On/about 22 Feb 2005,  the Packers were $6,461,621 over the projected/confirmed $85.5m cap space and they had two significant "cap hogs" in Mike Wahle and Darren Sharper.  Wahle ($11.375m) and Sharper ($8,633,334) were also two of the Packers' best players.   Obviously, the Packers had to reduce their cap deficit.  Ted Thompson chose to cut these players instead of brokering favorable salary reductions both parties could accept.  I thought he could've and should've got the acceptable salary reduction. 

Contract restructuring was common place during the CBA (phase II).  In fact, many contracts were initially structured for that purpose.  Sharper's was a prime example:

http://www.jsonline.com/packer/news/mar01/packnot05030401.asp
Free safety Darren Sharper's six-year, $30 million contract includes a base salary of $500,000 in 2001. He will also receive a $1 million base salary in '02, a $3.1 million base plus a $1.2 million roster bonus in '03, a $3.2 million base plus a $2 million roster bonus in '04, a $3.4 million base plus a $2.6 million roster bonus in '05 and a $4 million base plus a $2 million roster bonus in '06.

IMO, the purpose of the Sharper's $2.6m roster bonus (RB) for 2005 was to force a restructure in the form of converting that amount into signing bonus (SB) and prorate over the life of existing contract. They could've also negotiated a contract extension to further prorate that amount.  We all know Thompson cut Sharper to "recoup" $3,366,666 of 2005 cap.  ...a questionable move...

If Sharper's contract had been extended two years, his SB could've been converted into SB and the "recoup" would've been $1.95m plus a good player.  Cut Wahle and the Packers have enough cap room.

IMO, the bottom line is that Thompson could have kept Sharper but chose not to.