? Because he's Tom "motherf**king" Brady. Rodgers doesn't need two $9M WRs. any more than Brady needed a single one.

Go back the last five years. Flacco won a Super Bowl with who? Wilson won a Super Bowl with who? The Giants won the Super Bowl with who? Nobody. That's who. None of those teams had a top flight WR making $9M+ per year. You don't need them. You need a QB. Save the money for the big boys - lock up Bulaga.

Tom Brady didn't look nearly as good before Gronk shook off the rust last year and in the 2 games Edelman missed at the end of year Brady had a passer rating of 76.1 and 64.6. It matters. Rodgers has good chemistry with Cobb, who is young and talented. Without him they've got Jordy, a still green Davante Adams, underwhelming TEs and a couple of late round rookies who have a handful of regular snaps between them.

Putting together a defense that allows you to win with 200 yards passing and scoring 20 points every game is a lot easier said than done, especially when you're drafting at the end of every round.

They will not be letting Cobb go.

I'd like to wager with someone that they do not retain Cobb for north of $9M per year. That's absurd for a #2 WR. Only three teams have two WRs counting $7M+ ... I don't think any team has two WRs both making $9M+. You're talking about locking up ~15% of your cap for two players playing non-core positions. That's just absurd. I don't think Ted will do that. The core positions are QB, CB, left tackle, and pass rusher. That's where you spend the bulk of your cap if you want the best bang for your buck.

Last week I was thinking the Packers would offer him something in the $7M range (which is still a very high amount for a second WR) and I stand by that. Ted doesn't overpay guys and he's not going to overpay for a wide receiver.

Bulaga, even at right tackle, is more important to the success of the 2015 Packers than Randall Cobb. I would rather pay $8M to retain Bulaga than $8M for Randall Cobb. That would be a wonderfully talented front-line depth should anything happen to the other lineman and allows for both line continuity and right-side domination.

Hopefully Bulaga won't cost that much, though. The highest paid RT is getting $7M/year. It depends on whether he thinks he'll get paid LT money on the open market. Albert signed a $9.4M/year deal as the best free agent left tackle last year. It might actually take $8M/year to keep Bulaga.

I'd have to disagree with you that Cobb is a #2 WR. More like a 1A

 

[sho nuff]

He wants 9 mil...who is saying to sign him for north of that?

Great qualifier on your "wager".

 

[Sabertooth]

I put it at 50/50 to resign him. Bulaga is more a priority.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

I put it at 50/50 to resign him. Bulaga is more a priority.

The Pack are $23M under the cap, in essence, once they cut dead weight like Hawk and Jones.My guess is that TT finds a creative way to sign Cobb, Bulaga, and either House, Tramon, or Raji. He can then focus energy on filling remains gaps at either DT or DB via the draft, along with ILB.

If Cobb goes for a cap-friendly $9M per year (btw - he could go for less; the market might only value him at $7M per), and Bulaga goes for $7M per, then it leaves room to operate. It really all comes down to which players TT sees as most replaceable,and most worth the price.

Keep in mind, TT offered sizable extensions to Jennings and Finley (supposedly he offered $9 M per year to Jennings, who turned it down) and neither of those guys were as young as Cobb is.so why would TT do anything differently here?

Rodgers needs weapons to throw to. Right now he has two - Jordy and Adams - under contract. That isn't enough.

Related: it is comical listening to NFL radio......they keep talking about Jarrett Boykin replacing Cobb. Boykin blows. We have nobody ready to step into the #3 WR role if Cobb leaves.

 

[dirtyjay]

You dont let next level talent go because you think you can replace them. I know some teams do but cobb is a big part of this offense and i think tt is grinning ear to ear knowing it will only cost 9 mil for cobb.

 

[massraider]

I put it at 50/50 to resign him. Bulaga is more a priority.

If Cobb goes for a cap-friendly $9M per year (btw - he could go for less; the market might only value him at $7M per), and Bulaga goes for $7M per, then it leaves room to operate. It really all comes down to which players TT sees as most replaceable,and most worth the price.

Keep in mind, TT offered sizable extensions to Jennings and Finley (supposedly he offered $9 M per year to Jennings, who turned it down) and neither of those guys were as young as Cobb is.so why would TT do anything differently here?

Good stuff here.

Regarding the market for Cobb, I am betting he gets what he's looking for. Ton of teams have a ton of cap room, and Cobb really is a pretty unique specimen, not a lot of teams can look at Cobb and say, "We have one of those already...."

 

[Faust]

Randall Cobb could seek $9M per year; Packers might not franchise him

 

[Faust]

Packers still hope to reach deal with Randall Cobb

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

The Raiders are ready to make a run at free agent Randall Cobb.

No team is more desperate for receiving talent than Oakland. It's been a full decade since their last 1,000-yard receiver (Randy Moss in 2005). Oakland is said to be targeting Alabama receiver Amari Cooper in the draft, but that won't be enough to turn around one of the league's worst passing offenses. Cobb is still fully expected to re-sign with Green Bay, but don't be surprised if Oakland tempts him with a competitive offer.

Related: Raiders

Source: Bill Williamson on Twitter
Feb 23 - 4:07 PM

 

[mr roboto]

Rotoworld:

The Raiders are ready to make a run at free agent Randall Cobb.

No team is more desperate for receiving talent than Oakland. It's been a full decade since their last 1,000-yard receiver (Randy Moss in 2005). Oakland is said to be targeting Alabama receiver Amari Cooper in the draft, but that won't be enough to turn around one of the league's worst passing offenses. Cobb is still fully expected to re-sign with Green Bay, but don't be surprised if Oakland tempts him with a competitive offer.

Related: Raiders

Source: Bill Williamson on Twitter

Feb 23 - 4:07 PM

Please Lord no.

 

[sho nuff]

If the money is even close...not sure Cobb would be tempted by a team that bad. He wasn't around for the Super Bowl...it would be one thing if he had a ring and took off wanting the money (like Jennings).

Or if its a team like NE, Dallas, Seattle...teams that are more of a contender. But Oakland?

 

[LawFitz]

GB will offer him 7 MM per, Oak will offer 10; GB will counter with 8.5 and he'll stay. You can call me mystic mac.

 

[fruity pebbles]

I'm surprised GB hasn't locked him up already

 

[massraider]

I think the only chance is if the Raiders fly him in, make a nice front-loaded offer with more guaranteed and upfront money than the Pack reasonably can offer, and tell him if he leaves, the offer is off the table.

Raiders wanting him isn't the same as Cobb willing to go there, as well.

 

[fruity pebbles]

If the Pack lets him test the market he's gone imo. Too much money out there

 

[FUBAR]

GB will offer him 7 MM per, Oak will offer 10; GB will counter with 8.5 and he'll stay. You can call me mystic mac.

As a Cobb owner, I hope you're right. But I'd also like to see him in Indy.

not Oakland, please.

 

[mquinnjr]

GB will offer him 7 MM per, Oak will offer 10; GB will counter with 8.5 and he'll stay. You can call me mystic mac.

As a Cobb owner, I hope you're right. But I'd also like to see him in Indy.

not Oakland, please.

Could be great for Carr, why not try and put a WR1 in his arsenal and see what you really have with him?

 

[Warrior]

GB will offer him 7 MM per, Oak will offer 10; GB will counter with 8.5 and he'll stay. You can call me mystic mac.

As a Cobb owner, I hope you're right. But I'd also like to see him in Indy.

not Oakland, please.

Could be great for Carr, why not try and put a WR1 in his arsenal and see what you really have with him?

Because that's what they thought they were doing when they nabbed the WR from GB last time?

 

[massraider]

GB will offer him 7 MM per, Oak will offer 10; GB will counter with 8.5 and he'll stay. You can call me mystic mac.

As a Cobb owner, I hope you're right. But I'd also like to see him in Indy.

not Oakland, please.

Could be great for Carr, why not try and put a WR1 in his arsenal and see what you really have with him?

Because that's what they thought they were doing when they nabbed the WR from GB last time?

No one thought Jones was a WR1.

James Jones is being paid 3 mill a year, and was signed late in FA.

 

[Faust]

Randall Cobb should earn $9M/year on robust free-agent market

 

[FUBAR]

GB will offer him 7 MM per, Oak will offer 10; GB will counter with 8.5 and he'll stay. You can call me mystic mac.

As a Cobb owner, I hope you're right. But I'd also like to see him in Indy.

not Oakland, please.

Could be great for Carr, why not try and put a WR1 in his arsenal and see what you really have with him?

For Oakland it's probably a good call.

But not for Cobb.

 

[Faust]

Potential Jaguars free agent targets: Randall Cobb is a slot machine

 

[The Westin]

Cobb is only 24 yrs old if I'm not mistaken. He needs to be thinking about his next contract too, assuming this one is 4 yrs or so.

Jennings left for more money and completely fell off the face of the earth without Rodgers. A bad QB can make good WRs invisible.

Getting an extra million or so per year might lose Cobb money in the long run if he's catching balls from an unknown like Bortles or Carr.

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

ESPN's Rob Demovsky reports "no deal is imminent" between the Packers and free agent Randall Cobb.

Re-signing Cobb and RT Bryan Bulaga are the Packers' top priorities, but there haven't been any developments in contract talks. Cobb is reportedly seeking $9 million annually. The Packers have $33.2M in salary-cap space to re-sign Cobb, but could move forward with Davante Adams and Jeff Janis behind Jordy Nelson.

Source: ESPN.com
Feb 28 - 3:05 PM

 

[flapgreen]

Cobb is only 24 yrs old if I'm not mistaken. He needs to be thinking about his next contract too, assuming this one is 4 yrs or so.

Jennings left for more money and completely fell off the face of the earth without Rodgers. A bad QB can make good WRs invisible.

Getting an extra million or so per year might lose Cobb money in the long run if he's catching balls from an unknown like Bortles or Carr.

Jennings and Cobb situations are nothing alike. I really wish the Pack would let him walk so the Bears would have a shot, but they won't. No one let's a 24 year old wr as good as Cobb walk. They will figure it out. Green Bay is smart.

 

[Faust]

Keeping hope alive:

http://www.espnwisconsin.com/common/page.php?feed=2&id=19531&is_corp=1

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

The Packers have elected not to use the franchise tag on free agent Randall Cobb.
Cobb now heads to the open market, where he'll be the top wideout available after Dez Bryant and Demaryius Thomas were tagged on Monday. Still only 25 (in August), Cobb has had injury issues in the past, but beasted to a 91/1,287/12 line last season. The Pack will likely work to re-sign Cobb right up until the start of free agency, but there's little reason for Cobb not to let the market set his price.

Mar 2 - 4:05 PM

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reports free agent Randall Cobb could be seeking $12 million annually.
At least that was the scuttlebutt at the Combine. Cobb's original asking price was reportedly $9 million. The Packers could have secured Cobb for $12.823 million by giving him the franchise tag, but instead they'll let him test the market. $12 million isn't a realistic number for a player who, according to Pro Football Focus, played 87.3 percent of his snaps in the slot last season.

Source: Rob Demovsky on Twitter
Mar 2 - 5:02 PM

 

[Faust]

What's next for Packers, Randall Cobb?

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

Randall Cobb - WR - Packers

The Florida Times Union believes free agent Randall Cobb "should" be on the Jaguars' wish list.

Jaguars ace beat writer Ryan O'Halloran has been beating the drum for the team to add a premier playmaker, and is currently calling for Julius Thomas, Cobb, or even both. Jacksonville has a ton of room under the cap at the moment and seems prepared to blow some of its wad early in free agency. It's going to do everything it can to surround Blake Bortles with talent.

O'Halloran suggests ponying up a five-year, $56 million deal for Cobb. He's reportedly seeking $9-12 million per year.

Related: Jaguars

Source: Florida Times Union

Mar 4 - 8:47 AM

 

[cstu]

Rotoworld:

Randall Cobb - WR - Packers

The Florida Times Union believes free agent Randall Cobb "should" be on the Jaguars' wish list.

Jaguars ace beat writer Ryan O'Halloran has been beating the drum for the team to add a premier playmaker, and is currently calling for Julius Thomas, Cobb, or even both. Jacksonville has a ton of room under the cap at the moment and seems prepared to blow some of its wad early in free agency. It's going to do everything it can to surround Blake Bortles with talent.

O'Halloran suggests ponying up a five-year, $56 million deal for Cobb. He's reportedly seeking $9-12 million per year.

Related: Jaguars

Source: Florida Times Union

Mar 4 - 8:47 AM

Are they going 5 wide?