Truth & Rumors > NFL

Pack can't afford to franchise Flynn

Views
195779
Comments
131

08:04 AM ET 02.02 | The Packers may have some wiggle room with their 2012 salary cap, but it may not help them keep Matt Flynn. According to a source with access to NFL salary information, the Packers have $113,356,169 dedicated to their '12 salary cap. ... For all those who think the Packers can put a franchise tag on QB Matt Flynn and then trade him, consider that the Packers would have to fit in the $14 million one-year tender by releasing players. They also would need to have a deal in place with Finley so that he could not walk away an unrestricted free agent. So, to do the Flynn maneuver, they'd have to sign Finley (and the others) AND find a way to clear $10 million to $14 million off their cap. It's not going to happen.

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

Matt Flynn, Getty Images Matt Flynn, Getty Images
February 2, 2012  08:16 AM ET

Can't see signing him to a franchise tag. What would be the long-term benefit?

February 2, 2012  08:18 AM ET
QUOTE(#1):

Can't see signing him to a franchise tag. What would be the long-term benefit?

Keeping his rights and getting some value for him instead of just letting him walk?

February 2, 2012  08:21 AM ET
QUOTE(#2):

Keeping his rights and getting some value for him instead of just letting him walk?

A little too risky, me thinks. Tough situation for the Pack.

February 2, 2012  08:29 AM ET

That's a lot of Flynn-agling.

February 2, 2012  08:31 AM ET

Common sense would have to agree with the story.

February 2, 2012  08:34 AM ET

Like the Gambler said " You got to know when to hold them, know when to fold them..." not much choice but to cut him loose

February 2, 2012  08:35 AM ET
QUOTE(#3):

A little too risky, me thinks. Tough situation for the Pack.

Agreed. A team would have to be willing to fork over $14M for that first year of Flynn's deal, and that only works for the Pack if they can get something they want in return.

February 2, 2012  08:45 AM ET

Doesn't make a whole lot of sense to keep him.
www.losingtogether.com

February 2, 2012  08:54 AM ET

He played one good game. Let him go.

February 2, 2012  08:59 AM ET

This part we knew. It is the other FA that they have that are the problem.
A lot of teams are in this situation.

Comment #11 has been removed
February 2, 2012  09:02 AM ET
QUOTE(#2):

Keeping his rights and getting some value for him instead of just letting him walk?

It's exactly what the Patriots did with Matt Cassel. I thought of it more as a way of saying "Thank you" to the guy for a job well done, rather than a good business decision, but it worked out for the Pats and for Cassel. IMHO, it worked out less well for the Chiefs, but that's another story.

It's a way for the Packer front office to hang out an Open for Business sign, while saying "only serious bidders should apply."

February 2, 2012  09:04 AM ET

Bigger question for a team looking to sign Flynn...

Is he Matt Schaub...


Or Scott Mitchell?

February 2, 2012  09:06 AM ET

Buyer Beware!!!

February 2, 2012  09:07 AM ET

Given their other FA needs, franchising Flynn doesn't work, but teams are always overpaying for questionable QBs and Flynn is the flavor of the month right now. If they didn't need the tag to keep a contributor around, they should absolutely tag Flynn and make somebody give up picks to get him. It's not the right play given the specifics, but it's not outlandish, either.

February 2, 2012  09:09 AM ET
QUOTE(#1):

Can't see signing him to a franchise tag. What would be the long-term benefit?

Same thing the Patriots did with Cassel - got a free 2nd round pick out of tagging him for a few weeks. But that's obviously not going to happen unless they can lock up Finley first.

February 2, 2012  09:16 AM ET

I see a team that needs a quarterback. I see an owner with deep pockets who overpays for unproven talent. I see a draft position that's very good, but not good enough to get one of the superstar QBs this year....

February 2, 2012  09:22 AM ET
QUOTE(#9):

He played one good game. Let him go.

At least two.

Comment #19 has been removed
 
February 2, 2012  09:24 AM ET

Maybe I'm mistaken but hasn't this kid only played like 1 or 2 games?

Comment

Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.


Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    Bryant headed back to Germany
    Views
    3170
    Comments
    926
  2. 2
    D'Antoni's newest 'blunder'
    Views
    2840
    Comments
    866
  3. 3
    Baseball's top 2015 free agent
    Views
    2459
    Comments
    528
  4. 4
    Shakeup looms for White Sox
    Views
    5214
    Comments
    332
  5. 5
    The NHL's model franchise?
    Views
    2258
    Comments
    140

SI.com

SI Photos