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

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

A league source told Packer Report's Bill Huber the Raiders are considering offering free agent Randall Cobb "a blockbuster deal."

The same source said Jacksonville is "prepared to make a run" at Cobb. The source claims Raiders GM Reggie McKenzie -- an ex-Packers personnel man -- is willing to offer Cobb $11 million annually, a price Green Bay GM Ted Thompson almost certainly wouldn't match. Cobb would replace James Jones as the Raiders' slot receiver. His fantasy outlook would take a huge blow in Oakland.

Related: Jaguars, Raiders

Source: Packer Report
Mar 4 - 10:09 AM

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

The Packers reportedly informed free agent Randall Cobb's camp that they are willing to sign him to a five-year deal worth $8-9 million annually.

Agent Jimmy Sexton "basically has told the team he's confident more lucrative offers await." Venerable Packers beat writer Bob McGinn confirms the Jaguars are "expected to be all over Cobb," while the Raiders are "also ready to enter the Cobb sweepstakes." Concludes McGinn, "barring the unexpected ... it appears as if Cobb will be playing elsewhere next season."

Related: Jaguars, Raiders

Source: Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel
Mar 4 - 10:22 AM

 

[Faust]

Green Bay Packers, Randall Cobb parting ways?

 

[Phenomena]

Rotoworld:

The Packers reportedly informed free agent Randall Cobb's camp that they are willing to sign him to a five-year deal worth $8-9 million annually.

Agent Jimmy Sexton "basically has told the team he's confident more lucrative offers await." Venerable Packers beat writer Bob McGinn confirms the Jaguars are "expected to be all over Cobb," while the Raiders are "also ready to enter the Cobb sweepstakes." Concludes McGinn, "barring the unexpected ... it appears as if Cobb will be playing elsewhere next season."

Related: Jaguars, Raiders

Source: Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel

Mar 4 - 10:22 AM

I think Packers fans can feel pretty confident that if the Jags/Raiders want to do something it's the wrong decision, and I'm glad the Packers aren't following suit.

 

[mr roboto]

With Carr in OAK? That might make some sense.

 

[Raider Nation]

C'mon ROBBER COBBER! Sign on that dotted line...

 

[Steed]

@AdamSchefter: Randall Cobb back to Green Bay on a 4-year, $40 million deal, per source.

 

[identikit]

@AdamSchefter: Randall Cobb back to Green Bay on a 4-year, $40 million deal, per source.

Yay

 

[Sup_Yo]

YES! Go Pack Go!

 

[Steed]

Only 17m guaranteed, but the likelihood of him seeing all 4 years/40m is pretty high

 

[Raider Nation]

 

[beef]

Only 17m guaranteed, but the likelihood of him seeing all 4 years/40m is pretty high

plus a few mill in endorsements. and a new chevy for being super bowl mvp.

 

[Raider Nation]

I'm disappointed but I respect the dude for leaving more money on the table elsewhere. He realizes that playing with the best QB in the game is more important than a few more bucks.

 

[Phenomena]

I cannot believe he took less. If he did, it couldn't have been by much. Players just don't do that often. It's a business first.

I'm guessing if it was <$3M over the four years he thought he could make that up easily on his last contract, since he'll have a glowing resume after another four years in GB. Then again slot receivers don't age well.

 

[Tony Jabroni]

BOOM.

In Ted We Trust.

 

[Faust]

Packers re-sign Randall Cobb: 4 things to know

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/25097922/packers-re-sign-randall-cobb-4-things-to-know

 

[Donnybrook]

Ian Wharton ‏@NFLFilmStudy

Per a source, the Miami Dolphins, Oakland Raiders and one unnamed team were offering Randall Cobb as much as $48 million over 4 years

 

[Phenomena]

Ian Wharton ‏@NFLFilmStudy

Per a source, the Miami Dolphins, Oakland Raiders and one unnamed team were offering Randall Cobb as much as $48 million over 4 years

DO NOT BELIEVE.

Or it was structured in a ludicrous way with not much guaranteed or signing bonus.

No player in NFL history has taken $8M less than his worth on any contract ever (nor should they).

This is just a bogus report so the GMs can save face saying they tried to get the best weapons available in free agency (to pacify stupid fan bases).

 

[Donnybrook]

Ian Wharton ‏@NFLFilmStudy

Per a source, the Miami Dolphins, Oakland Raiders and one unnamed team were offering Randall Cobb as much as $48 million over 4 years

DO NOT BELIEVE.

I can't vouch for the validity of the source but I could imagine that a WR desperate team might value Cobb as high as 12 M per year. After all, that is what Mike Wallace is making and the cap has gone up since then.

 

[Faust]

Packers make right move, retain WR Cobb with four-year, $40 million deal:

http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/03/07/nfl-free-agency-packers-retain-randall-cobb

 

[Faust]

Randall Cobb's return to Packers shows winning matters:

http://espn.go.com/blog/green-bay-packers/post/_/id/19136/randall-cobbs-return-to-packers-shows-winning-matters

 

[Phenomena]

Ian Wharton ‏@NFLFilmStudy

Per a source, the Miami Dolphins, Oakland Raiders and one unnamed team were offering Randall Cobb as much as $48 million over 4 years

DO NOT BELIEVE.

I can't vouch for the validity of the source but I could imagine that a WR desperate team might value Cobb as high as 12 M per year. After all, that is what Mike Wallace is making and the cap has gone up since then.

That's not what I'm saying. I believe teams are stupid enough to do that (see Wallace). The part I don't believe is that any NFL player ever left $8M on the table to stay with his current team. There's just no way. Nobody would do that. I think the Raiders or whomever are leaking that to make a pass to the fans that they TRIED to get him. I don't seriously believe Cobb left $8M on the table to stay in GB. $1-$2M I could believe, because he can make that up on his last contract by playing stellar with Rodgers for four years. But $8M? No effin' way.

 

[The Man With No Name]

Ian Wharton ‏@NFLFilmStudy

Per a source, the Miami Dolphins, Oakland Raiders and one unnamed team were offering Randall Cobb as much as $48 million over 4 years

DO NOT BELIEVE.

I can't vouch for the validity of the source but I could imagine that a WR desperate team might value Cobb as high as 12 M per year. After all, that is what Mike Wallace is making and the cap has gone up since then.

That's not what I'm saying. I believe teams are stupid enough to do that (see Wallace). The part I don't believe is that any NFL player ever left $8M on the table to stay with his current team. There's just no way. Nobody would do that. I think the Raiders or whomever are leaking that to make a pass to the fans that they TRIED to get him. I don't seriously believe Cobb left $8M on the table to stay in GB. $1-$2M I could believe, because he can make that up on his last contract by playing stellar with Rodgers for four years. But $8M? No effin' way.

Can't do much more with $48 million than with $40 million.

 

[Sabertooth]

Nice. Since they cut Bostick now and dumped Slocum, you'd have to think they are the favorites in the NFC right?

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Nice. Since they cut Bostick now and dumped Slocum, you'd have to think they are the favorites in the NFC right?

They should be neck and neck with Seattle.

 

[Rookie_Whisperer]

Even if Cobb left a few million on the table short term by not taking an Oakland offer, his long term value and opportunity at his next contract are now better. No WR comes out of Oakland and lands a mega contract.

 

[Sabertooth]

There was no Oakland offer.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Nice. Since they cut Bostick now and dumped Slocum, you'd have to think they are the favorites in the NFC right?

Lets see what seattle does at WR

GB could improve their D a little too, and if GB loses Bulaga they need to address his spot

if #12 is healthy though they have a shot

 

[Rookie_Whisperer]

There was no Oakland offer.

According to Ian Rapoport, Cobb had 6-7 other offers yesterday. What makes you think Oakland wasn't one?

 

[Sabertooth]

I stand corrected

 

[sho nuff]

Nice. Since they cut Bostick now and dumped Slocum, you'd have to think they are the favorites in the NFC right?

They should be neck and neck with Seattle.

Sign Bulaga and yes. Seattle with a slight edge...but GB is right there ad long as Rodgers is healthy.

 

[Donnybrook]

There was no Oakland offer.

Vincent Frank ‏@VincentFrankNFL@NFLFilmStudy @DAR12321 Raiders and 49ers were near $25M guaranteed. Cobb pulled a major home-town discount.

I don't know this Vincent Frank from Adam but his profile says he is an NFL business writer at Forbes.

Hard to know what to believe in the Twitterverse.

 

[Jeremy]

Even if Cobb left a few million on the table short term by not taking an Oakland offer, his long term value and opportunity at his next contract are now better. No WR comes out of Oakland and lands a mega contract.

Yeah, Oakland or another team like them will still be there for him when he's in his late 20s and looking to cash in one last time. Aside from even that, he can build a brand much easier in Green Bay as a star player than a 900 yard/5TD player in Oakland or Miami. Have you seen Greg Jennings doing pushups with a boat on his back recently?

 

[Donnybrook]

I will play devil's advocate here and argue that a player taking less money not to play for certain organizations upsets the parity of the league. It's funny how it's not an issue yet the league is wasting multi-millions on the issue of deflated footballs that supposedly caused some sort of competitive advantage.

 

[sho nuff]

I will play devil's advocate here and argue that a player taking less money not to play for certain organizations upsets the parity of the league. It's funny how it's not an issue yet the league is wasting multi-millions on the issue of deflated footballs that supposedly caused some sort of competitive advantage.

You want the league to mandate where free agents sign and for how much?

 

[The Kerminator]

Maybe the NFL should become a redraft league every year. This keeper league stuff is no fun.

 

[Donnybrook]

I will play devil's advocate here and argue that a player taking less money not to play for certain organizations upsets the parity of the league. It's funny how it's not an issue yet the league is wasting multi-millions on the issue of deflated footballs that supposedly caused some sort of competitive advantage.

You want the league to mandate where free agents sign and for how much?

No but they give out compensatory picks to teams that draft well. They do this because it supposedly helps promote "parity". I think they are redundant and the league should do away with them. The rich get richer. Carry on.

 

[cstu]

I will play devil's advocate here and argue that a player taking less money not to play for certain organizations upsets the parity of the league. It's funny how it's not an issue yet the league is wasting multi-millions on the issue of deflated footballs that supposedly caused some sort of competitive advantage.

You want the league to mandate where free agents sign and for how much?

No but they give out compensatory picks to teams that draft well. They do this because it supposedly helps promote "parity". I think they are redundant and the league should do away with them. The rich get richer. Carry on.

It helps out the less desirable teams that can't keep free agents without overpaying.

 

[Donnybrook]

I will play devil's advocate here and argue that a player taking less money not to play for certain organizations upsets the parity of the league. It's funny how it's not an issue yet the league is wasting multi-millions on the issue of deflated footballs that supposedly caused some sort of competitive advantage.

You want the league to mandate where free agents sign and for how much?

No but they give out compensatory picks to teams that draft well. They do this because it supposedly helps promote "parity". I think they are redundant and the league should do away with them. The rich get richer. Carry on.

It helps out the less desirable teams that can't keep free agents without overpaying.

and they can't get free agents without overpaying so the net gain is zero.

 

[Faust]

Randall Cobb made the right call sticking with the Packers

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

ESPN's Andrew Brandt reports WR Randall Cobb turned down better deals elsewhere to remain with the Packers.
"I know for a fact -- I'm pretty tied in with his situation -- he left a lot of money on the table," Brandt said. "And I knew it was going to be hard to pry him away. It's a system he liked; he knows he's playing with the best quarterback." Cobb was reportedly seeking $11 million per season, but settled for $10M annually. His new contract keeps him in Green Bay through his age-29 season. Cobb is a top-15 fantasy receiver for 2015.

Source: ESPN.com
Mar 14 - 3:15 PM

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

Randall Cobb admitted "it's going to be hard to top what I did last year."

In a contract year last season, Cobb went off for 91 catches, 1,287 yards and 12 touchdowns. The catches and yards are potentially repeatable thanks to Aaron Rodgers, but the scoring will regress. Cobb also expects Davante Adams and Richard Rodgers to take steps forward in terms of target count as they get more comfortable in the scheme. "We’ve got a great offense, a lot of weapons. It’s going to be hard to top what I did last year," he said.

Source: Packers.com
Jun 9 - 11:19 AM

 

[Faust]

Randall Cobb’s Honesty, the Saints’ Potential Pain, Bruce Arians’ Wisdom and More

Excerpt:

I think it’s refreshing for Randall Cobb to put bravado aside and admit that it’s going to be hard for him to top what he did last year, when he caught 91 passes for 1,287 yards and 12 touchdowns. Cobb, who signed a four-year, $40 million contract this past offseason to stay in Green Bay, had reason for his assertion, telling the Packers’ website, “Davante [Adams is] coming along, that adds a target, and he’s going to get more targets.” Exactly. Adams has a chance to become the next Jordy Nelson in Mike McCarthy’s system. His rise—plus the subtle rise we can expect from second-year tight end Richard Rodgers—means fewer touches for Cobb.

 

[cstu]

(Rotoworld)Randall Cobb admitted "it's going to be hard to top what I did last year."

Analysis: In a contract year last season, Cobb went off for 91 catches, 1,287 yards and 12 touchdowns. The catches and yards are potentially repeatable thanks to Aaron Rodgers, but the scoring will regress. Cobb also expects Davante Adams and Richard Rodgers to take steps forward in terms of target count as they get more comfortable in the scheme. "WeÂ’ve got a great offense, a lot of weapons. ItÂ’s going to be hard to top what I did last year," he said.

 

[Sabertooth]

Randall Cobb's return to Packers shows winning matters:

http://espn.go.com/blog/green-bay-packers/post/_/id/19136/randall-cobbs-return-to-packers-shows-winning-matters

Winning matters to the Packers? Huh, I'd have never thought that.

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

Randall Cobb lined up in the backfield 33 times over his last five games.

He saw only 13 snaps there in his previous 11 contests. Cobb's 11 carries last season were a career high. The 24-year-old is a far better receiver than gadget players like Percy Harvin or Cordarrelle Patterson, but Cobb's position versatility gives the Packers another way to funnel him touches.

Source: Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel

Jul 26 - 11:02 AM

 

[Deamon]

What is his value now that Nelson is out? Some are saying he gets a bump (this sites rankings included)... some saying a downgrade.

 

[TheBottomLine]

I don't see how he gets downgraded from this, especially in PPR leagues. Maybe his TD's dip but I expect him to see a lot more targets, which is stating the obvious. I could see his projections going from 90/1200/10 to 100/1350/8, or something similar.

 

[EastonBlues22]

Cobb will get a few more targets, but GB will spread most of the excess targets and TD opportunities around so I don't think the offensive boost will be huge.

I do think this negates some of the concern about him regressing, though, so you could argue there's less risk in selecting him.

Slightly higher ceiling plus slightly higher floor = bump for me.

 

[karmarooster]

Maybe a few more targets but I don't think his short/intermediate/backfield role changes much. Adams and TE Rodgers (and Lacy) the real beneficiaries here.