Raiders are idiots if they trade Khalil Mack

[Guest]

@MaroonBells said:
Yeah but can Green Bay afford him considering they just gave Rodgers more than the GDP of many small countries?

I'm sure they could find a way to fit Mack under the cap...  they have Cobb and Clay coming off the books after this season... or they could even cut one or both players to free up more cap space this season.  If you're talking purely from a cash flow perspective, I don't know about that.
I really hope Oakland finds a way to pay him or trade him to anyone but Green Bay.  My resident Packer lovin' buddies are just salivating at the thought of getting Mack.  That would SUCK.

[Guest]

@MaroonBells said:
Yeah but can Green Bay afford him considering they just gave Rodgers more than the GDP of many small countries?

Check out the comments section of this article...

https://www.profootballrumors.com/2018/0...halil-mack

Bearmeat • 13 hours ago
I’m telling you, Green Bay has the absolute need at 34OLB, the draft capital in 2019 AND the salary cap room to hand Mack 100m over 5 years. No other team has this capital.
I really think they’re the outside leader in the clubhouse. I think it’s 2/3 a chance Mack stays in Oakland, and a 1/3 chance that he is traded to GB and signs a mega-deal.

  

• bowserhound • 11 hours ago And then becomes the next spokesperson for Campbell’s soup?
  

   
• vinman66 • 9 hours ago GREEN BAY? Are you smoking crack? Raiders would NEVER trade to Green Bay, they are looking for a crappy team to pawn him off too to get a 1st round and second round pick, Green Bay most likely make it to the playoffs, I don’t think the raiders will trade to get a 34th first round pick
  
  •   

    Bearmeat • 1 hour ago lol. first of all, there are 32 picks in the 1st round.
    Second, Green Bay has 2 of those picks. No one else has that. I can see the argument for a top 10 pick and a great player on a rookie deal for Mack, but who would do that? I can’t think of anyone who has that kind of capital to move.
    Green Bay could offer the most reasonable deal. I’m not saying it will happen, but it could.
    
    

[Guest]

Ugh.....yeah, makes sense I guess. I've read that Cobb is gone. Won't be on the roster come opening day whether that's via trade or release, who knows, but it's possible they're trying to swing this.

Hopefully Oakland comes to its senses. What the hell's the point of even having a top 10 pick if you just trade him away? Still remember all the draft talk that year. Aaron Donald was too small. Khalil Mack never faced a quality lineman at Buffalo. Greg Robinson, Blake Bortles and Sammy Watkins went before Mack. Add Justin Gilbert and Eric Ebron to Donald's list. 

[Guest]

@purplefaithful said:

@MaroonBells said:
Yeah but can Green Bay afford him considering they just gave Rodgers more than the GDP of many small countries?

I heard that his previous contract was 17.9% of their cap and the new one is higher at 19% or so.  They've had 2 Mt Rushmore QB's over almost  30 years and have 2 trophies to show for it. That's how many of their hard-core fans are looking at it and probably how I'd be too if I was a Pack fan. 

I am envious of 2, but understand how their fans might be a bit restless. I hope we make them downright sad again. 

I will say that we are not on an even playing field with them at QB. We are sure not handicapped anymore. We closed the QB gap while widening the overall talent gap. I wonder how much closer they can get overall with 19% of the money going to stay ahead in only one area of the team. 

[Guest]

Raiders are not a very well run organization.  So they are cash strapped and they go out and sign "The Grin" for a record contract and Gruden and Mack have still not met.  I don't think Gruden is a very good coach and I am not sure he will be able to turn around Carr who had a very subpar year last year.

[Guest]

Why would the Packers give up two first rounders for a 1 year rental? How many guys can they give $100 million contracts to?

When it comes to cap management... they aren't the Vikings...  B) 

[Guest]

Isn’t Mack in the same boat as Barr, as in playing on his 5th year option as a 1st rounder? The Raiders don’t have to move him...

[Guest]

@Kentis said:
Isn’t Mack in the same boat as Barr, as in playing on his 5th year option as a 1st rounder? The Raiders don’t have to move him...

FWIW I think it's Mack that is holding out to be paid, (new contract) Raiders just arent budging.

[Guest]

@BlackMagic7 said:
Why would the Packers give up two first rounders for a 1 year rental? How many guys can they give $100 million contracts to?

When it comes to cap management... they aren't the Vikings...  B) 

Don't you think they would have a deal in place before trading?

[Guest]

So the owner doesn't want to trade Mack but Gruden is much more open to it? What a cluster. He's the best PLAYER on their team, not just on defense. Why bother even having talented guys if this is how it goes down in Oakland? Disgraceful and some team will benefit from the idiots in the Raider organization.