Skip to content

Packers want Steven Jackson on the cheap

images Getty Images

We reported last night that the Packers are the current leaders to land running back Steven Jackson.

But that doesn’t mean Jackson will be breaking the bank.

According to Tom Silverstein of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, the Packers have indeed expressed interest in Jackson.  However, they refuse to get involved in a bidding war for him, or to become leverage for a deal Jackson does elsewhere.

Silverstein suggests that the Packers’ decision to bring in Chiefs running back Peyton Hillis for a visit could be aimed at sending a message to Jackson that the train will soon be leaving the station.  (I know that’s Shad Khan’s line, but I like it.)

There’s also a chance that Hillis will replace fan favorite John Kuhn, who is getting pretty pricey for a fullback at $2.5 million.Regardless, if Jackson wants to play a significant role for a contending team, Green Bay could be his best option.  And he’s been around the NFL long enough to realize it.

Permalink 59 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Green Bay Packers, Rumor Mill, Top Stories
59 Responses to “Packers want Steven Jackson on the cheap”
  1. skoobyfl says: Mar 13, 2013 9:39 AM

    He’d have a chance to win a SB there.

  2. fuglyflorio says: Mar 13, 2013 9:40 AM

    Bet that $7,000,000 the Rams were going to pay you looks pretty good right now huh chump?

  3. Rick Spielman is a Magician says: Mar 13, 2013 9:41 AM

    Just because Hillis is white, that doesn’t make him a fullback.

  4. gordoom says: Mar 13, 2013 9:42 AM

    Odd move for a team that desperately needs a RB. Steven has proven he can play behind a crappy OL.
    I get not over paying but drawing a hard line is a bit out of place.

  5. kja22 says: Mar 13, 2013 9:42 AM

    Bringing in Steven Jackson AND bringing back Greg Jennings? I can’t wait for my Packers to win the Super Bowl next season!! Go Pack Go!

  6. gtodriver says: Mar 13, 2013 9:43 AM

    Thompson is willing to pay (reportedly) $10 mil to WR (a position of strength) Greg Jennings to keep him away from the Vikings, but isn’t willing to pay RB (a position of weakness) Steven Jackson???

    I’m sorry, this makes no sense.

  7. blahblahblah1313 says: Mar 13, 2013 9:43 AM

    I like Jackson but he will go where ever they pay him the most. Just like 99.9 % of the other players who say they play for a shot at being a champion. Don’t blame him but when it comes down to $$ -vs- rings we all know what is trumps.

  8. Rick Spielman is a Magician says: Mar 13, 2013 9:44 AM

    Why don’t the Packers just draft a running back in the second round like everyone else? Oh, that’s right. They’re probably a little wary after that whole Brandon Jackson thing.

  9. myspaceyourface says: Mar 13, 2013 9:44 AM

    G.B. O-line isn’t that great and there are other contenders out there that could utilize S-JAX.

  10. jimnsota says: Mar 13, 2013 9:44 AM

    Not surprising, the Packers are pretty frugal bunch. Maybe they can sweeten the pot and give him partial ownership with some of those “stocks”…

  11. filthymcnasty1 says: Mar 13, 2013 9:45 AM

    Teams don’t bid up prices for RBs anymore.

  12. uwsptke says: Mar 13, 2013 9:47 AM

    Actually, McCarthy said “The train has left the station” way back in 2008 regarding the Brett Favre saga, so your use is entirely appropriate here.

  13. paul82461 says: Mar 13, 2013 9:48 AM

    It just depends if he wants a shot at the title. He wont play for 3 million.

  14. thejabronisayz says: Mar 13, 2013 9:48 AM

    If money was the number one priority for Steven Jackson then he would still be a Ram, but it’s not. He voided the final year of a contract that would have payed him a cool $7 million, and he did that for one reason – to go to a contender that had a real shot at winning the Super Bowl. I’m a Rams fan so I am by no means trying to imply that the Rams could not be a contender, but he gave them his heart and soul, and now it was simply time to move on. I don’t think the Packers are doing anything wrong by offering Jackson a “cheap” contract because he is getting old and will only have 2-3 years MAX remaining of productive play. But money is not of concern to Jackson, and if he wants to play for a contender at a discount, then best of luck to him.

  15. jimmyt says: Mar 13, 2013 9:48 AM

    I guess you are too young to know but “the train is leaving the station and you can hop on or hop off” was actually a Ronald Reagan line.

  16. mnpacker says: Mar 13, 2013 9:48 AM

    As much as I like yelling Kuuuuuuuuuhn, Peyton Hillis at fullback would be awesome and there’s no way packers will pay a fullback $2.5M and with S Jackson at halfback it would be like an offense off of Madden

  17. bradshawlives says: Mar 13, 2013 9:49 AM

    If he goes to the Packers he better get used to getting 8 carries in the first half, then be nothing more than a pass protector in the 2nd half.

  18. twonis says: Mar 13, 2013 9:49 AM

    If Jackson is serious about wanting a ring he needs to play ball here. The Packers have gotten it done with less so they don’t ‘need’ him, but he would be a strong addition and a bit of a game changer. I’m sure there are other places that could deliver the money but after all his years in the league you would have to imagine that he is thinking about his legacy more than his pocketbook.

  19. dellkev says: Mar 13, 2013 9:50 AM

    Make it happen pack!

  20. goat2060 says: Mar 13, 2013 9:50 AM

    I hope he signs elsewhere. I’m sooo tired of the Packers being cheap.

  21. mvp43 says: Mar 13, 2013 9:51 AM

    The Packers will not over pay for anyone considering Rodgers, CM3 & Raji will be breaking the bank very soon. As far as I’m concerned thats a good way to manage a team in today’s NFL. I like Ted Thompson’s approach on this. Unless there’s a specific glaring need to fill a position, he’s not going to make a big splash. and potentially waste a bunch of money.

  22. ccjcsr says: Mar 13, 2013 9:52 AM

    Must be the post Flacco savings plan, they want to go cheap because Aaron Rodgers is going to command another 20 mil a year salary!

  23. wludford says: Mar 13, 2013 9:53 AM

    Packers want everyone on the cheap. Then again, so does every other team.

  24. randolph32 says: Mar 13, 2013 9:54 AM

    They won’t overspend for anyone…actually surprised they’re in the running so early.

  25. frozeninfear says: Mar 13, 2013 9:55 AM

    Jack wants big money. This is a no go.

  26. karlton3 says: Mar 13, 2013 9:55 AM

    “Regardless, if Jackson wants to play a significant role for a contending team, Green Bay could be his best option.”

    ———————————————————–

    I don’t know about mutual interest, but Indy is switching to a more power running system now that Arians left and aside from Ballard they don’t have anyone else that’s a starter-level quality to run the ball.

    I think Jackson would be a tremendous fit there.

  27. dublindemonszfl says: Mar 13, 2013 9:58 AM

    With his experience he should be looking to a ring, hate it GB has that to offer. When is Frank Gore going to show some age? 49ers should take a look and cut the injury prone Jacobs. Gore’s longevity is amazing.

  28. flavordave says: Mar 13, 2013 9:58 AM

    The Eagles could maybe use him on special teams if he needs a job. We love Jackson but we’re stacked at RB.

  29. alonestartexan says: Mar 13, 2013 10:03 AM

    It’s funny to see a team that desperately needs a running back take a stance like that against arguably one of the best in the league.

    I hope Jackson signs somewhere else and makes much more money..

  30. dwarftosser says: Mar 13, 2013 10:03 AM

    This is typical Ted Thompson.. and it’s awesome. I’d love to see Jackson on the Packers, but it’s obviously not the #1 priority for them. The Packers offense is going to be good whether Stephen Jackson is there or not, Thompson needs to be spending his money on the defense.

  31. thefox61 says: Mar 13, 2013 10:06 AM

    Yeah, I want tickets to a game on the cheap.

  32. iluvbears says: Mar 13, 2013 10:17 AM

    If I were Jackson, I wouldn’t do anything “on the cheap.” He deserves to be paid, especially if he is joining a team that has been desperate for a running game for the last decade. He will give the Packers a valid running game, which will enhance the passing game even more. Stick to your guns, Steven & get paid.

  33. mblue24 says: Mar 13, 2013 10:19 AM

    Screw the Packers, Go to the Falcons

  34. topwonk says: Mar 13, 2013 10:21 AM

    Steven Jackson is an under achiever and is not a winner. Would not want him on my team…

  35. mnrube23 says: Mar 13, 2013 10:25 AM

    If RB isnt #1 priority for the packers what is!! it might be the only thing they are missing. Are you pac fans drunk already??

  36. glastron1 says: Mar 13, 2013 10:26 AM

    If Ted Thompson would of traded away his precious third round pick a few years ago for Marshan Lynch we wouldn’t even be talking about Steven Jackson.

  37. justintuckrule says: Mar 13, 2013 10:27 AM

    Keep ignoring the defense and it will be more one and done

  38. purpleguy says: Mar 13, 2013 10:29 AM

    The guy would add a whole different dimension and weapon to the Pack offense. You’d think they’d be focusing more on finding a LB that can move and tackle though.

  39. irishgary says: Mar 13, 2013 10:31 AM

    @Rick Spielman is a Magician

    Brandon Jackson has a super bowl ring which is something no one in Minny has

  40. gpack22 says: Mar 13, 2013 10:40 AM

    Big back like Jackson teamed with change of pace Dujan Harris would be solid. Typical cheap a$$ Teddy.

    Although, why the hell would he drop 10 mil per on Jennings? If going to drop that on a player should’ve gone after Dashon Goldson to play safety since there isn’t a starting NFL caliber option on this team. Burnett sucks and no one else behind him. Haven’t been the same defense since Collins got hurt.

  41. rpiotr01 says: Mar 13, 2013 10:45 AM

    Every team wants every player on the cheap. Every person wants everything they buy on the cheap.

    Except the Dolphins.

  42. jikkle49 says: Mar 13, 2013 10:53 AM

    This is a case in define “cheap”.

    Being fiscally responsible and drawing a line are both what successful teams and front offices subscribe too but sometimes you need to pay a little more than you would like for a player that can help push you over the edge.

    Jackson would be a big addition to them because you need to look at the teams standing in your way to the Super Bowl. And two teams you’re likely going to see at least one of is Seattle and San Francisco and those are teams you’re going to have a difficult time beating through the air alone as we saw last season. Jackson has had success against both of those teams.

  43. njpurplehaze says: Mar 13, 2013 10:58 AM

    Steven Jackson would be a great addition, but lets get real Pack, your defense SUCKS! and will only be worse in 2013 than 2012.

  44. 15starr says: Mar 13, 2013 11:03 AM

    Im a drunk packer fan, but i still know stephen jackson would be a huge addition, and we shouldnt waste 10 mill on the WR position. Spread that 10 mill (if we actually have it) over jackson and any position on the defense.

  45. dukeeddy says: Mar 13, 2013 11:13 AM

    The Packers’ window is open now, but it is also open for several other teams that seem to be more aggressive in building their team. The 49’ers beat the Packers twice last year, and that is before they added Boldin, plus CK was just getting started. Rodgers is not going to be there forever, nor is Clay Mathews, so if Thompson doesn’t start to add the pieces that are missing, he may end up squandering the opportunity that is there. The window will close. The running back position in GB has been a problem for several years, which also makes the passing game less effective. GB has exited the playoffs too quickly the last two years, so spend some money, get the missing pieces in place, and take advantage of the open window that is there……at least for the moment.

  46. packfan1179 says: Mar 13, 2013 11:25 AM

    Maybe we should be putting more of a focus on our non existent defense

  47. chi01town says: Mar 13, 2013 11:28 AM

    Jackson wont be that DUMB… Why would a good RB go to a team that
    dont run the football? the packers wouldnt know what to do with AP if
    the Vikings gave him to them. Rodgers is gone pass.. pass.. pass on every play.

  48. dirtybirds233 says: Mar 13, 2013 11:41 AM

    Atlanta will land him, he already said he wants to be a Falcon and TD said he’s waiting for the dust to settle before making any big signings. And we’ll pay him more

  49. 76raiders says: Mar 13, 2013 11:42 AM

    Has anyone seen Peyton Hillis play lately. He’s not very good. I’m not saying pay Kuhn 2.5 million. But there are certainly better alternatives other than Hillis. He has a bad attitude, and the only reason he saw time last year is because Brian Dabol was calling the plays for the Chiefs. They were buddies in Cleveland before the brief tenure in KC. The Browns were smart not to pay this joker when he was looking to break the bank a few years ago while he was high on the hog, after getting the cover of Madden. Forget about Jackson as well. His gears are gone and he doesnt offer alot of value for the price he’s expecting to get. If your going to spend some money go and get a dynamic playmaker like Reggie Bush and then find a diamond in the rough late in the draft like the Skins did with Alfred Morris last season.The Packers need speed out on the edge. Rodgers needs someone he can throw to in the flat, that can get up the field in a hurry and make big plays. Bush can do that for you. Plus he was in former Packer OC’s Joe Philbin’s offense last year in Miami, so he is already versed in the offense. Is Ted losing his touch?

  50. onlineinsite says: Mar 13, 2013 12:05 PM

    As a Vikes fan I can’t believe GB would not snap up Jackson at a decent price in a second. He would instantly help the O-line and Rodgers’ sack totals. Then again, GB sees RBs the way the Vikes have seen QBs – just go out and get some guy on the cheap and see if you can get a season or two out of him.

  51. linemanguy74 says: Mar 13, 2013 12:38 PM

    LIKE I SAID BEFORE , BEFORE I WAS DELETED CAN HE TACKLE ???????

  52. gbmickey says: Mar 13, 2013 1:26 PM

    Chitown your jealousy is showing up again. Do you realize the Packers ran 44% of the time last year? Which equates to 23 per game. Jackson averaged only 16 carries last year with the Rams. Do i need to really say who is the dumb one?

  53. joejacks says: Mar 13, 2013 1:41 PM

    Kevin Colbert…did you set up a visit yet?

  54. emoney826 says: Mar 13, 2013 3:25 PM

    Lol @Chi01town! That pass pass pass theory that you’re talking trash about has beat your team six times in a row now. You’re still an idiot. For them to get further in the playoffs, they need a legit running back. They don’t need a running back to beat the baby bears.

  55. deltaoracle says: Mar 13, 2013 3:52 PM

    Crazy living in a world where $3 million is “cheap.”
    BTW, strongly doubt that having Hillis in for a visit is delivering a message that Jackson would bother to read.

  56. bronconation623 says: Mar 13, 2013 4:15 PM

    he needs to go to denver we would use him there

  57. vikesfansteve says: Mar 13, 2013 6:24 PM

    Hope he doesn’t play with the Packers because they would have close to a perfect offense.

  58. axespray says: Mar 13, 2013 8:59 PM

    Can’t we just re sign Cedric Benson ?
    He managed most of his yards after contact – spend an off season making our oline improve their run blocking – I’d like to see what a Cedric/Dujuan combo could do.

    Plus – they’re both less expensive than Steve Jackson – spend the money on Defense.

    Get rid of AJ Hawk – Keep Brad Jones.

  59. bronconation623 says: Mar 14, 2013 2:56 PM

    steven jackson needs to go to denver if he wants to win he is one of the missing pieces we need he would be used in denver not forgoten with the packers look at what mannig did in one year with our team jackson fits right in our team is all players that wat to win there not hard headed look at type of players we got all there atitudes are just like jacksons team players

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!