Ben Taylor

[HarveyWallbangers]

I like his comment at the end. I wish other players would have the same attitude. Criticize Ahmad Carroll (and I do), but at least he took the signing of Charles Woodson as a challange, and he seems to be working even harder.

Taylor turns heads at linebacker
By Pete Dougherty, PackersNews.com

No one wins a job for a wide-open starting position in the NFL in offseason practices.

But players can stake themselves to early leads, and little-known newcomer Ben Taylor has done that at the strong side of the Green Bay Packers’ revamped linebackers corps.

Taylor has worked most of the minicamps and organized team activities as the starter on the strong side, ahead of second-year pro Roy Manning. Manning knew the defense after starting two games at that position last year, yet former Cleveland Browns starter Taylor surpassed him.

Maybe Manning will beat out Taylor when the pads go on, or perhaps third-round draft pick Abdul Hodge will play so well in training camp that the Packers will move him from the backup at middle linebacker to compete for the strong-side job. Even Brady Poppinga lingers in the background as a possible starter, though that hinges on him bucking the odds and coming back from knee-reconstruction surgery in time to practice during training camp.

That leaves Taylor, signed as a security blanket because of his 26 starts in four NFL seasons with the Browns, the front-runner when training camp opens in July.

“Although he has his limitations, he’s a football player,” said Reggie McKenzie, the Packers’ director of pro personnel.

“Thatâ� �‚¬â„¢s what we liked. We felt like he was a football player, and once we got him in and got to know him in person, he plays like he is: a tough guy, smart, a football guy.”

The Packers signed Taylor to one-year deal that included $80,280 in signing and workout bonuses hoping, but not knowing, whether he’d be a starter in their re-made linebacker corps.

Before they signed him, they cut ties with two regulars at linebacker: Na’il Diggs and Paris Lenon. They released Diggs because of his contract — $2.9 million in roster bonus and base salary this year — and made no effort to compete with Detroit’s surprisingly lucrative contract offer in free agency that included a $1.8 million bonus.

Diggs was a full-time starter for five years before injuries to both knees limited him to six starts last year, and Lenon started 12 games combined at weak-side and strong-side linebacker last season.

With only middle linebacker Nick Barnett back as a sure-fire starter and A.J. Hawk still not drafted, the Packers needed a linebacker who could play all three positions immediately. Taylor, a fourth-round pick out of Virginia Tech in 2002, had played every linebacker position in his four seasons with the Browns.

“We thought he was a good candidate (to start), and if he won the starting spot, fine,” McKenzie said. “But the bottom line is, we wanted to make sure we had a good, sound football player, and that guy had to be versatile. We didn’t sign Taylor just to come in and start at Sam (i.e., strong-side) linebacker.”

At first blush, Diggs appeared to be a much better fit for the defensive scheme that Jim Bates introduced last year and that defensive coordinator Bob Sanders will continue this year. The scheme emphasizes speed and quickness at linebacker over size, and Diggs would time significantly faster than Taylor in a foot race. Taylor ran only 4.83 seconds in the 40 coming out of college, whereas Diggs ran 4.66 seconds.

However, the Packers’ coaching and scouting staffs concluded that Diggs didn’t have the lateral quickness they wanted, not to mention injuries were a concern. Taylor, on the other hand, performed the lateral-quickness three-cone drill at the NFL scouting combine coming out of college in 6.56 seconds, which is excellent for a linebacker. Hawk, the fifth pick overall in this year’s draft, did it in 6.82 seconds.

The Packers thought Taylor’s lateral movement and instincts allowed him to play a touch faster than Diggs when they watched him on videotape, and he came at a much cheaper price — his base salary is $656,000 to go with the $80,000 in bonuses.

“A lot of guys that are ‘football players’ can do things because they keep themselves in good position or they understand the scheme,” Sanders said of Taylor.

Taylor also considered re-signing with the Browns for a slightly more lucrative offer, but Cleveland insisted on him taking a half salary if he sustained a season-ending injury — he’d had a torn pectoral muscle that cost him 13 games in 2004 and a back injury and staph infection that cost him three games in ’03.

The Packers didn’t require the injury split in the contract, and at least as important, Taylor preferred playing in their “linebacker-friendly,” as he called it, 4-3 defense rather than Cleveland’s 3-4. At 6-foot-2, 238 pounds, he’s not a take-on linebacker, and in the Packers’ scheme, the defensive line protects its linebackers from offensive linemen. In a 3-4, linebackers are taking on offensive linemen.

When Taylor signed with the Packers, they had two openings in the starting lineup, so he appeared to have an excellent shot at winning a job. When they drafted Hawk with the fifth pick overall, that immediately filled weak-side linebacker, and when they drafted Hodge in the third round, that added another possible competitor to go with Manning and possibly Poppinga.

“If you do what you’re supposed to do with the ones, it’s hard to move a guy out of there,” Taylor said.

[Harlan Huckleby]

However, the Packers’ coaching and scouting staffs concluded that Diggs didn’t have the lateral quickness they wanted, not to mention injuries were a concern .... The Packers thought Taylor’s lateral movement and instincts allowed him to play a touch faster than Diggs when they watched him on videotape, and he came at a much cheaper price — his base salary is $656,000 to go with the $80,000 in bonuses.

I don't like this decision. How much would it have cost to let Diggs & Taylor compete for a job this summer? Taylor is quicker laterally, OK, Diggs is much faster. Diggs is a very good football player too. Ya, the injuries, but players come back from injured periods. Flanagan was nearly washed up from injuries after first 3 years.

Thompson has guessed wrong on a lot of free agents. I'm not busting his balls for past mistakes, but why not spend some dough to have a summer competition?

[Patler]

I don't like this decision. How much would it have cost to let Diggs & Taylor compete for a job this summer?


How much would it have cost? About $600,000. That's the roster bonus that would have been due to keep Diggs on the roster. They would have had to pay that just to bring him into camp. In addition, you also run the risk of a Cletidus Hunt situation. If Diggs were hurt in camp, he would have been due his full salary of $2.300,000 in addition to the $600,000.

Both of those figures are in addition to the $912,500 he already counts against the cap for the final year of his prorated signing bonus.

In the end, they probably decided that no matter what he was not worth the almost $4,000,000 against the cap that he would have counted if he made the final roster. Once that conclusion was reached, you might as well let him go before the $600,000 was due.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I don't like this decision. How much would it have cost to let Diggs & Taylor compete for a job this summer? Taylor is quicker laterally, OK, Diggs is much faster.

Well, you could have just as easily said Diggs is faster, but Taylor is MUCH quicker. His better score in three cone drill, relative to the test, was at least as much as Na'il's score in the 40.

[BlueBrewer]

I can gaurantee that Diggs can't run in the 4.6s anymore after knee injuries in both knees.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I can gaurantee that Diggs can't run in the 4.6s anymore after knee injuries in both knees.

Well, OK, if Diggs is washed-up, end of discussion.

Shamler has answered the question, a $600K roster bonus was due.

He signed just a one-year deal with Carolina. Don't know what kind of guaranteed money it would have taken to keep him, perhaps too much.

[Pack0514]

From an ESPN chat today:


Doug (Ohio): I saw one magazine that said New Browns lineback Dqwell Jackson could have over 100 takles, can he truly help that defense that much?

Mike Wilkening: (4:40 PM ET ) Jackson is likely to start, and he'll be an upgrade over Ben Taylor. One hundred tackles sounds reasonable.

[Harlan Huckleby]

party pooper

[Patler]

From an ESPN chat today:


Doug (Ohio): I saw one magazine that said New Browns lineback Dqwell Jackson could have over 100 takles, can he truly help that defense that much?

Mike Wilkening: (4:40 PM ET ) Jackson is likely to start, and he'll be an upgrade over Ben Taylor. One hundred tackles sounds reasonable.

Interesting, because Taylor had 113 tackles last year, 77 solo and 36 assists.

[Bretsky]

From an ESPN chat today:


Doug (Ohio): I saw one magazine that said New Browns lineback Dqwell Jackson could have over 100 takles, can he truly help that defense that much?

Mike Wilkening: (4:40 PM ET ) Jackson is likely to start, and he'll be an upgrade over Ben Taylor. One hundred tackles sounds reasonable.

Interesting, because Taylor had 113 tackles last year, 77 solo and 36 assists.


Let's not let our homerism fool ourselves here. Green Bay and Cleveland were the only two teams pursuing Taylor at a time where the LBing options were washed up. And we didn't offer him the type of deal with long term expectations as a starter. He's the guy w/o great measurables that teams try to replace as the starter.

Ben Taylor seems like the perfect backup to me. Smart, hard nosed football player who knows multiple positions. I hope he backs them all up and Abdul Hodge finds his way into our starting lineup.

[ny10804]

The word on Hodge is that the only position he'll play this year is the Mike, until he at least he shows the lateral quickness required for the Sam or Will positions. Also, it is unlikely that Nick Barnett would be moved to accomodate an unproven rookie. So, I think it's safe to say the LB core will be AJ Hawk, Nick Barnett, and (Ben Taylor, Roy Manning, or Brady Poppinga). I think Taylor is the front runner, followed by Manning then Brady.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Let's not let our homerism fool ourselves here. Green Bay and Cleveland were the only two teams pursuing Taylor at a time where the LBing options were washed up. And we didn't offer him the type of deal with long term expectations as a starter. He's the guy w/o great measurables that teams try to replace as the starter.

Ben Taylor seems like the perfect backup to me. Smart, hard nosed football player who knows multiple positions. I hope he backs them all up and Abdul Hodge finds his way into our starting lineup.

Who all was pursuing Diggs? About the same number of teams. At least, with Taylor his old team still wanted him. Diggs signed for even less money than Taylor did. I can't tell you Taylor is the answer, but Diggs wasn't exactly a hot commodity either.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Diggs signed for even less money than Taylor did.

The only info I could find anywhere on Diggs' deal is that it was a one-year deal.

Where'd you find this? I suspect an anal extraction. But your rectal source is good enough for me: I'm back to saying the Packers could have kept Diggs to compete for a job.

[Bretsky]

Let's not let our homerism fool ourselves here. Green Bay and Cleveland were the only two teams pursuing Taylor at a time where the LBing options were washed up. And we didn't offer him the type of deal with long term expectations as a starter. He's the guy w/o great measurables that teams try to replace as the starter.

Ben Taylor seems like the perfect backup to me. Smart, hard nosed football player who knows multiple positions. I hope he backs them all up and Abdul Hodge finds his way into our starting lineup.

Who all was pursuing Diggs? About the same number of teams. At least, with Taylor his old team still wanted him. Diggs signed for even less money than Taylor did. I can't tell you Taylor is the answer, but Diggs wasn't exactly a hot commodity either.

How do I know who Diggs was pursued by; he was clearly not wanted by Green Bay and I really didn't see who was interested. I'm also not aruging that Diggs is the answer; but I'm just not that stoked about Taylor either.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Diggs could come back and be a serviceable starter. However, he's easily replaceable. Taylor may not be the answer, but I'll lose no sleep with Taylor or Hodge starting instead of Diggs--especially for the money he was making. If you wait a year to cut him, that's just money you are pushing to future years. Might as well eat that contract this year. BTW, Diggs signed for the veteran's minimum with Carolina.

[SD GB fan]

diggs to panthers is like taylor to packers. both are brought in at low price to stir competition and fight for starting spot. although proven starters, both are just as easily cuttable if they fail to produce in favor for younger developing players.

[Harlan Huckleby]

diggs to panthers is like taylor to packers. both are brought in at low price to stir competition and fight for starting spot. although proven starters, both are just as easily cuttable if they fail to produce in favor for younger developing players.

From glancing at Panther press online, sounds like Diggs is gonna start.

Well, it will be interesting if one of the two guys proves to be significantly superior player. Nobody can say.

[HarveyWallbangers]

diggs to panthers is like taylor to packers. both are brought in at low price to stir competition and fight for starting spot. although proven starters, both are just as easily cuttable if they fail to produce in favor for younger developing players.

From glancing at Panther press online, sounds like Diggs is gonna start.

Well, it will be interesting if one of the two guys proves to be significantly superior player. Nobody can say.

That's not saying too much though. They have had a huge hole at LB. That's why they tried to use S Thomas Davis there last year. Then, they went and lost a Pro Bowl LB in Will Witherspoon. That team has corners, DL, and Dan Morgan--but there are holes on that defense.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I thought Diggs was a heck of a player two years ago, one of top players on defense. He is only 27. It's possible that injuries have taken toll on him. But I saw something in him. Then again, Cletedius Hunt had that impressive 3rd season where I thought he was headed to something special!

[Patler]

From an ESPN chat today:


Doug (Ohio): I saw one magazine that said New Browns lineback Dqwell Jackson could have over 100 takles, can he truly help that defense that much?

Mike Wilkening: (4:40 PM ET ) Jackson is likely to start, and he'll be an upgrade over Ben Taylor. One hundred tackles sounds reasonable.

Interesting, because Taylor had 113 tackles last year, 77 solo and 36 assists.


Let's not let our homerism fool ourselves here. Green Bay and Cleveland were the only two teams pursuing Taylor at a time where the LBing options were washed up. And we didn't offer him the type of deal with long term expectations as a starter. He's the guy w/o great measurables that teams try to replace as the starter.

Ben Taylor seems like the perfect backup to me. Smart, hard nosed football player who knows multiple positions. I hope he backs them all up and Abdul Hodge finds his way into our starting lineup.

Bretsky; its got nothing to do with homerism. To me it is kind of amusing when "so and so" is considered an "upgrade" because he could get 100 tackles, when the guy he is replacing had 113 tackles. Especially interesting when the new guy is a rookie who has proven absolutely nothing yet.

If a veterans 100 tackles are insignificant, certainly an unproven rookies potential 100 tackles are not a clear upgrade at this point.

I think some on here suffer from reverse homerism. Barnett's 180 tackles are insignificant, Taylor's 113 tackles are insignificant, Kampman's league leading unassisted tackles (for a D-lineman) are insignificant, Pickett's impressive totals are insignificant.. For their positions, each of these guys had many more tackles than most others who play the same position. Doesn't mean they are future HOFers, but it is not something to be completely ignored either. If nothing else it shows that the Packers now have at least four guys in the front 7 who if they are blocked eventual get free enough to get to the ball. I would rather have that than a bunch of guys that rarely get in on a tackle anywhere.

Taylor is likely a short term answer at best, but he is also about $3 million cheaper than Diggs would have been.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Taylor is likely a short term answer at best, but he is also about $3 million cheaper than Diggs would have been.

According to internet sources (that would be Harvey), Diggs signed a one-year deal with Carolina for league minimum.

So it is reasonable to assume that the Packers might have retained Diggs for far less money than his current contract.

(I believe that veteran players with certain seniority don't have to clear waivers. Or maybe I just dreamed that.)

[Green Bud Packer]

taylor for diggs is a wash saving the pack over half a mil.one key phrase that keeps popping up is "he's a football player" as opposed to the vermin years "he's got po".man i'm so glad sherman is gone.

[Harlan Huckleby]

hey, Diggs was a good football player. To hell with the po.

You are right, Taylor vrs Diggs is hardly worth arguing about. The coaches had plenty of film on Diggs to study, it's highly unlikely they passed on a gem. I just have a sense of loyalty to existing players, am more understanding when they get cut at end of training camp after fair competition, than when they get swapped out.

And for the last time, I don't think money was a factor, if Diggs really did sign for Vet Min in Carolina.

[Green Bud Packer]

hey, Diggs was a good football player. To hell with the po.

.agreed and thats cuz shermie didn't draft diggs mr. wolf did.

[Patler]

hey, Diggs was a good football player. To hell with the po.

You are right, Taylor vrs Diggs is hardly worth arguing about. The coaches had plenty of film on Diggs to study, it's highly unlikely they passed on a gem. I just have a sense of loyalty to existing players, am more understanding when they get cut at end of training camp after fair competition, than when they get swapped out.

And for the last time, I don't think money was a factor, if Diggs really did sign for Vet Min in Carolina.

Of course money was a factor. To keep Diggs at a cheaper price they would have had to first release him, terminating the existing contract, and then re-sign him like they did last year with Ruegamer. The catch of course is that once released he becomes a free agent and can go anywhere.

Diggs wanted to leave when Detroit made him an offer in restricted free agency. He openly begged the Packers not to match it. I'm not suggesting that he was a problem of any kind, I don't think he was, but having the opportunity he very well may have been just as happy to leave.

Most of the time the players prefer to be released early. Getting cut at the end of training camp makes it very difficult to catch on with another team. Being released as early as he was gave Diggs the best chance to find a good fit. If he wasn't really in their plans, the Packers did him a favor releasing him early.

[Harlan Huckleby]

To keep Diggs at a cheaper price they would have had to first release him, terminating the existing contract, and then re-sign him like they did last year with Ruegamer..

Be it far from ME to be argumentative, but money wasn't a factor. Diggs signed for Vet minimum. He probably could have been signed for a number similar to what Taylor signed for. You and others have been claiming multi-million dollar savings.

As you point-out, maybe Diggs wasn't coming back anyway. (Although Taylor's salary is an upgrade over what Carolina paid Diggs.)

And as far as Diggs being released because he is not in the Packers plans, well, OK, but my whole point is that the Packers SHOULD have kept him in their plans, at least give him a fair competition with Taylor.

(OK, I confess, this whole argument is silly. Diggs was gonna leave because he had a better chance to start in Carolina. But again, not about the money, Pedro.)

[Partial]

Man, do I ever wish I made veteran minimum

[Patler]

To keep Diggs at a cheaper price they would have had to first release him, terminating the existing contract, and then re-sign him like they did last year with Ruegamer..

Be it far from ME to be argumentative, but money wasn't a factor. Diggs signed for Vet minimum. He probably could have been signed for a number similar to what Taylor signed for. You and others have been claiming multi-million dollar savings.

As you point-out, maybe Diggs wasn't coming back anyway. (Although Taylor's salary is an upgrade over what Carolina paid Diggs.)

And as far as Diggs being released because he is not in the Packers plans, well, OK, but my whole point is that the Packers SHOULD have kept him in their plans, at least give him a fair competition with Taylor.

(OK, I confess, this whole argument is silly. Diggs was gonna leave because he had a better chance to start in Carolina. But again, not about the money, Pedro.)

It all started with money. GB had two options.

OPTION 1 - Pay him a $600,000 bonus and bring him to camp with the risk of having to pay another $2.3 million if he were injured ala Cletidus Hunt or if made the team.

OPTION 2 - release him before the $600,000 was due. Thereafter they could try to re-sign him or let him go. With this option they have no control over whether he returns or not. It is entirely up to the player where he decides to sign if offered a contract.

Psychologically it might be tough to have a player around who had been due close to $4 million after you cut and re-sign him for the vet's minimum. At that point it is better to part ways, a fresh start for each.

[KYPack]

H, you lose it once in awhile & this is one of those times.

Diggs was due to make big dollars this season. he was coming off a year in which he hurt both knees. He would've been one of the highest paid players on the team. The Pack didn't want to pay for a questionable player and cut him.

He then signed for the vet minimum. Diggs and his agent didn't want to sign for the minimum, but the market determined that's all he'd get. I imagine if the Pack had offered to cut him, then sign him for the minimum, both Diggs and the agent would've went nuts.

It was totally over money, coupled with performance.

All that said, Carolina got a good vet for cheap. I was amazed to see that Diggs could still run the field last year after his comeback.

[Harlan Huckleby]

There is no disagreement that Diggs needed to be cut. So forget about his old contract, that is not relevant. I am looking at point where Diggs became a free agent.

I think the Packers should have made an attempt to sign him. And Diggs' market value was evidently minimal. So from financial considerations alone, the Packers would have been in the game with Ben Taylor money.

That's all. Not about money.

[Patler]

There is no disagreement that Diggs needed to be cut. So forget about his old contract, that is not relevant. I am looking at point where Diggs became a free agent.

I think the Packers should have made an attempt to sign him. And Diggs' market value was evidently minimal. So from financial considerations alone, the Packers would have been in the game with Ben Taylor money.

That's all. Not about money.

Once the guy was cut, I think bringing him back was out of the question. It's one thing to have done that with Ruegamer, who lost out on only a few hundred thousand. With Diggs it would have been more like (We didn't want to pay $3 million, but we will pay $700k". Trying to put myself in the shoes of either the player or the team, I think I would prefer to part ways in that situation.

[billy_oliver880]

Wow y'all might as well be arguing the price of cabbage in china. We got to be hard up for entertainment if we are talking about a 2nd stringer on the team. :shock:

[Harlan Huckleby]

yes, it does seem that once a player is cut, they usually don't return.

Diggs is still young. A one-year deal at low salary is no big problem. He is looking to prove himself and restore his market value. Carolina is place to do it.

[Harlan Huckleby]

billy,

Are you aware that China produces over one third of all cabbage in the world? A lot of American family farms are directly affected by cabbage imports. Maybe you should think about other people, and get your facts straight, before you open your mouth again with some smart aleck remark.

FYI:

Commodity Profile: Cabbage
Agricultural Issues Center
University of California

Overview
New York, California and Texas are the largest producers of U.S. fresh-market cabbage,
although all 50 states produce cabbage commercially. According to the FAO, China and
India are the world’s largest cabbage producers, with China alone accounting for over
one-third of world production in 2001.
By USDA Economic Research Service estimates, coleslaw accounts for 40 to 45
percent of cabbage utilization in the United States, fresh head cabbage accounts for 35
percent, and other various fresh-cut products account for 5 to 10 percent. The other
important use of cabbage is sauerkraut, which accounts for 12 percent of cabbage
utilization. As there is little overlap between the fresh cabbage and sauerkraut markets,
these two commodities will be discussed separately.
Demand
Domestic fresh cabbage consumption varied from 1970 to 2001 (Figure 1). Consumption
was 8.7 pounds per capita 1970. In 1980, consumption reached a low of 7.6 pounds per
capita. In 1987 it rose to 9.1 pounds, peaking in 1993 at 9.3 pounds. Per capita
consumption subsequently declined but rebounded in 2000 and 2001, reaching 9.0
pounds per capita in both years. According to the USDA, the increase in cabbage
consumption in 2000 and 2001 is attributable to the marketing of fresh-cut products,
including fresh slaw products and the use of red cabbage in fresh-cut salad mixes; growth
in away-from-home eating (affects coleslaw consumption); and nutritional research
showing the benefits of cruciferous vegetables.
Domestic consumption of canned cabbage (sauerkraut) has declined since 1970,
from 2.3 pounds per capita in 1970 to 1.3 pounds per capita in 2001. Consumption
peaked in 1971 at 2.5 pounds and then followed a downward trend until reaching its
lowest point in 1996 at 1.0 pounds per capita.
Although the United States is a net exporter of cabbage, trade is not a major factor
in the cabbage industry. The United States exported only 3.4 percent of domestic
production in 2002. Total U.S. cabbage exports are comprised mostly of fresh cabbage
and were valued at $22.5 million in 2002 (Figure 2). The largest market for U.S. cabbage was Canada, which received over $20.2 million, or 90 percent, of U.S. cabbage exports in 2002. Japan and Mexico were the next largest destinations for U.S. cabbage. In 2002, Japan received over $1.1 million in U.S. cabbage and Mexico received $717,117. Fresh cabbage made up over 87 percent of U.S. cabbage exports in 2002. Fresh cabbage exports have increased since 1989, when they were only $2.2 million. Exports peaked in 1998 at $20.9 million before declining to $16.1 in 1999. By 2002 exports had risen to $19.7 million. The largest destination for U.S. fresh cabbage was Canada, which received $17.6 million in fresh cabbage from the United States. Japan and Mexico were other important destinations for U.S. fresh cabbage. The largest customer for U.S. sauerkraut was Canada, which received $2.6 million, or over 91 percent of sauerkraut exports in 2002. Japan and Mexico were the second and third largest markets, respectively, for U.S. sauerkraut. SupplyIn the United States, New York, California and Texas are the largest producers of fresh-market cabbage. In 2002, the three states combined to produce 47.8 percent of the nation’s 24.4 million cwt of fresh cabbage. New York, alone, produced over 4.1 million cwt, or almost 17 percent, of total fresh cabbage. In 2002 total fresh cabbage production was down 6.3 percent from a 10-year high of 26.1 million cwt in 2001 (Table 1). The value of U.S. fresh-market cabbage in 2002 was $301.5 million, down from over $340.2 in 2001. In 2002 the average domestic inflation-adjusted price for fresh-market cabbage (in 1996 dollars) was $11.52 per cwt (Table 1), down from $12.44 per cwt in 2001 . Since 1992, when the average fresh cabbage price was $9.92 (1996 dollars), prices have generally increased. Cabbage enters the United States under a 0.54 cent per kilogram tariff for countries not granted preferential trade status. Sauerkraut imports into the United States face a 4.8 percent ad valorem tariff for countries not granted preferential trade status.Total imports of cabbage (fresh and sauerkraut) were $14.9 million in 2002, down 2 percent from 2001, when imports peaked at $15.2 million (Figure 3). The largest sources of U.S. cabbage imports were Mexico and Canada. Imports from Canada in 2002 were valued at $8.1 million and accounted for 54.2 percent of total cabbage imports. Mexico exported almost $5 million in cabbage to the United States in 2002, comprising one-third of all imports. All of the imports from Mexico were fresh cabbage. Fresh cabbage, valued at $13.3 million in 2002, made up 89 percent of total U.S. cabbage imports. Canada was the largest source of fresh cabbage imported into the U.S. in 2002 when cabbage imports from Canada were valued at over $7.7 million. Sauerkraut imports totaled $1.6 million in 2002. Germany provided two-thirds ($1.1 million) of U.S. sauerkraut imports in 2002, a 101.6 percent increase from 2001. More than 30 percent of the sauerkraut imports came from Canada and Poland, making them the other important sources of U.S. sauerkraut imports.

[KYPack]

OK, good.

HH is back to "abnormal".

[Patler]

HH, I agree with your last comments about Diggs. I hope he does well. I always liked him.

You've raised my cabbage-awareness level. I'm not sure if simply saying "Thank You" is adequate. There are many issue in life, such as cabbage, about which I am so naive. Now, there is one less.

[Zool]

I had no idea the complexity of the cabbage market in relation to American farmers. I personally think that 'kraut is more a test of bravery than it is a food but thats my opinion.

Anything that smells like that just doesnt taste good. Guess you have to be German.

[billy_oliver880]

billy,

Are you aware that China produces over one third of all cabbage in the world? A lot of American family farms are directly affected by cabbage imports. Maybe you should think about other people, and get your facts straight, before you open your mouth again with some smart aleck remark.


Hey man you need not argue a thing about American family farms. I was born and raised on one. I always joke that farming is just an expensive hobby. Thank you for the info about cabbage. You aren't telling me anything I do not already know about how imports affect farmers. Perhaps you think about your local farmer when you go and buy that inexpensive milk, cheese, and eggs. I was just making a point to show how slow the news is right now. I mean you are arguing about a potential second stringer on the team man. Forgive me for not just going and laying down HH. I think you need to settle down man. Take a joke once and awhile. You will not change my personality but good luck trying. :smile:

[Harlan Huckleby]

sorry about losing my temper there, farm boy, I've cooled down.

[billy_oliver880]

sorry about losing my temper there, farm boy, I've cooled down.

Life is good mon. :D