Scoops McGinn Stirs the Pot!

[mraynrand]

McGinn is better than this. Really, he is.



Boldin was that good, a one-man wrecking crew if you will, in the 49ers' hard-fought 34-28 victory over the mediocre Packers.


Unlike the Packers, whose only veteran newcomer to their roster is Seneca Wallace, the 49ers and general manager Trent Baalke use every personnel avenue in building a team.

Packers are mediocre because they don't sign free agents like Boldin!

[mraynrand]

If the Packers are mediocre, why would the Niners have to win a 'hard fought' game? Shouldn't the best or second best team in football have no troubles and not trail late at home against a 'mediocre' team?

McGinn is starting to hemorrhage credibility

[mraynrand]

"Poking the bear" is not hard-hitting journalism

[wist43]

Suppose we sign a mid-level veteran safety?? Would communication be better in the back end?? Would we have fewer blown assignments??

We're perpetually young, and will always be like that until TT leaves - but that comes with its own set of drawbacks... the inexperience is a constant, and it shows up on the field.

Boldin is an experience vet - TT has no use for experienced vets, unless they are experienced vets that he drafted. TT has signed 2 contributing vets the entire time he's been here, Woodson and Pickett. He would rather lose with youth, than win with vets - at some point a happy medium would be nice?? I don't know about you, but I am sick to death of watching busted coverages every stinking game. It's mind numbing to watch.

[mraynrand]

There really are some remarkably terrible lines in the game article from McGinn. Another:

"In the air, the 49ers covered up their weak nickel back (Nnamdi Asomugha) and rookie free safety (Eric Reid) better than the Packers hid their holes."

So now Asomugha is 'weak' and Reid needed 'covering up?' What game was Scoops watching?

[Zool]

They traded for Boldin. 6th rounder.

[mraynrand]

Suppose we sign a mid-level veteran safety??

who should have been signed? Could the Packers afford to sign a mid-level veteran safety to ride the pines behind Hayward and Burnett? Do you know he would be willing to sign to ride the pines? How much did this mid-level veteran safety get where he went? Perhaps you are referring to Assomugha who Bob McGinn claimed had to be covered up, he was so terrible?

[Brandon494]

So supposedly the best team in the NFC barely beat us at home after putting up 400+ yards on a secondary missing two starters....yea the Packers are mediocre at best. :roll:

BTW they traded a 6th round pick for Bolden which I'm pretty sure 9ers got first dibs on with the brother connection.

[pbmax]

Forget all this bellyaching. Defense is better, offense is going to need time to get O line to gel. Need to beat Washington and not get buried in standings early so they can play for seeding in December.

[Guiness]

who should have been signed? Could the Packers afford to sign a mid-level veteran safety to ride the pines behind Hayward and Burnett? Do you know he would be willing to sign to ride the pines? How much did this mid-level veteran safety get where he went? Perhaps you are referring to Assomugha who Bob McGinn claimed had to be covered up, he was so terrible?

I wonder how long Burnett is going to be out. If there's a vet safety out there to be had it might not be a bad idea to bring him in for a few weeks, at least until Burnett comes back. I'm worried how much damage McMillan will do back there and not sure Banjo will be much better at this point. I'm not terribly interested in seeing him learn on the job. Having said that, the last FA safety the Pack brought in was Mark Roman...

And for the record, yes, McGinn is being an ass.

[smuggler]

Packers not the very very best team in the league. MEDIOCRE. I stopped reading McGinn, because he's trolling for pageviews at this point. He has no credibility outside of draft time.

[Pugger]

McGinn is better than this. Really, he is.








Packers are mediocre because they don't sign free agents like Boldin!

WR was not a big need for us to go after a vet FA. Now if we talk about a safety or center? Then we have something to discuss.

[mraynrand]

WR was not a big need for us to go after a vet FA. Now if we talk about a safety or center? Then we have something to discuss.

That's what we're talking about - signing a safety. Of course, TT has to be prescient and know that Hayward and Burnett will be injured in the Seattle preseason or a competent safety, able to pick up the scheme better than McMillian, in a couple of weeks has to be available, on the cheap, and ready to be cut at any time. Who is that guy? and as several have pointed out, SF traded a sixth - to the coach's brother - to get him - well before OTAs.

The Packers problem is that TT can't predict injuries like other GMs, and can't proactively sign high level FA players for the NFL minimum, while the GMs of 'non-mediocre' teams all can. Like Pittsburgh.

[wist43]

who should have been signed? Could the Packers afford to sign a mid-level veteran safety to ride the pines behind Hayward and Burnett? Do you know he would be willing to sign to ride the pines? How much did this mid-level veteran safety get where he went? Perhaps you are referring to Assomugha who Bob McGinn claimed had to be covered up, he was so terrible?

Simply speaking to the philosophy ayn...

You know full well that TT wouldn't give up a 6th round draft pick for a guy like Boldin - find a comparable safety of Boldin's caliber, if we have a glaring hole there, TT would never resort to signing a vet. We have years of track record to back that up.

He will throw 2,487 6th round draft picks at fixing the hole, and if that doesn't work, he will just live with the hole in the lineup. That's his MO.

For better or worse, that's his MO.

[Pugger]

After the disaster of signing Saturday last year I don't blame TT for being gun-shy in FA. :lol:

[mraynrand]

Simply speaking to the philosophy ayn...

You know full well that TT wouldn't give up a 6th round draft pick for a guy like Boldin - find a comparable safety of Boldin's caliber, if we have a glaring hole there, TT would never resort to signing a vet. We have years of track record to back that up.

He will throw 2,487 6th round draft picks at fixing the hole, and if that doesn't work, he will just live with the hole in the lineup. That's his MO.

For better or worse, that's his MO.


Sure, but the MO has a reason. Follow the line of questioning and you start to run out of options pretty fast. Who could the Packers have signed or traded for at a reasonable cost to step in for Burnett and Hawyard after the Seattle preseason game who could learn the D, play for a few weeks, then either be relegated to the bench or be waived.

I'm not opposed to trying to improve the team via FA, and recognize TT's extreme reticence to go that route. But it seems to me the MO is formed by a recognition of the circumstances, and the low success rates of such FA/trade stop gap methods.

[wist43]

Sure, but the MO has a reason. Follow the line of questioning and you start to run out of options pretty fast. Who could the Packers have signed or traded for at a reasonable cost to step in for Burnett and Hawyard after the Seattle preseason game who could learn the D, play for a few weeks, then either be relegated to the bench or be waived.

I'm not opposed to trying to improve the team via FA, and recognize TT's extreme reticence to go that route. But it seems to me the MO is formed by a recognition of the circumstances, and the low success rates of such FA/trade stop gap methods.

I wouldn't have the foggiest notion who was available at any position - I'm a Packer fan, and TT is our GM. We are not going to look at FA's, we are not going to sign FA's - I don't even bother looking at who is available.

We have 1 method of player procurement, and that is the draft; hence, I look solely at the draft.

[run pMc]

Well if bigger and tougher doesn't get you the win, free agency must be the answer...:roll:

Honestly, I can't think of a safety that was available and worth signing that wouldn't have caused hand-wringing over cap space. They extended Rodgers, Matthews and Burnett; they weren't going to get the heyday of Ed Reed for the vet minimum...and it makes sense to hope one of your young guys can make that leap.

Sure, I'd like to see TT be more active in FA, but the pickings are usually pretty slim unless you are looking to break the bank. As soon as someone starts a 2014 thread, I'm sure S will be listed as one of the top needs.

+1 to this:

Forget all this bellyaching. Defense is better, offense is going to need time to get O line to gel. Need to beat Washington and not get buried in standings early so they can play for seeding in December.

[MJZiggy]

I wouldn't have the foggiest notion who was available at any position - I'm a Packer fan, and TT is our GM. We are not going to look at FA's, we are not going to sign FA's - I don't even bother looking at who is available.

We have 1 method of player procurement, and that is the draft; hence, I look solely at the draft.

We did not draft Seneca Wallace (at least the Packers did not) nor did we sign Vince Young. Or Pickett. Or Grant when he was with the team. Your argument is absolute shit because we do it selectively, only when a player that fills a need becomes available at the time we need him. If you have a safety that's available right now, I'd love to hear about it. But your argument is silly and frankly, a little stupid.

[mmmdk]

Packers not the very very best team in the league. MEDIOCRE. I stopped reading McGinn, because he's trolling for pageviews at this point. He has no credibility outside of draft time.

The death of the Packers is greatly exaggerated...the rise of Packers to champ contention is also greatly exaggerated!

[mmmdk]

After the disaster of signing Saturday last year I don't blame TT for being gun-shy in FA. :lol:

Woodson, Pickett and even Grant via trade seemed to work brilliantly. I think TT has trouble drafting OL as well as signing FA OL. TTs drafting has been awesome - just not lately...though I hope Lacy is a coming star RB.

[mraynrand]

We did not draft Seneca Wallace (at least the Packers did not) nor did we sign Vince Young. Or Pickett. Or Grant when he was with the team. Your argument is absolute shit because we do it selectively, only when a player that fills a need becomes available at the time we need him. If you have a safety that's available right now, I'd love to hear about it. But your argument is silly and frankly, a little stupid.

He's talking philosophy dammit; being qua being, not real being. In the Kantian and Descarte whorls of Wist's inner mind, TT has erected an impenetrable, perfectly reflecting free agent mirrored surface that prevents signing a non-draft pick until time exhausts itself in entropic dissolution.

[MJZiggy]

He's talking philosophy dammit; being qua being, not real being. In the Kantian and Descarte whorls of Wist's inner mind, TT has erected an impenetrable, perfectly reflecting free agent mirrored surface that prevents signing a non-draft pick until time exhausts itself in entropic dissolution.

Descartes made me want to sit in garage with a running car. Now I understand why.

[pbmax]

Simply speaking to the philosophy ayn...

You know full well that TT wouldn't give up a 6th round draft pick for a guy like Boldin - find a comparable safety of Boldin's caliber, if we have a glaring hole there, TT would never resort to signing a vet. We have years of track record to back that up.



He has thrown better than 6th round picks at vets before and they went elsewhere (Moss, Gonzalez, Lynch). Next contention?

[hoosier]

He's talking philosophy dammit; being qua being, not real being. In the Kantian and Descarte whorls of Wist's inner mind, TT has erected an impenetrable, perfectly reflecting free agent mirrored surface that prevents signing a non-draft pick until time exhausts itself in entropic dissolution.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2gJamguN04

[bobblehead]

Simply speaking to the philosophy ayn...

You know full well that TT wouldn't give up a 6th round draft pick for a guy like Boldin - find a comparable safety of Boldin's caliber, if we have a glaring hole there, TT would never resort to signing a vet. We have years of track record to back that up.

He will throw 2,487 6th round draft picks at fixing the hole, and if that doesn't work, he will just live with the hole in the lineup. That's his MO.

For better or worse, that's his MO.

I spent the offseason hammering my one 9er friend about the collusion trade. NO way Boldin should have been had for a 6th, and as such, there is NO WAY TT could have found a comparable safety for a 6th since that trade was shit.

[bobblehead]

We did not draft Seneca Wallace (at least the Packers did not) nor did we sign Vince Young. Or Pickett. Or Grant when he was with the team. Your argument is absolute shit because we do it selectively, only when a player that fills a need becomes available at the time we need him. If you have a safety that's available right now, I'd love to hear about it. But your argument is silly and frankly, a little stupid.

wow, schooled by a woman :shock:

[Zool]

The other problem with a trade, the team that currently owns the players rights needs to want them gone. There's a reason very few trades happen in the NFL. There's also a reason FA's hit the market. Teams hold on to productive players until they can't afford them. At that point the Packers can't afford them either. Once in a while you get lucky and sign a Woodson or a Pickett. Most of the time you end up with John Carlson in FA.

[mraynrand]

Teams hold on to productive players until they can't afford them. At that point the Packers can't afford them either.

Ding Ding Ding! We have a winner. Repped.

[hoosier]

I spent the offseason hammering my one 9er friend about the collusion trade. NO way Boldin should have been had for a 6th, and as such, there is NO WAY TT could have found a comparable safety for a 6th since that trade was shit.

You really believe Ozzie gave up Boldin for less than market value to help out his head coach's brother??? :-)

[mraynrand]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2gJamguN04

holy christmas, I'd forgotten all about that one! Excellent!

[mraynrand]

You really believe Ozzie gave up Boldin for less than market value to help out his head coach's brother??? :-)

Dad made him, otherwise he couldn't use the summer cottage this season!

[wist43]

We did not draft Seneca Wallace (at least the Packers did not) nor did we sign Vince Young. Or Pickett. Or Grant when he was with the team. Your argument is absolute shit because we do it selectively, only when a player that fills a need becomes available at the time we need him. If you have a safety that's available right now, I'd love to hear about it. But your argument is silly and frankly, a little stupid.

Again MJ, I am just speaking in general, philosophical terms - no team in the NFL is as draftcentric as GB. That is the proper way to build IMO, but at the same time, it can present problems that show up on the field - inexperience, miscommunication, busted coverages, etc.

It is what it is.

TT would rather live with those problems, than patch in a veteran.

[wist43]

He's talking philosophy dammit; being qua being, not real being. In the Kantian and Descarte whorls of Wist's inner mind, TT has erected an impenetrable, perfectly reflecting free agent mirrored surface that prevents signing a non-draft pick until time exhausts itself in entropic dissolution.

That be deep man :cnf:

[Guiness]

Ding Ding Ding! We have a winner. Repped.

+1

Boldin is out of Baltimore because Flacco got $120M to be a top 20 QB! His cap number was about $6M IIRC.

[MJZiggy]

Again MJ, I am just speaking in general, philosophical terms - no team in the NFL is as draftcentric as GB. That is the proper way to build IMO, but at the same time, it can present problems that show up on the field - inexperience, miscommunication, busted coverages, etc.

It is what it is.

TT would rather live with those problems, than patch in a veteran.Then what's Wallace doing here? Why was Woodson on the team? Why did he go after Moss et al? It's not a done-deal "philosophy" as you make it out to be. We're just not foolhardy in running after every big name out there the way some here would like us to. This isn't Madden. We have to use some common sense. Case in point, I'm still waiting for the name of that safety that TT should have acquired. He hasn't because there isn't one available that suits what we need. Actually, I don't think there's a good one available at all...

[wist43]

Then what's Wallace doing here? Why was Woodson on the team? Why did he go after Moss et al? It's not a done-deal "philosophy" as you make it out to be. We're just not foolhardy in running after every big name out there the way some here would like us to. This isn't Madden. We have to use some common sense. Case in point, I'm still waiting for the name of that safety that TT should have acquired. He hasn't because there isn't one available that suits what we need. Actually, I don't think there's a good one available at all...

What part of "general, philosophical point" don't you understand?? You've become deliberately obtuse these days??

You don't like the point I made - ignore it.

We signed Reggie White to the biggest FA contract in history to that point - there, I win.

[MJZiggy]

What part of "general, philosophical point" don't you understand?? You've become deliberately obtuse these days??

You don't like the point I made - ignore it.

We signed Reggie White to the biggest FA contract in history to that point - there, I win.

I was responding to your last sentence there. I don't believe for a second that TT would rather live with a problem than patch it if a suitable patch were available. Seneca Wallace is the patch in point.

[Pugger]

Woodson, Pickett and even Grant via trade seemed to work brilliantly. I think TT has trouble drafting OL as well as signing FA OL. TTs drafting has been awesome - just not lately...though I hope Lacy is a coming star RB.

TT has problems drafting O linemen that stay healthy. Thank god he drafted Bak!

[George Cumby]

IMO, this is slightly silly. Boldin doesn't have that game if Hayward and Burnett are back there. My concern is with the injury rate. What the hell is going on out there?

[Pugger]

wow, schooled by a woman :shock:

You go girl!! :grin:

[hoosier]

Case in point, I'm still waiting for the name of that safety that TT should have acquired. He hasn't because there isn't one available that suits what we need. Actually, I don't think there's a good one available at all...

Don't hold your breath. The guy who most people that are inclined to jump at every big name free agent would have wanted to sign is Michael Huff. TT could have had him for about $6M for three years, and then we could have watched our shiny new free agent safety getting smoked by Vernon Davis instead of seeing Julius Thomas run by him.

[Noodle]

You go girl!! :grin:

I learned when I moved to Wisconsin long ago the male conceit that only those with the xy chromosome set can understand football is WAY stupid. The truth is, most women have played as many NFL snaps as I have. That being the case, their views are likely to be as informed as mine, and maybe even more so, since they aren't relying on misconceptions born of a few years of high school football. Besides, Zigs rules.

[wist43]

I was responding to your last sentence there. I don't believe for a second that TT would rather live with a problem than patch it if a suitable patch were available. Seneca Wallace is the patch in point.

Backup QB is hardly a problem - if we have to go to the BU QB, our season is sunk regardless.

Besides, that argument is a double edged sword for you - if Harrell and Coleman were garbage enough to be kicked to the curb this year, they were garbage enough to be kicked to the curb last year - yet they lanquished on the roster, did they not??

If BU QB were such a big issue, and your contention were correct - they both would have been booted last year.

[wist43]

Here's a scoop - Washington is a truly horrible team.

If we can't stomp them in easy fashion next week - we should start looking at next years draft.

Wow, do they look horrible.

[Patler]

Again MJ, I am just speaking in general, philosophical terms - no team in the NFL is as draftcentric as GB. That is the proper way to build IMO, but at the same time, it can present problems that show up on the field - inexperience, miscommunication, busted coverages, etc.

It is what it is.

TT would rather live with those problems, than patch in a veteran.

...and yet, in 2012 when they needed a center, he went out and signed a very experienced free agent center.
...and in 2012 when he needed a running back, he went out and signed a very experienced free agent running back.
...and in 2013 when they needed a #2 QB, he went out and signed one and then another experienced free agent quarterback.

Looking at the safety position in the off season, they had a guy who didn't miss a snap in 2012, who seems to be regarded as an up and comer by many. They also had two returning vets who shared the other starting spot, both young, one just entering his second season. Why would TT think it necessary to invest in a veteran free agent safety?

Now, if it looks like Burnett will be out a while, and if Jennings and McMillan continue to struggle, I expect we will see another safety in GB soon.

[Patler]

Besides, that argument is a double edged sword for you - if Harrell and Coleman were garbage enough to be kicked to the curb this year, they were garbage enough to be kicked to the curb last year - yet they lanquished on the roster, did they not??

No, that is where you are wrong. Every NFL roster carries players who are not really ready to play now, but who are thought to be developable.
Besides, Coleman was not on the roster last year anyway. He was on the practice squad, exactly where he should have been with good physical tools but with a need to adapt to the NFL game.

[Joemailman]

Here's a scoop - Washington is a truly horrible team.

If we can't stomp them in easy fashion next week - we should start looking at next years draft.

Wow, do they look horrible.

Already setting up next week, aren't you? If the Packers don't blow out the Redskins, the season is hopeless. And if they do, it's only because the Redskins are horrible. Al least you're consistent. :lol:

[MJZiggy]

No, that is where you are wrong. Every NFL roster carries players who are not really ready to play now, but who are thought to be developable.
Besides, Coleman was not on the roster last year anyway. He was on the practice squad, exactly where he should have been with good physical tools but with a need to adapt to the NFL game.
Thanks for saving me the keystrokes.

[cheesner]

I often wonder why some people are Packer fans. They seem to despise the coaches and management. They rip on most of the players. They never seem to be happy. Why follow something that is so detestable?

[HarveyWallbangers]

Already setting up next week, aren't you? If the Packers don't blow out the Redskins, the season is hopeless. And if they do, it's only because the Redskins are horrible. Al least you're consistent. :lol:

Washington made the playoffs last year, so they can't be completely devoid of talent. Unfortunately, RGIII got some confidence going in the second half after missing most of training camp.

[Bretsky]

He has thrown better than 6th round picks at vets before and they went elsewhere (Moss, Gonzalez, Lynch). Next contention?

So your point it TT can't close a deal ? :)

[Bretsky]

...and yet, in 2012 when they needed a center, he went out and signed a very experienced free agent center.
...and in 2012 when he needed a running back, he went out and signed a very experienced free agent running back.
...and in 2013 when they needed a #2 QB, he went out and signed one and then another experienced free agent quarterback.

Looking at the safety position in the off season, they had a guy who didn't miss a snap in 2012, who seems to be regarded as an up and comer by many. They also had two returning vets who shared the other starting spot, both young, one just entering his second season. Why would TT think it necessary to invest in a veteran free agent safety?

Now, if it looks like Burnett will be out a while, and if Jennings and McMillan continue to struggle, I expect we will see another safety in GB soon.


Who was the up coming safety ? McMillen ? I've never shared his Kool Aide and MD Jennings is a JAG...which is why I wanted Eric Reed so badly. Burnett is stellar but I didn't see much there beyond him.

[Upnorth]

Here's a scoop - Washington is a truly horrible team.

If we can't stomp them in easy fashion next week - we should start looking at next years draft.

Wow, do they look horrible.

The first half they did look like garbage, the second half they started looking good. Still think we will win.

[pbmax]

So your point it TT can't close a deal ? :)

I will accept that argument before I accept that he would never offer a sixth, which is clearly false.

It takes two to tango and the team or player have to want to deal with you for it to happen.

[denverYooper]

I often wonder why some people are Packer fans. They seem to despise the coaches and management. They rip on most of the players. They never seem to be happy. Why follow something that is so detestable?

Taking such an attitude makes everything easy: when they lose, you get to be right; when they win, you were wrong, but your team won.

I always picture him like Randy Quaid in Major League.

[pbmax]

Taking such an attitude makes everything easy: when they lose, you get to be right; when they win, you were wrong, but your team won.

I always picture him like Randy Quaid in Major League.

Oh no Yoop, its an even better proposition when they win. It can be that they FINALLY listened to you OR that its the exception that proves the rule.

#neverbewrong

[wist43]

Listening to you guys - TT just can't stay away from the FA market... like a john addicted to the Bunny Ranch, huh ;)

[3irty1]

People forget what backup QB's are really for. Their main responsibility day to day is to run the scout team. They research the opposition and mimic them in practice against the first team D. Now doesn't it seem obvious why we'd prefer a guy in the mold of Vince Young or Seneca Wallace instead of sticking with Graham Harrell or BJ Coleman this year? Check the NFC playoffs last year for clues.

[wist43]

No, that is where you are wrong. Every NFL roster carries players who are not really ready to play now, but who are thought to be developable.
Besides, Coleman was not on the roster last year anyway. He was on the practice squad, exactly where he should have been with good physical tools but with a need to adapt to the NFL game.


Thanks for saving me the keystrokes.

MJ, you made the point that TT would not let a hole lanquish on the roster - he'd find a patch, if that was what was necessary. He may have done that this year with Wallace replacing Coleman and Harrell, but he didn't do it last year when they were both still on the roster... again, if they were shit this year, they were shit last year - hence, TT let the roster glide along with a hole - did he not??

You guys get so caught up trying to poke me in the eye, you contradict yourselves all the time.

I made a GENERAL, PHILOSOPHICAL point - get it?? General - as in not an ironclad rule, as in not a scientific law - get it?? No?? I didn't think so.

[3irty1]

Listening to you guys - TT just can't stay away from the FA market... like a john addicted to the Bunny Ranch, huh ;)

Listening to you - " the Anquan Boldin of safeties" is a choice that is perpetually available to every GM in the league.

WHY oh WHY does Ted not just have his cake and eat it too?! It's soooo simple!

[Patler]

MJ, you made the point that TT would not let a hole lanquish on the roster - he'd find a patch, if that was what was necessary. He may have done that this year with Wallace replacing Coleman and Harrell, but he didn't do it last year when they were both still on the roster... again, if they were shit this year, they were shit last year - hence, TT let the roster glide along with a hole - did he not??

You guys get so caught up trying to poke me in the eye, you contradict yourselves all the time.

I made a GENERAL, PHILOSOPHICAL point - get it?? General - as in not an ironclad rule, as in not a scientific law - get it?? No?? I didn't think so.

...and we don't do the same??? It seems to me you are the one who gets tied up in his shorts attempting to twist every situation into a common theme.

[Zool]

...and we don't do the same??? It seems to me you are the one who gets tied up in his shorts attempting to twist every situation into a common theme.

This is a fantastic visual. Thank you for this.

I present to you, men's shorts as a dress.

http://cdn0.dailydot.com/cache/c3/74/c374e8a05001a207dc166c088ac179ce.jpg

[Guiness]

Washington made the playoffs last year, so they can't be completely devoid of talent. Unfortunately, RGIII got some confidence going in the second half after missing most of training camp.

Yup, they're not going to be a pushover. A playoff team that should be improved from last year. RG3 will have shaken the rust off. His timing and decision making looked bad first half but improved from there.

[pbmax]

Image does not compute.

[Fritz]

Who was the up coming safety ? McMillen ? I've never shared his Kool Aide and MD Jennings is a JAG...which is why I wanted Eric Reed so badly. Burnett is stellar but I didn't see much there beyond him.

Ah, but didn't the Niners trade up to the 18th spot to get him? They gave up their first round pick plus a third.

That would mean Green Bay would have had to given up the same, in all likelihood. So...no Datone Jones, and no Bahktieri and Tretter - the two fourth rounders, I think, they received from SF in exchange for GB's third rounder.

So, to recap, if I am correct, to get your man Reid, the Packers would have:

No Datone Jones
No David Bahktieri
No JC Tretter

Interesting thought. Not sure I agree with your thinking, though. Without Bahk, who played pretty well, we'd have the same "Marshmallow" Newhouse you love so much, still starting at left tackle.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Ah, but didn't the Niners trade up to the 18th spot to get him? They gave up their first round pick plus a third.

That would mean Green Bay would have had to given up the same, in all likelihood. So...no Datone Jones, and no Bahktieri and Tretter - the two fourth rounders, I think, they received from SF in exchange for GB's third rounder.

So, to recap, if I am correct, to get your man Reid, the Packers would have:

No Datone Jones
No David Bahktieri
No JC Tretter

Interesting thought. Not sure I agree with your thinking, though. Without Bahk, who played pretty well, we'd have the same "Marshmallow" Newhouse you love so much, still starting at left tackle.

Box.

[Patler]

Looking at the safety position in the off season, they had a guy who didn't miss a snap in 2012, who seems to be regarded as an up and comer by many.


Who was the up coming safety ? McMillen ? I've never shared his Kool Aide and MD Jennings is a JAG...which is why I wanted Eric Reed so badly. Burnett is stellar but I didn't see much there beyond him.

Burnett.

[Bretsky]

Then what's Wallace doing here? Why was Woodson on the team? Why did he go after Moss et al? It's not a done-deal "philosophy" as you make it out to be. We're just not foolhardy in running after every big name out there the way some here would like us to. This isn't Madden. We have to use some common sense. Case in point, I'm still waiting for the name of that safety that TT should have acquired. He hasn't because there isn't one available that suits what we need. Actually, I don't think there's a good one available at all...

I really don't think Seneca Wallace proves anything but miserable failure on the part of the GB Packers organization in terms of not having a remotely qualified backup. We went too far and too long with developmental junk. Kudos for realizing this...I guess....but it's a desperate move because there were no other options.

To me the Wooson and PIckett signing provides solid evidence of why we should go after the occasional free agents more. We just don't because we'd rather develop our own. It is what it is.

Michael Huff; of course you may recall many bringing up his name in the offseason. There were others but he seemed to be a decent fit. Ozzie Newsome signed him....but hell..he knows nothing .....right ?

AND Huff is no star but he's better than the wannabe's we had out there last week

[Bretsky]

Ah, but didn't the Niners trade up to the 18th spot to get him? They gave up their first round pick plus a third.

That would mean Green Bay would have had to given up the same, in all likelihood. So...no Datone Jones, and no Bahktieri and Tretter - the two fourth rounders, I think, they received from SF in exchange for GB's third rounder.

So, to recap, if I am correct, to get your man Reid, the Packers would have:

No Datone Jones
No David Bahktieri
No JC Tretter

Interesting thought. Not sure I agree with your thinking, though. Without Bahk, who played pretty well, we'd have the same "Marshmallow" Newhouse you love so much, still starting at left tackle.


I'm not complaining we didn't trade up for him; but dam we sure as hell could have drafted another safety

Speaking of draft day deals.............could we have had Brandon Williams in round 3 and the Backman in round 4.

Jonathon Franklyn has been junk anyways...........as has been Everybody's man BOYD

[Bretsky]

Ah, but didn't the Niners trade up to the 18th spot to get him? They gave up their first round pick plus a third.

That would mean Green Bay would have had to given up the same, in all likelihood. So...no Datone Jones, and no Bahktieri and Tretter - the two fourth rounders, I think, they received from SF in exchange for GB's third rounder.

So, to recap, if I am correct, to get your man Reid, the Packers would have:

No Datone Jones
No David Bahktieri
No JC Tretter

Interesting thought. Not sure I agree with your thinking, though. Without Bahk, who played pretty well, we'd have the same "Marshmallow" Newhouse you love so much, still starting at left tackle.


And one other thing.............I'd still take Reed over Jones.....we might have had the Backman with our own 4th. I don't care about Tretter :)

[mraynrand]

I really don't think Seneca Wallace proves anything but miserable failure on the part of the GB Packers organization in terms of not having a remotely qualified backup. We went too far and too long with developmental junk. Kudos for realizing this...I guess....but it's a desperate move because there were no other options.

To me the Wooson and PIckett signing provides solid evidence of why we should go after the occasional free agents more. We just don't because we'd rather develop our own. It is what it is.

Michael Huff; of course you may recall many bringing up his name in the offseason. There were others but he seemed to be a decent fit. Ozzie Newsome signed him....but hell..he knows nothing .....right ?

AND Huff is no star but he's better than the wannabe's we had out there last week

Would Huff have been interested in signing knowing his playing time would be reduced because he would come off the field a lot in favor of Hayward? In other words, when it was time to sign him, you didn't know that the guys who were going to play ahead of him would be injured. And so he has to make a decision based on projected playing time, and the Packers have to make a decision if they want to pay him the money he's worth as an insurance policy in case of injury or in case some guys don't step up through OTAs, training camp, and preseason. I think most people here expected one of Millian, Doc Jennings, or the injured guy Richardson to step up and be a capable starter next to Burnett. And they didn't expect burnett and hayward to be missing the opener. You can't make personnel decisions assuming guys are going to be injured - no team can sign effective starters to all backup roles.

[Bretsky]

Would Huff have been interested in signing knowing his playing time would be reduced because he would come off the field a lot in favor of Hayward? In other words, when it was time to sign him, you didn't know that the guys who were going to play ahead of him would be injured. And so he has to make a decision based on projected playing time, and the Packers have to make a decision if they want to pay him the money he's worth as an insurance policy in case of injury or in case some guys don't step up through OTAs, training camp, and preseason. I think most people here expected one of Millian, Doc Jennings, or the injured guy Richardson to step up and be a capable starter next to Burnett. And they didn't expect burnett and hayward to be missing the opener. You can't make personnel decisions assuming guys are going to be injured - no team can sign effective starters to all backup roles.


Would Heyward really take that much time away form a safety ? I kind of looked at him as a very capable CB. I have absolutely no faith in MD Jennings or Richardson. Those are pipe dreams IMO.

Huff would have been signed to be a near every play starter IMO. Let the other guys develop until they are ready

[3irty1]

Would Heyward really take that much time away form a safety ? I kind of looked at him as a very capable CB. I have absolutely no faith in MD Jennings or Richardson. Those are pipe dreams IMO.

Huff would have been signed to be a near every play starter IMO. Let the other guys develop until they are ready

FYI profootball focus gave Michael Huff the lowest grade of every defensive player Thursday night. This would come to no surprise to those who watched it. I don't think the answer to our safeties that can't cover or tackle is an older, more expensive safety who can't cover or tackle.

Huff's a turd.