Re: Charles Woodson to be released. Wow.
posted at 2/16/2013 3:46 PM EST
In response to ClarkGriswold's comment:
In response to mthurl's comment:
Geez Rusty, the Packers releasing Woodson will give the Packers 10 million dollars in cap space...that can't be possible with "salary cap hell" lurking around, can it? So let me get this straight, the packers signed Woodson to big money - he then helped them win a Super Bowl - they then cut him when he got old (36) and expensive to their cap. How can this be? Aren't teams not supposed to be able to do this? It will land them in hell!! Paying big for a player (that is really good) gets you nowhere - it just screws up your cap and you get yourself into "salary cap hell"..there is no way out! That is what you've been telling us for years, yet four teams over the last two weeks have shaved a combined 36 million off their payrolls without cutting one single player that is not old and way past their prime. Those very same teams will now go out and spend that available cap space on younger players heading into their prime. Interesting. Amazing. And yet confusing/puzzling to one.
Glad you have this salary cap stuff figured out rusty - keep us informed of any new/cutting edge developments on the subject.
You act as if Woodson hasn't been a good player for them and whoever replaces him will be as good or better.
This is what you don't get. If BB had to release a key cog on our D, you'd not only string him up here whining like a 6 year old girl who just wet her panties, but you still wouldn't understand why imporant cuts hurt a team.
In all honesty, I'd need to take a ride on a short bus to see someone as stupid as you are. It's unbelievable, I am sure to most here, that you are in a fact a teacher. WOW
Look at it this way - the packers signed a guy to a big and scary salary cap hell contract - he then went on and lived up to that contract and won a Super Bowl in the process. Now at the ripe old age of 36, the packers terminated that big old scary contract and saved themselves 10 million to go out and find a younger and better player. Business as usual in the NFL...some understand that (you don't), but some do.
now you are correct, they may not find someone better than the younger version of the 36 year old Woodson to play safety for them, but they should be able to replace the older version at a fraction of the cost. Unless of course they waste time and resources bringing in guys like Chung, Bodden, Butler, Dowling and Wilson - then that would be a waste of money and the few resources (draft selections) that the NFL allows. That would hurt.