So,...what should the Packers do about Mike Neal????

[Patler]

This is an interesting situation.
Was he a linebacker disguised in a d-lineman's body for 3 years?
He seems to have embraced the switch whole-heartedly.

Oh, and he did have 5 sacks and 30 pressures in what was a year-long learning experience for him. Could he become the best of the lot they have tried opposite Matthews? Maybe he already is.

Is he worth keeping?

[red]

boy i don't know with him

to me he seemed pretty average this year, and i have no clue if he'll get any better

judging by the brad jones deal which was based on the walden deal, you're probably looking at spending between 4 or 5 million a year on him

is he worth that at this point? i'd say no
is he worth it if he continues to improve? maybe
will he improve? maybe

is he really that much different the arron kampman who we deemed to not be good enough to play the OLB position?

[HarveyWallbangers]

I think he is, but I don't think you can offer him big money because he's injury prone. I'm worried that some other team will overspend based on the potential.

[HarveyWallbangers]

is he really that much different the arron kampman who we deemed to not be good enough to play the OLB position?

I don't think they are that comparable. Nick Perry is more like Aaron Kampman. I think both are 4-3 DEs. They just don't have ideal quickness for a 3-4 OLB. You could make it work, but it's trying to put a square peg in a round hole. Neal, on the other hand, looked like he had the quickness to play 3-4 OLB.

[red]

I don't think they are that comparable. Nick Perry is more like Aaron Kampman. I think both are 4-3 DEs. They just don't have ideal quickness for a 3-4 OLB. You could make it work, but it's trying to put a square peg in a round hole. Neal, on the other hand, looked like he had the quickness to play 3-4 OLB.

see, i didn't think that at all

i though neal and perry looked a lot a like, the only difference being the idea that neal could improve because he just made the switch when perry made the switch last year

guess its all in the eye of the beholder

[denverYooper]

I think he is, but I don't think you can offer him big money because he's injury prone. I'm worried that some other team will overspend based on the potential.

I have a feeling that much of his injury history is related to his probable PED use and putting on more mass than he could support structurally.

[mraynrand]

Perry plays like a lot of strong side OLBs. Neal I thought improved dropping into coverage. I'd be happy with both of them on the field at the same time, with Matthews as the other ILB next to Hawk, with the ability to freelance like Woodson. I think APRH, that would be a very good LB group.

[Patler]

Perry looks stiff compared to Neal. I saw Kampman more like Perry, too.

The injury issue with Neal is also complicated. Maybe the significant weight-loss (and he said he intends to lose a little bit more this off-season) and his change in training habits last year will improve the injury issue. Again, maybe his body really couldn't handle the weight he carried on his body and the weights he lifted in workouts. If he trains to be a linebacker, maybe his injuries will decrease.

[denverYooper]

I hope they get a deal done with Neal. He occasionally made plays that jumped off the screen, as did Perry. I hope they can keep Neal around long enough to sort out which one will be a longer-term answer.

[mraynrand]

I don't like Matthews on the Strong side and Neal on the weak side. I think it's a waste to throw Matthews at the LT all the time. He's smaller and quicker and they need to exploit that more. And Perry is much better lined up at ROLB. At least on early and run downs. If you have to keep Matthews at OLB, at least have him LOLB and Neal (or Perry) at ROLB on passing downs.

[denverYooper]

Perry plays like a lot of strong side OLBs. Neal I thought improved dropping into coverage. I'd be happy with both of them on the field at the same time, with Matthews as the other ILB next to Hawk, with the ability to freelance like Woodson. I think APRH, that would be a very good LB group.

I endorse this idea.

[mraynrand]

Perry looks stiff compared to Neal. I saw Kampman more like Perry, too.

Perry looks better in space than Kamp. Kamp was a better pass rush technician than Perry; Perry has better burst, but needs more moves. I'm OK with Perry as ROLB, so long as he knows whether it's man or zone!

[Patler]

I hope they get a deal done with Neal. He occasionally made plays that jumped off the screen, as did Perry. I hope they can keep Neal around long enough to sort out which one will be a longer-term answer.

That's were I am at.
Then I hope they get a guy in the draft who changes their decision to one of deciding which of Neal and Perry is the better back-up.

[run pMc]

That's were I am at.
Then I hope they get a guy in the draft who changes their decision to one of deciding which of Neal and Perry is the better back-up.

+1

I don't think we've got a full idea of Perry yet, because of the injuries. I do worry about him being "injury-prone". Neal too, although I think he was too bulked up on the DL and that was stressing his body. If he drops some weight he might get a little faster/quicker. Both of them alternately flashed and struggled. Most of Perry's sacks resulted in fumbles.
I don't think of either as especially proficient dropping into coverage, so I could them being used more on early downs or rushing. Also think they should flipflop Clay to LOLB and put the winner of the Perry/Neal camp battle to the ROLB. Perry did better there and I agree that Clay might have more success against RT's -- although I think some teams will just double/chip him with the RB or TE.

"APRH", with another year the OLB group could be decent. Depends on whether they can get some developmental leap from one or two of: Palmer, Mulumba, Perry, and (if resigned) Neal.

Some of the writers really love Neal and think a team will give him Walden money. I'm not quite seeing that, but I suppose it only takes one team. If that happens, I'd let him walk, draft a replacement, and enjoy the comp pick in 2015. (It's better than making Worthy an OLB)

[3irty1]

I think Neal will probably be retained but I have a hard time guessing how much he'll cost. He's the kind of bull in a china shop they have been looking for with pretty much everyone they've brought in to play opposite of Matthews. I know Kampman will be remembered as the failed conversion experiment but I think people use this memory to overplay the transition to OLB. Kampman was already starting to suck before he became an OLB.

Hopefully his strange transition and injury history drives away the kinds of suitors that think Erik Walden is worth 4M/year.

[Striker]

+1

I don't think we've got a full idea of Perry yet, because of the injuries. I do worry about him being "injury-prone". Neal too, although I think he was too bulked up on the DL and that was stressing his body. If he drops some weight he might get a little faster/quicker. Both of them alternately flashed and struggled. Most of Perry's sacks resulted in fumbles.
I don't think of either as especially proficient dropping into coverage, so I could them being used more on early downs or rushing. Also think they should flipflop Clay to LOLB and put the winner of the Perry/Neal camp battle to the ROLB. Perry did better there and I agree that Clay might have more success against RT's -- although I think some teams will just double/chip him with the RB or TE.

"APRH", with another year the OLB group could be decent. Depends on whether they can get some developmental leap from one or two of: Palmer, Mulumba, Perry, and (if resigned) Neal.

Some of the writers really love Neal and think a team will give him Walden money. I'm not quite seeing that, but I suppose it only takes one team. If that happens, I'd let him walk, draft a replacement, and enjoy the comp pick in 2015. (It's better than making Worthy an OLB)

+2

I'd like the Packers to keep him around, but might as well let him test the market first. Unless they can get him on the cheap.

[mraynrand]

Kampman was already starting to suck before he became an OLB.

people insist he was better than Jared Allen

[Patler]

people insist he was better than Jared Allen

For a couple years, I think he was. His short career and JA's much longer one should not obscure just how good Kampman was for a few years. He was very good as a pass rusher, and was even better against the run. At that time JA was as good rushing, but mediocre against the run. Throw in AK's first rate character against JA's more questionable one at the time, and I was more than pleased to have AK. Unfortunately, he flamed out relatively quickly, and JA got even better while maturing as an individual.

[Guiness]

Perry looks stiff compared to Neal. I saw Kampman more like Perry, too.

The injury issue with Neal is also complicated. Maybe the significant weight-loss (and he said he intends to lose a little bit more this off-season) and his change in training habits last year will improve the injury issue. Again, maybe his body really couldn't handle the weight he carried on his body and the weights he lifted in workouts. If he trains to be a linebacker, maybe his injuries will decrease.

Ya, and maybe Kate Moss will call one of us to go out for drinks. This is the Packers we're talking about, injuries are a given, severity is the only question.:-P

[Patler]

Ya, and maybe Kate Moss will call one of us to go out for drinks. This is the Packers we're talking about, injuries are a given, severity is the only question.:-P

Will reply later. Have to go answer my phone..........

[red]

Ya, and maybe Kate Moss will call one of us to go out for drinks. This is the Packers we're talking about, injuries are a given, severity is the only question.:-P

i hit that shit last weekend

it was alright

[denverYooper]

Kate Moss is a mediocre supermodel!

[gbgary]

Is he worth keeping?

gotta keep him in my view. we'll be a weaker team without him. there are many on this board that get mad and say get rid of this guy or that guy. it ends being a list of consisting of half the team. gotta replace them with someone and that only leaves cheap fa's and draft picks to chose from. marginal players that their teams didn't want to keep and crap-shoot middle to low round rookies. it's not practical to turn over half the roster. we'll continue being the youngest (least experienced) team in the league if this continues. we've got to keep some of these guys that played solid and let them grow into the position and get the experience they need. we're not that far away.

[Bretsky]

I like Neal as a OLB better than Perry..who I too think is stiff as a LB

Perry was the wrong pick by TT

[red]

i guess i would be ok if they did a brad jones type of deal now that i've thought about it and looked over jones numbers again

first year is 2.5 millionish, thats fine.

the next year it goes of to the 4 million range. if he continues to improve as an OLB next season, then he gets to make his 4 million in 2015. if he dosen't continue to improve, you have the option of cutting him if you need the cap space.

the key is the signing bonus. if they make it small enough, and use other things like roster bonuses, then they can cut him after a year if they have to without taking a big cap hit. just like i would suspect if they need the cap room this year, jones could be cut, if they can fine someone better of course

[red]

Perry was the wrong pick by TT

then i think they need to trade him ASAP, and try and get some value out of him while they can.

the browns were able to trade a first round draft bust to the colts for a first round pick this year

we need to start finding suckers like other teams find

[Bretsky]

that's an interesting thought.....but what would you get for Nick Perry.......a low 3rd tops ? He has not shown much but a guy with one pass rushing move who can stuff the run at times when he's healthy...which is not a lot

[red]

that's an interesting thought.....but what would you get for Nick Perry.......a low 3rd tops ? He has not shown much but a guy with one pass rushing move who can stuff the run at times when he's healthy...which is not a lot

to a 4-3 team he might look pretty good

i would start out asking for a second, if someone offered a 3rd, i'd maybe take it

[woodbuck27]

That's were I am at.
Then I hope they get a guy in the draft who changes their decision to one of deciding which of Neal and Perry is the better back-up.

Yes.

[smuggler]

Or.... we could switch to a 4-3

[Maxie the Taxi]

Or.... we could switch to a 4-3

Hmmm...

LDE -- Perry
LDT -- Daniels
RDT -- Pickett
RDE -- D. Jones

SAM -- Neal
MLB -- Lattimore
WLL -- Matthews

LCB -- Williams
RCB -- Shields
SS -- Burnett
FS -- Hayward

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

I have been getting into the draft a lot more this year then the last couple years and I must say I love the offensive prospects a lot more than the defensive prospects in the early rounds. With that said I would love to keep all our valuable defensive players if possible. Mike Neal actually really impressed me this past season. I think if we continue the transition of Mike Neal to OLB to can become the 8 to 10 sack guy we have wanted opposite Clay Matthews. I would love for them to then make the full transition of Nick Perry to DE. If we can do that and somehow keep Raji and Shields that would be the fastest way to improve the team. Losing Raji, Finley, Jones, needing a ILB, a SS, etc is to much in one offseason.


Safety: Burnett, mid/late round pick/Hyde

Corner: Shields, Williams, Hayward, House, Hyde/Bush

ILB: Hawk, mid/late round pick, Jones, Lattimore

OLB: Matthews, Neal, Palmer....

DE: Perry, Jones, Worthy, Daniels

NT: Raji, Boyd


Two players I love in the draft that would fit perfectly on our team is Jace Amaro TE and Brandin Cook WR. Add those two on offense and we would be a complete offense.....Great Qb, good rb, good wrs, good te, and pretty good ol.

[Bretsky]

I have been getting into the draft a lot more this year then the last couple years and I must say I love the offensive prospects a lot more than the defensive prospects in the early rounds. With that said I would love to keep all our valuable defensive players if possible. Mike Neal actually really impressed me this past season. I think if we continue the transition of Mike Neal to OLB to can become the 8 to 10 sack guy we have wanted opposite Clay Matthews. I would love for them to then make the full transition of Nick Perry to DE. If we can do that and somehow keep Raji and Shields that would be the fastest way to improve the team. Losing Raji, Finley, Jones, needing a ILB, a SS, etc is to much in one offseason.


Safety: Burnett, mid/late round pick/Hyde

Corner: Shields, Williams, Hayward, House, Hyde/Bush

ILB: Hawk, mid/late round pick, Jones, Lattimore

OLB: Matthews, Neal, Palmer....

DE: Perry, Jones, Worthy, Daniels

NT: Raji, Boyd


Two players I love in the draft that would fit perfectly on our team is Jace Amaro TE and Brandin Cook WR. Add those two on offense and we would be a complete offense.....Great Qb, good rb, good wrs, good te, and pretty good ol.


Jake Amaro is ok.....un spectacular but steady. I undoubtedly would not throw a 1st at him but he'd be a fine pick in round two or three.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

If we lose Raji, Neal, and Shields, I honestly believe that would hurt a lot more than losing Finley, Jones, Quarless, Starks, EDS, Flynn, and Kuhn combined. TT has shown the ability to replace offensive weapons at a fairly successful rate. I believe we would be scary good on offense if we add a TE and WR in the early rounds. Add two solid weapons to Rodgers, Lacey, Cobb, and Nelson and we could see the most balanced offense we have had since 2003. The hardest one in the group is going to be Raji though. Shields is our best corner and they have already have been talking to him about a extension and Neal has already said a couple times that he wants to come back next season and continue improving at OLB. Raji seems to be pulling a Greg Jennings this offseason though.....lucky us.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

Jake Amaro is ok.....un spectacular but steady. I undoubtedly would not throw a 1st at him but he'd be a fine pick in round two or three.

I think Amaro will turn out to be a fine pro esp teamed up with Rodgers. I actually like Eric Ebron more but I don't think he will be available at 21. If you want a TE in the second or third round C.J. Fiedorowicz would be a great pick. He is like 6'7 (great red zone target), good blocker, and has good hands. Not super fast though and not great after the catch.

[pbmax]

The Packers do not have a MLB on the roster. Neal would have TE coverage responsibilities and he cannot do that.

I don't see how people can praise Neal in coverage and claim Perry is stiff. Perry and Neal were interchangeable this year and that was an injury year for Perry. Neal might improve, might lose more weight, but there is not a lot of difference between Neal's first year at OLB and Perry's injured year. In fact, a number of Neal's plays in the backfield came when he was switched to DT and Datone Jones moved outside to OLB in the pass rush nickel.

Neal and Jones were so mediocre in their pass rush I am not sure which failure necessitated the move.

[smuggler]

Isn't Ebron basically a glorified receiver? I heard Amaro can actually block, but is not as good as a receiver.

[Bretsky]

Isn't Ebron basically a glorified receiver? I heard Amaro can actually block, but is not as good as a receiver.


Ebron is an ok blocker, very smooth route runner, and very high upside ....aka..very gifted
Amaro is a better blocker now....more consistent...will be fine....average upside.

Ebron is the guy you hope falls into your lap...along with Mosley in round one.
I'd look at the safety Prior as a nice backup plan if the guys with high ceilings are snapped up

Amaro probably will not be there round two but he's not a guy to get excited about at 21 IMO

I'd rather get another player in round one and then go with the Iowa TE in round 2.

[Bretsky]

The Packers do not have a MLB on the roster. Neal would have TE coverage responsibilities and he cannot do that.

I don't see how people can praise Neal in coverage and claim Perry is stiff. Perry and Neal were interchangeable this year and that was an injury year for Perry. Neal might improve, might lose more weight, but there is not a lot of difference between Neal's first year at OLB and Perry's injured year. In fact, a number of Neal's plays in the backfield came when he was switched to DT and Datone Jones moved outside to OLB in the pass rush nickel.

Neal and Jones were so mediocre in their pass rush I am not sure which failure necessitated the move.


To me, I saw a more gifted pass rusher with Neal and a guy who could play OLB. With Perry I saw a one trick pony pass rusher who can play the run.

[Bretsky]

I think Amaro will turn out to be a fine pro esp teamed up with Rodgers. I actually like Eric Ebron more but I don't think he will be available at 21. If you want a TE in the second or third round C.J. Fiedorowicz would be a great pick. He is like 6'7 (great red zone target), good blocker, and has good hands. Not super fast though and not great after the catch.


If no guys with upside are there at 21 I'm fine with trading down and picking up Amaro twn picks back if TT can swing that. I do like CJ as a Packer as well. He'd be a nice fit with Bostick.

[Bretsky]

If we lose Raji, Neal, and Shields, I honestly believe that would hurt a lot more than losing Finley, Jones, Quarless, Starks, EDS, Flynn, and Kuhn combined. TT has shown the ability to replace offensive weapons at a fairly successful rate. I believe we would be scary good on offense if we add a TE and WR in the early rounds. Add two solid weapons to Rodgers, Lacey, Cobb, and Nelson and we could see the most balanced offense we have had since 2003. The hardest one in the group is going to be Raji though. Shields is our best corner and they have already have been talking to him about a extension and Neal has already said a couple times that he wants to come back next season and continue improving at OLB. Raji seems to be pulling a Greg Jennings this offseason though.....lucky us.


Agree with you......but I don't think there is any way we lose Sheilds. He's getting resigned. Raji...torn on...he isn't set up to excel the way he's being used and is probably not worth the money he's going to get in FA to GB. I can roll either way with Neal.

TT's failed us in drafting defense; I hope we go get a couple average starting defensive players and do much of what you noted above in terms of keeping Shields and re tooling the offense a bit

[woodbuck27]

Agree with you......but I don't think there is any way we lose Sheilds. He's getting resigned. Raji...torn on...he isn't set up to excel the way he's being used and is probably not worth the money he's going to get in FA to GB. I can roll either way with Neal.

TT's failed us in drafting defense; I hope we go get a couple average starting defensive players and do much of what you noted above in terms of keeping Shields and re tooling the offense a bit

What if TT ( Russ Ball) have already insulted Sam Shields and his agent.

Sam Shields total intentions are really focused on that insult and getting out of Dodge /Green Bay?

[smuggler]

Then they still have the tag to operate with. If he simply won't sign anything after we tag him, we can trade him to another team. Although GB has said they are against a simple tag+trade, I think that they will tag a player they want to sign and would trade him anyway if there were no alternative.

[pbmax]

To me, I saw a more gifted pass rusher with Neal and a guy who could play OLB. With Perry I saw a one trick pony pass rusher who can play the run.

He is a sort of gifted pass rusher when he is lined up at DT, otherwise he looks just like Perry on the left. Perry on the right was a revelation.

[Patler]

What if TT ( Russ Ball) have already insulted Sam Shields and his agent.

Sam Shields total intentions are really focused on that insult and getting out of Dodge /Green Bay?

While every now and then you find a player who will cut off their nose to spite their face, it happens infrequently. Shields has shown no sign of that.

[woodbuck27]

While every now and then you find a player who will cut off their nose to spite their face, it happens infrequently. Shields has shown no sign of that.

Hi Patler:

This is a ? simply for you not me or this board and based in your personal integrity; unless you desire to post a personal and general position and "YOUR INTEGRITY".

Have you ever lost confidence in an employer?

How about in terms of any once formerly decent relationship?

Do you sacrifice your integrity in terms of what's right or wrong for you?

Sam Shields has been performing in a contract year.

He must do his very best no matter what his personal agenda is.

[Rastak]

While every now and then you find a player who will cut off their nose to spite their face, it happens infrequently. Shields has shown no sign of that.


Happens alot more than I would have expected. TI would assume this is just a big hypothetical....

[Smeefers]

I'm not to worried about our D line. As far as I'm concerned, any JAG could go in there and hold a couple blockers. No one is asking them to cut through to the QB, all they're asking is for them to hold their ground. If Dom Truly just wants them to be Oline eaters, there's no need to pay them any kind of money. There's plenty of tubbies out there looking for work. You don't break the bank on a position that you don't use. That would be like us paying top dollar for a RG or full back.

Every where I look, I'm told that in the 3-4, Linebacker is where it's at. Inside and out. If that's the case, We have one excellent player, one slightly above average player and two jokes. We need to shore up our LB core with solid talent. That's where the extra money should be spent. The rest of the D woes will take care of themselves if we have a solid rank of LBers.

[Patler]

Hi Patler:

This is a ? simply for you not me or this board and based in your personal integrity; unless you desire to post a personal and general position and "YOUR INTEGRITY".

Have you ever lost confidence in an employer?

How about in terms of any once formerly decent relationship?

Do you sacrifice your integrity in terms of what's right or wrong for you?

Sam Shields has been performing in a contract year.

He must do his very best no matter what his personal agenda is.

The Packers as an organization and Russ Ball as an individual are consistently rated at the very top for integrity and fairness in negotiations. I suspect any offers made to Shields have been fair and reasonable, even if low. Shields has not come across as the sort who can't take the pressure of a high level business negotiation. I think he understands (or his agent has skillfully convinced him) that there is no point in worrying about the preliminaries, only the end result matters. I think he is pushing his negotiation advantage of being a player the team can ill-afford to lose.

Some players have egos that have to be stroked with contracts made to look like best ever at their position, even if the details don't show that. I don't see anything from Shields that indicates he is one of them. I have seen only very matter of fact comments from him, and very few of those.

I see this situation different from the last three the Packers lost, Jenkins, Wells and Jennings. Jenkins and Wells never seemed happy in GB. Each seemed to feel slighted easily, whether it was playing time, challenges in camp, whatever, even though they faced nothing different than pro athletes face routinely. They were "business soft" for what is a very cold and harsh business. I felt Jennings would leave for several years, and said so here, because in spite of giving lip service to the team mentality, it seemed that he really didn't like sharing the spotlight, and catches, with a deep receiving corp in GB. I'm not at all suggesting they are bad people, or even wrong. It just seemed obvious that each needed to try something different. Longwell was the same with a desire to kick in better conditions. He complained annually about pro bowl slights for bad weather kickers.

I just don't see any of those red flags with Shields. He will leave GB if someone offers a blockbuster deal the Packers can't match, but I see no indication that he has closed the option of returning to GB.

[pbmax]

I'm not to worried about our D line. As far as I'm concerned, any JAG could go in there and hold a couple blockers. No one is asking them to cut through to the QB, all they're asking is for them to hold their ground. If Dom Truly just wants them to be Oline eaters, there's no need to pay them any kind of money. There's plenty of tubbies out there looking for work. You don't break the bank on a position that you don't use. That would be like us paying top dollar for a RG or full back.

Every where I look, I'm told that in the 3-4, Linebacker is where it's at. Inside and out. If that's the case, We have one excellent player, one slightly above average player and two jokes. We need to shore up our LB core with solid talent. That's where the extra money should be spent. The rest of the D woes will take care of themselves if we have a solid rank of LBers.

I would like a new big one, to pair up with Boyd as depth and to guard against Raji's departure. But as you point out, it doesn't need to be in the draft. After some misgivings mainly about Raji, I think their needs are safety and LBs first.

But I am still concerned about pass rush. Most other 3-4 teams get push from somewhere other than their OLBs. The Packers weren't getting consistent anything inside except for Daniels and he was free lancing a bit.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

If the packers want push from the dline they need to put Perry on the ground. He needs to put on some weight and go back to DE. Then somehow re-sign Raji and leave him at NT.....Do those two things and I think we have a much improved line and defense as a whole.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

The Packers as an organization and Russ Ball as an individual are consistently rated at the very top for integrity and fairness in negotiations. I suspect any offers made to Shields have been fair and reasonable, even if low. Shields has not come across as the sort who can't take the pressure of a high level business negotiation. I think he understands (or his agent has skillfully convinced him) that there is no point in worrying about the preliminaries, only the end result matters. I think he is pushing his negotiation advantage of being a player the team can ill-afford to lose.

Some players have egos that have to be stroked with contracts made to look like best ever at their position, even if the details don't show that. I don't see anything from Shields that indicates he is one of them. I have seen only very matter of fact comments from him, and very few of those.

I see this situation different from the last three the Packers lost, Jenkins, Wells and Jennings. Jenkins and Wells never seemed happy in GB. Each seemed to feel slighted easily, whether it was playing time, challenges in camp, whatever, even though they faced nothing different than pro athletes face routinely. They were "business soft" for what is a very cold and harsh business. I felt Jennings would leave for several years, and said so here, because in spite of giving lip service to the team mentality, it seemed that he really didn't like sharing the spotlight, and catches, with a deep receiving corp in GB. I'm not at all suggesting they are bad people, or even wrong. It just seemed obvious that each needed to try something different. Longwell was the same with a desire to kick in better conditions. He complained annually about pro bowl slights for bad weather kickers.

I just don't see any of those red flags with Shields. He will leave GB if someone offers a blockbuster deal the Packers can't match, but I see no indication that he has closed the option of returning to GB.

With Wells I think it was mostly about the money. I know Wells had times when he was upset because Spitz was starting ahead of him, but the last few years before he hit free agency he was the clear cut starter and even made the probowl once. The Rams offer made him one of the top paid centers in the league, something we never offered.

Jennings case really surprised me. We offered him a contract extension at or above his market value to stay with the team that drafted him a year before free agency. He had just won a superbowl two years before and was playing with an MVP QB in his prime. What else are you supposed to do to keep a player. Jennings turned out to be selfish and frankly a little fake. He always had this good guy persona when he was with our team but he was anything but that when he left. He threw his QB under a bus on the way out, complained about the spotlight and catches even though he had more than any other WR, and then accepted a similar offer from a rival team......WTF.

Jenkins was the only one I feel really bad about because of the year he was a free agent. Going into the 2011 season we were stacked and I think TT underrated his value to the team. Would we have hands down won the superbowl if we re-signed him? Nothing is ever certain, but we wouldn't have had a big hole on the dline if he did. What makes this worse is he gave Hawk like 30 something mil that same offseason. Jenkins also repeatedly told reporters during the season that his agent has not been approached by the team for an extension. I'm sure that contributed to his departure when the season was over.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

Agree with you......but I don't think there is any way we lose Sheilds. He's getting resigned. Raji...torn on...he isn't set up to excel the way he's being used and is probably not worth the money he's going to get in FA to GB. I can roll either way with Neal.

TT's failed us in drafting defense; I hope we go get a couple average starting defensive players and do much of what you noted above in terms of keeping Shields and re tooling the offense a bit

Well don't be so sure about Shields. They have been trying to re-sign Shields during the season and still no deal. It seems to me they are still far apart on the money. We are talking about TT here, do you really think he will budge? If he thinks Shields is worth 5-6 mil a year, and his agent thinks 7-8 mil a year that could be his ticket out. See fellow free agent BJ Raji.

Neal they should let walk IF he wants a big deal. He hasn't earned it. He has been in the league for four years but we have only been able to see him play two of those years (and only one at his new position). The other two were on the sidelines. We paid this guy money for two years to do nothing because he was always hurt. Had he stayed healthy we would have a better idea of his potential and were he fits on the team. Its only fair that he accepts a 2-3 year deal at about 2 mil a year to a) prove he can stay healthy, b) show improvement at OLB, and c) stay healthy (oh wait I said that). I like his potential but not enough to pay him big money.

[Striker]

Well don't be so sure about Shields. They have been trying to re-sign Shields during the season and still no deal. It seems to me they are still far apart on the money. We are talking about TT here, do you really think he will budge? If he thinks Shields is worth 5-6 mil a year, and his agent thinks 7-8 mil a year that could be his ticket out. See fellow free agent BJ Raji.

Neal they should let walk IF he wants a big deal. He hasn't earned it. He has been in the league for four years but we have only been able to see him play two of those years (and only one at his new position). The other two were on the sidelines. We paid this guy money for two years to do nothing because he was always hurt. Had he stayed healthy we would have a better idea of his potential and were he fits on the team. Its only fair that he accepts a 2-3 year deal at about 2 mil a year to a) prove he can stay healthy, b) show improvement at OLB, and c) stay healthy (oh wait I said that). I like his potential but not enough to pay him big money.

It wouldn't surprise me if the Packers were offering him the $4-$6 million dollar range, while the Packers are offering him somewhere in the $8 million range.

The question is if one of the teams with a lot of cap room will offer him that kind of money.

[Joemailman]

nm

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

It wouldn't surprise me if the Packers were offering him the $4-$6 million dollar range, while the Packers are offering him somewhere in the $8 million range.

The question is if one of the teams with a lot of cap room will offer him that kind of money.

Exactly. The best chance at re-signing Shields to a 4-6 mil/year type contract was in September/October. My gut feeling was that the closer he gets to free agency the more likely he is to test the market and the more it would cost to keep him. Almost February, not looking good.

A solid cover corner in the prime of his career has a lot of value. Shields has been playing solid football since his rookie year so teams know who he is and what he can do. Also, his speed is not hurting his cause.

[pbmax]

With Wells I think it was mostly about the money. I know Wells had times when he was upset because Spitz was starting ahead of him, but the last few years before he hit free agency he was the clear cut starter and even made the probowl once. The Rams offer made him one of the top paid centers in the league, something we never offered.

Jennings case really surprised me. We offered him a contract extension at or above his market value to stay with the team that drafted him a year before free agency. He had just won a superbowl two years before and was playing with an MVP QB in his prime. What else are you supposed to do to keep a player. Jennings turned out to be selfish and frankly a little fake. He always had this good guy persona when he was with our team but he was anything but that when he left. He threw his QB under a bus on the way out, complained about the spotlight and catches even though he had more than any other WR, and then accepted a similar offer from a rival team......WTF.

Jenkins was the only one I feel really bad about because of the year he was a free agent. Going into the 2011 season we were stacked and I think TT underrated his value to the team. Would we have hands down won the superbowl if we re-signed him? Nothing is ever certain, but we wouldn't have had a big hole on the dline if he did. What makes this worse is he gave Hawk like 30 something mil that same offseason. Jenkins also repeatedly told reporters during the season that his agent has not been approached by the team for an extension. I'm sure that contributed to his departure when the season was over.

Money is always a part of it but Wells commented about the slight of being benched for Spitz well before negotiations began and then again in his contract year. He could have been expressing his true feelings, it might have been a chip he used to motivate himself or it could have been part negotiating ploy (or all three). But he was not a happy camper and made it clear publicly.

Rosenhaus (Shields) generally tells his guys to shut up and not hold out or do anything dramatic while he becomes the public punching bag. So we could be set for trouble down the road, but nothing interesting has been said publicly yet.

The Packers have tended to lose front line guys who they don't get signed prior to FA at a more than average rate. I think its a definite sign of the Packers set price and the agent/player estimate are significantly far apart. The ones they get back (JJones and BJones) tend to have soft markets and their numbers come down. I don't remember the Packers coming back to the player and saying "here is what you asked for" in their last season.

Rodgers, Matthews, Burnett, Sitton, Jennings I and Hawk never got to that point. Thompson said the price was set for Woodson when they were told "this is what it would cost to get him in Green Bay". Packers were in a bit of a contest with someone (the Bills?) for Pickett but that is very rare. They are either going to meet your market ask or go elsewhere.

Unless Shields and Raji find the market less than ideal, my assumption is that they are gone. There are enough questions about Neal that he could be had for a middling second contract like the Jones guys.

[Patler]

Money is always a part of it but Wells commented about the slight of being benched for Spitz well before negotiations began and then again in his contract year. He could have been expressing his true feelings, it might have been a chip he used to motivate himself or it could have been part negotiating ploy (or all three). But he was not a happy camper and made it clear publicly.

That was why Wells' leaving seemed almost a forgone conclusion. He often mentioned the slight of being pushed aside for Spitz, even in his last year. All things being equal, maybe he would have stayed, maybe not; but the offer he got made it an easy choice for him. I don't think he had anything tugging at him to stay in GB, and would probably have left for equal money. (Just my opinion).



Rosenhaus (Shields) generally tells his guys to shut up and not hold out or do anything dramatic while he becomes the public punching bag. So we could be set for trouble down the road, but nothing interesting has been said publicly yet.

Rosenhaus has been much quieter in recent years. The Packers have often said that they actually enjoy dealing with him, because for the most part he is upfront and factual. He knows what the market is for his players. A lot of the FA's the Packers sign come from Rosenhaus, who said he likes sending players there because they get a fair chance to make the roster.

I think Shields will be in GB for 2014, either long term with a new contract or tagged for the year. I don't think they will let him walk this year.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

That was why Wells' leaving seemed almost a forgone conclusion. He often mentioned the slight of being pushed aside for Spitz, even in his last year. All things being equal, maybe he would have stayed, maybe not; but the offer he got made it an easy choice for him. I don't think he had anything tugging at him to stay in GB, and would probably have left for equal money. (Just my opinion).


Rosenhaus has been much quieter in recent years. The Packers have often said that they actually enjoy dealing with him, because for the most part he is upfront and factual. He knows what the market is for his players. A lot of the FA's the Packers sign come from Rosenhaus, who said he likes sending players there because they get a fair chance to make the roster.

I think Shields will be in GB for 2014, either long term with a new contract or tagged for the year. I don't think they will let him walk this year.

New contract for Shields maybe, but under the franchise tag? Doubt it. Tag for a corner is 11-12 million. Shields is not worth that kind of money even if for only a year. Only player I see that might be tagged is Raji. If they can tag him as DT then his number will be around 9 mil (not far off what they reportedly offered him). I think it would be dumb to just let Raji walk...Tag him and keep him for another year or trade him if possible. Seriously doubt Shields gets tagged and I seriously doubt Shields is coming back if he's not signed by the start of free agency. Clock is ticking for him to remain a packer imo.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

Money is always a part of it but Wells commented about the slight of being benched for Spitz well before negotiations began and then again in his contract year. He could have been expressing his true feelings, it might have been a chip he used to motivate himself or it could have been part negotiating ploy (or all three). But he was not a happy camper and made it clear publicly.

Rosenhaus (Shields) generally tells his guys to shut up and not hold out or do anything dramatic while he becomes the public punching bag. So we could be set for trouble down the road, but nothing interesting has been said publicly yet.

The Packers have tended to lose front line guys who they don't get signed prior to FA at a more than average rate. I think its a definite sign of the Packers set price and the agent/player estimate are significantly far apart. The ones they get back (JJones and BJones) tend to have soft markets and their numbers come down. I don't remember the Packers coming back to the player and saying "here is what you asked for" in their last season.

Rodgers, Matthews, Burnett, Sitton, Jennings I and Hawk never got to that point. Thompson said the price was set for Woodson when they were told "this is what it would cost to get him in Green Bay". Packers were in a bit of a contest with someone (the Bills?) for Pickett but that is very rare. They are either going to meet your market ask or go elsewhere.

Unless Shields and Raji find the market less than ideal, my assumption is that they are gone. There are enough questions about Neal that he could be had for a middling second contract like the Jones guys.

I agree. Once Shields and Raji hit the open market they will find a couple teams looking to sign them. Not many talented, athletic, 27 yo NT on the open market. And not many talented, athletic, super fast 26 yo cover corners on the open market. They will cash in either here or on another team. Neal I could see signing a Jones 3 mil per year type contract. If Raji plays hard ball slap him with the tag.

[woodbuck27]

Hmmm...

LDE -- Perry
LDT -- Daniels
RDT -- Pickett
RDE -- D. Jones

SAM -- Neal
MLB -- Lattimore
WLL -- Matthews

LCB -- Williams
RCB -- Shields
SS -- Burnett
FS -- Hayward

If Ryan Pickett has more left in his tank !?

If the guy's on the ends of the DL kick in in a bigger way (in 2014) !?

If Mike Neal demonstrates faith rewarded in terms of his upside !?

If Jamari Lattimore grows/produces more !?

If Clay Matthews concentrates more on football and less on his image and is available for 12-16 games !?

If Morgan Burnett rewards Ted Thompson for the contract that "he did sign" !?

If Casey Hayward can pick it up after his injury in 2013 and demonstrate his potential in the Packers defensive backfield !?

If Ted Thompson and Russ Ball can ink a happy; or lot's to $$$$$$$'s Sam "Big BUCKS" Shields $$$$$$$'s !?

If Tramon Williams accepts a pay cut with incentives !?

Then if we get 75% of the above... that might be very good, Maxie the Taxi.

GO PACK GO !

[Patler]

New contract for Shields maybe, but under the franchise tag? Doubt it. Tag for a corner is 11-12 million. Shields is not worth that kind of money even if for only a year. Only player I see that might be tagged is Raji. If they can tag him as DT then his number will be around 9 mil (not far off what they reportedly offered him). I think it would be dumb to just let Raji walk...Tag him and keep him for another year or trade him if possible. Seriously doubt Shields gets tagged and I seriously doubt Shields is coming back if he's not signed by the start of free agency. Clock is ticking for him to remain a packer imo.

You might be right. I see it differently, however. The Packers have shown a willingness to overpay players for a year or two, just not long term. Franchise tag for a corner has been projected at $11.25M for 2014. I think they could swallow that for a year in the same way they overpaid Finley for two years.

I think Raji played his way out of consideration for a franchise tag. If the guy disappears in his contract year, what's going to happen to him playing under the tag?

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

You might be right. I see it differently, however. The Packers have shown a willingness to overpay players for a year or two, just not long term. Franchise tag for a corner has been projected at $11.25M for 2014. I think they could swallow that for a year in the same way they overpaid Finley for two years.

I think Raji played his way out of consideration for a franchise tag. If the guy disappears in his contract year, what's going to happen to him playing under the tag?

Still don't think they will pay Shields close to 12 mil even if for only a year. He just isn't worth it....not even close.

You bring up a valid point about Raji disappearing in his contract year. He seemed to have the attitude that he disappears because the scheme doesn't allow him to shine (the same scheme he register 6 sacks with in 2010). If we tag him and he's forced to play another year under Capers will he do the same thing for another year? Possibly. It could go either way. We could tag him and some other team goes off his whole body of work and offers us a trade. Or we tag him and no team offers a trade. At that point does Raji risk not playing his ass off again? Consecutive years of lack luster play and pouting and another year removed from his prime might lose him millions on the open market the year after. I have a feeling he was hoping his lackluster effort this past year would be his ticket out.

"Effort will release it's reward only after you refuse to quit." - love that quote. Tag Raji imo.

[woodbuck27]

You might be right. I see it differently, however. The Packers have shown a willingness to overpay players for a year or two, just not long term. Franchise tag for a corner has been projected at $11.25M for 2014. I think they could swallow that for a year in the same way they overpaid Finley for two years.

I think Raji played his way out of consideration for a franchise tag. If the guy disappears in his contract year, what's going to happen to him playing under the tag?

Raji is history and Green Bay. Either that or TT and Russ ball get him very on the cheap.

Sam Shields will get his former offer upped but that may not be enough. It should have been a done deal by now.

It's not a done deal unless TT springs "$$$$$$$'s a boat load of cash $$$$$$$'s" for a serious need to retain Sam Shields or not. !? It's not looking good as it stands.

I hope that changes soon. Otherwise the next question is:

How easily can TT replace Sam Shields and an aging Tramon Williams?

A different question arises from that first one:

How close are we to seeing Ted Thompson forced to "Blow Up the Secondary"?

GO PACK GO !

[gbgary]

you can't fix every position in one year. if tt doesn't pay some of these guys for at least the short term, if they'll accept it, the d will be even weaker. if next season's faces on d are drastically different it's gonna be a long disappointing season.

[woodbuck27]

you can't fix every position in one year. if tt doesn't pay some of these guys for at least the short term, if they'll accept it, the d will be even weaker. if next season's faces on d are drastically different it's gonna be a long disappointing season.

TT has to simply tear up the old... REALLY OLD not a plan.

[pbmax]

You might be right. I see it differently, however. The Packers have shown a willingness to overpay players for a year or two, just not long term. Franchise tag for a corner has been projected at $11.25M for 2014. I think they could swallow that for a year in the same way they overpaid Finley for two years.

I think Raji played his way out of consideration for a franchise tag. If the guy disappears in his contract year, what's going to happen to him playing under the tag?


Still don't think they will pay Shields close to 12 mil even if for only a year. He just isn't worth it....not even close.

You bring up a valid point about Raji disappearing in his contract year. He seemed to have the attitude that he disappears because the scheme doesn't allow him to shine (the same scheme he register 6 sacks with in 2010).

While I am not high on Raji's future prospects here, his role in 2010 was decidedly different than this year. He was specifically asked to stay with his man in the traditional 3-4 lineman role. Which he did. And he was removed from nickel pass rush to limit his snaps. Its hard to hold his sack total against him when he wasn't on the field for passing downs.

And its not as if the Packers replaced his pass rush. Datone Jones became invisible as the year went on. Daniels came on but they had to resort to putting Neal back at DT at the end of the year.

Raji can be rightly said to be terrible at playing off blocks and getting too locked up with an O lineman. That is part of what makes him a bad fit in this defense. His strength is quickness and penetration and they asked him not to do those things. That plus his price makes me think he is gone. However, he is still apparently the second best big guy on the team (to Pickett) and that does give him some value to Thompson unless they are sold on Boyd.

[red]

does raji have value to the team if they let pickett walk and move raji full time to the NT?

if they leave him in his current role then he's just a giant waste of money, but could he become a solid NT, or have they already tried that and he failed?

[pbmax]

does raji have value to the team if they let pickett walk and move raji full time to the NT?

if they leave him in his current role then he's just a giant waste of money, but could he become a solid NT, or have they already tried that and he failed?

I am not sure he wants the job but physically he can do it. Pickett had much the same rep coming out of college and to the Packers. Had not quite realized his potential, too eager to take off, suspect motor. He was considered an expensive and not quite as rock steady replacement for Grady Jackson.

So he could grow into the role. But I think Raji needs a disappointment in his career first before he is going to be ready for that. I think he wants a payday and 1 gapping with pass rush duties in a 4-3 is his ideal situation now.

Neither Pick not Raji are the physical ideal for their positions in the 3-4. Starting over might not be a bad thing.

[woodbuck27]

While I am not high on Raji's future prospects here, his role in 2010 was decidedly different than this year. He was specifically asked to stay with his man in the traditional 3-4 lineman role. Which he did. And he was removed from nickel pass rush to limit his snaps. Its hard to hold his sack total against him when he wasn't on the field for passing downs.

And its not as if the Packers replaced his pass rush. Datone Jones became invisible as the year went on. Daniels came on but they had to resort to putting Neal back at DT at the end of the year.

Raji can be rightly said to be terrible at playing off blocks and getting too locked up with an O lineman. That is part of what makes him a bad fit in this defense. His strength is quickness and penetration and they asked him not to do those things. That plus his price makes me think he is gone. However, he is still apparently the second best big guy on the team (to Pickett) and that does give him some value to Thompson unless they are sold on Boyd.

RE: UFA B.J. Raji:

A fifty pond bag of potatoes has more value to Ted Thompson unless a) and one of b) and/or c) happen:

a) He's paid more money that $8 Million$ /Season...or less plus performance based incentives.

B) He's moved to NT

c) TT forces MM to force DC Dom Capers to go to a Base 4-3 'D' or Fires him !

[red]

Neither Pick not Raji are the physical ideal for their positions in the 3-4. Starting over might not be a bad thing.

what do you mean by that PB?

not fat enough, or not tall enough?

i don't see anything in the draft that looks like a decent NT

however, there is one free agent that just jumped off the screen at me, and he wouldn't cost a lot. a guy i loved coming out of college, but its never clicked in the pros

mount cody is a free agent

thats a guy that can eat up multiple blockers. i saw him push back a quadruple team in college

[call_me_ishmael]

I would like a big 6'7"ish NT. Yes, they are rare, and it's questionable whether you want height there. I want long arms and power. Size is gonna win. It really is too bad JH didn't work out. 320 and 6'5" would have been an amazing NT.

[woodbuck27]

I would like a big 6'7"ish NT. Yes, they are rare, and it's questionable whether you want height there. I want long arms and power. Size is gonna win. It really is too bad JH didn't work out. 320 and 6'5" would have been an amazing NT.

Really tall ie 6'-7 " is a good thing?

Please explain why you believe that's the case.

Thanks.

[call_me_ishmael]

Really tall ie 6'-7 " is a good thing?

Please explain why you believe that's the case.

Thanks.

I'd settle for 6'4" or 6'5". Just stick of these squatty bastards. The taller they are, the longer arms they are. Natural power. I have never been a fan of the short NTs some around here like. I recall discussing with Lurker about how he thought it was desireable. I don't really think that it is. Jay Ratliff was quite tall, for example, and there have been many stud NTs that are tall. John Henderson is one that comes to mind. When they are tall with long arms, weight is less of an issue IMO.

I tend to think the days of really fat linemen are coming to an end. A tall-but-fit 310 lbs would be more than sufficient in the middle I would think.

[smuggler]

It makes sense... if a guy has a really broad reach and good hand technique, he covers more ground than a guy with a lesser wingspan, no matter how fatty he is. The higher center of gravity is definitely not desirable, however.

[pbmax]

what do you mean by that PB?

not fat enough, or not tall enough?

i don't see anything in the draft that looks like a decent NT

however, there is one free agent that just jumped off the screen at me, and he wouldn't cost a lot. a guy i loved coming out of college, but its never clicked in the pros

mount cody is a free agent

thats a guy that can eat up multiple blockers. i saw him push back a quadruple team in college

Not stout enough. Both are listed at 6' 2". You could go taller and get Wilfork (also need more weight) or shorter and get Hayward at the same weight.

Both Pickett (in his youth) and Raji (current) were considered more penetrators and playmakers than stout NT, unmovable NT.

Pickett sort of morphed into an unmovable object for a few years but he has been getting shoved around in the last couple of years. Even in 2010, Raji has not been stout enough for NT in run D.

[pbmax]

I'd settle for 6'4" or 6'5". Just stick of these squatty bastards. The taller they are, the longer arms they are. Natural power. I have never been a fan of the short NTs some around here like. I recall discussing with Lurker about how he thought it was desireable. I don't really think that it is. Jay Ratliff was quite tall, for example, and there have been many stud NTs that are tall. John Henderson is one that comes to mind. When they are tall with long arms, weight is less of an issue IMO.

I tend to think the days of really fat linemen are coming to an end. A tall-but-fit 310 lbs would be more than sufficient in the middle I would think.

You need to be a monster like Wilfork to make it work. You cannot simply be taller as the leverage works against you. You also need heft.

[bobblehead]

What if TT ( Russ Ball) have already insulted Sam Shields and his agent.

Sam Shields total intentions are really focused on that insult and getting out of Dodge /Green Bay?

HOLY REACH!! :-D

Is there ANY evidence to that or is it slightly possible your hatred of all things TT is clouding your judgement? Rosendick is Shields' agent, so if anyone is being unreasonable I would shade it that way.

[mraynrand]

I think Shields will be in GB for 2014, either long term with a new contract or tagged for the year. I don't think they will let him walk this year.

I don't see how they can let him go when he is one of the very few (3-4 at most) playmakers on the defense.

[mraynrand]

HOLY REACH!! :-D

Is there ANY evidence to that or is it slightly possible your hatred of all things TT is clouding your judgement? Rosendick is Shields' agent, so if anyone is being unreasonable I would shade it that way.

now you did it. Here comes the lecture...

[bobblehead]

It wouldn't surprise me if the Packers were offering him the $4-$6 million dollar range, while the Packers are offering him somewhere in the $8 million range.

The question is if one of the teams with a lot of cap room will offer him that kind of money.

I think he is being offered WAY more than 4-6. I would almost definitely think TT has offered him close to 8. I think he is being offered a contract similar to what TWill got.

[bobblehead]

I agree. Once Shields and Raji hit the open market they will find a couple teams looking to sign them. Not many talented, athletic, 27 yo NT on the open market. And not many talented, athletic, super fast 26 yo cover corners on the open market. They will cash in either here or on another team. Neal I could see signing a Jones 3 mil per year type contract. If Raji plays hard ball slap him with the tag.

Actually there are a ton of DL on the market this year. That is our best chance to get Raji back, but I still think they let him walk and push for Randy Starks. If not him, someone else who is just as effective as Raji, but more reasonable in his demands.

[bobblehead]

Still don't think they will pay Shields close to 12 mil even if for only a year. He just isn't worth it....not even close.



You must have been watching other teams. Shields was a legit shutdown guy this year. I still think if he doesn't go down, we beat SF.

[bobblehead]

now you did it. Here comes the lecture...

Other than KY's icebowl post I never read anything over 8 lines long.

[Smidgeon]

Hmmm...

LDE -- Perry
LDT -- Daniels
RDT -- Pickett
RDE -- D. Jones

SAM -- Neal
MLB -- Lattimore
WLL -- Matthews

LCB -- Williams
RCB -- Shields
SS -- Burnett
FS -- Hayward

If the Packers went 4-3, I think they'd keep Raji.

But in other news, the more time I take away from the season and the more time I've had to ruminate on the defense, the more I'm convinced that the defensive failings aren't on Capers but on the crapshoot of a draft. Two years ago, TT drafted for defense to replenish the talent. It hasn't worked so far:

Nick Perry: injuries have clouded his impact, but it's possible he turns into something considering his ability to rush from the right. Verdict: Maybe
Jerel Worthy: zero impact
Casey Hayward: playmaker his first year, but lost the entirety of his second year. Can he put together a solid sophomore year in his third year in the league?
Mike Daniels: consistent rush and likely the focus on the d-line of offenses, but in my opinion not because he's dominant but because there's no one dominant on the line. He could even get better.
Jerron McMillian: swing and a miss, but one I had hope for after seeing him in his rookie year
Terrell Manning: swing and a miss

Six picks in the first five rounds and all defense. And Daniels and Hayward are the only ones who even remotely qualify as playmaker from this draft, and I still wouldn't classify either as a difference maker (I tend to want to see it for a couple years before anointing anyone).

Of course TT is accountable for the draft talent, but I'm not going to the end of saying that I think he has to produce more talent or else (yet). Everyone makes bad picks and has off years. Here's hoping he can get some better talent in this upcoming draft and that the talent he has drafted can stay healthy. Matthews, Hayward, and Perry all remaining healthy would have made an impact. And maybe even Worthy, although I don't know what he's going to offer this team...

PostScript: I still find it hard to believe that the entire 2010 draft class is still on the team, considering the turnover rate and how likely it is for picks to be busts. Yes, Newhouse, Wilson, and Starks are probably all gone this year, but all seven of the players have started a stretch of games for the Packers in their careers. Makes the 2011 and 2012 classes seem bereft of talent in comparison, but the 2011 and 2012 classes are probably closer to the norm across the NFL. Time for the odds to work in our favor this year: great draft class and no injuries.

[call_me_ishmael]

If a guy is gonna be a star, you'll see it right away. They'll be raw but at least flash brilliance on a regular basis.

The hope with a lot of these guys is they can become average to above average players. Worthy is a lot like Raji to be honest. Both have "rare" burst but are "lazy"and prone to "take plays off".

[Bossman641]

I'd hate to lose Neal, but I could easily see him being offered a big deal elsewhere and jump on it. Clay and Perry are both basically guaranteed to miss 3-4 games a year so that 3rd LB spot is very important.

[call_me_ishmael]

I'd hate to lose Neal, but I could easily see him being offered a big deal elsewhere and jump on it. Clay and Perry are both basically guaranteed to miss 3-4 games a year so that 3rd LB spot is very important.

He's not gonna get offered a big contract. He'll get a Brad Jones contract and be back if we want him. He is a JAG right now.

[Striker]

If a guy is gonna be a star, you'll see it right away. They'll be raw but at least flash brilliance on a regular basis.

The hope with a lot of these guys is they can become average to above average players. Worthy is a lot like Raji to be honest. Both have "rare" burst but are "lazy"and prone to "take plays off".

I don't think you can really make that call on Worthy at the moment. The injury and recovery destroyed any impact he would have this season. We'll see if he can come into camp ready to play.

[Zool]

He's not gonna get offered a big contract. He'll get a Brad Jones contract and be back if we want him. He is a JAG right now.

Let me direct you to: Walden, Eric 4 years 16mil.

[Smeefers]

That was why Wells' leaving seemed almost a forgone conclusion. He often mentioned the slight of being pushed aside for Spitz, even in his last year. All things being equal, maybe he would have stayed, maybe not; but the offer he got made it an easy choice for him. I don't think he had anything tugging at him to stay in GB, and would probably have left for equal money. (Just my opinion).




Rosenhaus has been much quieter in recent years. The Packers have often said that they actually enjoy dealing with him, because for the most part he is upfront and factual. He knows what the market is for his players. A lot of the FA's the Packers sign come from Rosenhaus, who said he likes sending players there because they get a fair chance to make the roster.

I think Shields will be in GB for 2014, either long term with a new contract or tagged for the year. I don't think they will let him walk this year.

Just to get in on the Wells conversation - He wouldn't of been benched if he had played better than Spitz. I remember thinking that Spitz was hand over fist better than Wells when he started over him, then he got hurt and never got back to his potential. Meanwhile, getting benched really lit a fire under Wells and he improved remarkably. It was a shame to loose him, but anyone who is willing to sit on his laurels isn't worth keeping. You have to fight for your job and I don't think Wells really wanted to do that and now that he's got the cash, he's a defacto center who hasn't been back to the pro bowl...

[Smeefers]

If the Packers went 4-3, I think they'd keep Raji.

But in other news, the more time I take away from the season and the more time I've had to ruminate on the defense, the more I'm convinced that the defensive failings aren't on Capers but on the crapshoot of a draft. Two years ago, TT drafted for defense to replenish the talent. It hasn't worked so far:

Nick Perry: injuries have clouded his impact, but it's possible he turns into something considering his ability to rush from the right. Verdict: Maybe
Jerel Worthy: zero impact
Casey Hayward: playmaker his first year, but lost the entirety of his second year. Can he put together a solid sophomore year in his third year in the league?
Mike Daniels: consistent rush and likely the focus on the d-line of offenses, but in my opinion not because he's dominant but because there's no one dominant on the line. He could even get better.
Jerron McMillian: swing and a miss, but one I had hope for after seeing him in his rookie year
Terrell Manning: swing and a miss

Six picks in the first five rounds and all defense. And Daniels and Hayward are the only ones who even remotely qualify as playmaker from this draft, and I still wouldn't classify either as a difference maker (I tend to want to see it for a couple years before anointing anyone).

Of course TT is accountable for the draft talent, but I'm not going to the end of saying that I think he has to produce more talent or else (yet). Everyone makes bad picks and has off years. Here's hoping he can get some better talent in this upcoming draft and that the talent he has drafted can stay healthy. Matthews, Hayward, and Perry all remaining healthy would have made an impact. And maybe even Worthy, although I don't know what he's going to offer this team...

PostScript: I still find it hard to believe that the entire 2010 draft class is still on the team, considering the turnover rate and how likely it is for picks to be busts. Yes, Newhouse, Wilson, and Starks are probably all gone this year, but all seven of the players have started a stretch of games for the Packers in their careers. Makes the 2011 and 2012 classes seem bereft of talent in comparison, but the 2011 and 2012 classes are probably closer to the norm across the NFL. Time for the odds to work in our favor this year: great draft class and no injuries.

I really have to disagree with you that Daniels and Hayward remotely qualify as playmakers. 6 sacks for Daniels and solid play puts him in Jenkins Territory. Someone you'd definitely miss if he left. He's going to get a lot more time playing and is the heir apparent to Pickett. Shields has been a fantastic corner and still has room to grow and improve. Otherwise you're pretty spot on.

[red]

Actually there are a ton of DL on the market this year. That is our best chance to get Raji back, but I still think they let him walk and push for Randy Starks. If not him, someone else who is just as effective as Raji, but more reasonable in his demands.

i don't know about randy starks

first, he's on the wrong side of 30. and as i've stated many times, TT seems to think the 30 barrier applies to all positions, not just RB
second, he's going to cost you some good coin. this last season his cap number was 8.5 million
third, is he gonna be a NT or a DE? imo he's way too small to be a NT. and as a DE he only brings an average of about 4-4.5 sacks per season to the table

is a DE that can get you 3-5 sacks a season worth 6-9 million a year. to me he's not worth it

and do we even need another DE? we got a bunch of those, what we don't have are NT. and like i said, starks at 305 just isn't gonna cut it at NT imo

[Patler]

I haven't given up on Worthy just yet. He did play quite a bit as a rookie and had a couple sacks at least. This year was a complete washout due to the knee injury at the end of 2012. Daniels made a big jump from year 1 to year 2. I hope something at least somewhat similar can happen with Worthy next year. We can hope, anyway.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

You must have been watching other teams. Shields was a legit shutdown guy this year. I still think if he doesn't go down, we beat SF.

Get real. Shields is not worth anything near 12 mil/year. Sam is good not great and certainly not "a legit shutdown guy." Shields doesn't take away half the field.....those are the guys you pay 12 mil/year for.

[mraynrand]

Get real. Shields is not worth anything near 12 mil/year. Sam is good not great and certainly not "a legit shutdown guy." Shields doesn't take away half the field.....those are the guys you pay 12 mil/year for.

Well, how many legit shutdown guys are in the league these days. Maybe one or two? Shields is extremely valuable to the Packers given the division they play in; he's probably the second or third most valuable guy on the defense. 12 million? Hard to think anyone will give him that much, but there are crazy stupid GMs out there. He's worth 9 mil, 20-30 guaranteed.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

Well, how many legit shutdown guys are in the league these days. Maybe one or two? Shields is extremely valuable to the Packers given the division they play in; he's probably the second or third most valuable guy on the defense. 12 million? Hard to think anyone will give him that much, but there are crazy stupid GMs out there. He's worth 9 mil, 20-30 guaranteed.

9 mil? Ummm no. Still to high. I wouldn't pay him over 7. Shields is a very good player, but he's not that good.

[mraynrand]

9 mil? Ummm no. Still to high. I wouldn't pay him over 7. Shields is a very good player, but he's not that good.

you may be closer to what the Packers are willing to pay than I am. I'm less than objective because I love that Shields comes up big a lot when they need him, especially against the Bears.

[bobblehead]

i don't know about randy starks

first, he's on the wrong side of 30. and as i've stated many times, TT seems to think the 30 barrier applies to all positions, not just RB
second, he's going to cost you some good coin. this last season his cap number was 8.5 million
third, is he gonna be a NT or a DE? imo he's way too small to be a NT. and as a DE he only brings an average of about 4-4.5 sacks per season to the table

is a DE that can get you 3-5 sacks a season worth 6-9 million a year. to me he's not worth it

and do we even need another DE? we got a bunch of those, what we don't have are NT. and like i said, starks at 305 just isn't gonna cut it at NT imo

He is an end, and he also is good at eating up blockers. I watched a handful of Miami games this year and I like what I saw. I think you land him for 5mill a year and he is a balanced player that helps a team.

[bobblehead]

Get real. Shields is not worth anything near 12 mil/year. Sam is good not great and certainly not "a legit shutdown guy." Shields doesn't take away half the field.....those are the guys you pay 12 mil/year for.

Alshon Jeffries and AJ Green had a ton of HUGE games this year. Shields was a rock on both of them. 12 mil/year...probably not, but 8-9 is likely in my book. IMO shields is a top 10 in the NFL corner right now, and if our D starts playing better everyone will become aware of it.

[bobblehead]

9 mil? Ummm no. Still to high. I wouldn't pay him over 7. Shields is a very good player, but he's not that good.

I have a pretty good track record on guessing guys worths. I had Grant pegged when everyone thought I was crazy. I guarantee that 28 teams would pay sam over 7 mil/year...Just like I guarantee that CJ Wilson starts for someone next year (should be us).

[red]

if we give sam 9 million a year, all of a sudden we have the highest paid CB tandem in the NFL

on one the worst secondaries in the nfl

does that make any sense?

[KYPack]

I haven't given up on Worthy just yet. He did play quite a bit as a rookie and had a couple sacks at least. This year was a complete washout due to the knee injury at the end of 2012. Daniels made a big jump from year 1 to year 2. I hope something at least somewhat similar can happen with Worthy next year. We can hope, anyway.

I wuz gonna give you a jolt on that one, Patler.

I watched some of those game synopsis shows on NFLN and paid close attention to Worthy. Man, he didn't do shit. but I just looked up his stat line. 2.5 sacks. I have absolutely no recall of that. He was listed as a starter in 4 games, once again, don't recall that shit at all.

The big negative was his activity. He had one move. he would attack with one arm and try to turn his body, make himself skinny and then slip into the play that way. That just don't work for an NFL 5 tech. But... he was a feakin' rook. He has to work hard, learn some tricks and get violent with his hands if he will ever hope to make it in the league. The 3rd year is supposed to be a big deal, maybe he will make the big leap. Trgo has got to get the kid going if we will ever have some production from him.

This research puts me in the "wait and see" column, too.

[bobblehead]

if we give sam 9 million a year, all of a sudden we have the highest paid CB tandem in the NFL

on one the worst secondaries in the nfl

does that make any sense?

Well, when you consider our safeties...yes.

[mraynrand]

Well, when you consider our safeties...yes.

and lack of pass rush

[smuggler]

and lack of pass rush

x1000

[Patler]

I wuz gonna give you a jolt on that one, Patler.

I watched some of those game synopsis shows on NFLN and paid close attention to Worthy. Man, he didn't do shit. but I just looked up his stat line. 2.5 sacks. I have absolutely no recall of that. He was listed as a starter in 4 games, once again, don't recall that shit at all.

The big negative was his activity. He had one move. he would attack with one arm and try to turn his body, make himself skinny and then slip into the play that way. That just don't work for an NFL 5 tech. But... he was a feakin' rook. He has to work hard, learn some tricks and get violent with his hands if he will ever hope to make it in the league. The 3rd year is supposed to be a big deal, maybe he will make the big leap. Trgo has got to get the kid going if we will ever have some production from him.

This research puts me in the "wait and see" column, too.

He actually played a lot of snaps as a rookie, just didn't make much of an impression. He might never be anything, but he must have some potential because they sure gave him opportunities in 2012.

[run pMc]

Agree with KY on Worthy, although I've probably been less kind than others on Worthy. I didn't see much his rookie year that gave me hope he could be a keeper. Comparing rookie years, I think Datone Jones looked better, honestly. This year I figured the injury would have hindered any real production, but if nothing else getting him back on the field likely gave him confidence in his knee. Agree Trgovac needs to teach him to play in the pros -- this is a big year for Worthy. Assuming he's healthy, the light has to go on for him.

IIRC his sacks were hustle/coverage sacks, not something where he flat out beat an OL. I saw a lot of thrashing around but not a lot of pressure, and it seemed like he could be moved out of his gap and run on.

Save me a seat in the "wait and see" lounge.

[pbmax]

if we give sam 9 million a year, all of a sudden we have the highest paid CB tandem in the NFL

on one the worst secondaries in the nfl

does that make any sense?

For what its worth, Football Outsiders agrees with you, they aren't too high on either this year. However, they cannot tease out safety help from CB play and they cannot count pass rush (unless its a sack) effects on DB coverages.

The uncertainty makes me cautious about offering him 11 or 12 million, but he is worth Tramon's deal at around $9 mil per.

[pbmax]

He actually played a lot of snaps as a rookie, just didn't make much of an impression. He might never be anything, but he must have some potential because they sure gave him opportunities in 2012.

That is what worried me about him. He played a lot, even was a backup 5 tech in base by midseason in addition to his rotation in pass rush nickel.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

if we give sam 9 million a year, all of a sudden we have the highest paid CB tandem in the NFL

on one the worst secondaries in the nfl

does that make any sense?

No Kidding...way to many players paid well on defense to be as bad as they are. More money needs to go to the offense since they carry the team year in year out. Williams is over paid and has been for a few years, Burnett is over paid, Hawk WAS over paid and still might be, Brad Jones is over paid, Pickett was over paid the last couple years, Bush is over paid, heck even MD Jennings was over paid (shouldn't even be in the league). Everyone else is on a rookie deal still. Only player not over paid is Matthews and he barely stays on the field anymore. Not saying Shields is a bad player but lets not get carried anyway....the guy is good but not great. I don't mind paying guys to keep them, but just make sure you're paying for production is all I'm saying.

Cobb, Nelson, and James Jones are all under paid and they have been carrying our team since they arrived. If you want to pay Shields 9 mil/year fine, but then you have to start axing other high paid under performers on defense. I don't want Shields contract to come at the expense of keeping Cobb or Nelson next season for example.

[red]

For what its worth, Football Outsiders agrees with you, they aren't too high on either this year. However, they cannot tease out safety help from CB play and they cannot count pass rush (unless its a sack) effects on DB coverages.

The uncertainty makes me cautious about offering him 11 or 12 million, but he is worth Tramon's deal at around $9 mil per.

i was thinking about his a bit last night too

we run more of a zone correct? with some man to man sprinkled in. but its mostly zone right? thats why we have cb's letting guys run past them thinking there is a safety their to pick them up, and they rarely are. or a cb letting a wr run accross the middle of the field when there's no one there

i mean, we run mostly zone coverage, correct. or am i off on that?

if we are running zone, then whats the point of having two very highly paid/skilled cb's on the team, when the whole secondary is only as strong as its weakest link?

you could have deon and revis in their primes out there, if the safeties behind them are off in la la land, then its not gonna matter how good those cb's are

we saw so many blown assignments and miscommunications involving shields and tramon and the safeties this year that i don't know if either one is worth 9 million a year.

would we have been any better or any worse off with a couple of 3 million dollar CB's out there? probably not imo

[red]

Cobb, Nelson, and James Jones are all under paid and they have been carrying our team since they arrived. If you want to pay Shields 9 mil/year fine, but then you have to start axing other high paid under performers on defense. I don't want Shields contract to come at the expense of keeping Cobb or Nelson next season for example.

i said during the season, before tramon put together a couple nice games. that i thought the team could only afford 1 of tramon or shields. if they want to keep tramon, then shields should be allowed to leave. if they sign shields to a big deal, then they need to release tramon.

i said at the time, and i still say now, that the team should release tramon and give shields his money

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

i said during the season, before tramon put together a couple nice games. that i thought the team could only afford 1 of tramon or shields. if they want to keep tramon, then shields should be allowed to leave. if they sign shields to a big deal, then they need to release tramon.

i said at the time, and i still say now, that the team should release tramon and give shields his money

I completely agree. Shields, House, Hayward, and Hyde would still be very solid. While you're at it put Burnett on the same flight as Tramon.

[red]

I completely agree. Shields, House, Hayward, and Hyde would still be very solid. While you're at it put Burnett on the same flight as Tramon.

yeah, i'm starting to think that signing a vet free agent safety and drafting one in the 1st or second round might be the way to go

burnett was really bad this year. add in the fact that he was calling out all the coverage adjustments and getting the seconday lined up right (at least thats what i remember reading). him being in the wrong place all the time, and other people being in the wrong place all the time, makes me think that a lot of the problems we saw in the secondary came from one guy, burnett

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

yeah, i'm starting to think that signing a vet free agent safety and drafting one in the 1st or second round might be the way to go

burnett was really bad this year. add in the fact that he was calling out all the coverage adjustments and getting the seconday lined up right (at least thats what i remember reading). him being in the wrong place all the time, and other people being in the wrong place all the time, makes me think that a lot of the problems we saw in the secondary came from one guy, burnett

Easily the player least deserving of his contract this past season (not including injured players). MD Jennings sucked just as bad but at least he wasn't getting paid. Really bad deal were made with both Burnett and Brad Jones.

[3irty1]

We've got little choice but to take our lumps with Burnett. We NEED him to actually be good. He certainly has the tools.

I think I don't think Shields is worth Tramon 2010 money. but neither is Tramon. Ideally this is a Hawk/Jones situation where everyone gets a fair deal based on what is reasonable to expect going forward.

[Joemailman]

Burnett is a pretty good player who needs to bounce back from a bad year. Jennings on the other hand is not an NFL-caliber starting safety. He has to be replaced. I think they can afford to keep both Shields and Tramon. I would probably try to restructure Tramon's contract, giving him an extension and reducing the 2014 salary cap hit a bit. TT needs to find a way to get Shields signed. I think he will.

[Patler]

Brad Jones contract is barely significant in the overall scheme of things. $2.5M against the cap in 2013, $2M in dead money if they cut him before 2014, $3.9 if they keep him. Final year at $4.8, or $1M if they cut him. I suspect he will either be a good player worth the $4.8M, or he won't see 2015 with GB because it is so cheap to cut him. Heck, he might not see 2014.

Burnett is too expensive to cut for several years ($6.6 dead money in 2014). He cost $3.2M in 2013, will cost $4.8M this year and $5.2M in 2015 (or $5M in dead money).

[red]

Burnett is a pretty good player who needs to bounce back from a bad year. Jennings on the other hand is not an NFL-caliber starting safety. He has to be replaced. I think they can afford to keep both Shields and Tramon. I would probably try to restructure Tramon's contract, giving him an extension and reducing the 2014 salary cap hit a bit. TT needs to find a way to get Shields signed. I think he will.

joe, i like you. you're one of my favorite posters

but for the last couple of days, i haven't been able to agree with anything you've said. in fact every time you post, i want to reach into the screen and punch you

i can't help but think it has something to do with your avatar, looking at it makes my blood boil and makes me want to go on a killing spree

i think you should be forced to change it seeings how it is such an objectionable, disgusting picture

[Rodgers12]

Shields, House, Hayward, and Hyde would still be very solid. While you're at it put Burnett on the same flight as Tramon.

Solid? No bleeping way. Shields, House, Hayward and Hyde would make Jay Cutler look like Lorenzo.

Shields plays good at time but he's no shutdown corner (too inconsistent). House? Jarrett Fucking Bush bypassed him on the depth chart for fuck's sake. Hayward can't play outside and he's injury-prone. Hyde's a backup safety who played corner by default last season.

The NFL is still a passing league. You can't have enough good corners. Williams was not only the Packers' best corner last season, he was also their best defender. Instead of releasing Williams, Teddy should add a shutdown corner in addition to resigning Shields.

It makes no sense to release T-Will. Even with his $9.5 M cap figure accounted for, the Packers still have approximately $28 M under the blue sky. Take away Williams, and who the bleep replace him?

Hyde? House? Jay Cutler is reading this and he's going LOL.

[red]

Solid? No bleeping way. Shields, House, Hayward and Hyde would make Jay Cutler look like Lorenzo.

Shields plays good at time but he's no shutdown corner (too inconsistent). House? Jarrett Fucking Bush bypassed him on the depth chart for fuck's sake. Hayward can't play outside and he's injury-prone. Hyde's a backup safety who played corner by default last season.

The NFL is still a passing league. You can't have enough good corners. Williams was not only the Packers' best corner last season, he was also their best defender. Instead of releasing Williams, Teddy should add a shutdown corner in addition to resigning Shields.

It makes no sense to release T-Will. Even with his $9.5 M cap figure accounted for, the Packers still have approximately $28 M under the blue sky. Take away Williams, and who the bleep replace him?

Hyde? House? Jay Cutler is reading this and he's going LOL.

and we don't play a system that requires shutdown corners, and even if we did, tramon is not one of them

jay cuter looks at out safeties and going LOL, because all he has to do is throw deep everytime

of course, as packer fans, we just have to look at cutler and we go LOL

[Joemailman]

joe, i like you. you're one of my favorite posters

but for the last couple of days, i haven't been able to agree with anything you've said. in fact every time you post, i want to reach into the screen and punch you

i can't help but think it has something to do with your avatar, looking at it makes my blood boil and makes me want to go on a killing spree

i think you should be forced to change it seeings how it is such an objectionable, disgusting picture

I've been waiting for someone to say something, especially since I started the Fire Slocum thread. :lol: I'll be changing it. I'm surprised Woody's epic meltdown wasn't directed at me.

[Bretsky]

I've been waiting for someone to say something, especially since I started the Fire Slocum thread. :lol: I'll be changing it. I'm surprised Woody's epic meltdown wasn't directed at me.


Every time I look at that avatar I feel more stupid then the minute before
If that avatar remains I'm making one with Hoody Genius so you guys can look at him and get smarter !

[Joemailman]

Better?

[red]

Every time I look at that avatar I feel more stupid then the minute before
If that avatar remains I'm making one with Hoody Genius so you guys can look at him and get smarter !

one step ahead of you b

my new one should help offset his a bit

[red]

Better?

no

there's a fucking bear in your picture

the only time its acceptable to have a bear in your av, is if it looks like he's getting butt fucked by KGB

[Rodgers12]

and we don't play a system that requires shutdown corners, and even if we did, tramon is not one of them

jay cuter looks at out safeties and going LOL, because all he has to do is throw deep everytime

of course, as packer fans, we just have to look at cutler and we go LOL

Williams is not a shutdown corner but he sure came close to being one last season. He will turn 31 in March, but I seem to recall some old-timer named Charles Woodson being named defensive player of the year at the tender age of 30-something.

To cut a good corner in a passing league just to save $9.5 M when you have $28 M and no bona fide replacement is mindboggling. Now if Thompson can pull a rabbit out of a hat and trade for Dick Sherman, releasing Williams might be reasonable.

[Joemailman]

no

there's a fucking bear in your picture

the only time its acceptable to have a bear in your av, is if it looks like he's getting butt fucked by KGB

Lighten up Red. It's Lacy leaving a Bears player in the dust. As it should be. You don't have to be Einstein to figure that out.

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

Williams is not a shutdown corner but he sure came close to being one last season. He will turn 31 in March, but I seem to recall some old-timer named Charles Woodson being named defensive player of the year at the tender age of 30-something.

To cut a good corner in a passing league just to save $9.5 M when you have $28 M and no bona fide replacement is mindboggling. Now if Thompson can pull a rabbit out of a hat and trade for Dick Sherman, releasing Williams might be reasonable.

Well you don't cut Williams just to sit on the cash and smile. The defense sucks and have had a lot of underperforming players the last three years including Williams. Instead of paying a soon to be 31 yo corner who has played average for 2 1/2 of the last 3 years 9 million dollars, why not use that to sign someone to upgrade the safety position? Or at least use it to pay players who have played great every year - see Nelson/Cobb/Jones. Give me some solid safety play and a pass rush and Shields, House, Hayward and Hyde would be more than adequate at corner.

[Bretsky]

Better?

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
probably a good move; as you probably know I'm a tech dummie and everytime I have an avatar change Mad actually does it for me
So my avatar's tend to stick with me for at least 3-5 years

The forum would have had to blame you for having to view Hoody Genius til 2020

[Rodgers12]

Well you don't cut Williams just to sit on the cash and smile. The defense sucks and have had a lot of underperforming players the last three years including Williams. Instead of paying a soon to be 31 yo corner who has played average for 2 1/2 of the last 3 years 9 million dollars, why not use that to sign someone to upgrade the safety position? Or at least use it to pay players who have played great every year - see Nelson/Cobb/Jones. Give me some solid safety play and a pass rush and Shields, House, Hayward and Hyde would be more than adequate at corner.

$28 M is enough to sign Nelson/Cobb/Jones and a hotshot saftey. Just need to be creative and efficient with the cap.

But we all know Thompson is NOT gonna sign the top free agent saftey or any elite free agent whatsoever even if he had unlimited cap space. Thompson lacks the skill to lure elite free agents to Green Bay, a la Ron Wolf with Reggie White. I know, Thompson likes to draft and develop. That's just an excuse to cover up that lack of skill, methinks.

[red]

$28 M is enough to sign Nelson/Cobb/Jones and a hotshot saftey. Just need to be creative and efficient with the cap.

But we all know Thompson is NOT gonna sign the top free agent saftey or any elite free agent even if he had unlimited cap space. Thompson lacks the skill to lure elite free agents to Green Bay, a la Ron Wolf with Reggie White. I know, Thompson likes to draft and develop. That's just an excuse to cover up that lack of skill, methinks.

time for everyone to read this

http://overthecap.com/top-heavy-spending-nfl/

its an article that talks about how tying up huge chunks of cap space on just a few players is not the right way to do things


What is interesting to note is that none of the seven top heavy spenders was a playoff team in 2013 and none had a winning record. The Saints are the only team in the top 10 to have made the playoffs last season or had a winning record. These are teams that need changes not large investments in the same group of players and they all need to keep that in mind when giving up more future flexibility to keep a mediocre team together.

what they are talking about, is a team like the lions that have over 50 million in cap space invested in just 3 players, or the steelers that have 67 million invested in their top 5 players

we're gonna be getting dangerously close to those types of figures in a couple years if we pay a guy like shields or jordy or cobb top end money to go a long with the large contracts already given to a-rod and clay

the point the article is trying to make, is that you don't build a team by having a handfull of superstar players with the rest of the squad filled in with vet minimum scrubs. you need to ge one or 2 big paid guys, and get a shitload of midrange guys

[bobblehead]

i was thinking about his a bit last night too

we run more of a zone correct? with some man to man sprinkled in. but its mostly zone right? thats why we have cb's letting guys run past them thinking there is a safety their to pick them up, and they rarely are. or a cb letting a wr run accross the middle of the field when there's no one there

i mean, we run mostly zone coverage, correct. or am i off on that?

if we are running zone, then whats the point of having two very highly paid/skilled cb's on the team, when the whole secondary is only as strong as its weakest link?

you could have deon and revis in their primes out there, if the safeties behind them are off in la la land, then its not gonna matter how good those cb's are

we saw so many blown assignments and miscommunications involving shields and tramon and the safeties this year that i don't know if either one is worth 9 million a year.

would we have been any better or any worse off with a couple of 3 million dollar CB's out there? probably not imo

And now you understand why I say that pass rush makes a bad secondary look good and a good secondary look bad.

[bobblehead]

i said during the season, before tramon put together a couple nice games. that i thought the team could only afford 1 of tramon or shields. if they want to keep tramon, then shields should be allowed to leave. if they sign shields to a big deal, then they need to release tramon.

i said at the time, and i still say now, that the team should release tramon and give shields his money

Am I the only one that saw the return of Tramon the playmaker from week 12ish on? You pay them both. You let Finley walk. You deal with next years cap next year.

[bobblehead]

Easily the player least deserving of his contract this past season (not including injured players). MD Jennings sucked just as bad but at least he wasn't getting paid. Really bad deal were made with both Burnett and Brad Jones.

But capers needs continuity and veterans in his system. those signings made us better :-D

[bobblehead]

time for everyone to read this

http://overthecap.com/top-heavy-spending-nfl/

its an article that talks about how tying up huge chunks of cap space on just a few players is not the right way to do things



what they are talking about, is a team like the lions that have over 50 million in cap space invested in just 3 players, or the steelers that have 67 million invested in their top 5 players

we're gonna be getting dangerously close to those types of figures in a couple years if we pay a guy like shields or jordy or cobb top end money to go a long with the large contracts already given to a-rod and clay

the point the article is trying to make, is that you don't build a team by having a handfull of superstar players with the rest of the squad filled in with vet minimum scrubs. you need to ge one or 2 big paid guys, and get a shitload of midrange guys

You are wrong....as my proof I cite the playmaker theory. /end discussion.

[Patler]

Am I the only one that saw the return of Tramon the playmaker from week 12ish on? You pay them both. You let Finley walk. You deal with next years cap next year.

I agree and disagree.

I agree about Williams. He was a different player the last part of the season. It started about the time that I wrote on here that it was obvious that the injury had changed him, and he would never be the player he had been. (Maybe there is something to the curse of Patler, even in reverse.)

I disagree with your last statement. You absolutely have to deal with the 2015 cap this year, and maybe even the 2016 cap to some extent. The decisions made this year will have a significant impact on the decisions you might be forced to make in 2015. Take Burnett's contract, for example. The decision to sign him to a significant contract has tied up significant money for 2014 and 2015 because of the cap hits to release him. I think his contract was based a lot on an assumption that he would continue to progress in 2013. He didn't, and may have regressed instead. Re-signing him early has probably cost the Packers several million per year, because I think he might have been signed cheaper this year. It might mean there is less money available to sign Shields this year.

They absolutely must think several cap years ahead when making player signing decisions this year.

[Rodgers12]

They absolutely must think several cap years ahead when making player signing decisions this year.

The current CBA makes it easy/easier to "forecast" future cap hits. Probably the only major question remaining is how much the networks are willing to pay the league in a couple of years.

Add this, subtract that, and the Packers actually have more money this year to resign Shields than they do last year.

It's all about being creative and efficient with the cap. :)

[smuggler]

One argument against letting people go now to save for Cobb/Nelson is injuries. But then, that's an argument against pretty much any high dollar contract.

[Rodgers12]

You are wrong....as my proof I cite the playmaker theory. /end discussion.

Whatever that is, I guess I have to agree. :)

[Patler]

The current CBA makes it easy/easier to "forecast" future cap hits. Probably the only major question remaining is how much the networks are willing to pay the league in a couple of years.

Add this, subtract that, and the Packers actually have more money this year to resign Shields than they do last year.

It's all about being creative and efficient with the cap. :)

Calculating cap hits on player contracts has always been relatively simple. Each player's contract determines that. What change did the latest CBA make in determining future cap hits?

[bobblehead]

I agree and disagree.

I agree about Williams. He was a different player the last part of the season. It started about the time that I wrote on here that it was obvious that the injury had changed him, and he would never be the player he had been. (Maybe there is something to the curse of Patler, even in reverse.)

I disagree with your last statement. You absolutely have to deal with the 2015 cap this year, and maybe even the 2016 cap to some extent. The decisions made this year will have a significant impact on the decisions you might be forced to make in 2015. Take Burnett's contract, for example. The decision to sign him to a significant contract has tied up significant money for 2014 and 2015 because of the cap hits to release him. I think his contract was based a lot on an assumption that he would continue to progress in 2013. He didn't, and may have regressed instead. Re-signing him early has probably cost the Packers several million per year, because I think he might have been signed cheaper this year. It might mean there is less money available to sign Shields this year.

They absolutely must think several cap years ahead when making player signing decisions this year.

The reason I disagree with you about the cap is because it isn't the same as me being your personal financial adviser. You don't know what the future will hold. Guys you think you are saving money for could end up not being desirable. A number of things may happen. I am not saying put us in cap hell and do bad deals, but to sacrifice a player you need to keep today in anticipation of something that MIGHT happen...I'm just not on board.

NOW...your point about Burnett I agree with. They signed him to contract that he MIGHT live up to if he improves. Bad move. BAD TT...BAD!!! I am referring to shields et al. You sign them to a contract that is fair for their play. I am not so worried about who I MIGHT lose if I sign Shields since I KNOW I will lose shields if I don't sign him.

Edit: More to the point. I said you sign shields and worry about next year next year as an isolated statement. As I said, you don't lose shields unless he is acting like Revis. You don't worry so much about losing Jordy that you cost us a shot at the big game this year by letting shields walk. You look at the situation you are in NOW. Jennings was allowed to walk because we had 3 really good receivers. That is how you think ahead, by addressing the team NOW. Would you ever let ARod walk because it might cost you a player? If Mike Neal is willing to sign for $2 mil do you let him walk so you can sign Cobb next year? No, you sign every good player you can if its a fair deal.

[Patler]

The reason I disagree with you about the cap is because it isn't the same as me being your personal financial adviser. You don't know what the future will hold. Guys you think you are saving money for could end up not being desirable. A number of things may happen. I am not saying put us in cap hell and do bad deals, but to sacrifice a player you need to keep today in anticipation of something that MIGHT happen...I'm just not on board.

NOW...your point about Burnett I agree with. They signed him to contract that he MIGHT live up to if he improves. Bad move. BAD TT...BAD!!! I am referring to shields et al. You sign them to a contract that is fair for their play. I am not so worried about who I MIGHT lose if I sign Shields since I KNOW I will lose shields if I don't sign him.

Edit: More to the point. I said you sign shields and worry about next year next year as an isolated statement. As I said, you don't lose shields unless he is acting like Revis. You don't worry so much about losing Jordy that you cost us a shot at the big game this year by letting shields walk. You look at the situation you are in NOW. Jennings was allowed to walk because we had 3 really good receivers. That is how you think ahead, by addressing the team NOW. Would you ever let ARod walk because it might cost you a player? If Mike Neal is willing to sign for $2 mil do you let him walk so you can sign Cobb next year? No, you sign every good player you can if its a fair deal.

I think we pretty much agree. I wasn't suggesting that you let Shields leave, or Jones; but you do if it compromises your ability to sign Cobb or Nelson. Particularly Jones. If you can see that both he and at least one of Nelson and Cobb would fit in the 2015-2017 caps, you go ahead and do it, hoping to adjust and still keep the third. But, if signing Jones means you know one of Nelson or Cobb has to leave, I think you let Jones go now and hope to keep the other two.

Burnett was a risk because they paid based on what they thought he could be. Jones is not a risk, because they know exactly what he is. Same for Nelson and Cobb. Shields is somewhere in between, I think; which makes his negotiation a bit more difficult. He has earned a lot, but has the potential to still improve.

[run pMc]

Yeah I think you don't sign a guy to a contract if you KNOW it prevents you from making a future offer to another player you really want to keep...which is why the $8M offer to Raji stunned me. I don't think they want to lose him, but IMO he's not essential and would prevent them from signing other players. I'd rather they draft a NT and keep Shields over signing Raji to a big money contract.

If someone offers Neal an Erik Walden contract, I think you let him go and move on. He's got potential at OLB, but between his injury history and the position switch I think $4M/yr is a gamble. Speaking of OLB contracts, does CM3's contract cost them Neal or some other future player?

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

I agree about Neal...I would let him go if he wants 4mil or more., Keeping Raji would make rebuilding the defense a lot easier. I don't want him at more than 8mil/year, but I think if you leave him at NT he would be solid.

[Pugger]

Well you don't cut Williams just to sit on the cash and smile. The defense sucks and have had a lot of underperforming players the last three years including Williams. Instead of paying a soon to be 31 yo corner who has played average for 2 1/2 of the last 3 years 9 million dollars, why not use that to sign someone to upgrade the safety position? Or at least use it to pay players who have played great every year - see Nelson/Cobb/Jones. Give me some solid safety play and a pass rush and Shields, House, Hayward and Hyde would be more than adequate at corner.

We are paying Tramon too much but as this past season progressed he started to look more like his old self. His veteran leadership would come in handy back there too. I hope we can keep both TW (by restructuring his contract) and Sam as our starting corners in 2014+.

[Cleft Crusty]

Shields is somewhere in between, I think; which makes his negotiation a bit more difficult. He has earned a lot, but has the potential to still improve.

And there's the rub with Shields. Do you risk paying him an extra 2-4 mil/year for that top end potential, if that's what it takes to keep him, or do you figure he's hit his ceiling - will make some great plays, but will also has too much inconsistency. For sure, you can let him go if you have trust in what's behind him, but House is a wild card, and you need more corners in a Division like the NFC North.

[Cleft Crusty]

Just a quick general note about Free Agency signings, particularly from other teams where you have the unknown whether they can fit your schemes or not:

When you make a mistake in a FA signing, you not only have the problem of a dead player, but you have their salary dead weight. Often the assumption is that the FA not only will be able to step in and play, play well, and the more you pay, the better player you get, but that's not necessarily so. The failed draft pick eventually just gets cut. It's not the same risk/reward calculation, especially the more draft picks you have. There's a pretty hard line percentage on draft picks that work out, and it doesn't change a huge amount between rounds 1-4 (30-40%), so you know what the odds are. This might seems totally obvious to many, but it bears repeating.

[red]

Just a quick general note about Free Agency signings, particularly from other teams where you have the unknown whether they can fit your schemes or not:

When you make a mistake in a FA signing, you not only have the problem of a dead player, but you have their salary dead weight. Often the assumption is that the FA not only will be able to step in and play, play well, and the more you pay, the better player you get, but that's not necessarily so. The failed draft pick eventually just gets cut. It's not the same risk/reward calculation, especially the more draft picks you have. There's a pretty hard line percentage on draft picks that work out, and it doesn't change a huge amount between rounds 1-4 (30-40%), so you know what the odds are. This might seems totally obvious to many, but it bears repeating.

or your GM signs siad failed draft pick to a rather large new deal (brad jones, burnett, some might say hawk, he tried to do it with raji, i would say tramon)

overvaluing and spending too much money on free agents isn't reserved for just other peoples free agents

whats wrong rand, mad finally have enough of you so he banned that account forcing you to pull out ole cleft?

[Cheesehead Craig]

When you make a mistake in a FA signing, you not only have the problem of a dead player, but you have their salary dead weight.

Is the risk of players actually dying while under contract that great that we need to worry about it?

[Cleft Crusty]

whats wrong mad finally have enough of you so he banned that account forcing you to pull out ole cleft?

Clefty keeps it to football. Hope you do the same

[mraynrand]

whats wrong rand, mad finally have enough of you so he banned that account

nope. Just not going to post much. You guys can have all the Woodbuck you want.

[Cleft Crusty]

QUOTE=red;772365]or your GM signs siad failed draft pick to a rather large new deal (brad jones, burnett, some might say hawk, he tried to do it with raji, i would say tramon)

overvaluing and spending too much money on free agents isn't reserved for just other peoples free agents[/QUOTE]

Of course not, and it's can be just as devastating. The difference is you know whether the guy fits your scheme or not. The difficulty is that you don't always know whether a guy will continue to produce.

Did Brad Jones really get a rather large deal? wasn't it something like 3 years, 12 million. That's peanuts in the NFL for a guy you expect to play a lot. I don't think he's quite worth it, but it's not large.

Hawk's 5 year 33-4 mil contract was cap friendly, and as pedestrian as Hawk is for where he was selected, it's not a huge amount for a starter the team likes on the field most of the time

Tramon was hurt and 2011 and 2012, helped win a SB in 2010, and was fantastic down the stretch in 2013. He's worth every penny.

Raji - someone is gonna pay him, and let him rush the passer, and we'll see what he's worth, and whether he's disciplined at all. Packers did seem to be prepared to pay him for a lack of production that they helped foster. Would be interesting to hear the conversations about him at 1265.

[Smidgeon]

nm

[Guiness]

Clefty keeps it to football. Hope you do the same

Clefty? Clefty Crusty? The only other person I know with rhyming names was Marcy Darcy.

You must've had to be a tough kid. Probably helped on the football field in your playing days, tougher is one of the magical trifecta!

[Cleft Crusty]

Clefty? Clefty Crusty? The only other person I know with rhyming names was Marcy Darcy.

You must've had to be a tough kid. Probably helped on the football field in your playing days, tougher is one of the magical trifecta!


'Lefty' and 'Clefty' rhymes, and that's what kids call you when you're a southpaw pitcher. 'Rusty' and 'Crusty' rhyme, and that's what your grandkids call you when it takes you half an hour to get up out of your easy chair.

'Clefty Crusty' is closer to an alliteration, but don't take that literally from an illiterate.

[smuggler]

This really is the agonizing part of draft and develop. You can't really pay Neal what he's worth and expect to keep him, because 1. he's worth more to one of the other 31 teams and 2. there are those among them that will pay him more than he's worth to begin with...

I'm in favor of the NFL abolishing the franchise tag and just bumping comp picks to the back of the first round.

[bobblehead]

nope. Just not going to post much. You guys can have all the Woodbuck you want.

so....8 lines maximum?