Igor Olshansky

[KYPack]

I always wondered what happened with this guy. He was a "feel good" story when he came out and got lots of attention and ink. Last year, he kind of fell off the map. I caught a Bolts game last year and he barely played in it. This is some info I glommed off the net about the big Russian...

Igor Olshansky
Born: May 3, 1982
Dnepropetrovsk, Ukraine
Height: 6-6
Weight: 309 lbs. Age: 26
Pos: DE
Experience: 5 years
College: Oregon
Drafted: Year:2004 Round:2 Pick:3, Chargers

Expert's Take Olshansky is the starting RDE in the Chargers' 3-4 defense. He contributes mainly in regular situations, but also rush inside in sub. He has been a starter since the day he was drafted in the second round in 2004. In three of his four NFL seasons, the Chargers have ranked in the league's top seven in rushing defense. He is a blue collar type football player. He has good size and strength for the position. He plays hard on every snap and is very competitive. He's at his best versus the run and he is the Chargers' most consistent run defender. He has good recognition and play awareness to blocking patterns. Olshansky has good, strong hands with the ability to control blockers at the point of contact. He plays with good pad level and leverage. He can hold up at the point of attack and displays good shed ability. He is an explosive tackler who can find the ball, but he lacks great quickness off the ball and can be sealed off at times. As a pass-rusher, he shows good effort and motor. He has been productive with his rip move to the outside, while continuing to work up field. He doesn't have the closing speed and quickness to be an effective rusher off the edge. He lacks counters and the ability to redirect.

Combine numbers
His combine numbers are
4.98 40
41 bench press fourth best at that time in history
29 on the wonderlic

Olshansky was a #2 pick. He seemed to be progressing nicely in his career and had a solid season in '07. He also picked up a rep as a lazy and indifferent player in practice. He has a good motor, but never picked up a lot of tricks that would assist him in raising his game. Igor also developed a "big mouth" label. Writers flocked to him after games for his tendency to talk about things most players would remain mum about. He also shot his mouth off on several occasions when the Chargers played in big games, including calling the Patriots "scared" of the Bolts prior to a late season game. There was some talk of resentment by teammates of Olshansky's love of the press. He was included in many articles, replete with photos of his impressive power lifter physique and numerous tattoos. This did little to endear himself to fellow ballplayers.

Olshansky was also a whipping boy for new DC Ron Rivera, who replaced Ted Cottrell in mid-year. Olshansky experienced reduced playing time and his public pronouncements also dropped off considerably when Rivera took over the D coaching job.

He was rated a "Good Starter" by one of the scouting sites I looked at. They also commented his play falls off when faced against an elite starter.

[sheepshead]

I can his name on the "ring of honor" now.

[Waldo]

He's a guy that needs a lot of coaching attention. He started playing football really late in his life relative to other pro football players, and his early coaching wasn't very good, football isn't nearly as instinctive with him because of it. He's not the kind of guy that's going to thrive under a schemer type coach or motivator type coach. He needs to be in a teacher type coach environment to thrive. As a coordinator that is one of Wade's forte's, which explains his diminishing play since Wade left. Capers is a teacher type coach, as is Trgovac.

[KYPack]

I am really on the fence about this guy.

We don't have enough lineman for the 3-4 as it stands. The FA class is still in the "stupid money" phase. Should we pay him stupid money and come out with an average NFL starter?

I really don't know and have no idea if his addition would help us or kill us when our other guys need to be resigned?

Olshansky has some talent and skills. He also will never be a big star or an impact player.

We have the money to get him, but the impact his salary would have might really hurt the team in the future. He'll make money money than Cole and is a better player, but what to do, I dunno.

[imscott72]

I am really on the fence about this guy.

We don't have enough lineman for the 3-4 as it stands. The FA class is still in the "stupid money" phase. Should we pay him stupid money and come out with an average NFL starter?

I really don't know and have no idea if his addition would help us or kill us when our other guys need to be resigned?

Olshansky has some talent and skills. He also will never be a big star or an impact player.

We have the money to get him, but the impact his salary would have might really hurt the team in the future. He'll make money money than Cole and is a better player, but what to do, I dunno.

I'm on the fence about him as well. When I click on rotoworld about this guy and there's two posts about him in 5 years of play in San Diego, this tells me he's not all that special. I've also read about his lack of motivation at times. Not really what we need. I'm all for giving the guy a look, but definitely not someone I'd want Ted to overpay for. It's funny how you don't hear anything about other teams being interested as well. If he was that solid in San Diego I'd like to think they would have made an effort to re-sign the guy.

[Spaulding]

Hmm, I'm of the opposite thought on this guy. The more I hear about him the more I think he'd thrive in GB under Capers.

We have veteran leadership/work ethic (Kampman, Harris, Woodson, etc.) on defense and we have a teaching type DC in Capers.

I look at SD and since Seau and Harrison left, who is there is signature player - Merriman. A great individual player but not the brains of the outfit out there on the field and mentoring others.

I think if the Pack signs him they end up with a solid end for at least downs 1 and 2. We'd then go with Cullen, Ryan and Igor with the ability to mix in Jolly and Harrell (if he proves healthy).

[Waldo]

I am really on the fence about this guy.

We don't have enough lineman for the 3-4 as it stands. The FA class is still in the "stupid money" phase. Should we pay him stupid money and come out with an average NFL starter?

I really don't know and have no idea if his addition would help us or kill us when our other guys need to be resigned?

Olshansky has some talent and skills. He also will never be a big star or an impact player.

We have the money to get him, but the impact his salary would have might really hurt the team in the future. He'll make money money than Cole and is a better player, but what to do, I dunno.

I'm on the fence about him as well. When I click on rotoworld about this guy and there's two posts about him in 5 years of play in San Diego, this tells me he's not all that special. I've also read about his lack of motivation at times. Not really what we need. I'm all for giving the guy a look, but definitely not someone I'd want Ted to overpay for. It's funny how you don't hear anything about other teams being interested as well. If he was that solid in San Diego I'd like to think they would have made an effort to re-sign the guy.

He is a 5 tech DE and doesn't project well as a possible 4-3 DE, 3 tech DT or 1 tech DT like Canty did. 4-3 teams rightfully are showing no interest. His value is to 3-4 teams.

Dallas is broke.
NE has no need
Pit doesn't sign FA's
SD needs the money for Merriman and doesn't have a lot of cap
Den is taking the quantity over quality approach and has blown most of their cap
Ari needs the money for Boldin and Warner
Cle went speding crazy on their line last year
In Mia, Parcells prefers the draft, and they have a decent line
Balt is low in $$, and is trying to keep their LB's, plus have a good line
The 49er's have solid DE's and much bigger needs elsewhere

There isn't much of a market for him.

[Fritz]

So..wait a week, let him dangle, start casual conversations, etc. etc...

[KYPack]

Atlanta might have an interest.

TT seems to use Fritz's strategy.

ID a lower tier guy you may use and leverage the lack of league interest. Chillar and Igor are kind of similar guys, although Chillar was a lot more unheralded coming into FA.

I agree with the fact that that he is green despite being in the league for years and still needs to be coached up. Rivera saw this as a negative. Capers is a great teacher/coach and Trgo would work with this guy I think Olshansky knows he needs to get smart, his first years have not shown the development everyone expected.

Another negative you hear about the guy is that he is too in love with the weight room. He lifts like a power lifter/body builder. This gets him heat with the other players. There was an incident in his first couple years when he had bad games. The guy hit the weights like crazy, but still had some weak games. The players realized he was training for a magazine article that came out and not to develop his play.

As Waldo pointed out, Wade Phillips got him going and Igor had his best season for the dough boy. Capers and Wade are very similar coaches, able to use a guy's strengths and get him involved in the defense.

Maybe he is a fit, but he might be a flop.

[Fritz]

Thus he is still on the market, and can be had for what passes in the NFL as "cheap," but which would be, for you and me, tremendous wealth.

Well, maybe not for you. You started the premier chicken franchise, after all.

[texaspackerbacker]

I like the sound of the analysis of the other teams' needs.

I don't have a very high opinion of Olshansky, and I don't see Packer DL needs as nearly as critical as some people. Just the same, we could use Olshansky if he came cheap enough. I just don't see him as much if any better than Jolly and Harrell.

[Freak Out]

Is he Packer People?

[retailguy]

Is he Packer People?

Well, he's not hurt, so that helps. But he has a reputation for being "indiffernt" during practice and not the hardest worker.

But, hey, what does Packer people really mean anyhow. :wink:

One could make the case that "surviving to the second week of free agency" is the biggest criteria of a "Packer Person". :P

[oregonpackfan]

I wouldn't call Olshansky a "Russian" to his face. He was born in the Ukraine.

On the West Coast, we have a number of legal immigrants from the former satellite countries like the Ukraine, Belarus, etc. which was once ruled by the former Soviet Union and/or influenced by Russia. They bristle at being labeled "Russians."

Despite his Ducks coaches advice, Olshansky turned pro early. While he was a very good Division I college DE, we was still raw when he turned pro. I think his declaring early hurt his development as a pro.

[Lurker64]

But he has a reputation for being "indiffernt" during practice and not the hardest worker.

Interestingly enough, so does Canty, the guy a lot of people critical of Thompson are railing on us missing out on.

[retailguy]

But he has a reputation for being "indiffernt" during practice and not the hardest worker.

Interestingly enough, so does Canty, the guy a lot of people critical of Thompson are railing on us missing out on.

I think folks are just frustrated that they have no idea what the "plan" is. Didn't use to be that way under Wolf, who was remarkably candid about his plans/direction.

My theory is that Ted doesn't understand the part of his job where there is no "owner". The team is publicly owned. He has a duty to "lay out the plan", even though the sharholders hold no voting rights.

If he did that, I think you'd see the criticism fall over night. People care about this team. Ted should do a better job recognizing and managing that.

[packrat]

"Lay out the plan" I'm sure all the other GM's would love to see him do that. Anyone watching how TT does business knows what the plan is--get as many good guys as you can in the draft and sign whatever free agents or do whatever trades you can do without busting the cap or threatening team cohesion. We know he is looking for players. The only thing we don't know is which players and what he is willing to pay them. And, NO ONE should know that until the deal is done.

[retailguy]

"Lay out the plan" I'm sure all the other GM's would love to see him do that. Anyone watching how TT does business knows what the plan is--get as many good guys as you can in the draft and sign whatever free agents or do whatever trades you can do without busting the cap or threatening team cohesion. We know he is looking for players. The only thing we don't know is which players and what he is willing to pay them. And, NO ONE should know that until the deal is done.

Yep, I get your point. Didn't seem to affect Wolf though..... :idea:

[Gunakor]

But he has a reputation for being "indiffernt" during practice and not the hardest worker.

Interestingly enough, so does Canty, the guy a lot of people critical of Thompson are railing on us missing out on.

I think folks are just frustrated that they have no idea what the "plan" is. Didn't use to be that way under Wolf, who was remarkably candid about his plans/direction.

My theory is that Ted doesn't understand the part of his job where there is no "owner". The team is publicly owned. He has a duty to "lay out the plan", even though the sharholders hold no voting rights.

If he did that, I think you'd see the criticism fall over night. People care about this team. Ted should do a better job recognizing and managing that.

The shareholders do not have ownership rights either, at least in the sense of an actual NFL owner anyway. They are just fans who own Packer stock. They are no more entitled to an explanation than fans who do not own Packers stock IMO. They do not need the plan laid out for them, nor should it be. Anything TT tells the shareholders will be heard by other teams, who will then have an advantage over us if they are targeting the same players we are. I'd prefer Ted remain silent about what goes on behind closed doors at Lambeau.

[Patler]

"Lay out the plan" I'm sure all the other GM's would love to see him do that. Anyone watching how TT does business knows what the plan is--get as many good guys as you can in the draft and sign whatever free agents or do whatever trades you can do without busting the cap or threatening team cohesion. We know he is looking for players. The only thing we don't know is which players and what he is willing to pay them. And, NO ONE should know that until the deal is done.

Yep, I get your point. Didn't seem to affect Wolf though..... :idea:

The "Wolf Era" was a totally different time. He could afford to be more candid. For most of it, the Packers were one of only a few teams able to play in the free agent market. Most teams were cutting players left and right just to get under the salary cap. Some would sign big free agents, but would cut 3 or 4 solid players to do it. The June 1 waivers used to contain scads of very good players who had just become too expensive. Now days, most teams are able to keep the best of their own, and the competition for those that hit the market is fairly broad.

Hard to belief, but the Wolf era has been over for almost 10 years. The NFL that he operated in 10-20 years ago is really quite different from the NFL today.

[KYPack]

I wouldn't call Olshansky a "Russian" to his face. He was born in the Ukraine.

On the West Coast, we have a number of legal immigrants from the former satellite countries like the Ukraine, Belarus, etc. which was once ruled by the former Soviet Union and/or influenced by Russia. They bristle at being labeled "Russians."

Despite his Ducks coaches advice, Olshansky turned pro early. While he was a very good Division I college DE, we was still raw when he turned pro. I think his declaring early hurt his development as a pro.

I know OPF.

I listed his hometown in the profile...Dnepropetrovsk, Ukraine

Don't worry, if I'm ever within Igor's earshot, I'll only call him "a Russian" behind his back.

Around here, we have a number of illegal immigrants from the former satellite countries like the Ukraine, Belarus, etc. which was once ruled by the former Soviet Union.

They are stick-up men and run stolen car rings. Nobody messes with 'em. Nobody calls 'em Russians, either.

[retailguy]

The "Wolf Era" was a totally different time. He could afford to be more candid. For most of it, the Packers were one of only a few teams able to play in the free agent market. Most teams were cutting players left and right just to get under the salary cap. Some would sign big free agents, but would cut 3 or 4 solid players to do it. The June 1 waivers used to contain scads of very good players who had just become too expensive. Now days, most teams are able to keep the best of their own, and the competition for those that hit the market is fairly broad.

Hard to belief, but the Wolf era has been over for almost 10 years. The NFL that he operated in 10-20 years ago is really quite different from the NFL today.

Patler, we can always come up with excuses and reasons. Some of them more legitimate than others. My point was, and is twofold.

Ted is a polar opposite to Wolf. People came to expect candid comments, whether they were entitled to them or not wasn't and isn't the issue. Sherman largely carried on that policy as well. Good or bad is different discussion. Second, the ownership issue is a unique anomaly in the NFL. Rightly or wrongly, it needs to be handled differently, almost with kid gloves. PR skills are necessary. Ted has NONE.

End of the line, for me at least, is that Ted's management style gets him some criticism. Some deserved, some not deserved. Ted says the criticism doesn't bother him and I hope not, because I don't see it stopping until a Super Bowl win, and maybe not even then.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Apparently, the Packers are looking Olshansky, Marques Douglas, and Mike Wright--all 3-4 DEs. At least, it appears they are aware that they need DEs.

[Lurker64]

Patler, we can always come up with excuses and reasons. Some of them more legitimate than others. My point was, and is twofold.

Ted is a polar opposite to Wolf. People came to expect candid comments, whether they were entitled to them or not wasn't and isn't the issue. Sherman largely carried on that policy as well. Good or bad is different discussion. Second, the ownership issue is a unique anomaly in the NFL. Rightly or wrongly, it needs to be handled differently, almost with kid gloves. PR skills are necessary. Ted has NONE.

End of the line, for me at least, is that Ted's management style gets him some criticism. Some deserved, some not deserved. Ted says the criticism doesn't bother him and I hope not, because I don't see it stopping until a Super Bowl win, and maybe not even then.

The key difference between Thompson and Wolf is that Thompson is uncomfortable with standing up in front of people and lying, while Wolf was legendary at it. Wolf was a master of misdirection, misinformation, and the outright lie. If he liked a player, he'd say he hated them or if he hated a player, he'd say he loved him, just to drive down the value of the guy you want and up the value of the guy you want someone else to end up with. There really hasn't been a snake oil salesman of the caliber of Wolf in the league for any team since Wolf retired.

The current modus operandi of the best organizations is just to clam up and say nothing. When's the last time you had Parcells, or Bellichick, or Pioli, or Poiian, or Colbert come out and give any useful information to the fans or media? The sports media is so omnipresent these days that it's really terribly hard to get away with the sorts of bald-faced lies that Wolf made his career out of. Sure, Wolf was candid, but about 50% of the things that came out of his mouth were blatant falsehoods.

The fact of the matter is that the good ones these days don't lie outright, they just clam up and like it or not, it's worked for those guys.

[Patler]

Patler, we can always come up with excuses and reasons. Some of them more legitimate than others. My point was, and is twofold.

Ted is a polar opposite to Wolf. People came to expect candid comments, whether they were entitled to them or not wasn't and isn't the issue. Sherman largely carried on that policy as well. Good or bad is different discussion. Second, the ownership issue is a unique anomaly in the NFL. Rightly or wrongly, it needs to be handled differently, almost with kid gloves. PR skills are necessary. Ted has NONE.

End of the line, for me at least, is that Ted's management style gets him some criticism. Some deserved, some not deserved. Ted says the criticism doesn't bother him and I hope not, because I don't see it stopping until a Super Bowl win, and maybe not even then.

Not making excuses, simply stating the facts. I get tired of fans wanting to live in the Lombardi era, the Wolf era, etc. The simple fact is that what worked then, what you could do then , what you were ALLOWED to do then doesn't always translate to the current situation.

The "ownership" issue of the Packers is a cute factoid, of absolutely little significance. What is one of those "owners" going to do if Thompson pisses him off? What if a GM pisses off a real owner? Rather than requiring handling with kid gloves, the Packers' ownership situation really gives the Packer management the freedom of an owner, even though they are employees.

I agree with one thing, Thompson is weak in the PR area. I have long thought the Packers should employ a "press secretary" or someone to run the public presentations. Wolf seemed to really enjoy that part. Thompson appears to hate it. Sherman tried to accept it, but I thought also handled it poorly at times. I see no reason why the GM has to be the publicity face of the team.

on another note, Murphy has not been as visible as Harlan was. I wonder if he will develop into a more visible leader. Both Thompson and Murphy work more behind closed doors, it seems.

[Lurker64]

I agree with one thing, Thompson is weak in the PR area. I have long thought the Packers should employ a "press secretary" or someone to run the public presentations.

Capital idea, as a fan of the Green Bay Packers, I would rather the General Manager (whoever he is) can devote all of his attention to improving the football team, and as little of it as as he likes to talking to the people.

Possibly the traditional role of the General Manager as "one who makes press conferences" would make this difficult.

[Patler]

The key difference between Thompson and Wolf is that Thompson is uncomfortable with standing up in front of people and lying, while Wolf was legendary at it. Wolf was a master of misdirection, misinformation, and the outright lie. If he liked a player, he'd say he hated them or if he hated a player, he'd say he loved him, just to drive down the value of the guy you want and up the value of the guy you want someone else to end up with. There really hasn't been a snake oil salesman of the caliber of Wolf in the league for any team since Wolf retired.

The current modus operandi of the best organizations is just to clam up and say nothing. When's the last time you had Parcells, or Bellichick, or Pioli, or Poiian, or Colbert come out and give any useful information to the fans or media? The sports media is so omnipresent these days that it's really terribly hard to get away with the sorts of bald-faced lies that Wolf made his career out of. Sure, Wolf was candid, but about 50% of the things that came out of his mouth were blatant falsehoods.

The fact of the matter is that the good ones these days don't lie outright, they just clam up and like it or not, it's worked for those guys.

Ahhh...a reminder of times gone by! :lol:
You are absolutely right about Wolf and the truthfulness of what he said.

[Fritz]

Patler, we can always come up with excuses and reasons. Some of them more legitimate than others. My point was, and is twofold.

Ted is a polar opposite to Wolf. People came to expect candid comments, whether they were entitled to them or not wasn't and isn't the issue. Sherman largely carried on that policy as well. Good or bad is different discussion. Second, the ownership issue is a unique anomaly in the NFL. Rightly or wrongly, it needs to be handled differently, almost with kid gloves. PR skills are necessary. Ted has NONE.

End of the line, for me at least, is that Ted's management style gets him some criticism. Some deserved, some not deserved. Ted says the criticism doesn't bother him and I hope not, because I don't see it stopping until a Super Bowl win, and maybe not even then.

Not making excuses, simply stating the facts. I get tired of fans wanting to live in the Lombardi era, the Wolf era, etc. The simple fact is that what worked then, what you could do then , what you were ALLOWED to do then doesn't always translate to the current situation.

The "ownership" issue of the Packers is a cute factoid, of absolutely little significance. What is one of those "owners" going to do if Thompson pisses him off? What if a GM pisses off a real owner? Rather than requiring handling with kid gloves, the Packers' ownership situation really gives the Packer management the freedom of an owner, even though they are employees.

I agree with one thing, Thompson is weak in the PR area. I have long thought the Packers should employ a "press secretary" or someone to run the public presentations. Wolf seemed to really enjoy that part. Thompson appears to hate it. Sherman tried to accept it, but I thought also handled it poorly at times. I see no reason why the GM has to be the publicity face of the team.

on another note, Murphy has not been as visible as Harlan was. I wonder if he will develop into a more visible leader. Both Thompson and Murphy work more behind closed doors, it seems.

I'd have to agree. The NFL is nothing like the NFL of Lombardi's time - even the players' sizes are totally different. The NFL of today is also not the NFL of Wolf's time. In fact, one of the reasons he said he was getting out of it was that he didn't like the "new rules" that didn't allow him to wheel and deal as he liked.

You bring up a good point about June 1. It wasn't long ago that that was like candy day - scads of good players got cut. But once teams figured out you couldn't just buy guys willy-nilly (well, some owners still don't know that), June 1 became just another day. And that's a fairly recent change.

So new rules require new strategies. I do think if the Pack would hire one super hot, sexy babe, and one hot hunk o' guy as PR people, most posters on this site would cease criticism immediately and spend all their time in the garbage can thread....Heck, I would.

[retailguy]

The key difference between Thompson and Wolf is that Thompson is uncomfortable with standing up in front of people and lying, while Wolf was legendary at it. Wolf was a master of misdirection, misinformation, and the outright lie. If he liked a player, he'd say he hated them or if he hated a player, he'd say he loved him, just to drive down the value of the guy you want and up the value of the guy you want someone else to end up with. There really hasn't been a snake oil salesman of the caliber of Wolf in the league for any team since Wolf retired.

The current modus operandi of the best organizations is just to clam up and say nothing. When's the last time you had Parcells, or Bellichick, or Pioli, or Poiian, or Colbert come out and give any useful information to the fans or media? The sports media is so omnipresent these days that it's really terribly hard to get away with the sorts of bald-faced lies that Wolf made his career out of. Sure, Wolf was candid, but about 50% of the things that came out of his mouth were blatant falsehoods.

The fact of the matter is that the good ones these days don't lie outright, they just clam up and like it or not, it's worked for those guys.

Ahhh...a reminder of times gone by! :lol:
You are absolutely right about Wolf and the truthfulness of what he said.

See, I think Wolf was more truthful than not. People believed him. People don't believe Thompson.

I find it ironic that we're talking about 'competitive advantage' in a thread that is discussing the possibility of signing a DE that is a "backup" want, because the Packers got outbid (rather weren't even deemed enough of an option to make a trip to inquire about an offer), by the guy most in these rooms wanted.

What kind of 'competitive advantage' is that? Ted could've printed his "wish list" in the New York Times and it wouldn't have mattered. So, in this situation, what difference would it make if Ted had told us he wanted Canty? Maybe if he had made it known, (and did really want the guy) Canty would've at least visited before he accepted another offer.

Gotta love how this 'competitive advantage' is working for us. :wink:

[Fritz]

Let's say Ted had gone publicly ga-ga over Canty. He wants the guy, has to have him. So how might Canty's agent respond to that...hmmm....I wonder.

Retail, look at the owners who do broadcast their plans - the Jerry Joneses and the Dan Snyders. No doubt about who they want, right? And they get who they want, mostly.

I'll betcha Haynesworth doesn't turn out to be worth near what he's paid. Not near. T.O. wasn't worth what he was paid, not after the first season, anyway.

I just don't think some big plan announcement is going to do anyone any good. TT's plan, generally, is clear. But why would he go into specifics about the players he wants to draft or sign?

[Patler]

See, I think Wolf was more truthful than not. People believed him. People don't believe Thompson.


That is the really ironic part. Wolf was believed, yet he mislead routinely. Thompson is disliked and not trusted, yet everyone who works with him has said he is as honest and as trustworthy as anyone they have ever dealt with.

In the end, it is their public speaking ability that they have been judged on. Wolf could lie to the press in very convincing ways. Thompson is a hesitating speaker, which give the impression of deceitfulness.

[retailguy]

Let's say Ted had gone publicly ga-ga over Canty. He wants the guy, has to have him. So how might Canty's agent respond to that...hmmm....I wonder.

Retail, look at the owners who do broadcast their plans - the Jerry Joneses and the Dan Snyders. No doubt about who they want, right? And they get who they want, mostly.

I'll betcha Haynesworth doesn't turn out to be worth near what he's paid. Not near. T.O. wasn't worth what he was paid, not after the first season, anyway.

I just don't think some big plan announcement is going to do anyone any good. TT's plan, generally, is clear. But why would he go into specifics about the players he wants to draft or sign?

Fritz, that isn't really the point. Others have claimed that Ted's "clamming" up is good for business, because it keeps other teams from "knowing our wants".

Then, Canty goes on record by accepting an offer before he even visited, that he doesn't want to "play ball" with GB. Why? Gee, could it be because he believes that Ted won't make a competitive offer? Again, what kind of competitive advantage is that? What are we getting for Ted's silence? I don't see the return on investment. I don't even see "mis-direction" opportunities, because no one even asks Ted anymore, because he has a "reputation" for not talking, and apparently has a "reputation" for not dealing either. Good thing he's got a reputation for above average drafting...

I don't see the 'competitive advantage'.

[Patler]

Then, Canty goes on record by accepting an offer before he even visited, that he doesn't want to "play ball" with GB. Why? Gee, could it be because he believes that Ted won't make a competitive offer? Again, what kind of competitive advantage is that? What are we getting for Ted's silence? I don't see the return on investment. I don't even see "mis-direction" opportunities, because no one even asks Ted anymore, because he has a "reputation" for not talking, and apparently has a "reputation" for not dealing either. Good thing he's got a reputation for above average drafting...

I don't see the 'competitive advantage'.

Why he did what he did is all just speculation, and proclamations from agents are always for a purpose, sometimes for the advantage of other clients of theirs. In a lot of ways it is like an auctioneer, who will drag out some biddings, but will sell the next very quickly to show bidders that they have to jump in. It is a standard tactic to drive up prices overall. It is generally good for the seller and bad for the buyer.

Did I read somewhere that Canty lived for most of his pre-college life in New York City? Or was that one of the other FAs? I think it was Canty. Whether it was or not, he was there, with an offer, and the Giants surely applied the pressure of "take it or leave it, it might not be here later," a standard negotiating ploy. Responding to that is the worst thing another suitor can do. Canty needed to call the Giants bluff, if he was truly interested in assessing options from others.

Of course, I could not care less about any one plyer, be it a draft pick, UFA or Packer re-signing. I never get concerned over any single player. It is kind of like buying a car or a house; you might really like one, but others will do and in the end it is value that is important.

[cpk1994]

"Lay out the plan" I'm sure all the other GM's would love to see him do that. Anyone watching how TT does business knows what the plan is--get as many good guys as you can in the draft and sign whatever free agents or do whatever trades you can do without busting the cap or threatening team cohesion. We know he is looking for players. The only thing we don't know is which players and what he is willing to pay them. And, NO ONE should know that until the deal is done.

Yep, I get your point. Didn't seem to affect Wolf though..... :idea:

The "Wolf Era" was a totally different time. He could afford to be more candid. For most of it, the Packers were one of only a few teams able to play in the free agent market. Most teams were cutting players left and right just to get under the salary cap. Some would sign big free agents, but would cut 3 or 4 solid players to do it. The June 1 waivers used to contain scads of very good players who had just become too expensive. Now days, most teams are able to keep the best of their own, and the competition for those that hit the market is fairly broad.

Hard to belief, but the Wolf era has been over for almost 10 years. The NFL that he operated in 10-20 years ago is really quite different from the NFL today.And lets not forget that Wolf's candid ways and his mouth got him into trouble. As an example the Ray Rhodes hiring and then his firing as well.

[retailguy]

Why he did what he did is all just speculation, and proclamations from agents are always for a purpose, sometimes for the advantage of other clients of theirs. In a lot of ways it is like an auctioneer, who will drag out some biddings, but will sell the next very quickly to show bidders that they have to jump in. It is a standard tactic to drive up prices overall. It is generally good for the seller and bad for the buyer.

Did I read somewhere that Canty lived for most of his pre-college life in New York City? Or was that one of the other FAs? I think it was Canty. Whether it was or not, he was there, with an offer, and the Giants surely applied the pressure of "take it or leave it, it might not be here later," a standard negotiating ploy. Responding to that is the worst thing another suitor can do. Canty needed to call the Giants bluff, if he was truly interested in assessing options from others.

Of course, I could not care less about any one plyer, be it a draft pick, UFA or Packer re-signing. I never get concerned over any single player. It is kind of like buying a car or a house; you might really like one, but others will do and in the end it is value that is important.

So, how many times does this have to happen before you can establish a "trend"? Similar situations have gone on during Ted's entire tenure here. There have been more than a few times where players have bypassed GB for this to be "one" event. It has passed enough singular situations, that I see a trend.

I don't know a thing about Canty, don't know whether he'd have been a good fit or not. Don't know if Olshansky "fits" either. But the comments that I have read related to this deal bother me.

Does it bother anyone else that it was reported that on the opening weekend of Free Agency, GB gave its coaches the weekend off? What message does that send to the NFL and the free agency players if true?

Patler, I believe that Ted is sending messages by what he "doesn't say". My curiousity revolves around whether the messages heard by the league and fans are the ones he "intends" to send.

Only Ted knows for sure, because no one knows if he really wanted Canty, or anyone else. If I don't know, as a fan, that's not a big deal. But, if Canty's agent doesn't know, then, well, that is a problem.

[swede]

Is he Packer People?

Well, he's not hurt, so that helps. But he has a reputation for being "indifferent" during practice...

Maybe he only SEEMS indifferent because he's having trouble with the lingo.


"Emergency! Emergency! Everybody to get from street!"

[Partial]

Apparently, the Packers are looking Olshansky, Marques Douglas, and Mike Wright--all 3-4 DEs. At least, it appears they are aware that they need DEs.

We need two of the 3. Don't care which two. They're just bigeons to plug the run anyway.

[ThunderDan]

Is he Packer People?

Well, he's not hurt, so that helps. But he has a reputation for being "indifferent" during practice...

Maybe he only SEEMS indifferent because he's having trouble with the lingo.


"Emergency! Emergency! Everybody to get from street!"

Wow, a quotation from, "The Russians are Coming."

[Patler]

So, how many times does this have to happen before you can establish a "trend"? Similar situations have gone on during Ted's entire tenure here. There have been more than a few times where players have bypassed GB for this to be "one" event. It has passed enough singular situations, that I see a trend.

I don't know a thing about Canty, don't know whether he'd have been a good fit or not. Don't know if Olshansky "fits" either. But the comments that I have read related to this deal bother me.

Does it bother anyone else that it was reported that on the opening weekend of Free Agency, GB gave its coaches the weekend off? What message does that send to the NFL and the free agency players if true?

Patler, I believe that Ted is sending messages by what he "doesn't say". My curiousity revolves around whether the messages heard by the league and fans are the ones he "intends" to send.

Only Ted knows for sure, because no one knows if he really wanted Canty, or anyone else. If I don't know, as a fan, that's not a big deal. But, if Canty's agent doesn't know, then, well, that is a problem.

Doesn't bother me a bit that he gave the coaches the weekend off. Apparently most were there anyway. It was said they always have the weekend after the combine off, and it is the only weekend available between now and forever for them to have one off because of other things like camps, draft prep, etc. I would rather they take off "crazy money weekend," when guys like Colin Cole get the contract he did, than a different weekend when useful things go on. Besides, it wouldn't have made any difference even if they were there. That didn't stop them from getting Canty or anyone else.

You seem to suggest that the Packers are something different than everyone else in the NFL. I doubt they are. I think there are two camps, those that jump in aggressively on day 1 of free agency and those who take a more cautious approach. I don't think only the Packers are in the second group.

If you don't know whether Canty was worth it or not, why are you seemingly so upset that Thompson didn't put on a big push to get him? It doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

[Patler]

Patler, I believe that Ted is sending messages by what he "doesn't say". My curiousity revolves around whether the messages heard by the league and fans are the ones he "intends" to send.

Only Ted knows for sure, because no one knows if he really wanted Canty, or anyone else. If I don't know, as a fan, that's not a big deal. But, if Canty's agent doesn't know, then, well, that is a problem.

Canty's agent knows. The league knows. The Packers message is clear. They will pay fair money to good players. The will provide a great environment in which to be a football player and to concentrate on football. They will not participate in a feeding frenzy for any free agent.

[mission]

Patler, I believe that Ted is sending messages by what he "doesn't say". My curiousity revolves around whether the messages heard by the league and fans are the ones he "intends" to send.

Only Ted knows for sure, because no one knows if he really wanted Canty, or anyone else. If I don't know, as a fan, that's not a big deal. But, if Canty's agent doesn't know, then, well, that is a problem.

Canty's agent knows. The league knows. The Packers message is clear. They will pay fair money to good players. The will provide a great environment in which to be a football player and to concentrate on football. They will not participate in a feeding frenzy for any free agent.

Yet so many act so surprised to see it play out ... :lol:

I was disappointed just for the fact that we didn't get him. I was obviously following it very closely but that doesnt mean just acquiring the guy blindly ... if we would have paid him $10m/yr I would have had a completely different view. Players aren't/can't be assessed strictly based on performance. Value is the word that's been thrown around a lot lately and that has to be the consideration.

[Fritz]

The only exception to that "value" word....in my estimation, is the way it's used vis a vis the drdaft. What the hell is a "value" pick? A guy who has a big name but slides a bit is a "value" pick? What does that even mean? Can he play or not?

At the time, no one would've said Donald Driver was a value pick in the seventh round. But in retrospect, he sure was.

When the Pack drafted Darrell Thompson in I think the fourth round it was seen as a "value" pick. What the heck did that mean? Guy sucked, from the beginning to the end.

[mission]

The only exception to that "value" word....in my estimation, is the way it's used vis a vis the drdaft. What the hell is a "value" pick? A guy who has a big name but slides a bit is a "value" pick? What does that even mean? Can he play or not?

At the time, no one would've said Donald Driver was a value pick in the seventh round. But in retrospect, he sure was.

When the Pack drafted Darrell Thompson in I think the fourth round it was seen as a "value" pick. What the heck did that mean? Guy sucked, from the beginning to the end.

Good post. It's really impossible to nail that at the time of the draft and has always been a nice way to somehow validate a questionable (for some reason, off field, or otherwise) pick.

What's the exact definition of value as it pertains to FA? Factors are obviously expected/past performance, contract, age, need, etc ... I'm sure Patler or Waldo could come up with a nifty little equation. :P

[retailguy]

If you don't know whether Canty was worth it or not, why are you seemingly so upset that Thompson didn't put on a big push to get him? It doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Patler, it isn't about Canty specifically. What happened with Canty has played out in one form or another on several occasions. I think I see the beginnings of a trend.

Also, I have concerns with several articles that I've read lately. I don't share your optimistic perspective that Thompson has been clear with player agents. Free Agency is largely about the money. From time to time it is important to players to play in a certain place. In Canty's case, if you believe Peter King, the Giants were NINTH on the list. You can hardly claim he "wanted" to play there more than anywhere else.

I guess, I think I know the answer to "Why" he didn't want to visit GB. Yeah, it's speculation, yeah, I'll never prove it, but it's my view. That's what I see as concerning, not Canty specifically.

[RashanGary]

UFA, by nature, drives prices through the roof. Occasionally there is a good piece at a fair price but mostly it's decent players getting paid like stars and then a bunch of "what if he fits in my scheme and finally becomes something", "what if he's finally healthy". More often than not, teams get burned by UFA. So long as Ted keeps lockign up his own and adds talent faster than it diminishes, this team should keep taking steady steps forward, eventually over the top if he's as good as I think he is. Oh, and I'm sure he'll keep sprinkling in the UFA's like he has. Maybe not as much as some would like, but I love that agents can't lure him into these crazy bidding wars. That contract Nate Clements got a year or two ago is what happens there. Just think, if we had upped our offer 1 mil per year, we coulda had Canty for about 50 million. I'm sure that's just as good as extending a guy like Jennings or Rodgers.

[RashanGary]

Draft well
Negotiate good 2nd and third contracts a year early with leverage
Sprinkle UFA's and street FA's
Be right on your evaluations
Win SB

There, it's that easy. Now hit on some front seven players, Ted.

[Bretsky]

So..wait a week, let him dangle, start casual conversations, etc. etc...



right up TTT's alley

[mission]

So..wait a week, let him dangle, start casual conversations, etc. etc...



right up TTT's alley

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

the 'dangle' tipped you off huh :lol:

[Partial]

Ted needs to start hitting on his draft picks if he wants to completely ignore the big name free agents. This team wouldn't need Canty if the DE/DT out of Tennessee and Hawk were studs..

[pbmax]

... In Canty's case, if you believe Peter King, the Giants were NINTH on the list. You can hardly claim he "wanted" to play there more than anywhere else.
That was the agent's list and from the conversations King reports, it wasn't about where he played, it was about how much he was going to make. So Canty might have had a preferred list, but the agent seemed to be listing the top dollar destinations. The agent had also downgraded the Giants once he knew they were chasing Rocky Bernard. Once team's started to sign players, suddenly the agent was down to the Giants, Packers and Seahawks as possible destinations. The Giants went first because the offered the most per year before the trip.

There isn't much mystery here, he went where he could maximize the dollars short term. He might earn that contract, he might not.

[pbmax]

Ted needs to start hitting on his draft picks if he wants to completely ignore the big name free agents. This team wouldn't need Canty if the DE/DT out of Tennessee and Hawk were studs..
I agree that his draft hasn't lit the world on fire. However, he doesn't need to sign big name free agents. He might have to, one day, to drop more coin than value dictates to get the final pieces together.

[Partial]

Ted needs to start hitting on his draft picks if he wants to completely ignore the big name free agents. This team wouldn't need Canty if the DE/DT out of Tennessee and Hawk were studs..
I agree that his draft hasn't lit the world on fire. However, he doesn't need to sign big name free agents. He might have to, one day, to drop more coin than value dictates to get the final pieces together.

I guess big name free agents isn't the correct term. I don't care who he signs, as long as it is someone that is sufficient and can hold up against the run to play DE. We are dangerously weak at that spot, with two of the three on the roster being very injury prone and the third with a generous injury history of his own as well as some potential legal issues.

[Lurker64]

Ted needs to start hitting on his draft picks if he wants to completely ignore the big name free agents. This team wouldn't need Canty if the DE/DT out of Tennessee and Hawk were studs..

The thing is... how do we measure who the "big name" free agents are? Is it just "the best guys who are out there, regardless of how good they actually are?" or "the guys who hit free agency who are truly elite players"? Since there are a lot of years that are just a wasteland for free agency, but the best players at their positions get paid a lot even if they're not actually that great by an objective scale. Bernard Berrian and Javon Walker were compensated as though they were the fourth and fifth best WRs in the league coming out of FA last year, were they really? Absolutely not.

Its rare that a team lets a truly elite player hit free agency, and most of those guys get paid a truckload. Haynesworth was one of those guys, but Canty was not. Canty was somewhat inconsistent, he underperformed at times, and just wasn't all that productive, plus he played a non-money position in the 3-4. Canty was a guy with more talent than everybody else left at his position over the weekend, so he got talked up a fair bit. More than he deserved? Who knows.

But think about it like a General Manager here. Just due to how the cap math works, signing Canty would probably mean that they were unable to keep one of: Jennings, Colledge, Kampman, or Collins. If you were the general manager, is that choice exactly clear cut? Signing Haynesworth would probably mean that we lost two of those guys.

Personally, though I understand the defensive line needs some serious help, I'd prefer to keep the good players we already have, and fill the holes with guys who are somewhat less expensive. Olshansky will probably cost 60% of what Canty did, and is probably 90-95% as good as Canty in the 3-4 defense.

I don't want to see our GM, whoever he is, overpay for guys just because they're "needs" and "they're the best at their respective position". If we overpay for anybody, I hope it's because they're actually impact players.

I mean, if we can get Peppers for a 2nd and a 3rd, and then pay him that would be a much bigger upgrade for the defense than signing Canty. Peppers would play an impact, big money, position in the 3-4. Canty does not.

[mission]

Ted needs to start hitting on his draft picks if he wants to completely ignore the big name free agents. This team wouldn't need Canty if the DE/DT out of Tennessee and Hawk were studs..
I agree that his draft hasn't lit the world on fire. However, he doesn't need to sign big name free agents. He might have to, one day, to drop more coin than value dictates to get the final pieces together.

I guess big name free agents isn't the correct term. I don't care who he signs, as long as it is someone that is sufficient and can hold up against the run to play DE. We are dangerously weak at that spot, with two of the three on the roster being very injury prone and the third with a generous injury history of his own as well as some potential legal issues.

Hawk has nothing to do with this at all. Harrell? Sure.

[Partial]

Ted needs to start hitting on his draft picks if he wants to completely ignore the big name free agents. This team wouldn't need Canty if the DE/DT out of Tennessee and Hawk were studs..
I agree that his draft hasn't lit the world on fire. However, he doesn't need to sign big name free agents. He might have to, one day, to drop more coin than value dictates to get the final pieces together.

I guess big name free agents isn't the correct term. I don't care who he signs, as long as it is someone that is sufficient and can hold up against the run to play DE. We are dangerously weak at that spot, with two of the three on the roster being very injury prone and the third with a generous injury history of his own as well as some potential legal issues.

Hawk has nothing to do with this at all. Harrell? Sure.

Sure it does. If Hawk was playing up the his combine numbers, he could be our OLB. Instead, we've got to address that spot early and hard on the first day of the draft.

I'm not saying TT needs to hit home runs or go and sign Canty. Canty was overpaid. But we need somebody that can be a capable starter and we need them in a hurry, before they sign elsewhere.

I would love to see them add Olshansky, another 4-3 DT converted to an end (somebody cheap), and then draft Raji. We have that many holes across the DL.

[mission]

We'd still need an ILB in that case. The point is we need an LB anyway... and we need a DE.

Sooooooooo :?:

[Bossman641]

Ted needs to start hitting on his draft picks if he wants to completely ignore the big name free agents. This team wouldn't need Canty if the DE/DT out of Tennessee and Hawk were studs..
I agree that his draft hasn't lit the world on fire. However, he doesn't need to sign big name free agents. He might have to, one day, to drop more coin than value dictates to get the final pieces together.

I guess big name free agents isn't the correct term. I don't care who he signs, as long as it is someone that is sufficient and can hold up against the run to play DE. We are dangerously weak at that spot, with two of the three on the roster being very injury prone and the third with a generous injury history of his own as well as some potential legal issues.

Hawk has nothing to do with this at all. Harrell? Sure.

Sure it does. If Hawk was playing up the his combine numbers, he could be our OLB. Instead, we've got to address that spot early and hard on the first day of the draft.

I'm not saying TT needs to hit home runs or go and sign Canty. Canty was overpaid. But we need somebody that can be a capable starter and we need them in a hurry, before they sign elsewhere.

I would love to see them add Olshansky, another 4-3 DT converted to an end (somebody cheap), and then draft Raji. We have that many holes across the DL.

No question Hawk was a disappointment this year, but I don't think he would ever fit the role of a 3-4 OLB. That's just not the type of player he is. His strengths are his overall level of play in all aspects of the game, but he's not a rush LB at all.

[Lurker64]

Sure it does. If Hawk was playing up the his combine numbers, he could be our OLB.

Even if Hawk was playing in excess of his combine numbers, I don't think he could play OLB in the 3-4, he's too small. Plus his strengths are "run support", "coverage", and not "pass rushing." 3-4 OLBs are basically just pass rushing specialists with fluid hips, which nobody, even with the hype Hawk was getting before the draft, saw Hawk as.

Guys like Shawne Merriman (6-4 272) and DeMarcus Ware (6-4 262) play the OLB spot we need to fill. Rarely guys like A.J. Hawk (6-1 248). However, Julius Peppers (6-7 283) is available via trade, and would likely fit the bill.

Your OLBs ought to be guys who can rush the passer and have fluid enough hips to cover in the flat. Hawk is an instinctive, aggressive, read-and-react, coverage and run-support backer. He's the exact sort of guy you want as ILB in the 3-4. Anyway, whether Hawk was playing inside or outside, whichever starting LB spot you didn't pencil him in at would have a hole.

[Patler]

Patler, it isn't about Canty specifically. What happened with Canty has played out in one form or another on several occasions. I think I see the beginnings of a trend.

Also, I have concerns with several articles that I've read lately. I don't share your optimistic perspective that Thompson has been clear with player agents. Free Agency is largely about the money. From time to time it is important to players to play in a certain place. In Canty's case, if you believe Peter King, the Giants were NINTH on the list. You can hardly claim he "wanted" to play there more than anywhere else.

I guess, I think I know the answer to "Why" he didn't want to visit GB. Yeah, it's speculation, yeah, I'll never prove it, but it's my view. That's what I see as concerning, not Canty specifically.

I don't disagree, the early time of FA is often about money, and the Packers have made it clear they will pay fair contracts, not excessive ones. There is no mystery, no evolving trend. It is a fact the agents and players know very well.

It doesn't bother me one bit. If that is why any FA chooses not to visit GB, so be it.

Dallas has been fairly active in FA markets the last few years. What has it gotten them? Some decent seasonal records, nothing in the playoffs, and a situation where they can't keep Canty, a young player many seem to have coveted for GB.

The "Thompson Plan" has not played out completely. It will in the next two years as the glut of young starters begin getting their second contracts. Some culling may occur at that time, but hopefully a nucleus will remain around which lesser expensive fill-ins will be assembled to make a consistently competitive team. The first piece of the puzzle appears to be Rodgers. More to come. The trade-off for signing Canty may have been losing Colledge, or Collins, maybe someone else. The cap picture (if there is one) might look very different for the Packers in 2011 than it does right now. Thompson's inactivity in FA the last few seasons might pay off in the players he can keep next year and the year after.

[wist43]

Ted needs to start hitting on his draft picks if he wants to completely ignore the big name free agents. This team wouldn't need Canty if the DE/DT out of Tennessee and Hawk were studs..
I agree that his draft hasn't lit the world on fire. However, he doesn't need to sign big name free agents. He might have to, one day, to drop more coin than value dictates to get the final pieces together.

I guess big name free agents isn't the correct term. I don't care who he signs, as long as it is someone that is sufficient and can hold up against the run to play DE. We are dangerously weak at that spot, with two of the three on the roster being very injury prone and the third with a generous injury history of his own as well as some potential legal issues.

Hawk has nothing to do with this at all. Harrell? Sure.

Sure it does. If Hawk was playing up the his combine numbers, he could be our OLB. Instead, we've got to address that spot early and hard on the first day of the draft.

I'm not saying TT needs to hit home runs or go and sign Canty. Canty was overpaid. But we need somebody that can be a capable starter and we need them in a hurry, before they sign elsewhere.

I would love to see them add Olshansky, another 4-3 DT converted to an end (somebody cheap), and then draft Raji. We have that many holes across the DL.

TT has stated that he and the coaching staff like the players they have... they're apparently quite happy with Hawk, and Harrell, and Barnett, et al...

If they really like the personnel they have... it explains at least to some extent why TT doesn't see the need to tip his toe in the water.

Most of us, and the media disagree... the defense is really substandard in terms of talent IMO.

[SkinBasket]

Sure it does. If Hawk was playing up the his combine numbers, he could be our OLB. Instead, we've got to address that spot early and hard on the first day of the draft.

How many tackles did Hawk have at the combine? INTs? Sacks? I just need to know so I'll be at peace when I know when he's played up to his combine numbers. I've looked everywhere for his combine stats, but can't seem to find any of these.

And if Hawk was our OLB, wouldn't we just be looking to find an ILB? Or did you mean he could play both ILB and OLB? At the same time.

[Partial]

Not really. I think Poppinga or Chillar would be better suited inside. Poppinga is much better at getting off of blocks and I have a hunch having a bruiser like Poppinga inside would bode well for us.

If Hawk was as fast, agile and strong as he showed at the combine (he's not - at least last season), we could continue to play outside.

Remember, he was used a fair amount of blitzes and in coverage from the OLB spot. As a versatile athlete, he certainly could handle it, however, he has shown he's not as athletic as we once thought.

One could argue he would be slightly undersized, but then again so is DPOY James Harrison.

[Partial]

TT has stated that he and the coaching staff like the players they have... they're apparently quite happy with Hawk, and Harrell, and Barnett, et al...

If they really like the personnel they have... it explains at least to some extent why TT doesn't see the need to tip his toe in the water.

Most of us, and the media disagree... the defense is really substandard in terms of talent IMO.

I think you and I agree, but to say most of us is crazy talk. There are a few amount of homers here who think our team is rip-roaring and ready to go.

I think they have virtually no chance of winning the battle on either side of the ball unless they change their offensive philosophy or upgrade at QB, and then they need to add some quality depth at just about every sport on defense.

[cpk1994]

I think they have virtually no chance of winning the battle on either side of the ball unless they change their offensive philosophy or upgrade at QB, and then they need to add some quality depth at just about every sport on defense. :roll: :roll: :roll:

[Lurker64]

One of the things that's interesting to me: 2007 and 2008 were very similar years, in that the Packers were in a lot of very close games.

2007
We beat Philly by 3 with a couple of big special teams plays, we beat San Diego with the long Jennings TD, we beat Washington off of the long fumble recovery by Woodson, we beat Denver in OT off of Favre's beautiful deep rainbow, and we trailed in the third quarter to Kansas City and only pulled away after a Woodson INT for a TD followed a Favre TD pass.

2008:
We trailed the Bucs by 2 with 6:00 to go in the game and the ball before turning the ball over and giving up a TD in a game where our QB was injured, we lost to Atlanta by 3 where a late INT setting up a TD sealed the game for the Falcons, We lost to Tennessee in overtime because nobody on defense could stop Chris Johnson, we lost to the Vikings in Minny both because the defense caved and gave up a long TD run to Peterson as time was running down to give up the lead and also because Crosby shanked the game winning FG that Rodgers had put him in position to kick, we lost to the Panthers after taking the lead late on the back of a long pass to Smith and a 1 yard TD run by Hall who was having success all game, we lost to Houston by 3 on a 40 yard FG as time expired, we lost to the Jaguars in a game we lead most of the way by giving up 2 4th quarter TDs and ended up losing by 4, and we lost to Chicago in overtime after Crosby's potential game winning FG was blocked and the Bears won the toss and went down and scored.

The 2007 Packers won a lot of close games and the 2008 Packers lost a lot of close games. The specific reasons why this is are less important, but the fact of the matter is that the last two years the Packers have been in a lot of close games. This leads me to believe that the talent on the roster is there. Whether or not you win close games really comes down in large part to coaching. In 2008, the defensive coaching staff was clearly deficient and a lot of games would have gone the other way for us if the defense had made one or two more plays a game. Hopefully that's been corrected by hiring the new (impressive on paper) defensive staff.

You can't bitch and moan because your roster has some holes in it, every roster has some holes in it. The Steelers have a terrible offensive line, the Cardinals lack an effective running game and have some suspect defense, the Ravens have very little offensive production from anybody, the Eagles lack a running game and have some suspect WRs, the Titans have really no offensive playmakers other than Chris Johnson, the Giants need WRs and their secondary isn't great, the Panthers desperately need a QB and really have only one good WR, the Vikings desperately need a QB and half of their OL is suspect, and looking at their rosters, nobody is really sure how the Dolphins or the Falcons did so well last year. And that's just the playoff teams from last year, the picture is grimmer for some of the teams that missed the playoffs (New England need 3 starting LBs , 2 CBs, and a S on defense, for example).

The mark of good coaching is being able to get the most out of a roster with some weaknesses, but other strengths. We probably had it in 2007, we didn't really have it in 2008. I'm reasonably confident that the defense will be better coached in 2009, but maybe McCarthy is in over his head, who knows?

[wist43]

TT has stated that he and the coaching staff like the players they have... they're apparently quite happy with Hawk, and Harrell, and Barnett, et al...

If they really like the personnel they have... it explains at least to some extent why TT doesn't see the need to tip his toe in the water.

Most of us, and the media disagree... the defense is really substandard in terms of talent IMO.

I think you and I agree, but to say most of us is crazy talk. There are a few amount of homers here who think our team is rip-roaring and ready to go.

I think they have virtually no chance of winning the battle on either side of the ball unless they change their offensive philosophy or upgrade at QB, and then they need to add some quality depth at just about every sport on defense.

PR is overrun homers... but if you listen to 1250, or Michaels on 620, or just the talk around the water cooler - not too much love there.

Can't quantify my contention that "most" Packer fans would contend that defense is lacking in talent, especially in the front seven, but at the same time I don't think the homer view that is predominant on PR is reflective of most Packer fans.

[Deputy Nutz]

Not really. I think Poppinga or Chillar would be better suited inside. Poppinga is much better at getting off of blocks and I have a hunch having a bruiser like Poppinga inside would bode well for us.

If Hawk was as fast, agile and strong as he showed at the combine (he's not - at least last season), we could continue to play outside.

Remember, he was used a fair amount of blitzes and in coverage from the OLB spot. As a versatile athlete, he certainly could handle it, however, he has shown he's not as athletic as we once thought.

One could argue he would be slightly undersized, but then again so is DPOY James Harrison.

Hawk injured his chest early in preseason and missed all but one game, he was questionable for the first week of the season. He played his ass off for the first 4 games of the season, but then he tore his groin muscle and had no change of direction or any kind of speed. He played only one good game in the second half of the season against the Bears. His slide also had to do with Cullen Jenkins who is the defensive end in front of him getting hurt for the season as well.

Poppinga certainly doesn't get off blocks better, more likely he charges into them. Poppinga can only handle one responsibility when on the field and most likely it will be to chase down QBs. In the last scheme all the linebackers had way too many reads, and checks. The blitz Package was always slow because it seemed like on the weakside the backer would check the flat or his zone of coverage before going after the QB.

[vince]

Nice nipples nutz.

[mission]

TT has stated that he and the coaching staff like the players they have... they're apparently quite happy with Hawk, and Harrell, and Barnett, et al...

If they really like the personnel they have... it explains at least to some extent why TT doesn't see the need to tip his toe in the water.

Most of us, and the media disagree... the defense is really substandard in terms of talent IMO.

I think you and I agree, but to say most of us is crazy talk. There are a few amount of homers here who think our team is rip-roaring and ready to go.

I think they have virtually no chance of winning the battle on either side of the ball unless they change their offensive philosophy or upgrade at QB, and then they need to add some quality depth at just about every sport on defense.

PR is overrun homers... but if you listen to 1250, or Michaels on 620, or just the talk around the water cooler - not too much love there.

Can't quantify my contention that "most" Packer fans would contend that defense is lacking in talent, especially in the front seven, but at the same time I don't think the homer view that is predominant on PR is reflective of most Packer fans.

I don't think it's as simple as we are lacking in talent or not ... there's a lot more that goes into it. Do you think for a minute that if we were a New York franchise, even one of the "lost-out-on" FAs over TT's tenure would be here? There are handicaps involved as well as value and all those are arguable.

The point is, a lot of us here would like more. Who wouldn't? I would have been happy about a Canty pickup and even stated so for 8mil/yr ... but the same people happy about that would be pissed when Jennings/Collins/Colledge got away and it shows a complete lack of understanding.

PR is more of a "well, here's the situation, let's try to make the most of it" and "ok, so what now?". The "majority" as you put it choose to focus on a lot of shit that just isn't relevant anymore ... problem finders. And we need problem finders, keeps people on their toes. But we also need some "solutionists". PR definitely has a lot more threads about potential deals we could do and how things could shake out and this/that. PackerChatters has a lot more people still bitching and whining about the Canty situation.

[Bossman641]

Not really. I think Poppinga or Chillar would be better suited inside. Poppinga is much better at getting off of blocks and I have a hunch having a bruiser like Poppinga inside would bode well for us.

If Hawk was as fast, agile and strong as he showed at the combine (he's not - at least last season), we could continue to play outside.

Remember, he was used a fair amount of blitzes and in coverage from the OLB spot. As a versatile athlete, he certainly could handle it, however, he has shown he's not as athletic as we once thought.

One could argue he would be slightly undersized, but then again so is DPOY James Harrison.

Let's also not forget we had one of the lamest blitz packages ever. No movement, no deception. The blitzers might as well as have been holding up signs saying "Here I come" because it was that obvious who was going after the quarterback. Due to injury and scheme, Hawk has at least one more year before I give up on him.

[Lurker64]

PR is overrun homers... but if you listen to 1250, or Michaels on 620, or just the talk around the water cooler - not too much love there.

Can't quantify my contention that "most" Packer fans would contend that defense is lacking in talent, especially in the front seven, but at the same time I don't think the homer view that is predominant on PR is reflective of most Packer fans.

I don't think that most fans of any professional sports franchise are really particularly well informed. Having listened to some of these radio shows for several teams (not just the Green Bay ones), I'm almost certain of it. Most fans don't think much beyond "the defense didn't play well last year, therefore we need better players on defense." Which is true insofar as the fact that everybody could use some better players on defense, but misleading insofar as "lack of talent" may not be the only reason the defense struggled. Majority rule by the fans would be probably the quickest way to destroy a franchise, since a whole lot of fans are idiots. I mean, just read the comments on a JSO article...

Afflicted with homerism or not, we do at least tend to attract a crowd of reasonably well-informed fans here.

[SkinBasket]

Not really. I think Poppinga or Chillar would be better suited inside. Poppinga is much better at getting off of blocks and I have a hunch having a bruiser like Poppinga inside would bode well for us.

Well if you think it, it must be true. Forget where their coaches have them. Forget that Poppinga doesn't even know the meaning of getting off blocks. Forget common sense and reality while we're at it too, I guess. If you want to see TEs getting 14 grabs for 150 yards a game, then by all means, put Poppinga in the middle.

Poppinga's a bruiser now? If you mean slow and dumb, then I would agree. The only thing bruised by Poppinga's diving misses and arm tackles was the turf. If you mean he's a hard hitter, you should check your Haldol dosage again.

As far as Chillar goes, he was supposed to be able to play all the LB positions in our last scheme and seemed to have trouble playing any of them. I don't see where that's going to change under Capers' system.

[Lurker64]

Not really. I think Poppinga or Chillar would be better suited inside. Poppinga is much better at getting off of blocks and I have a hunch having a bruiser like Poppinga inside would bode well for us.

Not in a one-gap 3-4. The ILBs need to be guys who are quick, agile, aggressive, have good awareness, make quick decisions, and are good in coverage. That's Hawk and Barnett.

Poppinga is aggressive, he is not quick or agile, he doesn't have good awareness, and he isn't any good in coverage.

Chillar is good in coverage, he does not have good awareness or make quick decisions, he is not aggressive.

Poppinga has a chance of being able to play outside, but I don't have a lot of hope. Chillar is purely a backup.

[Sparkey]

The only exception to that "value" word....in my estimation, is the way it's used vis a vis the drdaft. What the hell is a "value" pick? A guy who has a big name but slides a bit is a "value" pick? What does that even mean? Can he play or not?

At the time, no one would've said Donald Driver was a value pick in the seventh round. But in retrospect, he sure was.

When the Pack drafted Darrell Thompson in I think the fourth round it was seen as a "value" pick. What the heck did that mean? Guy sucked, from the beginning to the end.

I think VALUE pick refers to the amount of money he will command at the pick he was taken with.

Hence, a guy that many project to go in rounds 2 or 3 would be "value" at 5 or 6. Has nothing to do with skill or ability and everything to do with $$$ cost to bring in and see what you have.

[Sparkey]

I think they have virtually no chance of winning the battle on either side of the ball unless they change their offensive philosophy or upgrade at QB, and then they need to add some quality depth at just about every sport on defense.


Definition of fucktard
fucktard

noun
* Someone who continually does something annoying after being told to stop.

Why does this fucktard keep team killing?


* 1. A serviceperson who at first seem of normal intelligence at a distance, but upon servicing is discovered to be inefficient, incompetent and/or stupid (but not rude) and thus severely irrating to the customer. 2. A person who is difficult to deal with because they act stupid.

I had to deal with a chain of fucktards while running errands.

Your almost there partial....... :?

[Zool]

When the Pack drafted Darrell Thompson in I think the fourth round it was seen as a "value" pick. What the heck did that mean? Guy sucked, from the beginning to the end.

Oh dear lord if only Thompson was a 4th rounder. He was the 19th overall pick in the 1990 draft.

[sheepshead]

TT has stated that he and the coaching staff like the players they have... they're apparently quite happy with Hawk, and Harrell, and Barnett, et al...

If they really like the personnel they have... it explains at least to some extent why TT doesn't see the need to tip his toe in the water.

Most of us, and the media disagree... the defense is really substandard in terms of talent IMO.

I think you and I agree, but to say most of us is crazy talk. There are a few amount of homers here who think our team is rip-roaring and ready to go.

I think they have virtually no chance of winning the battle on either side of the ball unless they change their offensive philosophy or upgrade at QB, and then they need to add some quality depth at just about every sport on defense.


"they" who?

[Partial]

I think they have virtually no chance of winning the battle on either side of the ball unless they change their offensive philosophy or upgrade at QB, and then they need to add some quality depth at just about every sport on defense.


Definition of fucktard
fucktard

noun
* Someone who continually does something annoying after being told to stop.

Why does this fucktard keep team killing?


* 1. A serviceperson who at first seem of normal intelligence at a distance, but upon servicing is discovered to be inefficient, incompetent and/or stupid (but not rude) and thus severely irrating to the customer. 2. A person who is difficult to deal with because they act stupid.

I had to deal with a chain of fucktards while running errands.

Your almost there partial....... :?

You're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine, but its pretty tough to refute the logic.

With our current offensive philosophy and old defensive philosophy we went 6-10. Now, with our new defensive philosophy, we don't have a single linemen that is an ideal fit for the scheme. Maybe Pickett, but I don't see him as a Kris Jenkins or Jamal Williams type player.

With that said, with the same offense, and a defense with players that don't quite fit, why would one expect improvement? :?:

[Fritz]

The only exception to that "value" word....in my estimation, is the way it's used vis a vis the drdaft. What the hell is a "value" pick? A guy who has a big name but slides a bit is a "value" pick? What does that even mean? Can he play or not?

At the time, no one would've said Donald Driver was a value pick in the seventh round. But in retrospect, he sure was.

When the Pack drafted Darrell Thompson in I think the fourth round it was seen as a "value" pick. What the heck did that mean? Guy sucked, from the beginning to the end.

I think VALUE pick refers to the amount of money he will command at the pick he was taken with.

Ah. thank you, Sparkey.

Hence, a guy that many project to go in rounds 2 or 3 would be "value" at 5 or 6. Has nothing to do with skill or ability and everything to do with $$$ cost to bring in and see what you have.

[Sparkey]

I think they have virtually no chance of winning the battle on either side of the ball unless they change their offensive philosophy or upgrade at QB, and then they need to add some quality depth at just about every sport on defense.


Definition of fucktard
fucktard

noun
* Someone who continually does something annoying after being told to stop.

Why does this fucktard keep team killing?


* 1. A serviceperson who at first seem of normal intelligence at a distance, but upon servicing is discovered to be inefficient, incompetent and/or stupid (but not rude) and thus severely irrating to the customer. 2. A person who is difficult to deal with because they act stupid.

I had to deal with a chain of fucktards while running errands.

Your almost there partial....... :?

You're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine, but its pretty tough to refute the logic.

With our current offensive philosophy and old defensive philosophy we went 6-10. Now, with our new defensive philosophy, we don't have a single linemen that is an ideal fit for the scheme. Maybe Pickett, but I don't see him as a Kris Jenkins or Jamal Williams type player.

With that said, with the same offense, and a defense with players that don't quite fit, why would one expect improvement? :?:

Are there questions on defense ? Mostly certainly. But the constant direct and indirect attacks on Rodgers vis a vis "the offense" is so old. We get it Partial. You don't like the guy. But to spout off about the offense and qb needing an upgrade ?

Rodgers overall passing ranking = 6th (Pro-Football-Reference.com)
Rodgers overall Fantasy Ranking = 7th (Pro-Football-Reference.com)
Green Bays offense overall ranking = 5th (Pro-Football-Reference.com)

You talk about being objective, but you are not. You have an agenda that involves bashing Rodgers and it kills your credibility.

You don't like Rodgers, fine. But, to make statements about them being unable to win the battle on either side of the ball when they had the #5 offense in the NFL in 2008 and the 6th best QB ranking is absurd and you know it. Does the offense and the qb need to look for improvement in areas? Of course, but your blanket "can't win the battle" statement is ridiculous.

[sheepshead]

Plus, unless you have access to game films Partial, you can't possibly make the statements youre making about guys on defense with any accuracy. You can't see defensive guys away from the ball on TV.

[sheepshead]

I think they have virtually no chance of winning the battle on either side of the ball unless they change their offensive philosophy or upgrade at QB, and then they need to add some quality depth at just about every sport on defense.


Definition of fucktard
fucktard

noun
* Someone who continually does something annoying after being told to stop.

Why does this fucktard keep team killing?


* 1. A serviceperson who at first seem of normal intelligence at a distance, but upon servicing is discovered to be inefficient, incompetent and/or stupid (but not rude) and thus severely irrating to the customer. 2. A person who is difficult to deal with because they act stupid.

I had to deal with a chain of fucktards while running errands.

Your almost there partial....... :?

You're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine, but its pretty tough to refute the logic.

With our current offensive philosophy and old defensive philosophy we went 6-10. Now, with our new defensive philosophy, we don't have a single linemen that is an ideal fit for the scheme. Maybe Pickett, but I don't see him as a Kris Jenkins or Jamal Williams type player.

With that said, with the same offense, and a defense with players that don't quite fit, why would one expect improvement? :?:

I am referring to your constant bashing of Rodgers. We get it Partial. You don't like the guy. But to spout off about the offense and qb needing an upgrade ?

Rodgers overall passing ranking = 6th (Pro-Football-Reference.com)
Rodgers overall Fantasy Ranking = 7th (Pro-Football-Reference.com)
Green Bays offense overall ranking = 5th (Pro-Football-Reference.com)

You talk about being objective, but you are not. You have an agenda that involves bashing Rodgers and it kills your credibility.

You don't like Rodgers, fine. But, to make statements about them being unable to win the battle on either side of the ball when they had the #5 offense in the NFL in 2008 and the 6th best QB ranking is absurd and you know it.


Careful, youll get threatened by somebody on here for making too much sense.

[Partial]

Plus, unless you have access to game films Partial, you can't possibly make the statements youre making about guys on defense with any accuracy. You can't see defensive guys away from the ball on TV.

It doesn't matter if they're a perfect fit...

We have Cullen Jenkins, historically a walking injury.
We have Justin Harrell, historically a walking injury.
We have Johnny Jolly, had season ending injury his second season (first playing), was not nearly as effective last year, and could face a suspension if convicted.

Thats all the depth we have at DE. Horrendous. Porous. Ouchies.

Now, lets look at Nose Tackle. We have.. Pickett. And.. Nope, just Pickett.

Are you kidding me? It doesn't take a wizard to see that this team is in serious trouble defensively. They have 4 linemen on their roster right now. They need 8-9 when you factor in the injury prone players they're keeping.

That's not even beginning to address the gaping hole at the OLB spot, not to mention in the event that Kampman cannot transition (I'm sure he'll be fine).

This defense is in trouble, and they need some horses. I don't care if they're good players at this point, just capable bodies.

[sheepshead]

:huh:

[Chevelle2]

We have Cullen Jenkins, historically a walking injury.


You may be an idiot, but don't flat out lie.

2008: 4 games (injured)
2007: 16 games
2006: 14 games
2005: 16 games
2004: 16 games.

[Partial]

We have Cullen Jenkins, historically a walking injury.


You may be an idiot, but don't flat out lie.

2008: 4 games (injured)
2007: 16 games
2006: 14 games
2005: 16 games
2004: 16 games.

In 2007, he played hurt the entire season and coached ripped him for not being at all effective.

In 2006, he was playing injured the entire beginning of the season, and when he was finally healthy enough to play a lot of downs, they put him in the starting lineup.

I don't remember 2005 or 2004, but I'm sure he was injured during those seasons as well.

Injured does not necessarily mean they are missing a game.

[SkinBasket]

Injured does not necessarily mean they are missing a game.

True dat. Partial has obviously injured his brain, and he hasn't missed a day.

[imscott72]

:huh:

Partial's argument about Arod is tired and stale, but he's dead on about the defense, particularily the front 7. I mean seriously, are they going to be able to fill that many positions before week 1? It may be a bit too early to press the panic button, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see we're behind the 8 ball here. Lots of holes to fill and not a lot of available bodies to fill them with.

[HarveyWallbangers]

In 2007, he played hurt the entire season and coached ripped him for not being at all effective.

True


In 2006, he was playing injured the entire beginning of the season, and when he was finally healthy enough to play a lot of downs, they put him in the starting lineup.

That's not the way I remember it. KGB was so ineffective as a run defender the first half of that year they finally gave up the notion that he was an every down player. More than at any other time, teams exploited KGB in the run game. I think he only ended up starting the last handful of games.[/quote]

[Bretsky]

In 2007, he played hurt the entire season and coached ripped him for not being at all effective.

True


In 2006, he was playing injured the entire beginning of the season, and when he was finally healthy enough to play a lot of downs, they put him in the starting lineup.

That's not the way I remember it. KGB was so ineffective as a run defender the first half of that year they finally gave up the notion that he was an every down player. More than at any other time, teams exploited KGB in the run game. I think he only ended up starting the last handful of games.[/quote]

Agree; I think it was the last 4 games; maybe 5. And the defense was far better when it occured

[Joemailman]

My recollection is that Partial has it right. The Packers were dissatisfied with KGB for quite a while. However, it wasn't until late in the season that they felt Jenkins was healthy enough to be inserted in the starting lineup.

[Lurker64]

I think we do need to take a step back and re-evaluate how we're thinking of defensive end. In the 4-3 defense, defensive ends are superstars and playmakers, they have to be able to rush the passer and they have to be stout against the run. If your 4-3 DE does not get sacks, that is a problem and that guy generally needs to be replaced. In the 3-4, defensive ends are not pass rushers. They are basically big bodies inside that are stout against the run and will periodically cause a little bit of inside pressure (rarely sacks, though).

If Cullen Jenkins plays up to his 2007 "oft-injured" form, he'll be perfectly fine in the 3-4. He was a disappointment in 2007 since he just wasn't getting much in the way of sacks and pressures. But in 2009, nobody will be expecting him to get much in the way of sacks or pressures (Canty is getting $7 million per year coming off a year in which he got 3.0 sacks in 16 games, while Cullen Jenkins got 2.5 sacks last year despite only playing in 4 games). But even when he was playing hurt, Jenkins was consistently stout against the run at his end, which is really all that anybody is asking of him next year. But the best 3-4 DEs in the league only get between 1 and 8 sacks in a 16 game season, if Cullen manages 2.5 next year, that will be perfectly serviceable. 6-8 sack seasons by 3-4 DEs are rare, the best 3-4 DE in the league (Richard Seymour) has only managed more than 6 sacks in a season twice in his career. The most athletic 3-4 DE in the league (Luis Castillo) has only managed 6 or more sacks in a season once in his career.

[pbmax]

My recollection is that Partial has it right. The Packers were dissatisfied with KGB for quite a while. However, it wasn't until late in the season that they felt Jenkins was healthy enough to be inserted in the starting lineup.
Whatever health problem he had that year, it was KGB that was holding him out of the starting lineup. Against San Fran in one of the first two series, after KGB gave up another long run by rushing too far upfield, Jenkins took the field at RDE and was there for first and second down the rest of the season. KGB lost that job mid-game after McCarthy ordered him out, the trigger wasn't Jenkin's health.

[Joemailman]

It may be that that was the point in the season that Jenkins was finally healthy. So it may have been a combination of KGB's poor play against SF and the fact that Jenkins was finally healthy.

What I know is that one of the Packer coaches (don't remember which one) was asked why Jenkins wasn't inserted into the lineup at DE earlier. The reason given was that he had not been healthy enough.

[Partial]

What I know is that one of the Packer coaches (don't remember which one) was asked why Jenkins wasn't inserted into the lineup at DE earlier. The reason given was that he had not been healthy enough.

I remember reading this too.

[Waldo]

My recollection is that Partial has it right. The Packers were dissatisfied with KGB for quite a while. However, it wasn't until late in the season that they felt Jenkins was healthy enough to be inserted in the starting lineup.
Whatever health problem he had that year, it was KGB that was holding him out of the starting lineup. Against San Fran in one of the first two series, after KGB gave up another long run by rushing too far upfield, Jenkins took the field at RDE and was there for first and second down the rest of the season. KGB lost that job mid-game after McCarthy ordered him out, the trigger wasn't Jenkin's health.

I remember them talking about doing it for a while that season, but Cullen had a sprained ankle (or something of the sort), they wanted to wait until it healed up until he slid over to end.

I get the sense that that move, more then any other, is the reason we've spent the last two years running this defense. I always thought that MM was a hairs breath away from firing Sanders the first year, that the progress shown the last month was the only reason he was given another chance. And much of the success the last month came from an increased ability to stop the run, largely due to Cullen at DE.

[Packgator]

But to spout off about the offense and qb needing an upgrade ?

Rodgers overall passing ranking = 6th (Pro-Football-Reference.com)
Rodgers overall Fantasy Ranking = 7th (Pro-Football-Reference.com)
Green Bays offense overall ranking = 5th (Pro-Football-Reference.com)

Don't forget the following stats that Rodgers finished in the top 10.........

28 TD's............................................4t h in NFL
4,038 Yards......................................4th in NFL
16 pass plays of 40 yds or more.........1st in NFL
48 pass plays of 20 yds or more.........5th in NFL
341 Completions...............................7th in NFL
63.6 Completion PCT.......................10th in NFL
7.5 yds. per......................................9th in NFL
182 1st down passes.........................9th in NFL

[HarveyWallbangers]

What I know is that one of the Packer coaches (don't remember which one) was asked why Jenkins wasn't inserted into the lineup at DE earlier. The reason given was that he had not been healthy enough.

I remember reading this too.

Jenkins missed 2 games. The San Fran game was the 6th game after that sprain. I don't buy it. KGB had been a long time starter, but they had fallen out of the playoff race and just had been gauged by Shaun Alexander (200+ yards), something called Cedric Houston (100+ yards), and gave up the huge run right at KGB in that game. I think KGB getting destroyed in 3 straight games and being out of the playoff race was the impetus.

[KYPack]

The Viking game that season was a real joke. that big ass purple line was blowing KGB up every play. They ran left at will. He was benched soon after.

[red]

well, it looks like we aren't even showing any real interest in the guy

look under short yardage
http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/40760507.html

packers are not currently involved in discussions, they have not made him a priority at this time

why am i not surprised?

[Deputy Nutz]

Why should Packer fans come to expect anything different?

[Pugger]

You have to wonder why, if this Igor guy was all that hot a commodity, is he still available? And why is SD not resigning him? There are reasons why some guys are UFAs. :?

[retailguy]

In 2007, he played hurt the entire season and coached ripped him for not being at all effective.

True


In 2006, he was playing injured the entire beginning of the season, and when he was finally healthy enough to play a lot of downs, they put him in the starting lineup.

That's not the way I remember it. KGB was so ineffective as a run defender the first half of that year they finally gave up the notion that he was an every down player. More than at any other time, teams exploited KGB in the run game. I think he only ended up starting the last handful of games.[/quote]

Take a look at this article:

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/29342384.html

It doesn't say that. It says:

In his first start at end against the Detroit Lions, Jenkins had three sacks.

Until then, he had struggled with an ankle injury suffered against St. Louis Oct. 8, missing two games and being used sparingly in the weeks after that.

[retailguy]

You have to wonder why, if this Igor guy was all that hot a commodity, is he still available? And why is SD not resigning him? There are reasons why some guys are UFAs. :?

There are reasons for everything. Some good, some bad. With this guy, the biggest knock is that he has a track record for being a bit lazy.

Honestly, I think Ted still believes that Harrell will be ready to go... I agree, Justin will be ready to play... for about a week. :roll:

After that, it's anyones guess. Come week 3 if Olshansky is healthy, he'll be better than Harrell. Maybe we can get Cleditus Hunt out of retirement? :wink:

[Waldo]

PU opines (or heard through the grapevine) that the player that is keeping FA interest low is not Harrell or Jolly, it is in fact Alfred Malone, the guy we had on the PS that we signed late last season, that played in a few games for us.

Here's why:
He was added as a UDFA to Texas' team in 2005, as a 3-4 DE, under Dom Capers. He made it to the practice squad, then was signed late, and played in 2 games, including a whale of a game where he had 6 tackles and a sack. Malone is the one that Capers is high on. The kid's measurables are almost exactly the same as Marcus Spears from the Cowboys, though he can jump higher. That pool video with Gilbert.......Malone can do that too (in fact so can Jolly, he jumped 34" inches at his pro day, probably why the Pack drafted him).

Malone is in fact, athletically and physically, the most ideal 3-4 DE on the team (and experienced), even moreso than Harrell who is quite close to the ideal as well.

[KYPack]

PU opines (or heard through the grapevine) that the player that is keeping FA interest low is not Harrell or Jolly, it is in fact Alfred Malone, the guy we had on the PS that we signed late last season, that played in a few games for us.

Here's why:
He was added as a UDFA to Texas' team in 2005, as a 3-4 DE, under Dom Capers. He made it to the practice squad, then was signed late, and played in 2 games, including a whale of a game where he had 6 tackles and a sack. Malone is the one that Capers is high on. The kid's measurables are almost exactly the same as Marcus Spears from the Cowboys, though he can jump higher. That pool video with Gilbert.......Malone can do that too (in fact so can Jolly, he jumped 34" inches at his pro day, probably why the Pack drafted him).

Malone is in fact, athletically and physically, the most ideal 3-4 DE on the team (and experienced), even moreso than Harrell who is quite close to the ideal as well.

Good snag there, Waldo.

Malone was an upgrade at the end of last season at DT. Several times they would sub him for Cole. Malone would play more effectively, then be mysteriously swapped for Cole again. I never understood why. I think he could definitely be in the mix at RDE in the 3-4. (Or LDE, I don't give a shit, just get us some ends)

What of some of our RE's last season?

Are Jeremy Thompson, Pettway and those players men without roles or are they converted to elephant, rhinoceros or some other creature in the 3-4?

[Waldo]

Both Pettway and Thompson were thought to be 3-4 OLB's on draft day. They are both real small for a 4-3 DE, both are quite athletic.

I gave up trying to figure out the DL substitution patterns last season (and the season before), they were pretty nonsensical, a guy would play good, they'd swap him out for someone playing bad, play their worst players on critical downs, etc..., I didn't get it at all. Little things like that are going to have a much bigger effect than people think IMO if Capers is good at it, I think that it was a big drag on the effectiveness of our DL. We rarely gave up big plays in base D with primary personnel on the field, it's when the wacky/dumb calls and bad substitutions were on the field that we got gashed.

[RashanGary]

Alfred Malone does look like a pretty impressive athlete. We'll see how he develops under Tgrovac. If Jolly works hard on shedding a few lbs, he could be a pretty impressive DE too.

Jenkins, Jolly and Malone with Harrell as a bonus if he finally gets healthy or else cut. Kamp is also going to play DE in some of the sub packages. We also have the draft and scrap heap to sort though.

Honestly, I'm more worried about NT than DE. If we draft Raji, I think the DL could be in decent shape (mabe great shape if Raji is a playmaker and some guys develop). The LB's definitly need help (either through development or FA). There is certainly a lot of gray area from our vantage point right now, but that could turn into a good thing. In Ted we Trust!

Life after Favre was scary, in steps Rodgers. Life after Ahman Green was scary, in steps Grant. Let's not dive off any cliffs folks. We have, what looks to be, a hell of a defensive staff. We have a whole bunch of young, improving players (and it seems as though Ted is ready to start locking them up and growing into a win-now veteran squad). I'm very optimistic about this team, even the defense. One huge benefit of the 3-4 is that we're not going to rely so much on the DL and that was the weak point of last years defense. Everything staying exacly the same (even with injuries), I'd predict things to get better.

Oh, and this switch should help that 26 ranked ST's. Are we really this fickle? Does everything have to be so doomy and gloomy?

[Joemailman]

I think the Packers have some potential at DE, but damn, none of those guys can really be counted on injury-wise. I see Sporting News has Packers taking Tyson Jackson in 2nd round. I'd be doing cartwheels if that happened. Well, not really, but you get the idea.

I'm not as concerned about linebacker. I think Jeremy Thompson will surprise people.

[Partial]

I think the Packers have some potential at DE, but damn, none of those guys can really be counted on injury-wise. I see Sporting News has Packers taking Tyson Jackson in 2nd round. I'd be doing cartwheels if that happened. Well, not really, but you get the idea.

I'm not as concerned about linebacker. I think Jeremy Thompson will surprise people.

I agree on both accounts. Jeremy Thompson should be fine, not dominant, but good enough, and will eventually play the LOLB in Kampy's spot when he moves on from age, etc.

If Tyson Jackson fell that far, that would be PERFECT!

[Joemailman]

Alfred Malone at DE may be the guy flying under the radar a bit. Capers had him at Houston in 2005. http://www.packerupdate.com/

[Fritz]

Wasn't Malone subject to MM's favorite comment - "he needs to keep his pad level down"?

[Pugger]

Or was MM talking about our O linemen? I can't recall... :?:

[Fritz]

I'm trying not to get too excited over Alfred Malone...I'm trying to keep my pad level down, but it just keeps popping back up.

[Deputy Nutz]

My third boner of the day has just been named "Alfred". I am excited any time you can add a player like Alfred Malone into the mix is cause for unruly excitement and good deep penetration.

[imscott72]

The Cowboys will host DE Igor Olshansky for a free agent visit on Friday.
The Packers were rumored to be pursuing Olshansky, but haven't contacted his agent. A big-bodied Russian, Olshansky could help replace Chris Canty.
Source: dallascowboys.com
Related: Cowboys, Packers

[Bretsky]

well, it looks like we aren't even showing any real interest in the guy

look under short yardage
http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/40760507.html

packers are not currently involved in discussions, they have not made him a priority at this time

why am i not surprised?


Oh Polar Bear, O Polar Wherefore art thou, Polar Bear :?: :lol:

[Bretsky]

PU opines (or heard through the grapevine) that the player that is keeping FA interest low is not Harrell or Jolly, it is in fact Alfred Malone, the guy we had on the PS that we signed late last season, that played in a few games for us.

Here's why:
He was added as a UDFA to Texas' team in 2005, as a 3-4 DE, under Dom Capers. He made it to the practice squad, then was signed late, and played in 2 games, including a whale of a game where he had 6 tackles and a sack. Malone is the one that Capers is high on. The kid's measurables are almost exactly the same as Marcus Spears from the Cowboys, though he can jump higher. That pool video with Gilbert.......Malone can do that too (in fact so can Jolly, he jumped 34" inches at his pro day, probably why the Pack drafted him).

Malone is in fact, athletically and physically, the most ideal 3-4 DE on the team (and experienced), even moreso than Harrell who is quite close to the ideal as well.


Regardless TTT takes his dam time with every part of free agency

Have no expecations and you'll be about right most of the time

He'll likely find some discounts from the Goodwill store after the Walmart guys are picked though

[digitaldean]

Normally, I am fairly optimistic, but this round of FA has got me down.

No, there weren't a ton of big names worth getting, but there is some definitive help that is not even being brought in for a look-see.

Olshansky is not the be-all, end-all, but for crying out loud, he'd be an asset for this d-line.

Hey, TT we were 6-10 for a reason last year! Changing the scheme to a 3-4 alone isn't going to do it. Going JUST thru the draft this season isn't going to do it.

Pop your head out of the shell, Ted and get Igor in here! :x :x :x

[imscott72]

The Cowboys have reportedly agreed to terms with DE Igor Olshansky.
Dallas needed a replacement for Chris Canty, and Olshansky should do so for half the price.
Source: NFL.com
Related: Cowboys

[digitaldean]

BOOOOO!!!!

Thanks Ted! I know we signed Smith, but come on, we need help at NT. Igor would have been a great fit.

:evil: :evil: :evil:

[mission]

BOOOOO!!!!

Thanks Ted! I know we signed Smith, but come on, we need help at NT. Igor would have been a great fit.

:evil: :evil: :evil:

well now which one is it ... igor aint a NT so maybe we shouldnt sign him

[red]

4 year 18 million

is that a bockbuster deal, that would have put us in the poor house?

i think thats less then what cole just got

[Bretsky]

4 year 18 million

is that a bockbuster deal, that would have put us in the poor house?

i think thats less then what cole just got


we'll always have the healthiest cap in the nfl

standard infinite disclosure: It will help us next year

[Lurker64]

4 year 18 million

is that a bockbuster deal, that would have put us in the poor house?

i think thats less then what cole just got

At the same time though, suppose that Capers thinks Malone is better than Olshansky (plausible, based on Capers' comments). Would you want to pay 4.5 million a year for a backup?

[red]

4 year 18 million

is that a bockbuster deal, that would have put us in the poor house?

i think thats less then what cole just got

At the same time though, suppose that Capers thinks Malone is better than Olshansky (plausible, based on Capers' comments). Would you want to pay 4.5 million a year for a backup?

i still have a hard time believing a guy thats never done anything in his carrer and has hardly seen the field is going to all of a sudden be our starter at DE this year

theres a reason team after team has passed on him, and reasons why he's always been stuck on the practice squad

plus, why not spend 4.5 million for a backup? we don't need to keep finding creative ways to spend 30 million every year and find ways to roll it over to the next year

[Lurker64]

i still have a hard time believing a guy thats never done anything in his carrer and has hardly seen the field is going to all of a sudden be our starter at DE this year

theres a reason team after team has passed on him, and reasons why he's always been stuck on the practice squad

This is his fourth year in the league, and he's only been with two teams. As some people who spell doom and gloom about the DL like to point out, these guys take some time to develop. The flip side of that is "sometimes a guy who hasn't done much, will step up."

Also, there's some compelling reasons to not sign Olshansky (http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/40870762.html).

[KYPack]

Igor was a mixed bag, that for sure. He had a lot of heat with his teammates, who largely regarded the guy as a self-absorbed asshole. '07 was a pretty good year for him and he was poised to have a great year going into to FA.

A new DC got fired mid-way thru the season. New DC, Ron Rivera didn't get into all the mental reasons for Olshansky's play, he just benched him. '08 was largely a disaster for the boy.

All in all, I think the guy was too high priced, but maybe Dallas got themselves an OK deal

God, I hope not.

[SnakeLH2006]

4 year 18 million

is that a bockbuster deal, that would have put us in the poor house?

i think thats less then what cole just got

Yes, but Cole is a beastman. :shock: Why else would he get almost 22 million for 5 years? Err....I wanted to say something witty, but...why did he get that? :shock: Cole is A1Yola Crapola. Thank the lord we didn't give him $1 million a year. That dude and his bud Montgomery are useless.

Snake is happy other teams are blowing up their cap space with this garbage. I'm talking Cole. Igor was OK, but nothing we don't have.

[Sparkey]

Olshansky received $8 million in guaranteed money from the Cowboys. His agent informed Green Bay of this requirement to sign his client.

The Packers would have had a hard time justifying paying Olshansky $8 million guaranteed when they gave Jenkins $4 million, Nick Barnett $5.1 million and Pickett $2 million.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Partial]

The Packers have some guys that are vastly underpaid according to the current market value imo. That's a good thing financially, but hopefully it isn't quietly ticking off some of the guys.

[Guiness]

Olshansky received $8 million in guaranteed money from the Cowboys. His agent informed Green Bay of this requirement to sign his client.

The Packers would have had a hard time justifying paying Olshansky $8 million guaranteed when they gave Jenkins $4 million, Nick Barnett $5.1 million and Pickett $2 million.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I surely hope that isn't the reason he wasn't strongly considered.

Those contracts were signed a couple of years ago, and were market value then. Those guys shouldn't get pissy about another guy getting market value now. Yes, those numbers are less than they'd get now, but they got their SB's and signed multi-year deals because they wanted to.