Page 24 of 33 FirstFirst ... 14 22 23 24 25 26 ... LastLast
Results 461 to 480 of 651

Thread: Packers' Off Season Moves and 2017 Roster

  1. #461
    Red Devil Rat HOFer gbgary's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    up the road from jerrahworld
    Posts
    14,529
    Quote Originally Posted by Zool View Post
    I think Lacy and Jones were meh guys who got paid more than they are worth.

    I bet he would have loved to have Tretter and/or Lang back though at a lower cost than what they got from Cleveland and the Loins. When you assume Rodgers is getting a new contract next offseason, you have to plan accordingly. He is probably going to get $25M per.
    i'll bet it's more. he's on 22m a year now.
    Aaron Rodgers signed a 5 year, $110,000,000 contract with the Green Bay Packers, including a $33,250,000 signing bonus, $54,000,000 guaranteed, and an average annual salary of $22,000,000.
    that's if he's not so disgusted by the failing of his "all-in" decree and retires/becomes a free-agent/or is traded.

  2. #462
    Quote Originally Posted by Bretsky View Post
    Put me in the who cares category here
    Blount had 18 rushing tds last year.
    That's 3 x more than Lacy, Starks, Montgomery, Michael, ripkowski had combined.
    You're right who cares
    Last edited by yetisnowman; 03-17-2017 at 12:13 PM.

  3. #463
    Quote Originally Posted by Teamcheez1 View Post
    I read somewhere that the Packers would have made Lang the 5th highest paid guard if they had retained him. I like him, but not at that cost with his injury history and age.
    The guaranteed money in his deal is huge. Can't blame him. Nearly $20 million. For a Guard, he got paid. Good for him.
    Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.

  4. #464
    Wolf Pack Rat HOFer Deputy Nutz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    In Skin's basket
    Posts
    11,162
    I don't think that it is the loss of Lang that I question it is the replacement. Usually a GM should have an understanding what the value of his players are and he should be working to have a suitable replacement. I assume that Thompson has a better feel for his roster than I do, but I don't see a suitable replacement.

  5. #465
    Quote Originally Posted by Deputy Nutz View Post
    I don't think that it is the loss of Lang that I question it is the replacement. Usually a GM should have an understanding what the value of his players are and he should be working to have a suitable replacement. I assume that Thompson has a better feel for his roster than I do, but I don't see a suitable replacement.
    He's always got a 6 or 7th rounder or a street free agent replacement. Ted is always on the ball!!!

  6. #466
    Wolf Pack Rat HOFer Deputy Nutz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    In Skin's basket
    Posts
    11,162
    I would rather go with a late round guy rather than drafting a first rounder to play guard. I know that is unlike Ted, but he is looking more and more like a dementia victim, you never know what that opossum looking motherfucker is going to do.

  7. #467
    Moose Rat HOFer woodbuck27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    30,498
    Quote Originally Posted by pbmax View Post
    Packer Report‏ @PackerReport 32m32 minutes ago
    #Packers have lost seven free agents this offseason. Subject to change but might be moving on from Goode, too.

    Goode and Chris Michael are the odd men out still.

    Anyone else get the sense that Ted didn't like his roster much last year? Or was it that they were so middling they weren't worth paying.
    "Anyone else get the sense that Ted didn't like his roster much last year?" pbmax

    I think that is obvious.


    So he got outbid for guy's like Lang and Tretter (and maybe even Lacy) but what was his plan to replace these fellas?

    1.) Did Ted Thompson even have a contingency plan?

    2.) Then there is the question of Cap Space. Is TT going to waste more of that?

    3.) Does Ted Thompson realise that with all the former (beginning of the 2016 season) Roster players lost to FA this winter; and due to injury or trade last season. That any Draft and Development plan is 'a hooey and a hope' for a Super Bowl next season?
    ** Since 2006 3 X Pro Pickem' Champion; 4 X Runner-Up and 3 X 3rd place.
    ** To download Jesus Loves Me ring tones, you'll need a cell phone mame
    ** If God doesn't fish, play poker or pull for " the Packers ", exactly what does HE do with his buds?
    ** Rather than love, money or fame - give me TRUTH: Henry D. Thoreau

  8. #468
    Quote Originally Posted by woodbuck27 View Post
    "Anyone else get the sense that Ted didn't like his roster much last year?" pbmax

    I think that is obvious.


    So he got outbid for guy's like Lang and Tretter (and maybe even Lacy) but what was his plan to replace these fellas?

    1.) Did Ted Thompson even have a contingency plan?

    2.) Then there is the question of Cap Space. Is TT going to waste more of that?

    3.) Does Ted Thompson realise that with all the former (beginning of the 2016 season) Roster players lost to FA this winter; and due to injury or trade last season. That any Draft and Development plan is 'a hooey and a hope' for a Super Bowl next season?
    Even the TT nut huggers should be able to see that Ted doesn't do contingency plans. His ego is too big, if he had contingency plans it would be like admitting his base plans can fail.

  9. #469
    Anti Homer Rat HOFer Bretsky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Fort Atkinson, WI
    Posts
    32,551
    Blog Entries
    2
    no worries; as he always does AROD will get us to the playoffs
    LIFE IS ABOUT CHAMPIONSHIPS; I JUST REALIZED THIS. The MILWAUKEE BUCKS have won the same number of championships over the past 50 years as the Green Bay Packers. Ten years from now, who will have more championships, and who will be the fart in the wind ?

  10. #470
    Barbershop Rat HOFer Pugger's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    N. Fort Myers, FL
    Posts
    8,887
    Quote Originally Posted by Deputy Nutz View Post
    I would rather go with a late round guy rather than drafting a first rounder to play guard. I know that is unlike Ted, but he is looking more and more like a dementia victim, you never know what that opossum looking motherfucker is going to do.
    One good thing for us is Ted has been pretty good at finding gem linemen in later rounds of the draft.

  11. #471
    Barbershop Rat HOFer Pugger's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    N. Fort Myers, FL
    Posts
    8,887
    Quote Originally Posted by Rutnstrut View Post
    Even the TT nut huggers should be able to see that Ted doesn't do contingency plans. His ego is too big, if he had contingency plans it would be like admitting his base plans can fail.
    I know you suspect I'm a big Ted fan but I am very ambivalent about him. I wish he was a little more active in FA but I can understand he doesn't want to overpay guys. However, he is the last person I would say has a big ego.

  12. #472
    Jumbo Rat HOFer
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    14,035
    Quote Originally Posted by Pugger View Post
    I know you suspect I'm a big Ted fan but I am very ambivalent about him. I wish he was a little more active in FA but I can understand he doesn't want to overpay guys. However, he is the last person I would say has a big ego.
    100% Pugger! What GM of a team would not be present when they retired a player's number? If TT had an ego he would have been on the stage with Favre and Murphy. Instead he stayed up in the Packer's Box and let the ceremony go on without being seen.
    But Rodgers leads the league in frumpy expressions and negative body language on the sideline, which makes him, like Josh Allen, a unique double threat.

    -Tim Harmston

  13. #473
    Quote Originally Posted by woodbuck27 View Post
    "Anyone else get the sense that Ted didn't like his roster much last year?" pbmax

    I think that is obvious.


    So he got outbid for guy's like Lang and Tretter (and maybe even Lacy) but what was his plan to replace these fellas?

    1.) Did Ted Thompson even have a contingency plan?

    2.) Then there is the question of Cap Space. Is TT going to waste more of that?

    3.) Does Ted Thompson realise that with all the former (beginning of the 2016 season) Roster players lost to FA this winter; and due to injury or trade last season. That any Draft and Development plan is 'a hooey and a hope' for a Super Bowl next season?
    How much of a contingency plan do you need or want to commit to for a backup center? The contingency plan for Tretter is called starting Center Corey Linsley and backup Don Barclay. And before everyone busts open an important artery, while Barclay is limited, you cannot keep a backup on the roster for starter money in a 2nd contract. The numbers won't work. Tretter is also not Mr. Reliable.

    Lang simply got more guaranteed money than the other two teams chasing him were comfortable with. Its a near record for guaranteed money. For a guy with an injury history and coming off ankle/foot surgery. He might make it to the end of his contract, but previous history is not on his side.

    The contingency plan is for younger guys to step in and get better, just as Lang did when he was a youngster.
    Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.

  14. #474
    Quote Originally Posted by Rutnstrut View Post
    Even the TT nut huggers should be able to see that Ted doesn't do contingency plans. His ego is too big, if he had contingency plans it would be like admitting his base plans can fail.
    At one point, Josh Sitton and TJ Lang were the contingency plans that no one knew anything about (Sitton came through much faster).

    The reason you know about them is that they got a chance to play, rather than an expensive and over the hill vet.
    Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.

  15. #475
    Red Devil Rat HOFer gbgary's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    up the road from jerrahworld
    Posts
    14,529

  16. #476
    Quote Originally Posted by pbmax View Post
    At one point, Josh Sitton and TJ Lang were the contingency plans that no one knew anything about (Sitton came through much faster).

    The reason you know about them is that they got a chance to play, rather than an expensive and over the hill vet.
    Do you deny that Ted's unwillingness to put a team together through all avenues possible makes it much tougher? TT and stubby would not even still be employed in GB if it weren't for Rodgers continually saving their ass.

  17. #477
    Quote Originally Posted by Rutnstrut View Post
    Do you deny that Ted's unwillingness to put a team together through all avenues possible makes it much tougher? TT and stubby would not even still be employed in GB if it weren't for Rodgers continually saving their ass.
    I deny it because without Rodgers the Brett situation, draft position, draft picks and free agents all play out differently.

    You can't change one variable and pretend everything else stays the same.

    You can also sign a lot more FAs when the QB isn't making $22 million per year.

    And your basic claim, that he doesn't use all available avenues is demonstrably untrue.

    Short answer: I deny it, yes.
    Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.

  18. #478
    Anti Homer Rat HOFer Bretsky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Fort Atkinson, WI
    Posts
    32,551
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by pbmax View Post
    I deny it because without Rodgers the Brett situation, draft position, draft picks and free agents all play out differently.

    You can't change one variable and pretend everything else stays the same.
    You can also sign a lot more FAs when the QB isn't making $22 million per year.
    And your basic claim, that he doesn't use all available avenues is demonstrably untrue.
    Short answer: I deny it, yes.
    Year after year we gave chances to unrestricted free agent and how many have we signed in the past five years before this year ? Those are the pure facts.
    I'd hire you as a salesman in a second because your reasoning of using AROD's salary and linking it to our inability to sign free agents is a very effective way of shifting the focus when asked a question you don't want to address. We don't sign free agency because right or wrong, TT feels our chances are better to not take the short term risk/reward of free agency and instead believes in is ability to wins Super Bowls through the draft. Trades ? I'm sure there are some minor ones I forgot..maybe. I recall Ryan Grant. I recall Matthews about 7-8 years ago. I don't recall much else. TT is fine; he's an above average GM; but there is several I"d rather have and I wish he'd utilize other avenues better.
    LIFE IS ABOUT CHAMPIONSHIPS; I JUST REALIZED THIS. The MILWAUKEE BUCKS have won the same number of championships over the past 50 years as the Green Bay Packers. Ten years from now, who will have more championships, and who will be the fart in the wind ?

  19. #479
    Quote Originally Posted by Bretsky View Post
    We don't sign free agency because right or wrong, TT feels our chances are better to not take the short term risk/reward of free agency and instead believes in is ability to wins Super Bowls through the draft.
    This is the part that drives me crazy. He DOES sign free agents. You want him to sign more.

    If the Packers did not have a franchise QB, then that changes the cap picture completely. And that would lead to more spending everywhere else.
    Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.

  20. #480
    PB are you a politician?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •