you mean 4 don't you?Originally Posted by pbmax
you mean 4 don't you?
No, you can only get 4 total comp picks in any year.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
oh...ok. thx
For the record, I am more disappointed in the FA that were packer players and got away this year. Than I am about any he didn't sign. Mainly Tretter and Lang.
I can kinda see why Tretter is gone. He wanted a chance to start and he is a better tackle than guard and we seem to have more tackles than open spots on the line. I was really sorry to see Lang go. His absence makes RG the biggest hole on the offense. I know Lacy is gone but IMO RB is one of the few positions where a rookie can come in and contribute right away.
Funny thing about Ted Thompson. I've pretty much always been a detractor of him, but when it comes down to each individual decision - who to sign/who to let go, I most of the time have to agree with him. Lang, Tretter, and Hyde went for more money than it woulda been a good idea to pay. I'm glad he let Lacy and Jones go. He may have gotten more with less in the TE situation. He didn't really overpay to retain Perry. I would have liked to see him pick up a top quality Corner, but none of them have stood out as bargains. He signed my guy, Jayrone Elliot. Getting Barwin might have been nice, but I think we will be OK without him.
There's still several Corners out there worth considering, and I'd be pleased to see us pick up Adrian Peterson cheap (not Lynch or Blount).
What could be more GOOD and NORMAL and AMERICAN than Packer Football?
The Packers have money to spend. When you let your free agents go and leave money left over you bet that guys like Rodgers are then looking to get a cpntract upgrade especially if you are not spending it on the players that are going to make a run to the Super Bowl a little bit easier. I would think that having Lang at guard verse Spriggs or Barclay would give the Packer more protection for Rodgers, and sustain the running game. I might be wrong, but cutting Josh Sitton opened the door to Lane Taylor who statistically was the worst out of the five starting linemen. He was covered up because the other 4 of them were pretty good. I am sure that Taylor will be a bit better this upcoming season but now the Packers have to take the hit on introducing a new full time starter to the offensive line.
I agree that Lang got more money than he was worth but Lang filled a need and he was let go, and now the Packers go into the draft with far too many needs for a Super Bowl contending team.
tell me about it. this on so many levels.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again, Aaron Rodgers and his mobility make all O Linemen, past, present, and future, that have blocked for him BETTER - much better. That, and it's a helluva lot easier to be a "good" Guard than a "good" Offensive Tackle. Take Barclay (please take him hahahaha), horrible at OT but tolerable at G. My preference would be to use Bulaga at RG and to hope Spriggs plays up to the potential they say he has as a Tackle. Running less - mainly as a change of pace - also will make the O Line at least seem better with the element of surprise.
I would agree, we still have more question marks than we should on defense, but on offense, we should be even more solid than before even if there is no help from free agency or the draft.
What could be more GOOD and NORMAL and AMERICAN than Packer Football?
the Packers o-line was the number 1 pass blocking line last year according to pff. don't think they count scramble plays in their calculations/grades of o-lines. i think the o-line makes HIM better. his mobility extends plays, gives wrs extra time to get open. we've seen him with shitty lines and or wrs that can't get open. it's not pretty.
So if you agree Lang got more than he was worth, then you find another option. If a plug and play G is drafted in Rd1 or 2 and the position is filled, then you just raised your blood pressure for no reason. Last time I checked the NFL allows different ways to improve your team in an offseason. Do you really not understand filling EVERY hole in FA doesn't work?
Now what y'all know about dem Texas boys
Comin' down in candied toys, smokin' weed and talkin' noise!!!
if they draft a guard early they're ignoring the D that NEEDS ALL THE HELP. that would be malpractice. they had a great guard and let him go. now they're weaker there and the oline has less depth now too. way to take a step back. you can't take care of all your needs in the draft...not if your goal is to win a SB anyway.
Never said you can fix everything in the draft. Pretty sure if you reread my posts I'm talking about utilizing ALL avenues to improve this team. Some of y'all want it ALL done via FA. Once more, the good teams don't do it that way. From a fan base who is used to sitting idle during this time, you'd think there'd be a party for 3 non packer free agent signings. Has everybody forgotten about the FA period after the draft? You can make your team better then as well.
Now what y'all know about dem Texas boys
Comin' down in candied toys, smokin' weed and talkin' noise!!!
Name one member of this forum that has said they want it all done Via FA. I nor anyone else tht I can recall has said FA ids the only way.
didn't say you did, sorry. it wasn't really directed at you. i was just addressing the guard position you mentioned. i agree that all avenues need to utilized. we weren't that far off and on D that a couple of positions could have taken care of in FA. had they been the draft could be a little more diversified but as the D wasn't addressed the draft will have to be more focused.
I think most of the frustration comes from the fact that TT doesn't fill defensive positions of need that he and the organization have proven to be completely inept at evaluating, drafting, and developing.
The problem with this team is, and always will be, defense. Signing some competent defenders that would fill holes would go a long way toward getting us to another SB, but Ted simply won't admit that he hasn't a clue how to build a defense.
wist
Just from this last draft, Kenny Clark doesn't count? From the draft before, Rollins and Randall? From before that HHCD? It seems to me that the top pick or two usually addresses a need that year or one that will be coming up soon. I for one don't lament the pick of Jordy Nelson though it wasn't a need at the time.
No longer the member of any fan clubs. I'm tired of jinxing players out of the league and into obscurity.
I actually agree with this. They get guys who seem to flash a lot of potential but rarely does a guy stick long term. It's not for a lack of trying though. I don't have hard numbers, but it seems like the O draft picks pan out at a much higher rate than the D draft picks.
It does seem like his defensive picks hit less than his offensive ones. And the guys that don't like TT will tell us that's more reason to bring in defensive FAs. However that deters from the develop part of draft and develop system. And when draft and develop is your forte, it seems prohibitive to bring in those players.
Now what y'all know about dem Texas boys
Comin' down in candied toys, smokin' weed and talkin' noise!!!
Bob McGinn @BobMcGinn 6h6 hours ago
CB Davon House's 1-yr, $2.8M deal with GBP ($850K guar) includes $850K S-bonus, $1.5M base, $300K per-game rost bonus and $150K w'out bonus.
Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote