motife
04-05-2006, 05:44 PM
Q: Charles Woodson of Oakland - Hey cliff whats up, thought you could give me a inside opinion on why I left Green Bay without a deal? Do you think its we will probably compromising on a contract? I would really love to play for you guys!
A: Cliff Christl - Sounds like Woodson wants the kind of money that elite corners make. But he's missed 22 games in the past four years. With that kind of durability, or lack of it, any team would be wise to be somewhat cautious. If I were the Packers, I'd pay Woodson more than he's worth. But I wouldn't make him one of the top paid corners in the game.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jim of Wisconsin Rapids,Wi - Hi Clif, love the chats.First just a statement about Farve who is probble one the best QB's Playing the game.I think a lot of this wate and see thing is just another attention getter for him,just like the retirement question has been for the last three years.If he didn't want it brought up he could have said 3 years ago that he would be back and planed to be for some time period, but then he would't get all the atention.enough said. My question is do you think the fans will give McCarthy & TT enough time to build a team, or start head hunting after a couple losses? I thing 95% of the head coaches in the NFL are vary good at theire jobs,they only need some talent,Thats the GM's job. I dont think most people realise the luck it takes to have a winner, The GM has to get real lucky to get some FA's,a couple draft picks,and have some vets. still under contrack and all have to stay healthy.its unbelivable under todays system that GB stayed on top as long as they did. If the fans would look at Seattle and Pittsburg they could see what might happen when an organization don't pull the plug as soon as a team drops. It takes some time and a lot of luck to build a winner.and as soon as you do someone will take your players. thanks for the time
A: Cliff Christl - I think Thompson and McCarthy deserve some time. I just don't see how this thing can be turned around quickly. The Packers won for 13 straight years, or at least didn't lose. They're due for a dry spell. That's life in the NFL.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Paul of Sheboygan Falls - Cliff, first a rant...then a question. I'm never shocked by the fans that write in with suspect opinions on the Favre situation....they're only fans. Chmura, however, seems to have joined the lunatic fringe! I mean....get a grip....who cares if he takes time to retire or not. It isn't 'selfish' until he starts missing practice. He didn't call Walker out in April, he only spoke out when training camp started and Walker was a no show. I wish everyone would just give the topic a rest until there is something to report. Really...watch the Brewers, or the Bucks, or get out the clubs, or tune up the bike, whatever....just stop worrying about the implications of Brett ordering a brat instead of gumbo for lunch! Now that I have that off my chest....I read a report that said the Broncos need to trade up and get the 1 player that will put them over the top in the playoffs since they have pleanty of support guys. This supports your position on difference makers but it also points out that 1 guy can't win it alone. considering the number of needs the Packers have would you consider trading 5 for 15 and 22? You significantly reduce the odds of hitting a star but you have 3 of the first 40 picks. I have to believe you could significantly improve the overall talent of the team and you still might come up with a star. Then again, I suppose you can draft depth next year, you only get so many shots at the 5 pick, but you had better draft the right guy. I see both sides...what do you think.
A: Cliff Christl - No, I wouldn't trade 5 for 15 and 22. You never trade quality for quantity and that's essentially what you'd be doing. If the Packers are going to get better any time soon, they need to start with two or three star players as a nucleus. The rest would be much easier to fill in. Really great players are rare and most of them are drafted one, two, three, four, maybe five.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Arnsenio of Los Angeles - Do you think it reflects well on Favre, or poorly, to have a guy like Chmura bash you? I would bet my syndication rights we have seen the last of #4. It's getting a little sour over there, and probably worse than we know. Regardless, who is he gonna throw to? I can't see any upgrade in the passing game unless they take Vernon Davis. I have more hope for the defense than I do offense, at this point.
A: Cliff Christl - I agree there isn't much difference between the defense and offense. But I don't think either one looks very imposing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Greg Pils of Madison, WI - Cliff: First of all, thanks for being a voice of reason in this crazy debate about Favre's indecision. Mark Chmura, of all people, is the last guy that should be speaking out about "selfishness". I'm sure he had his team and family foremost in his mind when he was crashing high school prom parties and hopping into hot tubs with the babysitter. Anyway, do you think the Javon Walker situation has any bearing on Favre's decision? Seems to me like the last thing a guy at the end of his career would want to do is deal with that mess, especially considering what McNabb had to endure last season with his own personal meathead.
A: Cliff Christl - Walker's stance might have a bearing on Favre's decision. I could see why Favre wouldn't want to deal with Walker or the fallout. But I can't imagine it being an overriding consideration.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Bryan Appleton of Appleton, WI - So Chmura spouts off that Favre is a selfish guy. This is coming from a Married man that was drinking in a hottub with a bunch of high school girls. Why is it even worth printing?
A: Cliff Christl - Every question on my screen from here down relates to Chmura's comments. So if that's what's topical, here goes. Why is it worth printing? It's news. Favre and Chmura were close friends on a Super Bowl team. And I think everybody sensed there was a rift there since Chmura's arrest and trial. But I don't know if anybody realized the extent of it until Chmura's latest comments.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jay of Los Angeles - Thanks for the chat, That Chumura’s a real charmer. He puts everyone in his life, family, friends, teammates, employer, in an untenable situation when he, at best, feeds liquor to high school kids while chaperoning a wee hour hot tub in his skivvies, leaving everyone he knows damned if they support him and damned if they don’t, and then he blames them for their behavior? Let’s see, deciding whether or not to hang ‘em up and retire, or that, which is more selfish? It’s a shame 89 never got to run for public office, but now maybe he can have Tom DeLay on his radio show and they can discuss their integrity. Good riding to you, sir.
A: Cliff Christl - Thank you. I went for a ride today.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Richard of Johnson City, TN - Hi Cliff I enjoy your chats and perspective. Other than not resigning Wahle I think TT is doing a good job. But I recall at this time last year GB was in a cap bind due to Sherman’s legacy and TT had to make tough decisions to get us the cap cushion we enjoy this year. Big name FAs usually get the big bucks for their past performance, and they are on the market because their past team doesn’t think their future potential justifies the money. I think players like Pickett, Boerigter, Taylor and Manuel have upside potential in the GB defensive and offensive systems versus the ones they were in before. I see only two players in the draft that could have an immediate impact for GB; M Williams and V Davis (another Keith Jackson?). Hawke will be a solid player, but I don’t see him as a potential game breaking threat that opponents need to plan around every week. I think Davis would help bring back Favre and if not he’s a great safety net for Rodgers. It looks as if Williams won’t last until #5 and TT would like more picks. Assuming Hawke is still on the board at #5 would they take him? If not how far down do you think GB could go and still get Davis (SF needs LB more than TE, Raiders and Bills may want QBs and Bills signed FA TE Royal this year), and what added pick could they expect to receive?
A: Cliff Christl - Richard, we'll start with you. Your question was in first and your point about the draft is a good one. As of the moment, it appears that Mario Williams won't last until the fifth pick. And, thus, the expectation seems to be that the Packers will draft Hawk. And that may turn out to be the case. But my gut tells me that if it comes down to Hawk or Vernon Davis that Davis might be the pick. Here's why. Based on everything I've seen and heard, Hawk has a chance to be a rock for some defense as a starting middle linebacker. But how much upside is there? Would Hawk be better than Barnett in the dime? After all, Barnett closes and runs about as well as any middle linebacker this side of Urlacher. And if the Packers don't think Hawk could displace Barnett in the dime, you're talking about them drafting a one- or two-down player with the fifth pick. I've never seen Vernon Davis play so I'm going only by what I've read and heard. But it sounds as though he could be something special: A tight end with deep speed. The Packers have a solid tight end in Bubba Franks. But he'll never be any better than he is now and nobody knows that any better than Jeff Jagodzinski, the Packers' new offensive coordinator. He was Franks' coach. Drafting Davis might not only give the Packers a formidable weapon at tight end, someone in the class maybe of Antonio Gates or Tony Gonzales, but someone who could be split out and used in a multitude of ways. As a result, if Davis is everything he's supposed to be, he'd make the wide receivers better. Losing Javon Walker, for example, wouldn't be as crushing a blow. The same applies to Vince Young. If the Packers determine that he could be a franchise quarterback, they can't pass on him. D'Brickashaw Ferguson would be another possibility if he lasts until No. 5. But I think playing Ferguson anywhere but left tackle would be a waste. And I think that's Clifton's natural position and maybe only position. What I'm saying here is that I think Williams, Davis, Young and Ferguson all might have a bigger upside than Hawk. And based strictly on following the draft for 35 or more years, I think every GM in the game would take the better athlete, the player with the bigger upside with the No. 5 pick.
A: Cliff Christl - Sounds like Woodson wants the kind of money that elite corners make. But he's missed 22 games in the past four years. With that kind of durability, or lack of it, any team would be wise to be somewhat cautious. If I were the Packers, I'd pay Woodson more than he's worth. But I wouldn't make him one of the top paid corners in the game.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jim of Wisconsin Rapids,Wi - Hi Clif, love the chats.First just a statement about Farve who is probble one the best QB's Playing the game.I think a lot of this wate and see thing is just another attention getter for him,just like the retirement question has been for the last three years.If he didn't want it brought up he could have said 3 years ago that he would be back and planed to be for some time period, but then he would't get all the atention.enough said. My question is do you think the fans will give McCarthy & TT enough time to build a team, or start head hunting after a couple losses? I thing 95% of the head coaches in the NFL are vary good at theire jobs,they only need some talent,Thats the GM's job. I dont think most people realise the luck it takes to have a winner, The GM has to get real lucky to get some FA's,a couple draft picks,and have some vets. still under contrack and all have to stay healthy.its unbelivable under todays system that GB stayed on top as long as they did. If the fans would look at Seattle and Pittsburg they could see what might happen when an organization don't pull the plug as soon as a team drops. It takes some time and a lot of luck to build a winner.and as soon as you do someone will take your players. thanks for the time
A: Cliff Christl - I think Thompson and McCarthy deserve some time. I just don't see how this thing can be turned around quickly. The Packers won for 13 straight years, or at least didn't lose. They're due for a dry spell. That's life in the NFL.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Paul of Sheboygan Falls - Cliff, first a rant...then a question. I'm never shocked by the fans that write in with suspect opinions on the Favre situation....they're only fans. Chmura, however, seems to have joined the lunatic fringe! I mean....get a grip....who cares if he takes time to retire or not. It isn't 'selfish' until he starts missing practice. He didn't call Walker out in April, he only spoke out when training camp started and Walker was a no show. I wish everyone would just give the topic a rest until there is something to report. Really...watch the Brewers, or the Bucks, or get out the clubs, or tune up the bike, whatever....just stop worrying about the implications of Brett ordering a brat instead of gumbo for lunch! Now that I have that off my chest....I read a report that said the Broncos need to trade up and get the 1 player that will put them over the top in the playoffs since they have pleanty of support guys. This supports your position on difference makers but it also points out that 1 guy can't win it alone. considering the number of needs the Packers have would you consider trading 5 for 15 and 22? You significantly reduce the odds of hitting a star but you have 3 of the first 40 picks. I have to believe you could significantly improve the overall talent of the team and you still might come up with a star. Then again, I suppose you can draft depth next year, you only get so many shots at the 5 pick, but you had better draft the right guy. I see both sides...what do you think.
A: Cliff Christl - No, I wouldn't trade 5 for 15 and 22. You never trade quality for quantity and that's essentially what you'd be doing. If the Packers are going to get better any time soon, they need to start with two or three star players as a nucleus. The rest would be much easier to fill in. Really great players are rare and most of them are drafted one, two, three, four, maybe five.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Arnsenio of Los Angeles - Do you think it reflects well on Favre, or poorly, to have a guy like Chmura bash you? I would bet my syndication rights we have seen the last of #4. It's getting a little sour over there, and probably worse than we know. Regardless, who is he gonna throw to? I can't see any upgrade in the passing game unless they take Vernon Davis. I have more hope for the defense than I do offense, at this point.
A: Cliff Christl - I agree there isn't much difference between the defense and offense. But I don't think either one looks very imposing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Greg Pils of Madison, WI - Cliff: First of all, thanks for being a voice of reason in this crazy debate about Favre's indecision. Mark Chmura, of all people, is the last guy that should be speaking out about "selfishness". I'm sure he had his team and family foremost in his mind when he was crashing high school prom parties and hopping into hot tubs with the babysitter. Anyway, do you think the Javon Walker situation has any bearing on Favre's decision? Seems to me like the last thing a guy at the end of his career would want to do is deal with that mess, especially considering what McNabb had to endure last season with his own personal meathead.
A: Cliff Christl - Walker's stance might have a bearing on Favre's decision. I could see why Favre wouldn't want to deal with Walker or the fallout. But I can't imagine it being an overriding consideration.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Bryan Appleton of Appleton, WI - So Chmura spouts off that Favre is a selfish guy. This is coming from a Married man that was drinking in a hottub with a bunch of high school girls. Why is it even worth printing?
A: Cliff Christl - Every question on my screen from here down relates to Chmura's comments. So if that's what's topical, here goes. Why is it worth printing? It's news. Favre and Chmura were close friends on a Super Bowl team. And I think everybody sensed there was a rift there since Chmura's arrest and trial. But I don't know if anybody realized the extent of it until Chmura's latest comments.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Jay of Los Angeles - Thanks for the chat, That Chumura’s a real charmer. He puts everyone in his life, family, friends, teammates, employer, in an untenable situation when he, at best, feeds liquor to high school kids while chaperoning a wee hour hot tub in his skivvies, leaving everyone he knows damned if they support him and damned if they don’t, and then he blames them for their behavior? Let’s see, deciding whether or not to hang ‘em up and retire, or that, which is more selfish? It’s a shame 89 never got to run for public office, but now maybe he can have Tom DeLay on his radio show and they can discuss their integrity. Good riding to you, sir.
A: Cliff Christl - Thank you. I went for a ride today.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Richard of Johnson City, TN - Hi Cliff I enjoy your chats and perspective. Other than not resigning Wahle I think TT is doing a good job. But I recall at this time last year GB was in a cap bind due to Sherman’s legacy and TT had to make tough decisions to get us the cap cushion we enjoy this year. Big name FAs usually get the big bucks for their past performance, and they are on the market because their past team doesn’t think their future potential justifies the money. I think players like Pickett, Boerigter, Taylor and Manuel have upside potential in the GB defensive and offensive systems versus the ones they were in before. I see only two players in the draft that could have an immediate impact for GB; M Williams and V Davis (another Keith Jackson?). Hawke will be a solid player, but I don’t see him as a potential game breaking threat that opponents need to plan around every week. I think Davis would help bring back Favre and if not he’s a great safety net for Rodgers. It looks as if Williams won’t last until #5 and TT would like more picks. Assuming Hawke is still on the board at #5 would they take him? If not how far down do you think GB could go and still get Davis (SF needs LB more than TE, Raiders and Bills may want QBs and Bills signed FA TE Royal this year), and what added pick could they expect to receive?
A: Cliff Christl - Richard, we'll start with you. Your question was in first and your point about the draft is a good one. As of the moment, it appears that Mario Williams won't last until the fifth pick. And, thus, the expectation seems to be that the Packers will draft Hawk. And that may turn out to be the case. But my gut tells me that if it comes down to Hawk or Vernon Davis that Davis might be the pick. Here's why. Based on everything I've seen and heard, Hawk has a chance to be a rock for some defense as a starting middle linebacker. But how much upside is there? Would Hawk be better than Barnett in the dime? After all, Barnett closes and runs about as well as any middle linebacker this side of Urlacher. And if the Packers don't think Hawk could displace Barnett in the dime, you're talking about them drafting a one- or two-down player with the fifth pick. I've never seen Vernon Davis play so I'm going only by what I've read and heard. But it sounds as though he could be something special: A tight end with deep speed. The Packers have a solid tight end in Bubba Franks. But he'll never be any better than he is now and nobody knows that any better than Jeff Jagodzinski, the Packers' new offensive coordinator. He was Franks' coach. Drafting Davis might not only give the Packers a formidable weapon at tight end, someone in the class maybe of Antonio Gates or Tony Gonzales, but someone who could be split out and used in a multitude of ways. As a result, if Davis is everything he's supposed to be, he'd make the wide receivers better. Losing Javon Walker, for example, wouldn't be as crushing a blow. The same applies to Vince Young. If the Packers determine that he could be a franchise quarterback, they can't pass on him. D'Brickashaw Ferguson would be another possibility if he lasts until No. 5. But I think playing Ferguson anywhere but left tackle would be a waste. And I think that's Clifton's natural position and maybe only position. What I'm saying here is that I think Williams, Davis, Young and Ferguson all might have a bigger upside than Hawk. And based strictly on following the draft for 35 or more years, I think every GM in the game would take the better athlete, the player with the bigger upside with the No. 5 pick.