Jake Long Free Agent

[Packers4Glory]

Lets stop wishing and hoping and just go get a LT.

I don't see any injury that should really hold him down for the next few seasons, and he's way better than anyone we have right now competing for the job. That way you can keep Bulaga at RT where he could be an all-pro and then you have some depth w/ Newhouse and Sherrod and others.

provided the Dolphins don't sign him by march 12

[Cheesehead Craig]

He's going to awfully pricey though.

[smuggler]

He's not going to be worth the salary he will almost certainly command. That's the issue. When healthy, he's obviously an upgrade over Newhouse. However, Newhouse has what others on this forum have described as 'elite availability' which is a quality that Long and many Packers are sadly lacking in. Based on street-level knowledge we're all operating with, I'll pass.

[pbmax]

Lets stop wishing and hoping and just go get a LT.

I don't see any injury that should really hold him down for the next few seasons, and he's way better than anyone we have right now competing for the job. That way you can keep Bulaga at RT where he could be an all-pro and then you have some depth w/ Newhouse and Sherrod and others.

provided the Dolphins don't sign him by march 12

If he is such a sure thing Left Tackle, why is he on his way out?

[Patler]

Several articles have said the Dolphins were concerned because his play has declined rather significantly and unexpectedly the last year and a half. Still OK, but not elite like a few years ago. No one seemed to have an explanation why, other than wear and tear from accumulated injuries. He could be more of a risk than we might think. Then again, might just have gotten into a funk and will come out of it.

This even suggests he might be destined for RT:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/03/03/not-much-buzz-about-jake-long/

[Guiness]

There was another thread about this a while back. One of the problems is the money he'd command. He was a #1 overall pick under the 'old' rookie salary structure - his salary last year was $12.8 million!

This causes two problems - it becomes a starting point for negotiations, and the franchise tender would have cost the Dolphins about $15 million. Apparently the number he's looking for is about $11million.

I expect we'll see more of the same from the two next #1 picks, Stafford and Bradford. I'd say Stafford has an outside chance of extending his deal for similar money, but Bradford is going to take a pay cut. I'll be surprised if St-Louis doesn't try for a renegotation this year, his contract counts $13million against the cap, then $17.6 and $16.6 the next two years..

[pbmax]

There was another thread about this a while back. One of the problems is the money he'd command. He was a #1 overall pick under the 'old' rookie salary structure - his salary last year was $12.8 million!

This causes two problems - it becomes a starting point for negotiations, and the franchise tender would have cost the Dolphins about $15 million. Apparently the number he's looking for is about $11million.

I expect we'll see more of the same from the two next #1 picks, Stafford and Bradford. I'd say Stafford has an outside chance of extending his deal for similar money, but Bradford is going to take a pay cut. I'll be surprised if St-Louis doesn't try for a renegotation this year, his contract counts $13million against the cap, then $17.6 and $16.6 the next two years..

Fair point. I can see why they wouldn't franchise him and why the stories about his decline have been numerous. Will be interesting to see if those stories pan out or were just leaked to cloud the issue.

[Packers4Glory]

He's at the point where he may not be able to command anywhere near the salary he made last yr. It would be worth looking into. if your line is weak, your team will only go so far. That's been a lesson the past 2 seasons....that goes for both sides of the ball.

I'm sure his injuries have hurt his play, but I'm not entirely sure that his injuries are something that necessarily will have an impact on future play or ability to return to upper levels of performance. Just speculation based on what I've read.

[red]

andre smith is suppose to be looking for 9 mil a year

there is actually a large amount of LT's that are gonna be on the market that would be an upgrade for us

time to stop screwing around with that position and just go sign a guy that can keep a-rod off the ground

[pbmax]

andre smith is suppose to be looking for 9 mil a year

there is actually a large amount of LT's that are gonna be on the market that would be an upgrade for us

time to stop screwing around with that position and just go sign a guy that can keep a-rod off the ground

Would it be worth dragging up a 2009 combine thread about that kid or the draft thread when the Bengals took him?

Because he looked like a bust waiting to happen and I think KYPack said he was one of the best no one talks about.

[Smeefers]

andre smith is suppose to be looking for 9 mil a year

there is actually a large amount of LT's that are gonna be on the market that would be an upgrade for us

time to stop screwing around with that position and just go sign a guy that can keep a-rod off the ground

First we gotta sign Aaron Rodgers... and right now the going rate for Joe Flaco is 21 mil a year. What's Aaron going to get?

[Tony Oday]

If Flaco is used as a basis AR gets $200 million $100 guarenteed. Sign a real LT and a stud Saftey.

[red]

Would it be worth dragging up a 2009 combine thread about that kid or the draft thread when the Bengals took him?

Because he looked like a bust waiting to happen and I think KYPack said he was one of the best no one talks about.

dude was suppose to be way overweight and lazy coming out of school, i think he was still called that his rookie year, but it sounds like he's really turned into a solid LT. not a pro bowler, but solid

and he's still a big dude at 330 i think

theres quite a few more guys hitting the market. it would really be a crime if we didn't go into next season with a little bit better guy at LT

i say sign a free agent LT and draft barrett jones or another highly ranked center and we go into next season with a much improved line

[Fritz]

Everybody's all "stop screwing around and sign a LT!" like it's monopoly and there's no salary cap.

Sure, sign a guy who has a name we all recognize. Do it!

But don't whine when Raji or Matthews walks because TT signed that name LT or safety or DE you were calling for.

If someone can explain how to fit a likely contract that Long would command into the salary cap, and still afford to keep Sam Shields, say, and Raji and Matthews and Rodgers, and whatever other restricted free agents you'd bitch about if TT didn't keep, plus explain how that would fit with getting James Jones re-signed when he's up, and explain too how that fits into a plan to keep Finley, or not, then please do tell.

[Bretsky]

Everybody's all "stop screwing around and sign a LT!" like it's monopoly and there's no salary cap.

Sure, sign a guy who has a name we all recognize. Do it!

But don't whine when Raji or Matthews walks because TT signed that name LT or safety or DE you were calling for.

If someone can explain how to fit a likely contract that Long would command into the salary cap, and still afford to keep Sam Shields, say, and Raji and Matthews and Rodgers, and whatever other restricted free agents you'd bitch about if TT didn't keep, plus explain how that would fit with getting James Jones re-signed when he's up, and explain too how that fits into a plan to keep Finley, or not, then please do tell.


Are you arguing TT should do nothing in free agency or only sign minimal guys as has been his patern the past few years ?

[Bretsky]

In our offense with the injury I would not touch Long. Way too much money for someobdy coming off a bad injury. Miami wanted to keep the dude, but they franchised Starks because they wanted to keep him more......and with the severity of the injury they don't want to pay 8-10MIL for a left tackle.

I would be fine with singing a Matt Burke type of free agent that we think is competent there but I'm not sure I'd break the bank for anybody.

[Pugger]

If we don't draft a tackle or pick one up in FA that will tell us they think Sherrod - remember him? - is ready to compete with Newhouse for that position.

[KYPack]

dude was suppose to be way overweight and lazy coming out of school, i think he was still called that his rookie year, but it sounds like he's really turned into a solid LT. not a pro bowler, but solid

and he's still a big dude at 330 i think

theres quite a few more guys hitting the market. it would really be a crime if we didn't go into next season with a little bit better guy at LT

i say sign a free agent LT and draft barrett jones or another highly ranked center and we go into next season with a much improved line

He's a RT, but can play the left side.

In fact, he'd be playing the left in Cincy, but the Bengals already have an All Pro LT & #1 pick in Andrew Whitworth.

Smith would be a pretty solid guy for us to get, but as Fritz points out, he's no fit for us salary wise.

Smith is really a good player. Sportswriter are so lazy, they don't watch tape, so they don't know how good he is.

They just repeat the story from combine 4 years ago when Smith's flashed his man boobs in the 40.

[Guiness]

In our offense with the injury I would not touch Long. Way too much money for someobdy coming off a bad injury. Miami wanted to keep the dude, but they franchised Starks because they wanted to keep him more......and with the severity of the injury they don't want to pay 8-10MIL for a left tackle.

I would be fine with singing a Matt Burke type of free agent that we think is competent there but I'm not sure I'd break the bank for anybody.

We have no idea if Miami would like to keep Long at 8-10. If you look back to my post earlier in this thread, I did some digging and the tag would've cost the Dolphins about $15million because the '120%' clause would've kicked in.

The buzz is that he still lands back in Miami for the price you said, after he tests the waters and finds no takers.

I think we could obviously afford a Jack Long salary...if we wanted to. Look at the shenanigans teams around the league pull with the salary cap, but it's not the way TT does business and I don't want it to be. I'd rather go with what we have, which is Newhouse who can hold the fort and might still be improving, with Sherrod and Bulaga players with potential who may upgrade the position at a later date.

[Packers4Glory]

I don't know that anyone can say for certain what his price is going to be. It may be you can get him for a relative bargain. Gotta kick the tires on a legit solid LT or RT if you want to move Bulaga back to left. Can't go into next yr with what we have now and expect to be any better. I don't see newhouse improving enough to cut it as anything more than a decent backup, and Barclay is a nice project w/ some promise, but has a long way to go.

Our line last yr was line having an expensive car w/ lots of options, but carrying shitty insurance.

[Bossman641]

He's a RT, but can play the left side.

In fact, he'd be playing the left in Cincy, but the Bengals already have an All Pro LT & #1 pick in Andrew Whitworth.

Smith would be a pretty solid guy for us to get, but as Fritz points out, he's no fit for us salary wise.

Smith is really a good player. Sportswriter are so lazy, they don't watch tape, so they don't know how good he is.

They just repeat the story from combine 4 years ago when Smith's flashed his man boobs in the 40.

http://i.imgur.com/9fbrd.jpg

[HarveyWallbangers]

Are you arguing TT should do nothing in free agency or only sign minimal guys as has been his patern the past few years ?

Yes. Generally. And the minimal guy that works out is ideal. Every offseason it's the same conversation.

TT's way has worked. Dynasties are dead. (How long has it been since the Pats won a title, 7-8 years?) It's impossible to keep a team together. This is the way the NFL works nowadays. Great organizations are those that are annual contenders for a Super Bowl. It takes good fortune to win one title. The cards really have to fall your way to win more than one. But people will bitch and moan if there team doesn't win every year. TT has done a good job in the draft, and he's had to pay to keep his elite players (Rodgers, Collins, Jennings, Sitton, T. Williams in past years; Rodgers again, Raji, Matthews in the future). Poorly run franchises usually chase big name FAs because they've failed to develop their own elite players.

[Bretsky]

Yes. Generally. And the minimal guy that works out is ideal. Every offseason it's the same conversation.

TT's way has worked. Dynasties are dead. (How long has it been since the Pats won a title, 7-8 years?) It's impossible to keep a team together. This is the way the NFL works nowadays. Great organizations are those that are annual contenders for a Super Bowl. It takes good fortune to win one title. The cards really have to fall your way to win more than one. But people will bitch and moan if there team doesn't win every year. TT has done a good job in the draft, and he's had to pay to keep his elite players (Rodgers, Collins, Jennings, Sitton, T. Williams in past years; Rodgers again, Raji, Matthews in the future). Poorly run franchises usually chase big name FAs because they've failed to develop their own elite players.

Many ways to skin a cat
Teams, such as the Saints, have used free agency to supplement a few stars and drafts to win it all
The Giants are the only team to win 2 SuperBowls in the NFL over the past decade. They've mixed and matched drafts with free agency as well
There is nothing wrong with paying good money for the right free agents; the bad teams keep picking and chasing the wrong free agents to overpay year after year
How much did Woodson and Pickett have to do with the success Green Bay has had ? TT was successful in free agency because he chose the right free agents to give a lot of money to

In today's NFL, the way to stay in the top tier is to have an elite QB, a couple stars, and surround them with adequate talent. That gives you a consistent shot.

Rodgers, Brady, Manning, Manning, Brees, Rothlisberger, Rodgers.............as long as they play at a near elite level their teams will be in the playoffs nearly every year and have a shot

[pbmax]

There is a downside to the Saints and Giants method. The Saints are in Year 2 of blowing up their defense (and not just because of Gregg).

The Giants also do the Pittsburgh Steeler up one year, down the next yo-yo with their approach, though I confess it hasn't hurt them that one of the down years led to a title. :)

[Fritz]

Counterintuitively, signing a big-name free agent to a big contract is often more of a risk than using the draft and suplementing with the occasional low-level free agent.

[Packers4Glory]

how many playoff teams allowed as many sacks as GB and made the playoffs? ZERO. GB gave up the 2nd most sacks in the lg 51. The next playoff teams Indy & SF gave up 41. Balt gave up 38.

Packers super bowl season: 38

They have to get better at protecting the QB and right now they don't have a LT/RT combo that is adequate enough. I really feel like this team is a tackle short of having a good enough line. Right now they're short a starter, and that makes them short on depth.

If they do into the season w/ what they finished w/ plus Sherrod, then expect more of the same and another early exit in January...that's if AR can survive another big sack season.

[pbmax]

A LOT of Packer sacks were on the QB. He holds the ball rather than force throws or throwing it away. So unless those sack numbers come with comparisons over who was responsible on other teams, I don't think they should be taken at face value and made to be a make or break performance area.

That said, the protection can improve by a great margin on the O line alone.

[red]

A LOT of Packer sacks were on the QB. He holds the ball rather than force throws or throwing it away. So unless those sack numbers come with comparisons over who was responsible on other teams, I don't think they should be taken at face value and made to be a make or break performance area.

That said, the protection can improve by a great margin on the O line alone.

when you watch some of the other teams in the playoffs, those qb's had all day to sit back there and get comfortable. like 5-6 seconds or more

rodgers was usually having to move within 2-3 seconds. yeah, he was holding the ball longer then the 2.3 seconds that m3 tries to teach, but it would be nice if he could get 3 seconds or more every now and then without having to move around

[Bretsky]

A LOT of Packer sacks were on the QB. He holds the ball rather than force throws or throwing it away. So unless those sack numbers come with comparisons over who was responsible on other teams, I don't think they should be taken at face value and made to be a make or break performance area.

That said, the protection can improve by a great margin on the O line alone.


This is kind of selective reasoning. Rodgers also uses his mobility to avoid a lot of sacks that less than mobile QB's would do down on. He turns some of them into first downs via the run, he turns some into first downs via the pass, and it's his fault he takes some sacks when others migth throw the ball away.

But I find it hard to blame Rodgers for sacks w/o giving him credit for avoiding a lot as well

[pbmax]

The tackles definitely need to be better in pass pro. I am not satisfied with the status quo on the O line. And my fear is that the team will be forced to wait and see this year if Bulaga and Sherrod or other younger players get healthy, develop and play better. I don't think a FA LT is coming in this offseason.

But Rodgers causes sacks as well. He does escape some sacks and he does occasionally get first downs and should get credit. But mobile QBs cause more total sacks. Rodgers doesn't move to run, he moves to throw and buy time. Red sees QBs in the playoffs with 5 or 6 seconds to throw. I remember Rodgers with that kind of time (not often enough) and thinking "how can no one be open?". Then sack or throw away.

Think of the Favre statue ready to throw on a hair trigger when pressure reared it ugly head in the latter half of his career. He dropped the sack total below 20 and that wasn't all Clifton and Tauscher. Like a good running back, a quick QB can make the O line look brilliant.

If LT gets solidified and Rodgers can ignore his blindside, I think the 2011 offense comes back.

[smuggler]

Favre was really great at gunning it out of the pocket only to be picked off. I'll take my chances with Rodgers holding it and erring on the side of caution.

[wist43]

A LOT of Packer sacks were on the QB. He holds the ball rather than force throws or throwing it away. So unless those sack numbers come with comparisons over who was responsible on other teams, I don't think they should be taken at face value and made to be a make or break performance area.

That said, the protection can improve by a great margin on the O line alone.


when you watch some of the other teams in the playoffs, those qb's had all day to sit back there and get comfortable. like 5-6 seconds or more

rodgers was usually having to move within 2-3 seconds. yeah, he was holding the ball longer then the 2.3 seconds that m3 tries to teach, but it would be nice if he could get 3 seconds or more every now and then without having to move around

I agree with Red... Rodgers is always having to step up, slide, or outright break the pocket if his first read is covered. The protection tends to break down rather quickly and it is Rodgers houdini act that prevents many more sacks.

Combine the leaky passpro with a complete inability to move the LOS in short yardage situations, and their general weakness as run blockers to begin with, and you have a pretty shaky OL.

It'll be interesting to see if TT goes OL early in this draft.

[Fritz]

I agree with Red... Rodgers is always having to step up, slide, or outright break the pocket if his first read is covered. The protection tends to break down rather quickly and it is Rodgers houdini act that prevents many more sacks.

Combine the leaky passpro with a complete inability to move the LOS in short yardage situations, and their general weakness as run blockers to begin with, and you have a pretty shaky OL.

It'll be interesting to see if TT goes OL early in this draft.

I agree with PB in that the team may well have too much invested in tackles - two first round picks in the last three years, a two-year starter, and another possibly emerging starter - to be able to really afford to invest another first or second round pick at the tackle position. And if that is the case, then part of the problem is that they are all so young that we all may be forced to simply wait for them - and hope for them - to develop.

It's not ideal. I know Plater does not agree that the team can't afford another first rounder at tackle, but I believe it would be a waste of resources to draft yet another tackle in the first or even second round.

[3irty1]

Jake Long and Andre Smith will both be valued higher by a team looking for an elite power running game. Both are as good as it gets in that regard while not being totally worthless in pass protection. Ted puts a premium on pass pro though and neither of these guys will be a significant improvement over Sherrod in this area long term IMO.

[Pugger]

Favre was really great at gunning it out of the pocket only to be picked off. I'll take my chances with Rodgers holding it and erring on the side of caution.

Me too, but I will say my main concern is Aaron getting hammered so much in there.

[woodbuck27]

how many playoff teams allowed as many sacks as GB and made the playoffs? ZERO. GB gave up the 2nd most sacks in the lg 51. The next playoff teams Indy & SF gave up 41. Balt gave up 38.

Packers super bowl season: 38

They have to get better at protecting the QB and right now they don't have a LT/RT combo that is adequate enough. I really feel like this team is a tackle short of having a good enough line. Right now they're short a starter, and that makes them short on depth.

If they do into the season w/ what they finished w/ plus Sherrod, then expect more of the same and another early exit in January...that's if AR can survive another big sack season.

Anybody that knows anything about football would have to agree with you. Protecting Aaron Rodgers and allowing him time to make plays has to be TT's major concern. Our LT position has to improve. Just ..... not at the cost and risk of a 'Jake Long'.

GO PACKERS !

[Bretsky]

Jake Long and Andre Smith will both be valued higher by a team looking for an elite power running game. Both are as good as it gets in that regard while not being totally worthless in pass protection. Ted puts a premium on pass pro though and neither of these guys will be a significant improvement over Sherrod in this area long term IMO.

I don't think we should sign either but I do think both would be an upgrade of Sherry. From what I've seen I'm not yet convinced Sherry is beating out the Shmellow

[woodbuck27]

I don't think we should sign either but I do think both would be an upgrade of Sherry. From what I've seen I'm not yet convinced Sherry is beating out the Shmellow

I'll be estatic just to see Sherrod back and trying to protect AR.