Packers Eighth-highest In Adjusted Salary Cap and Said to be Pursuing Matt Forte

According to the current information posted NFL Players Association web site, the Packers have an adjusted cap number of $163,489,623 – the eighth highest in the league.  

If reports are true Bears running back Matt Forte may be a target of the Green Bay Packers.

The Green Bay Packers will be flush with total salary cap dollars when the NFL league year begins on March 9.  According to the current information posted NFL Players Association web site, the Packers have an adjusted cap number of $163,489,623 – the eighth highest in the league.

With the league-wide cap number in place at a record $155.27 million and final carryover and adjustment amounts reported from individual clubs, adjusted Team Salary Caps have been determined for all clubs for the upcoming year and the pending free agent signing period which starts this week.

As has been the case for the past several seasons the Jacksonville Jaguars lead the league in salary cap dollars at a whopping $190,301,710 aided by more than $32,000,000 in carryover from the 2015 league year.

Green Bay's rivals in the NFC North follow the Packers.  The Detroit Lions come in second at $157,311,216 followed by the Minnesota Vikings at $156,914,717, and the Chicago Bears fall in last at $156,588,879.

When it comes to available salary cap – money committed to count against the adjusted salary cap number - the story changes.  After the deduction for players’ salaries, bonuses and dead money the Packers only rank 18th best in the league at $20,854,306.  The tables are turned by their NFC North rivals all of whom have more available cap space than do the Green Bay Packers according to the web site Over The Cap.

The Packers are in a good position however.  They have locked up the core of their most important free agents by signing Mike Daniels, Mason Crosby and Letroy Guin earlier. They have done so without having to use a franchise tag, as the Bears did with Alshon Jeffery, or having to replace a major cog in their offense like the Lions must now due after today's retirement announcement by Calvin Johnson.  Johnon's decision however rewards the Lions with an additional $11M in available cap space.

The Packers have 54 players under contract for the upcoming season and are not expected to be major players during the upcoming veteran free agent period.  If things go as expected they will bide their time while the crazy money is thrown around and hope for bargains when all the dust has settled.  It has been reported that the team has expressed a desire to re-sign B.J. Raji, John Kuhn and either Nick Perry or Mike Neal if not both.

Some of the Packers veteran free agents will undoubtedly find new homes.  Some in hurry such as Casey Hayward, a young and accomplished cornerback who is expected to be a hot commodity and receive offers which the Packers would be unwilling to match.

An interesting report today from ESPN's Adam Schefter who has reported that the Packers are one of the suitors for former Bears running back Matt Forte.  The report goes on to say that Forte is being recruited by former Bear and current Packers OLB Julious Peppers.  Forte is on record as saying that signing with a Super Bowl caliber team trumps money at this stage of his career. "It's not even about the money," he said. "I want to be in the Super Bowls."  Take the rumor with a grain of salt, but the signing would make sense.

As reported by Ian Rapoport the Packers have also signed restricted free agent guard Lane Taylor to a two year deal worth a reported $4.15M.

With an eye toward the 2017 free agent period in which key players David Bakhtiari, TJ Lang and Josh Sitton, among others, will be free agents, general manager Ted Thompson will undoubtedly want to get deals done with each of them and will be looking to ensure that he has the money on hand to secure their services.  That fact likely translates to very judicious spending on the part of the Packers in 2016 for any veteran free agents.

0 points

Comments (20)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
meatstyk's picture

March 08, 2016 at 04:40 pm

First they over pay for lane taylor and now rumors of an over the hill forte and locker room cancer Bennett! Whats going on up there??

0 points
0
0
lou's picture

March 08, 2016 at 05:17 pm

Agreed on the issues with Bennett, the Cowboys and Bears couldn't put up with him even when he produced. I don't agree on Forte, he has Marcus Allen like talent, and Allen played at the same level until he was 35. If Lacy does not respond weight/condition wise or is injured, Forte becomes #1 and if spelled will produce big.

0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

March 08, 2016 at 06:19 pm

600k guaranteed over 2 years is overpaying?

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

March 08, 2016 at 07:20 pm

overacting oppy

0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

March 08, 2016 at 04:50 pm

This is shocking. I thought Forte would go to a cellar dweller for the top money he could get.... If we pay a more than 4 mil a year for an up-there-in-mileage-RB, I won't be terribly happy. Phat Ed is perfectly capable of being a bell cow if he's not...well... Phat...

0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

March 08, 2016 at 05:19 pm

If I'm Matt Forte, I want a shot at a ring before I retire, not a paycheck. He's had a HoF career, and made enough money.

0 points
0
0
Point-Packer's picture

March 08, 2016 at 05:57 pm

I actually believe this may happen and if it does, Forte will be a great addition to the offense.

After showing some promise, Eddie Lacy has not been the receiving threat I had hoped. After this season, clear that a backfield receiving threat would do wonders to our moderate to deep passing game.

Further, Forte is a great character guy (from all accounts). An addition of another veteran leader to a team that already has winners on both sides of the ball would make for an incredibly solid locker room.

Excited about this prospect.

0 points
0
0
NitschkeFan's picture

March 08, 2016 at 08:10 pm

Completely agree. At the right price he would be a great addition.

0 points
0
0
Samson's picture

March 09, 2016 at 12:04 am

" veteran leader to a team "

This is the key. The Pack lack veteran leadership in all areas. --- Ask AR.

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

March 08, 2016 at 08:23 pm

I think I'd love the Bennett addition if it came through.

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

March 09, 2016 at 03:59 am

I was all about Bennett. But after I read about his personality, I'm not sure I'm on that train any more... But, I expect Ted Thompson to make his homework and I believe he will decide what is the best for the Packers...

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

March 09, 2016 at 09:31 am

We've had worse.

0 points
0
0
holmesmd's picture

March 10, 2016 at 06:23 pm

Darren Sharper, Mossey Cade, and my beloved Johnny Jolly come to mind. Let's not forget Favre & Chumura! Lol

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

March 08, 2016 at 09:31 pm

Forte would be a nice pickup if the price is right, especially if we're not planning to resign Starks. The Packers desperately need an RB with his receiving skills. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

March 09, 2016 at 12:51 am

I'm fine with Forte at $3 million/yr. He should help.

Taylor is a surprise. A week ago I wrote a comment in a podcast article here suggesting that Mulumba should not be tendered but rather re-signed for just the minimum at most. I also suggested that Taylor should not be tendered but rather should be re-signed for more than the vet. minimum. This current $2.05 million per year is higher than I expected, but Taylor played pretty well (though absolutely and definitely not nearly flawless as suggested by Demovsky). Here are his stats in 153 snaps per McGinn: 3.5 pressures allowed (adjusted to 26 if he had played 100% of the snaps instead of 13%); 2.5 bad runs (adjusts to 18.8) and 1 penalty (adjusts to 7.5). That compares to Lang (Adjusted 20 pressures, 19.5 bad runs, 2 penalties) and Sitton (23 pressures, 15.5 bad runs and 10 penalties). As a run blocker, his numbers are better than Lang, not as good as Sitton. In pass pro Taylor is a little worse than both Sitton and Lang.

Overall, probably a savvy move to have a serviceable option for OG under contract in 2017 given the uncertainties surrounding Lang and Sitton. The tender options were for just 1 year, and the cost $1.67 million or $2.55 million is not that much different than this contract, which has only $600K guaranteed. [As always, stats are great but should be put in context. 1st, I am extrapolating from just 13.3% of snaps. It is possible I suppose that Taylor might get more comfortable if he plays more snaps and play better, and it is possible that other teams would have more tape on him, and thus would be able to find and exploit any weaknesses.]

0 points
0
0
@ballark's picture

March 09, 2016 at 01:41 am

If he's half the money, I'd rather have Starks than Forte. They're about the same age, but Starks has about 500 carries vs Forte's 2,000 carries. That matters. Besides, Starks has played very well for this team, and Forte (with Lacy) only really gets on the field on 3rd downs, or if Lacy goes down. And who knows when he runs out of gas. I say keep Starks and draft somebody they like. That money can be spent in better ways.

0 points
0
0
lou's picture

March 09, 2016 at 10:05 am

Sound logic "ballpark" and hard to argue those points. I like both Starks and Forte and one or the other is a must. to sign. The real difference is for the fans that think Forte is the piece that puts them into the Super Bowl and are concerned with Rodgers time clock.

0 points
0
0
holmesmd's picture

March 09, 2016 at 03:30 pm

Forte's body of work as a receiver is rare in the NFL at his position. The guys is still a stud, can line up in the slot, can still run, great instinct, great patience, IMO probably the best all around back in most of the last decade! I like JS more than many but Forte' would be a considerable upgrade at RB in my opinion. Bennet makes a ton of sense if he gets cut. Best TE we have had easily in the last decade. He's actually a better blocker than Finley and every bit the receiving threat Finley was minus the inconsistency. He has been a matchup problem for the Packers for years.

0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

March 09, 2016 at 04:42 pm

6 foot 7 and 260/265 -- let's not forget that he has proven hands.

He'll show Richard Rodgers how to use his big body too.

0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

March 09, 2016 at 08:48 pm

Forte to the Jets? It's okay, roll out the red Carpet for Manny Papoose, Free Agent Savior for the GBPs 2016!

0 points
0
0