Walker to Denver (1 Viewer)

[packersfan]

here are the Packers' options:1. Kiss and make up with Walker and give him a big contract right now. It's probably not too late. Money heals all wounds.

I think it is too late. Walker has too many people close to him giving him horrible advice. I think it's too late to repair the damage he's caused.

2. Let Walker report in week ten. Pay him his peanuts and see if he can help you win a few games at the end of the year. Then let him walk after the 2006 season.

I see no reason to do this from the Packers' perspective.

3. Let Walker report in week ten, pay him some peanuts, win some games. Then slap the franchise tag on him in 2007 and pay him like a top five receiver in the league.

If Walker isn't traded, this is the move that has the most potential for the Packers. It will put the onus on Walker to perform at a high level for them in 2007 which will have the end result of making the team better.

4. Trade Walker now.

This is what I think will happen. If the Packers do trade Walker I hope the worst they get for him is a second-round pick and preferably a high one (the Broncos' 37th pick is the one I'd be looking at). Anything less than that is akin to caving and giving in to Walker, not to mention Thompson will have failed badly to get a positive return for one of the few legitimate talents on the team. I think Thompson has handled the Walker situation perfectly so far but if he does decide to trade him he must make sure he gets proper value in return.

 

[jetsman]

The Packs Image is that of an organization that Disrespects its players, from Antonio Freeman to Mike McKenzie to Darren Sharper to Javon Walker to Grady Jackson. does it ever stop?this team was a great team for a long time but the front office has condemned this squad to the basement by not appreciating its stars and being totally ego driven. no wonder Bretts behaving this way. thompson it says here will be fired with a sub .500 record. get used to the top of the draft packer fans. the Arrogance of Thompson will keep you there a while

 

[P Boy]

The Packs Image is that of an organization that Disrespects its players, from Antonio Freeman to Mike McKenzie to Darren Sharper to Javon Walker to Grady Jackson. does it ever stop?this team was a great team for a long time but the front office has condemned this squad to the basement by not appreciating its stars and being totally ego driven. no wonder Bretts behaving this way. thompson it says here will be fired with a sub .500 record. get used to the top of the draft packer fans. the Arrogance of Thompson will keep you there a while

Coming from a Jets fan, that really hurts.Actually, I'd be strained to find poorer reasoning backed up with faultier evidence regarding any subject here on the board.

 

[msommer]

4. Trade Walker now.

This is what I think will happen.If the Packers do trade Walker I hope the worst they get for him is a second-round pick and preferably a high one (the Broncos' 37th pick is the one I'd be looking at). Anything less than that is akin to caving and giving in to Walker, not to mention Thompson will have failed badly to get a positive return for one of the few legitimate talents on the team. I think Thompson has handled the Walker situation perfectly so far but if he does decide to trade him he must make sure he gets proper value in return.

Given the talk that Lelie was supposed to be traded to SF for that pick I'd be surprised if that comes about. Certainly not before Denver has found a new home for Lelie. Personally I expect #37 to be used for a WR or RB - whichever is not picked at #15

 

[Big Score]

Anything less than that is akin to caving and giving in to Walker, not to mention Thompson will have failed badly to get a positive return for one of the few legitimate talents on the team................................................. I think Thompson has handled the Walker situation perfectly so far but if he does decide to trade him he must make sure he gets proper value in return.

The two blue entries of the quote don't make sense to me.If Ted Thompsons' handling of one of the few legitimate talents on his team, results in that talent threatening to retire before playing another down for said team, is an example of the situation being handled perfectly....I'm glad the FO of other teams aren't so perfect.

Just a couple of examples where I think other Front Offices have handled the talent on their team better.

The way the Steelers handled Ward.

More recently, the Bengals & Chad Johnson.

 

[packersfan]

Ward and Johnson are also better WRs with far more extensive seasons of success on their resume. If Walker had produced the numbers Ward and Johnson have over the past several seasons (as opposed to one standout season) it would be much easier for the Packers to follow suit. I have zero problems with how Thompson has handled this situation. Walker's made his own bed and he has to lie in it. The Packers are going to stink this season with or without Walker anyway so if he doesn't play it's not like it's going to be the difference between a Super Bowl or not or even a playoff berth or not.

 

[P Boy]

Anything less than that is akin to caving and giving in to Walker, not to mention Thompson will have failed badly to get a positive return for one of the few legitimate talents on the team................................................. I think Thompson has handled the Walker situation perfectly so far but if he does decide to trade him he must make sure he gets proper value in return.

The two blue entries of the quote don't make sense to me.If Ted Thompsons' handling of one of the few legitimate talents on his team, results in that talent threatening to retire before playing another down for said team, is an example of the situation being handled perfectly....I'm glad the FO of other teams aren't so perfect.

Just a couple of examples where I think other Front Offices have handled the talent on their team better.

The way the Steelers handled Ward.

More recently, the Bengals & Chad Johnson.

Okay, let's talk about the Walker situation for a moment, and consequently we'll talk a bit about Freeman & Grady Jackson at the same time, and McKenzie & Sharper in a round-about way.First of all, GB has a policy of not renegotiating player contracts until they have 1 year or less left on the contract. This serves a two-fold purpose. First, it allows them to manage their cap space from year to year, paying players who have earned salary increases in a regular, managed fashion.

DEN applies this philosophy also, which allows them to be one of the most adroit teams in the league at manging the cap & keeping competitive teams on the field year after year. I know some other teams do also, but I can't say with certainty so I won't try to guess. This is why precisely DEN traded Portis to WAS - he tried to hold up DEN & Shanahan with 2 years left on his rookie contract. Shanahan would have let Portis sit, but WAS made such an outrageous offer DEN couldn't say no.

Secondly, it allows them to not get held up by players after having one or two great years at the beginning or middle of an extended contract. GB renegotiated Freeman's contract right after he had consecutive 1200/12 & 1400/14 seasons, seeking to reward him handsomely for his work. How did Freeman repay GB? He came to camp out of shape & with a crappy attitude, and consequently his performance dropped by 25% in yards and 57% in TDs the next year, and continually fell each year until GB had to cut him to reduce the impact of a completely mediocre player with his huge cap number. Freeman was out of the league 2 years later, fizzling to a miserable finish.

GB also realizes that Favre's capability has inflated many WR's numbers. Look at WRs like Robert Brooks, who had a 1400/14 season and could never come anywhere close to repeating those numbers, and was out of the league 1 year after leaving GB, or Bill Schroeder who put up consecutive 1000 yd seasons (okay, one was a 999 yder) but couldn't come close to that after leaving as a FA and was out of the league 2 years later.

So, that puts GB in a position where they are trying to manage the cap effectively. Let's not lose sight that GB was a team that had won 3 consecutive NFC North championships as was 12-4 the year before when the Bears won it before 2005. They haven't had a below .500 record since 1991 before last year - when they were decimated by injuries & were relegated to starting their #4 WR and their #5 RB, yet still managed to stay in most games, losing by 7 or less 8 times. They had been to 2 SBs, winning one, and should have gone to a third if the players had been capable of preventing a completion of a 4th & 26 play vs PHI (or if the coaches had been smart enough to go for a 4th & 1 earlier when PHI was struggling stopping the running game).

I'd say GB does a pretty effective job in managing the cap (and hence cap philosophy) with that kind of continuous success. They also made some mistakes (ie Freeman) but were going to learn from them.

Now comes last year where GB is hard up against the cap but has managed their numbers very well so that they will have incredible cap space after the season. They managed their finnces so that they could pay a guy like Walker big dollars if he could repeat his one great year of 2004 the next year. It would have been Walker's time to cash in. Walker knows GB's policy of renegotiating, just like every agent knows DEN's policy. The players will be rewarded the year before the rookie contract is up if they honor their rookie contracts up to that time & they perform very well.

So, even knowing the GB cap policy, and knowing GB was hard up against the cap last year, both Walker & Grady Jackson decided to play hard ball instead at the same time. Even though they knew GB had no cap room, they both held out to get a significant pay increase. Nevermind that it was against GB policy to renegotiate those contracts - with the lack of cap space, GB would have had to cut a few players to comply with either of those requests. Interestingly enough, both Walker & Jackson had the same agent - so their agent was really playing the two players against each other while trying to get money that just wasn't there. And the really sad thing is if they had waited just 1 year, they both probably would have been in for long term, large number salaries compensatory ith their worth at their elative positions.

Instead, they both played chicken in a game they couldn't possibly win - and sure enough, they lost.

That's why I believe that the post above from Big Score has little merit. The cap situations apparently don't play into his thinking, much less expecting players to honor the contracts they willingly signed years before, taking guaranteed money up front in the manner of a signing bonus to sign for the years they did. Walker even insisted on an extended contract, rather than the 3 years contract GB initially offered.

That's also why I don't give the jetsman's post any credibility at all. He doesn't know what he' talking about in any way, shape, or form, and GB has one hell of a lot better track record over the past 15+ years than his beloved Jets do.

Have fun.

 

[Big Score]

Anything less than that is akin to caving and giving in to Walker, not to mention Thompson will have failed badly to get a positive return for one of the few legitimate talents on the team................................................. I think Thompson has handled the Walker situation perfectly so far but if he does decide to trade him he must make sure he gets proper value in return.

The two blue entries of the quote don't make sense to me.If Ted Thompsons' handling of one of the few legitimate talents on his team, results in that talent threatening to retire before playing another down for said team, is an example of the situation being handled perfectly....I'm glad the FO of other teams aren't so perfect.

Just a couple of examples where I think other Front Offices have handled the talent on their team better.

The way the Steelers handled Ward.

More recently, the Bengals & Chad Johnson.

First of all, GB has a policy of not renegotiating player contracts until they have 1 year or less left on the contract. This serves a two-fold purpose. First, it allows them to manage their cap space from year to year, paying players who have earned salary increases in a regular, managed fashion.

FYI Pony Boy.This is the last year of Walker's contract.

 

[packersfan]

This is the last year of Walker's contract.

He's also coming off a major knee injury. Given how there are no guarantees Walker will get back to the level he displayed in 2004 the Packers would be fools to give him a mega-contract now. The injury stinks for Walker but that's a part of football.

 

[packersfan]

Oh and how exactly did the Packers do wrong with Antonio Freeman. He got paid. He got paid A LOT and he promptly lost the fire and drive that made him a Pro Bowl WR and that ended up killing the Packers. So that's an example of the Packers doing right by a player and getting burned by it.

I'm not sure how they wronged Sharper either. Can they get a refund for all the money they paid him when he often stunk to high heaven his last two seasons with the team? How come nobody is whining about that?

 

[Big Score]

If Walker had produced the numbers Ward and Johnson have over the past several seasons (as opposed to one standout season) it would be much easier for the Packers to follow suit.

Your reasoning above seems to conflict with your reasoning below.

Thompson will have failed badly to get a positive return for one of the few legitimate talents on the team.

The position on what draft pick the Packers should hold out for if dealing Walker, is also conflicting.With one year remaining, he's not good enough to sign long term , but he is good enough to be worth at least 2nd rounder if not more?

That doesn't make sense.

Thompson has bungled the Walker situation badly. No doubt in my mind.

 

[Big Score]

This is the last year of Walker's contract.

He's also coming off a major knee injury. Given how there are no guarantees Walker will get back to the level he displayed in 2004 the Packers would be fools to give him a mega-contract now. The injury stinks for Walker but that's a part of football.

Several NFL teams who are trying to acquire Walker, seem to believe otherwise.

 

[packersfan]

I'm not sure why you're confused. I like Javon Walker and I believe in terms of talent he is worth keeping long-term. However, the Packers would be foolish to commit long-term money to a player coming off a major knee injury who has had only one good season. To ignore the fact he suffered a major injury is rather foolish IMO.

In terms of his trade value given how he is one of the few legitimate talents on the team Thompson needs to ensure he gets proper value in return. It's stupid for the Packers to just give him away.

As I've said, I haven't been a big fan of Thompson so far but I think he has handled this situation perfectly thus far. Walker's the one who's caused the problems here and now he has to deal with the consequences of his actions.

 

[packersfan]

This is the last year of Walker's contract.

He's also coming off a major knee injury. Given how there are no guarantees Walker will get back to the level he displayed in 2004 the Packers would be fools to give him a mega-contract now. The injury stinks for Walker but that's a part of football.

Several NFL teams who are trying to acquire Walker, seem to believe otherwise.

I don't know any team that's offered to sign Walker to an extension at this time. What I have heard are rumors that teams are interested in trading for him now and having him be on their team with the (likely) belief they'd then like to sign him to a long-term deal after the 2006 season.Sounds a lot like what the Packers would like to do.

 

[Bears_Man2]

GB also realizes that Favre's capability has inflated many WR's numbers.

......And Walker and the rest of the league saw the Packers 2005 passing offense w/o him. It's kind of ironic that Denver & Philadelphia are the two teams mentioned (one w/o a #1 & the other with an aging one). Obviously someone likes him to break back to being one of the best WR's in the league.Walker will get paid regardless and he's made his choice it won't be with the Packers. So Green Bay can continue to hold onto its money.

So let me get this straight, they won't spend $$ to better themselves for the present (to make a final run with Favre).......and they have arguably their best player for the future wanting out (who has made clear it's irrelevant what they offer). Nice

Thompson likes to build through the draft. Build away Ted.

 

[Sabertooth]

Okay, let's talk about the Walker situation for a moment, and consequently we'll talk a bit about Freeman & Grady Jackson at the same time, and McKenzie & Sharper in a round-about way.

First of all, GB has a policy of not renegotiating player contracts until they have 1 year or less left on the contract.  This serves a two-fold purpose.  First, it allows them to manage their cap space from year to year, paying players who have earned salary increases in a regular, managed fashion. 

DEN applies this philosophy also, which allows them to be one of the most adroit teams in the league at manging the cap & keeping competitive teams on the field year after year.  I know some other teams do also, but I can't say with certainty so I won't try to guess.  This is why precisely DEN traded Portis to WAS - he tried to hold up DEN & Shanahan with 2 years left on his rookie contract.  Shanahan would have let Portis sit, but WAS made such an outrageous offer DEN couldn't say no.

Secondly, it allows them to not get held up by players after having one or two great years at the beginning or middle of an extended contract.  GB renegotiated Freeman's contract right after he had consecutive 1200/12 & 1400/14 seasons, seeking to reward him handsomely for his work.  How did Freeman repay GB?  He came to camp out of shape & with a crappy attitude, and consequently his performance dropped by 25% in yards and 57% in TDs the next year, and continually fell each year until GB had to cut him to reduce the impact of a completely mediocre player with his huge cap number.  Freeman was out of the league 2 years later, fizzling to a miserable finish.

GB also realizes that Favre's capability has inflated many WR's numbers.  Look at WRs like Robert Brooks, who had a 1400/14 season and could never come anywhere close to repeating those numbers, and was out of the league 1 year after leaving GB, or Bill Schroeder who put up consecutive 1000 yd seasons (okay, one was a 999 yder) but couldn't come close to that after leaving as a FA and was out of the league 2 years later.

So, that puts GB in a position where they are trying to manage the cap effectively.  Let's not lose sight that GB was a team that had won 3 consecutive NFC North championships as was 12-4 the year before when the Bears won it before 2005.  They haven't had a below .500 record since 1991 before last year - when they were decimated by injuries & were relegated to starting their #4 WR and their #5 RB, yet still managed to stay in most games, losing by 7 or less 8 times.  They had been to 2 SBs, winning one, and should have gone to a third if the players had been capable of preventing a completion of a 4th & 26 play vs PHI (or if the coaches had been smart enough to go for a 4th & 1 earlier when PHI was struggling stopping the running game).

I'd say GB does a pretty effective job in managing the cap (and hence cap philosophy) with that kind of continuous success.  They also made some mistakes (ie Freeman) but were going to learn from them.

Now comes last year where GB is hard up against the cap but has managed their numbers very well so that they will have incredible cap space after the season.  They managed their finnces so that they could pay a guy like Walker big dollars if he could repeat his one great year of 2004 the next year.  It would have been Walker's time to cash in.  Walker knows GB's policy of renegotiating, just like every agent knows DEN's policy.  The players will be rewarded the year before the rookie contract is up if they honor their rookie contracts up to that time & they perform very well. 

So, even knowing the GB cap policy, and knowing GB was hard up against the cap last year, both Walker & Grady Jackson decided to play hard ball instead at the same time.  Even though they knew GB had no cap room, they both held out to get a significant pay increase.  Nevermind that it was against GB policy to renegotiate those contracts - with the lack of cap space, GB would have had to cut a few players to comply with either of those requests.  Interestingly enough, both Walker & Jackson had the same agent - so their agent was really playing the two players against each other while trying to get money that just wasn't there.  And the really sad thing is if they had waited just 1 year, they both probably would have been in for long term, large number salaries compensatory ith their worth at their elative positions.

Instead, they both played chicken in a game they couldn't possibly win - and sure enough, they lost.

That's why I believe that the post above from Big Score has little merit.  The cap situations apparently don't play into his thinking, much less expecting players to honor the contracts they willingly signed years before, taking guaranteed money up front in the manner of a signing bonus to sign for the years they did.  Walker even insisted on an extended contract, rather than the 3 years contract GB initially offered.

That's also why I don't give the jetsman's post any credibility at all.  He doesn't know what he' talking about in any way, shape, or form, and GB has one hell of a lot better track record over the past 15+ years than his beloved Jets do. 

Have fun.

Truly a This guy gets it.

 

[Sabertooth]

GB also realizes that Favre's capability has inflated many WR's numbers.

......And Walker and the rest of the league saw the Packers 2005 passing offense w/o him. It's kind of ironic that Denver & Philadelphia are the two teams mentioned (one w/o a #1 & the other with an aging one). Obviously someone likes him to break back to being one of the best WR's in the league.Walker will get paid regardless and he's made his choice it won't be with the Packers. So Green Bay can continue to hold onto its money.

So let me get this straight, they won't spend $$ to better themselves for the present (to make a final run with Favre).......and they have arguably their best player for the future wanting out (who has made clear it's irrelevant what they offer). Nice

Thompson likes to build through the draft. Build away Ted.

Bear's fans The Packers tried to give Favre "a final run" about 5 years in a row when Mike Sherman was at the Helm. He couldn't do it at 32, 33, 34 or 35, he won't do it at 36. Sherman so depleted this team of depth in the name of "one final shot" that they imploded upon themselves last season. They needed a guy like Ted Thompson who wanted to rebuild instead of reload.

 

[P Boy]

Anything less than that is akin to caving and giving in to Walker, not to mention Thompson will have failed badly to get a positive return for one of the few legitimate talents on the team................................................. I think Thompson has handled the Walker situation perfectly so far but if he does decide to trade him he must make sure he gets proper value in return.

The two blue entries of the quote don't make sense to me.If Ted Thompsons' handling of one of the few legitimate talents on his team, results in that talent threatening to retire before playing another down for said team, is an example of the situation being handled perfectly....I'm glad the FO of other teams aren't so perfect.

Just a couple of examples where I think other Front Offices have handled the talent on their team better.

The way the Steelers handled Ward.

More recently, the Bengals & Chad Johnson.

First of all, GB has a policy of not renegotiating player contracts until they have 1 year or less left on the contract. This serves a two-fold purpose. First, it allows them to manage their cap space from year to year, paying players who have earned salary increases in a regular, managed fashion.

FYI Pony Boy.This is the last year of Walker's contract.

Thanks for telling me something I already posted.Walker burned his bridge with GB last season. Please pay attention.

 

[gang-wars]

Anything less than that is akin to caving and giving in to Walker, not to mention Thompson will have failed badly to get a positive return for one of the few legitimate talents on the team................................................. I think Thompson has handled the Walker situation perfectly so far but if he does decide to trade him he must make sure he gets proper value in return.

The two blue entries of the quote don't make sense to me.If Ted Thompsons' handling of one of the few legitimate talents on his team, results in that talent threatening to retire before playing another down for said team, is an example of the situation being handled perfectly....I'm glad the FO of other teams aren't so perfect.

Just a couple of examples where I think other Front Offices have handled the talent on their team better.

The way the Steelers handled Ward.

More recently, the Bengals & Chad Johnson.

Exactly. They told Ward to report, they'd do a deal. They told Walker to just report and shut up. They should have locked him up once he reported in good faith. I'm not sure how anything can think GB is nothing but a mess on all accounts.

 

[jetsman]

pony boy has absolutely no credence here, the only reason green bay did anything in the last 15 years is that they grabbed Brett Favre. and were lucky enough to get Ron Wolf to be their GM If the Jets Ownership Had moved up two Spots as Wolf had suggested and gotten him ahead of atlanta, Greenbay would have been Second Division all Along.

What Pony can cant see since his nose is so far up thomsons Posterior is that no team in the NFL has had as many star players come out so vociferously in so short a period with basically the same complaint. the players all say they arent respected, thay all say they are treated as if they arent valued, and they dont ever want to play there any longer

All teams have players who say things to get better contracts only a fool would deny this, but how many have had as many pro Bowl Caliber performers leave in so short a time. and how many have done so spewing such anger. remember walker came back in camp last year at the urging of team Leader Favre and he was hurt. where was Brett then, did he come out publicly and say the team take care of Javon ? where is Brett now. why he's sitting hom holding his own little powerplay for which he castrated Javon and Mackenzie for previously.

Pony can say what he wants here, I have no axe to grind. I just look at how many pro bowl players have come and gone over the past 5 years and how many leave on very bad terms and say whats the corelation. If he can name another team with as much turnover of pro bowlers in 5 years let him produce it.... even ex packers who have retired like Chmura and Levens have spoken out about this, whats so hard to see.

personally I think Ponys nose is so far up Thompsons that he cant see the obvious

 

[Mario Kart]

Pony Boy spelled out everything that anyone needs to know about the subject. Those that have read his post and still post opposite comments are failing to see how the NFL works. We have to simply accept that those posters who do not get it... simply do not get it. Pony Boy and others have expressed the true opinion of the matter quite bluntly. Comparing any WR to Walker's situation is lame and an attempt to make a valid point from an invalid scenario.

Thanks for the post Pony Boy because those who can comprehend what it is you said should understand the situation more clearly. Unfortunately I dont think some picked up on it.

 

[Big Score]

Anything less than that is akin to caving and giving in to Walker, not to mention Thompson will have failed badly to get a positive return for one of the few legitimate talents on the team................................................. I think Thompson has handled the Walker situation perfectly so far but if he does decide to trade him he must make sure he gets proper value in return.

The two blue entries of the quote don't make sense to me.If Ted Thompsons' handling of one of the few legitimate talents on his team, results in that talent threatening to retire before playing another down for said team, is an example of the situation being handled perfectly....I'm glad the FO of other teams aren't so perfect.

Just a couple of examples where I think other Front Offices have handled the talent on their team better.

The way the Steelers handled Ward.

More recently, the Bengals & Chad Johnson.

First of all, GB has a policy of not renegotiating player contracts until they have 1 year or less left on the contract. This serves a two-fold purpose. First, it allows them to manage their cap space from year to year, paying players who have earned salary increases in a regular, managed fashion.

FYI Pony Boy.This is the last year of Walker's contract.

Walker burned his bridge with GB last season.

You're speaking out of your butt here Pony Boy. Unless you've got a direct pipeline to the pPackers Front Office, this pure unadulterated speculation on your part. Walker threatened a hold out last year, making it known he was unhappy with his current deal and then reported. The list of NFL players who do that is a long, long, long, longggg list. Has every single one of them burnt bridges to their respective clubs? A holdout or threatened holdout, is the only way for players to leverage themselves and I know you're well aware of that.

Please pay attention.

I pay attention to solid facts, not idle speculation or abritrary opinions.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

FYI Pony Boy.

This is the last year of Walker's contract.

Walker burned his bridge with GB last season.

You're speaking out of your butt here Pony Boy. Unless you've got a direct pipeline to the pPackers Front Office, this pure unadulterated speculation on your part.

Pony Boy said that the Packers don't renegotiate when there's more than one year left on a player's contract. Before the 2005 season, as Pony Boy mentioned, Walker had more than one year left on his contract. So he was holding out even though the Packers were not going to renegotiate at that point.Pony Boy had all of his facts right.

As for whether the bridge is totally burned, who knows? Walker says it has been. But large sums of money sometimes change people's minds. Nonetheless, I doubt the Packers are about to throw large sums of money at him, so the point is probably moot.

 

[Big Score]

Pony Boy spelled out everything that anyone needs to know about the subject. Those that have read his post and still post opposite comments are failing to see how the NFL works. We have to simply accept that those posters who do not get it... simply do not get it. Pony Boy and others have expressed the true opinion of the matter quite bluntly.

Could not disagree more strongly Psychology Kev. It IS by knowing how the NFL works, that makes Walker's situation understandable. The ONLY leverage a player has to get what they feel is an underserving contract addressed by an organization refusing to do so, is by holding out, or threatening a holdout.

Comparing any WR to Walker's situation is lame and an attempt to make a valid point from an invalid scenario.

This is just too ridiculous for words.

 

[Mario Kart]

Pony Boy spelled out everything that anyone needs to know about the subject.  Those that have read his post and still post opposite comments are failing to see how the NFL works.  We have to simply accept that those posters who do not get it... simply do not get it.  Pony Boy and others have expressed the true opinion of the matter quite bluntly.

Could not disagree more strongly Psychology Kev. It IS by knowing how the NFL works, that makes Walker's situation understandable. The ONLY leverage a player has to get what they feel is an underserving contract addressed by an organization refusing to do so, is by holding out, or threatening a holdout.

Comparing any WR to Walker's situation is lame and an attempt to make a valid point from an invalid scenario. 

This is just too ridiculous for words.

Walker asked and received the contract AND money he wanted in his rookie year. If he knew he was going to be a super star then he should have accepted the original offer from the Packers. Walker is the one who goofed up here... no ifs, ands, or buts about it. Accept that fact.

 

[Big Score]

FYI Pony Boy.

This is the last year of Walker's contract.

Walker burned his bridge with GB last season.

You're speaking out of your butt here Pony Boy. Unless you've got a direct pipeline to the pPackers Front Office, this pure unadulterated speculation on your part.

As for whether the bridge is totally burned, who knows?

Considering that my quote & reply was specifically to Pony Boy's assertation that Walker had burned his bridge last year and you're saying who knows about that, I'm not sure what your point is Maurile?

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Considering that my quote & reply was specifically to Pony Boy's assertation that Walker had burned his bridge last year and you're saying who knows about that, I'm not sure what your point is Maurile?

My point was that Pony Boy obviously already knew when Walker's contract was set to expire, so your "FYI" didn't make sense. It was just telling him what he already knew. Maybe I misunderstood.

 

[cstu]

Pony Boy spelled out everything that anyone needs to know about the subject. Those that have read his post and still post opposite comments are failing to see how the NFL works. We have to simply accept that those posters who do not get it... simply do not get it. Pony Boy and others have expressed the true opinion of the matter quite bluntly.

Could not disagree more strongly Psychology Kev. It IS by knowing how the NFL works, that makes Walker's situation understandable. The ONLY leverage a player has to get what they feel is an underserving contract addressed by an organization refusing to do so, is by holding out, or threatening a holdout.

Comparing any WR to Walker's situation is lame and an attempt to make a valid point from an invalid scenario.

This is just too ridiculous for words.

Walker asked and received the contract AND money he wanted in his rookie year. If he knew he was going to be a super star then he should have accepted the original offer from the Packers. Walker is the one who goofed up here... no ifs, ands, or buts about it. Accept that fact.

Most teams try to re-sign their young players for the long-term when they outplay their rookie contract. Walker was asking for what most young Pro Bowl players get but the Packers felt content to take advantage of his low salary on his rookie contract. That's their option, but it's not a good way to keep players from leaving in free agency. It's only human nature for people to want to get paid what they think they are worth.Let me put it this way - do you think that LT would be a Charger today if the management told him they wanted him to play out his original contract before re-signing him?

 

[Big Score]

Pony Boy spelled out everything that anyone needs to know about the subject. Those that have read his post and still post opposite comments are failing to see how the NFL works. We have to simply accept that those posters who do not get it... simply do not get it. Pony Boy and others have expressed the true opinion of the matter quite bluntly.

Could not disagree more strongly Psychology Kev. It IS by knowing how the NFL works, that makes Walker's situation understandable. The ONLY leverage a player has to get what they feel is an underserving contract addressed by an organization refusing to do so, is by holding out, or threatening a holdout.

Comparing any WR to Walker's situation is lame and an attempt to make a valid point from an invalid scenario.

This is just too ridiculous for words.

Walker asked and received the contract AND money he wanted in his rookie year. If he knew he was going to be a super star then he should have accepted the original offer from the Packers. Walker is the one who goofed up here... no ifs, ands, or buts about it. Accept that fact.

When an NFL player feels he has outperformed his initial contract that is still in effect, it is not at all unusual for the player to try and get the contract renegotiated. The only leverage a player has to do this, is by either staging a holdout, or threatening to. It IS the way the NFL works.

Antonio Gates? Clinton Portis?...etc...etc...etc

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

When an NFL player feels he has outperformed his initial contract that is still in effect, it is not at all unusual for the player to try and get the contract renegotiated. The only leverage a player has to do this, is by either staging a holdout, or threatening to. It IS the way the NFL works.

Antonio Gates? Clinton Portis?...etc...etc...etc

The Gates situation was slightly different since he wasn't under contract. But your overall point is correct. A player has a right to hold out (subject to any contractual penalties), and doing so is his only leverage. Of course, a team also has a right not to renegotiate.

 

[Mario Kart]

Pony Boy spelled out everything that anyone needs to know about the subject.  Those that have read his post and still post opposite comments are failing to see how the NFL works.  We have to simply accept that those posters who do not get it... simply do not get it.  Pony Boy and others have expressed the true opinion of the matter quite bluntly.

Could not disagree more strongly Psychology Kev. It IS by knowing how the NFL works, that makes Walker's situation understandable. The ONLY leverage a player has to get what they feel is an underserving contract addressed by an organization refusing to do so, is by holding out, or threatening a holdout.

Comparing any WR to Walker's situation is lame and an attempt to make a valid point from an invalid scenario. 

This is just too ridiculous for words.

Walker asked and received the contract AND money he wanted in his rookie year. If he knew he was going to be a super star then he should have accepted the original offer from the Packers. Walker is the one who goofed up here... no ifs, ands, or buts about it. Accept that fact.

Most teams try to re-sign their young players for the long-term when they outplay their rookie contract. Walker was asking for what most young Pro Bowl players get but the Packers felt content to take advantage of his low salary on his rookie contract. That's their option, but it's not a good way to keep players from leaving in free agency. It's only human nature for people to want to get paid what they think they are worth.Let me put it this way - do you think that LT would be a Charger today if the management told him they wanted him to play out his original contract before re-signing him?

Packers were ready and willing to give Walker the money he deserved had two variables been met. First, have 1 year left on his contract. Second, have the cap space to take care of said requests. This has been stated ad nauseum here. Walker demanded something when he was not in a position to do so given the state of affairs of the Packers organization. The Packers cannot bow down to a "one year wonder" and hope other players understand. Again, Walker is the one that messed up last year AND this year.

 

[Big Score]

When an NFL player feels he has outperformed his initial contract that is still in effect, it is not at all unusual for the player to try and get the contract renegotiated. The only leverage a player has to do this, is by either staging a holdout, or threatening to. It IS the way the NFL works.

Antonio Gates? Clinton Portis?...etc...etc...etc

The Gates situation was slightly different since he wasn't under contract. But your overall point is correct. A player has a right to hold out (subject to any contractual penalties), and doing so is his only leverage. Of course, a team also has a right not to renegotiate.

Agreed.

 

[Big Score]

Pony Boy spelled out everything that anyone needs to know about the subject.  Those that have read his post and still post opposite comments are failing to see how the NFL works.  We have to simply accept that those posters who do not get it... simply do not get it.  Pony Boy and others have expressed the true opinion of the matter quite bluntly.

Could not disagree more strongly Psychology Kev. It IS by knowing how the NFL works, that makes Walker's situation understandable. The ONLY leverage a player has to get what they feel is an underserving contract addressed by an organization refusing to do so, is by holding out, or threatening a holdout.

Comparing any WR to Walker's situation is lame and an attempt to make a valid point from an invalid scenario. 

This is just too ridiculous for words.

Walker asked and received the contract AND money he wanted in his rookie year. If he knew he was going to be a super star then he should have accepted the original offer from the Packers. Walker is the one who goofed up here... no ifs, ands, or buts about it. Accept that fact.

Most teams try to re-sign their young players for the long-term when they outplay their rookie contract. Walker was asking for what most young Pro Bowl players get but the Packers felt content to take advantage of his low salary on his rookie contract. That's their option, but it's not a good way to keep players from leaving in free agency. It's only human nature for people to want to get paid what they think they are worth.Let me put it this way - do you think that LT would be a Charger today if the management told him they wanted him to play out his original contract before re-signing him?

Packers were ready and willing to give Walker the money he deserved had two variables been met. First, have 1 year left on his contract. Second, have the cap space to take care of said requests. This has been stated ad nauseum here. Walker demanded something when he was not in a position to do so given the state of affairs of the Packers organization. The Packers cannot bow down to a "one year wonder" and hope other players understand. Again, Walker is the one that messed up last year AND this year.

So what was the contract the Packer's offered Walker this year Psychology Kev?

 

[Mario Kart]

Career Stats  Receiving  Kickoff Returns  Punt Returns  Fumbles Season	Team	G 	 Rec	Yds	Y/G	Avg	Lng	YAC	1stD	TD 	 KR	Yds	Avg	Long	TD 	 PR	Yds	Avg	Long	TD 	 Fum	FumL   2002	Green Bay	15 	 23	319	21.3	13.9	30	4.0	14	1 	 35	769	22.0	55	0 	 0	0	0.0	0	0 	 1	1   2003	Green Bay	16 	 41	716	44.8	17.5	66	4.3	27	9 	 0	0	0	0	0 	 0	0	0	0	0 	 1	1   2004	Green Bay	16 	 89	1382	86.4	15.5	79	3.9	63	12 	 0	0	0	0	0 	 0	0	0	0	0 	 2	2

What is this player with these career stats worth? One year does not a super star make that demands super star money.

 

[Mario Kart]

Pony Boy spelled out everything that anyone needs to know about the subject.  Those that have read his post and still post opposite comments are failing to see how the NFL works.  We have to simply accept that those posters who do not get it... simply do not get it.  Pony Boy and others have expressed the true opinion of the matter quite bluntly.

Could not disagree more strongly Psychology Kev. It IS by knowing how the NFL works, that makes Walker's situation understandable. The ONLY leverage a player has to get what they feel is an underserving contract addressed by an organization refusing to do so, is by holding out, or threatening a holdout.

Comparing any WR to Walker's situation is lame and an attempt to make a valid point from an invalid scenario. 

This is just too ridiculous for words.

Walker asked and received the contract AND money he wanted in his rookie year. If he knew he was going to be a super star then he should have accepted the original offer from the Packers. Walker is the one who goofed up here... no ifs, ands, or buts about it. Accept that fact.

Most teams try to re-sign their young players for the long-term when they outplay their rookie contract. Walker was asking for what most young Pro Bowl players get but the Packers felt content to take advantage of his low salary on his rookie contract. That's their option, but it's not a good way to keep players from leaving in free agency. It's only human nature for people to want to get paid what they think they are worth.Let me put it this way - do you think that LT would be a Charger today if the management told him they wanted him to play out his original contract before re-signing him?

Packers were ready and willing to give Walker the money he deserved had two variables been met. First, have 1 year left on his contract. Second, have the cap space to take care of said requests. This has been stated ad nauseum here. Walker demanded something when he was not in a position to do so given the state of affairs of the Packers organization. The Packers cannot bow down to a "one year wonder" and hope other players understand. Again, Walker is the one that messed up last year AND this year.

So what was the contract the Packer's offered Walker this year Psychology Kev?

Have mini camps started? Has training camp even started? The guy is coming off major knee surgery and you make it seem like the Packers should offer him boat loads of cash. Then, next year when Walker, may, not pan out you will be on here spewing spunk how the Packers should not have offered him so much. Whatever, whatever. Just as free agency began Walker shot his mouth off again. No need for that and like I have been saying like a broken record... Walker was the one who messed this whole thing up and if you think otherwise than there are no words that can change your opinion... however wrong it may be.

 

[Big Score]

Career Stats  Receiving  Kickoff Returns  Punt Returns  Fumbles Season Team G   Rec Yds Y/G Avg Lng YAC 1stD TD   KR Yds Avg Long TD   PR Yds Avg Long TD   Fum FumL   2002 Green Bay 15   23 319 21.3 13.9 30 4.0 14 1   35 769 22.0 55 0   0 0 0.0 0 0   1 1   2003 Green Bay 16   41 716 44.8 17.5 66 4.3 27 9   0 0 0 0 0   0 0 0 0 0   1 1   2004 Green Bay 16   89 1382 86.4 15.5 79 3.9 63 12   0 0 0 0 0   0 0 0 0 0   2 2What is this player with these career stats worth? One year does not a super star make that demands super star money.

You're kidding right?You don't see the steadily rising production?

That several NFL teams are actively trying to pry Walker away from the Pack means nothing?

Supposedly the asking price of a 2nd rounder or more means nothing?

 

[cstu]

Career Stats Receiving Kickoff Returns Punt Returns Fumbles Season Team G Rec Yds Y/G Avg Lng YAC 1stD TD KR Yds Avg Long TD PR Yds Avg Long TD Fum FumL 2002 Green Bay 15 23 319 21.3 13.9 30 4.0 14 1 35 769 22.0 55 0 0 0 0.0 0 0 1 1 2003 Green Bay 16 41 716 44.8 17.5 66 4.3 27 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2004 Green Bay 16 89 1382 86.4 15.5 79 3.9 63 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2What is this player with these career stats worth? One year does not a super star make that demands super star money.

How it that much different than this: 2001 cin | 12 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 28 329 11.8 1 |

| 2002 cin | 16 | 0 0 0.0 0 | 69 1166 16.9 5 |

He got a new contract at the beginning of his 3rd year with 2 years left (a month into the season) on his contract. Crazy to imagine that the Bengals are now an organization that knows how to treat their players.

http://www.blackathlete.com/Football/111603.shtml

 

[Big Score]

Pony Boy spelled out everything that anyone needs to know about the subject.  Those that have read his post and still post opposite comments are failing to see how the NFL works.  We have to simply accept that those posters who do not get it... simply do not get it.  Pony Boy and others have expressed the true opinion of the matter quite bluntly.

Could not disagree more strongly Psychology Kev. It IS by knowing how the NFL works, that makes Walker's situation understandable. The ONLY leverage a player has to get what they feel is an underserving contract addressed by an organization refusing to do so, is by holding out, or threatening a holdout.

Comparing any WR to Walker's situation is lame and an attempt to make a valid point from an invalid scenario. 

This is just too ridiculous for words.

Walker asked and received the contract AND money he wanted in his rookie year. If he knew he was going to be a super star then he should have accepted the original offer from the Packers. Walker is the one who goofed up here... no ifs, ands, or buts about it. Accept that fact.

Most teams try to re-sign their young players for the long-term when they outplay their rookie contract. Walker was asking for what most young Pro Bowl players get but the Packers felt content to take advantage of his low salary on his rookie contract. That's their option, but it's not a good way to keep players from leaving in free agency. It's only human nature for people to want to get paid what they think they are worth.Let me put it this way - do you think that LT would be a Charger today if the management told him they wanted him to play out his original contract before re-signing him?

Packers were ready and willing to give Walker the money he deserved had two variables been met. First, have 1 year left on his contract. Second, have the cap space to take care of said requests. This has been stated ad nauseum here. Walker demanded something when he was not in a position to do so given the state of affairs of the Packers organization. The Packers cannot bow down to a "one year wonder" and hope other players understand. Again, Walker is the one that messed up last year AND this year.

So what was the contract the Packer's offered Walker this year Psychology Kev?

Have mini camps started? Has training camp even started? The guy is coming off major knee surgery and you make it seem like the Packers should offer him boat loads of cash.

Please show me where I've said that. I haven't. Don't put words in my mouth. What I have said is that Walker is doing exactly what other NFL players have done before, to get his contract addressed.

Then, next year when Walker, may, not pan out you will be on here spewing spunk how the Packers should not have offered him so much. Whatever, whatever.

Thank you for first telling me what the future may hold Madame Cleo and secondly for telling me what I will do.

Just as free agency began Walker shot his mouth off again. No need for that and like I have been saying like a broken record... Walker was the one who messed this whole thing up and if you think otherwise than there are no words that can change your opinion... however wrong it may be.

I take it from this that you know for a fact Walker & his agent did not first put out feelers to the Packers Front Office about having the contract addressed, before going public with this whole retirement thing?If you know this for a fact, I agree with you that Walker has nobody but himself to blame.

But without you knowing this as a fact and you just blindly speculating with nothing to back your thoughts that this is the case, "then there are no words that can change your opinion... however wrong it may be".

 

[Bizkiteer]

Which is it? They only re-do contracts with one year left or not? All those that say Javon shouldn't have been paid last year then what is the excuse now that he's in his LAST YEAR? Oh yeah, he's injured..WHY THE HELL DO YOU THINK HE WANTED A CONTRACT LAST YEAR? Yes, players know they could be injured and seeing how a team treats you after injury..wouldn't you want to get paid when you could? The best teams take care of their players that get them there period. Walker was coming into his prime and had just become a featured guy, so they should have had a plan to to handle this if it occurred. Adding on years, an extension allows them to save face, but play the card that they are locking up a core player for years to come. Player is happy because they get a signing bonus, which is the ONLY thing that is guaranteed.

To compare this current GB team w/ any of the past GB teams is plain stupid, no matter how long of a book is written. Walker even went as far to get another agent because he knew GB and his old agent wouldn't be able to get it done. GB will be lucky to get anything for him because all the other teams know the situation is almost impossible for them to resolve. So, what they offer will not be true value for his talent. Maybe they get lucky and in return that get a surprise in value like the Redskins trade last year where they traded lame duck Coles and got Moss. Oh, GB has all that cap space now and what have they done? NOTHING! No wonder Favre can't make up his mind...his love for what GB was...and they crap that it is now. The way they handled Walker is awful, granted he hasn't helped himself much either with his behavior. They way they are handling Favre situation is plain awful too...both are a reflection on their Front Office.

I don't think holdouts are right and should be a LAST resort by a player, but in a league that teams cut players because contracts are back loaded and they have taken advantage of the earier years in the contract...then you can understand why they do it. Remember, only the signing bonus is a sure thing...after that you can be cut in a moments notice.

There! Another book...send it to the press and print it!

 

[jetsman]

Pony Boy spelled out everything that anyone needs to know about the subject. Those that have read his post and still post opposite comments are failing to see how the NFL works. We have to simply accept that those posters who do not get it... simply do not get it. Pony Boy and others have expressed the true opinion of the matter quite bluntly. Comparing any WR to Walker's situation is lame and an attempt to make a valid point from an invalid scenario.

Thanks for the post Pony Boy because those who can comprehend what it is you said should understand the situation more clearly. Unfortunately I dont think some picked up on it.

no what you fail to see is holdouts and threatening to hold out are parts of todays NFL,why is it that Green Bay can have their Rules regarding when they will renegotiate and the players cant express their displeasure with that by holding out ? other teams do Renegotiate with more than 1 year left on a deal. I believe Chad Johnson just was given a new deal this week with many years left on an existing deal and and the packers themselves did it for Brett Favre in 2001

Thus, Favre, who had three years left on his existing deal, will see his compensation over the next two years jump from $13.3 million to $16.2 million.

so the packers did it for favre.....why not javon

 

[Mario Kart]

no what you fail to see is holdouts and threatening to hold out are parts of todays NFL, why is it that Green Bay can have their Rules regarding when they will renegotiate and the players cant express their displeasure with that by holding out ? other teams do Renegotiate with more than 1 year left on a deal. I believe Chad Johnson just was given a new deal this week with many years left on an existing deal and and the packers themselves did it for Brett Favre in 2001

Thus, Favre, who had three years left on his existing deal, will see his compensation over the next two years jump from $13.3 million to $16.2 million.

so the packers did it for favre.....why not javon

Are you wanting to compare a 10+ year vet who never missed a game to a 3 year vet coming off a career year?

 

[cstu]

no what you fail to see is holdouts and threatening to hold out are parts of todays NFL, why is it that Green Bay can have their Rules regarding when they will renegotiate and the players cant express their displeasure with that by holding out ? other teams do Renegotiate with more than 1 year left on a deal. I believe Chad Johnson just was given a new deal this week with many years left on an existing deal and and the packers themselves did it for Brett Favre in 2001

Thus, Favre, who had three years left on his existing deal, will see his compensation over the next two years jump from $13.3 million to $16.2 million.

so the packers did it for favre.....why not javon

Are you wanting to compare a 10+ year vet who never missed a game to a 3 year vet coming off a career year?

A career year in his 3rd year at age 26? Yes.

 

[Bizkiteer]

In fairness, you can't compare QB's to any other position in football when it comes to contracts. Compare QB's with QB's is okay to a degree. Teams historically have always paid QB's differently than any other position. It's apples and oranges...

 

[jetsman]

no you dont get it, I just proved that the pack was hypocritical with Javon as they have been with others Apples and oranges dont apply here. pony Said:

First of all, GB has a policy of not renegotiating player contracts until they have 1 year or less left on the contract.

no mention of an exception for quarterbacks there that i can see. which is it a lie or not knowing the facts

holding out for a Renegotiation is a tool in todays NFL , to say Javon is all to blame is disingenuous to say the least

all the other Packers stars I mentioned have noaxe to grind with Javon.

I asked him to name one other team who has lost as many disgruntles stars as the pack has in as short a period and he couldnt, so he ridiculed my post as unknowledgeable. thats fine I just proved he was either clueless or a liar. which is it.

just because he cant back up his assertions is no reason to ridicule... I stand by my claim that the packers like to get rid of players rather then give them a a market value contract, unless of course your name is brett favre

psychology, how old was Brett when he had his deal renegotiated with 3 years to go on it. ? be consistent, that deal actually began the problem with the vets on the team. Freeman had to ask why give Brett his and not give me mine. so did Mckenzie and Levens

be consistent, the attitude has been growing for years

 

[trader jake]

favre's contract extensions were always given to lower the cap hit on the current year and push cap hits out throughout the duration of the deal. this freed money up to sign rookies, free agents, etc. the packers did this same thing with veterans numerous times who had proven their worth and health over multiple seasons (including leroy butler)

javon walker's situation was not this type of situation. he wanted a new contract with more than one year remaining on his current deal. the packers have never done this and still have not. any attempt to compare a restructured deal with a player like favre or butler to walker's situation in 2005 is comparing apples to oranges

an argument can be made against the packers policy of renegotiating with more than 1 year left on a contract, but using this example is not one of them imo

 

[Challenge Everything]

no you dont get it, I just proved that the pack was hypocritical with Javon as they have been with others Apples and oranges dont apply here. pony Said:

First of all, GB has a policy of not renegotiating player contracts until they have 1 year or less left on the contract.

no mention of an exception for quarterbacks there that i can see. which is it a lie or not knowing the facts

holding out for a Renegotiation is a tool in todays NFL , to say Javon is all to blame is disingenuous to say the least

all the other Packers stars I mentioned have noaxe to grind with Javon.

I asked him to name one other team who has lost as many disgruntles stars as the pack has in as short a period and he couldnt, so he ridiculed my post as unknowledgeable. thats fine I just proved he was either clueless or a liar. which is it.

just because he cant back up his assertions is no reason to ridicule... I stand by my claim that the packers like to get rid of players rather then give them a a market value contract, unless of course your name is brett favre

 

[Bri]

The Packs Image is that of an organization that Disrespects its players, from Antonio Freeman to Mike McKenzie to Darren Sharper to Javon Walker to Grady Jackson. does it ever stop?

that's not true at all.A lot of players whine on their way out. It's the wrong thing to do but I understand that they're comfy, have a home there etc. Some you mentioned were "old" and the NFL is not an old man's game. Every player knows it, ya just gotta accept it.

 

[jetsman]

favre's contract extensions were always given to lower the cap hit on the current year and push cap hits out throughout the duration of the deal. this freed money up to sign rookies, free agents, etc. the packers did this same thing with veterans numerous times who had proven their worth and health over multiple seasons (including leroy butler)

javon walker's situation was not this type of situation. he wanted a new contract with more than one year remaining on his current deal. the packers have never done this and still have not. any attempt to compare a restructured deal with a player like favre or butler to walker's situation in 2005 is comparing apples to oranges

an argument can be made against the packers policy of renegotiating with more than 1 year left on a contract, but using this example is not one of them imo

The Law, your knowledgeable ive read your posts and agree usually, but in this case youre off my friend. check your history, after the 2001 season Brett talked oenly about the ineqity of his deal they tore up his deal with 3 years to go and gave him a new 103 million dollar deal... since then however brett has done as youve said, but 2001 was not thatcheck your facts

as the Journal sentinel said that day:

The Packers announced today a renegotiated contract with Brett Favre that will keep the MVP quarterback in Green Bay the rest of his career.

Though details were not available, Favre's deal will pay him a signing bonus of between $10 million and $15 million and include a hefty roster bonus several years down the road. The length of the deal could be as long as 10 years, but it will effectively be a six-year deal because of salary cap considerations.

10-15 million signing bonus and roster bonuses,, with 3 years left on the deal he had at the time.

and you say:

he wanted a new contract with more than one year remaining on his current deal. the packers have never done this and still have not. .

care to reconsider

 

[P Boy]

no you dont get it, I just proved that the pack was hypocritical with Javon as they have been with others Apples and oranges dont apply here. pony Said:

First of all, GB has a policy of not renegotiating player contracts until they have 1 year or less left on the contract.

no mention of an exception for quarterbacks there that i can see. which is it a lie or not knowing the facts

Please cite an example of GB renegotiating a contract with a player with more year left on a contract where the renogotiation did not favor the salary cap position of the team.Favre renegotiating with more than 1 year left gave the team more cap room. If you want to take that in its strictest sense of renegotiating with more than 1 year left, then you are right. However, I figured that we were all adults here & were going to use a modicum of common sense in the discussion. Apparently I shouldn't assume anything here with some people.

 

[trader jake]

The Law, your knowledgeable ive read your posts and agree usually, but in this case youre off my friend. check your history, after the 2001 season Brett talked oenly about the ineqity of his deal they tore up his deal with 3 years to go and gave him a new 103 million dollar deal... since then however brett has done as youve said, but 2001 was not that

...

care to reconsider

first, thanks for the kind wordssecond, i understand your point...maybe it's a "chicken or the egg" type of argument

jsonline link

The Packers will restructure Favre's contract because his salary cap number balloons to $9.474 million next season, which represents roughly 14% of the recently released 2001 team salary cap of $67.4 million.

By extending Favre's deal and compensating him with a large signing bonus, the Packers will be able to lessen his salary cap number significantly. Favre, 31, has three years remaining on the seven-year, $47.25 million contract he signed in 1994, and is scheduled to receive a base salary of $6.3 million next year