Mike Pettine

[Bretsky]

But..But, Schneider makes brilliant moves like trading a 2nd for Sheldon Richardson that keeps him right in the superbowl hunt. He uses FA and trades and is brilliant. Look at how he traded an all pro center for Jimmy Graham and they went on to win multiple super bowls.

Schneider would probably be our GM if we could have got him for nothing
Same # of SB's as Ted in I think less time and had the coach just given Lynch the ball............

Well either way they are both currently farts in the wind.

[mraynrand]

When PB writes that it would help to be active before the draft to "actually allow some more BPA during the draft," I think back to Ted's early drafts. He seemed to go more BPA in those days - did the team need Aaron Rodgers at that moment? Did it need Jordy Nelson at that point? It was once Ted starting seeming at least to choose for need (say, what a coincidence that the team needed a safety so bad and the best player on the board happened to be Clinton-Dix, or that the team needed a penetrating pass rusher and traded up for Jerel Worthless) that things seemed to go less well.

Sure, there's some of that. But there's also 2009 - where both first round picks were for need - going to the "3-4" and they turned out well (well enough).

Bottom line is of course that you have to hit on your picks and FA. Having more picks typically means more success, but if you are picking lower your chances of a game changer are less too. Just like in the Sherman days, moving up/trading to get someone is great if they work out (Al Harris, Javon Walker), but devastating if they don't (take your pick).

[pbmax]

Easier to be BPA when you are rebuilding a roster too.

[gbgary]

Let's say this is right. Now do the heavy lifting. Given the salary cap, who do they cut and who do they sign to win now? Specific players, please.

they're some $22m+- under the cap now. they don't have to cut anyone. they have a month before the league year begins to make more room if they think they need it (they can do it later but there's a cost to it). they have to decide if they're going for the short-term win-now plan or go for the long-term plan. i don't think they'll do the long term thing as it means (imo) trading Rodgers to cle for their 2 #1's+++. doing so would get them a qb at #1, pick #4 and #14 to get whoever, end all cap issues, sign anyone they want in free agency, and collect later for anything else they could get in the deal. since we know that ain't happenin', the short term is all that's left...which is 3-5 years years max imo. the 3 names constantly being brought up for cutting are Jordy, Cobb, and Clay. i think they want to keep them all so if they're willing to take a cut and extend for a year or two, fine. that'll get them a little more room...which is likely to be eaten up by Rodger's extension. cutting them is a step backward imo. this year the d is going to go through a big learning curve so i don't expect them to be so great. losing Clay's experience would hurt. this year's schedule is a killer. i say let them play out their contracts and aim for 2019 when $30m+ falls off the payroll and the cap goes up another $15m.

edit: ya know, after typing all that...with next year's learning curve and schedule, why put off the $30m drop-off a year? cut the 3 of them now and start the fix now. that should get them a better pick next year than keeping them another year would.

[Joemailman]

they're some $22m+- under the cap now. they don't have to cut anyone. they have a month before the league year begins to make more room if they think they need it (they can do it later but there's a cost to it). they have to decide if they're going for the short-term win-now plan or go for the long-term plan. i don't think they'll do the long term thing as it means (imo) trading Rodgers to cle for their 2 #1's+++. doing so would get them a qb at #1, pick #4 and #14 to get whoever, end all cap issues, sign anyone they want in free agency, and collect later for anything else they could get in the deal. since we know that ain't happenin', the short term is all that's left...which is 3-5 years years max imo. the 3 names constantly being brought up for cutting are Jordy, Cobb, and Clay. i think they want to keep them all so if they're willing to take a cut and extend for a year or two, fine. that'll get them a little more room...which is likely to be eaten up by Rodger's extension. cutting them is a step backward imo. this year the d is going to go through a big learning curve so i don't expect them to be so great. losing Clay's experience would hurt. this year's schedule is a killer. i say let them play out their contracts and aim for 2019 when $30m+ falls off the payroll and the cap goes up another $15m.

They might need to cut someone if they want to sign Burnett. Otherwise, they're okay. I'm torn on Jordy. He looked really slow the 2nd half of the season. Still, he had 6 TD receptions with Rodgers playing, so he's still someone Rodgers likes to go to.

[gbgary]

They might need to cut someone if they want to sign Burnett. Otherwise, they're okay. I'm torn on Jordy. He looked really slow the 2nd half of the season. Still, he had 6 TD receptions with Rodgers playing, so he's still someone Rodgers likes to go to.

see my edit to that post.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

One thing people forget is that GMs and coaches cannot swapped out according to mathematical principles. You can't use the transitive property or substitution property.

Ted plus more FA and trades doesn't equal Belichick. Doesn't work that way. People have different skills and do a variable job of hiring other good people (and then listening to them) about things they do not excel in. Ted built an org that drafted like their life depended on it, mainly because it does. The guys who would be more FA or trade friendly? McKenzie is going backward in Oakland and may have taken a drastic hit in power, Schneider's team is falling apart on defense without a bevy of young top picks and Dorsey got fired from a team that is truly the definition of one and done.

Odds are hugely against Gutekunst being as good at building a team as Ted or Ron. Even if he adds some more FAs or trades for people.

And I would wager my last dollar the small difference between the Packers and the Patriots over the last decade plus was coaching, not personnel.

More likely, the Pats might've been capable of winning a fluke Super Bowl without Brady, with all other things being equal, but no way they win 6 (yes, they will win the 6th on Sunday) without Brady.

Tom Brady is an elite QB, the champion of the Pats. As Belichick himself has proved time and time again, the math is simple: Belichickism + Elite QB = Super Bowl wins.

The Packers have an elite QB on their roster, do they not?

[mraynrand]

they're some $22m+- under the cap now. they don't have to cut anyone. they have a month before the league year begins to make more room if they think they need it (they can do it later but there's a cost to it). they have to decide if they're going for the short-term win-now plan or go for the long-term plan. i don't think they'll do the long term thing as it means (imo) trading Rodgers to cle for their 2 #1's+++. doing so would get them a qb at #1, pick #4 and #14 to get whoever, end all cap issues, sign anyone they want in free agency, and collect later for anything else they could get in the deal. since we know that ain't happenin', the short term is all that's left...which is 3-5 years years max imo. the 3 names constantly being brought up for cutting are Jordy, Cobb, and Clay. i think they want to keep them all so if they're willing to take a cut and extend for a year or two, fine. that'll get them a little more room...which is likely to be eaten up by Rodger's extension. cutting them is a step backward imo. this year the d is going to go through a big learning curve so i don't expect them to be so great. losing Clay's experience would hurt. this year's schedule is a killer. i say let them play out their contracts and aim for 2019 when $30m+ falls off the payroll and the cap goes up another $15m.

edit: ya know, after typing all that...with next year's learning curve and schedule, why put off the $30m drop-off a year? cut the 3 of them now and start the fix now. that should get them a better pick next year than keeping them another year would.

So who do they sign to win now? I assumed there was a player on another roster who TT would never sign, but maybe BG would sign that would lead to a championship. You know, Belichickism. But who is that guy(s)?

[mraynrand]

More likely, the Pats might've been capable of winning a fluke Super Bowl without Brady, with all other things being equal, but no way they win 6 (yes, they will win the 6th on Sunday) without Brady.

Tom Brady is an elite QB, the champion of the Pats. As Belichick himself has proved time and time again, the math is simple: Belichickism + Elite QB = Super Bowl wins.

The Packers have an elite QB on their roster, do they not?

Sure, now all they need to do is trade Stubby/BG for Belichick.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Sure, now all they need to do is trade Stubby/BG for Belichick.

Not necessary, although I would love to see J-Mac in the Green and Gold as GM/Coach.

Look at the Eagles. Upgraded team via free agency. Upgraded team via trades. In the Super Bowl. That's Belichickism.

No reason the German Shepherd can't utilize Belichickism. Gutekunst has the cap space. He has the money. He has the elite QB. He needs to do his fucking job, as Belichick is fond of saying.

[mraynrand]

When philly is in 7 super Bowls over the next fifteen years then we’ll see how close to cheat they’ve come.

[gbgary]

So who do they sign to win now? I assumed there was a player on another roster who TT would never sign, but maybe BG would sign that would lead to a championship. You know, Belichickism. But who is that guy(s)?

in a short-term win-now (while Rodgers is still here 3-5yrs) you sign actual upgrades where you can. Malcolm Butler or Bashaud Breeland at cb perhaps, Tre Boston to take Burnett's place, or Austin Seferian-Jenkins at TE. that's if they keep Jordy, Cobb, Mathews. if they let one of the wrs go they could sign Jarvis Landry. if they let Mathews go they could sign Avery Williamson as an ilb and draft Clays successor. just some ideas.

[pbmax]

in a short-term win-now (while Rodgers is still here 3-5yrs) you sign actual upgrades where you can. Malcolm Butler or Bashaud Breeland at cb perhaps, Tre Boston to take Burnett's place, or Austin Seferian-Jenkins at TE. that's if they keep Jordy, Cobb, Mathews. if they let one of the wrs go they could sign Jarvis Landry. if they let Mathews go they could sign Avery Williamson as an ilb and draft Clays successor. just some ideas.

Jarvis Landry is Cobb with double the targets.

[mraynrand]

in a short-term win-now (while Rodgers is still here 3-5yrs) you sign actual upgrades where you can. Malcolm Butler or Bashaud Breeland at cb perhaps, Tre Boston to take Burnett's place, or Austin Seferian-Jenkins at TE. that's if they keep Jordy, Cobb, Mathews. if they let one of the wrs go they could sign Jarvis Landry. if they let Mathews go they could sign Avery Williamson as an ilb and draft Clays successor. just some ideas.

thanks for putting your cards on the table. Seferian-Jenkins is an interesting idea.

[gbgary]

Jarvis Landry is Cobb with double the targets.

2 years younger than Cobb and 7 younger than Jordy. will be the same price.

[pbmax]

2 years younger than Cobb and 7 younger than Jordy. will be the same price.

Yeah, but Cobb wasn't worth it unless he was #3. Landry won't be worth it as #2. You have to be one of the best slot guys in an offense with a good #1 and 2.

I love the guy, but he is the quintessential third option, get open and make a catch on third and short guy.

Would much rather have reliable #2 and keep Cobb.

[call_me_ishmael]

Landry is going to make as much as Adams. Maybe more. In my largely uninformed opinion, he's a better player who did it with a worse QB. He'll make more on the free market if he hits it.

[gbgary]

Landry is going to make as much as Adams. Maybe more. In my largely uninformed opinion, he's a better player who did it with a worse QB. He'll make more on the free market if he hits it.

perhaps. they'll have to see if he fits.

[gbgary]

Yeah, but Cobb wasn't worth it unless he was #3. Landry won't be worth it as #2. You have to be one of the best slot guys in an offense with a good #1 and 2.

I love the guy, but he is the quintessential third option, get open and make a catch on third and short guy.

Would much rather have reliable #2 and keep Cobb.

he's had two 100+ catch years in the last 3 (with a 94 catch year in between). that doesn't sound like a 3 to me. i could be wrong. i don't watch mia play.

there are going to be other guys come free besides the ones we know about now.

[pbmax]

he's had two 100+ catch years in the last 3 (with a 94 catch year in between). that doesn't sound like a 3 to me. i could be wrong. i don't watch mia play.

there are going to be other guys come free besides the ones we know about now.

In the last four years he is 102th out of 134 for players with 50 or more catches total in yards per reception at 10.10 per catch. He's quick not fast and would be captain check down in the Packer offense.