Packers Re-Sign Mike Neal

[smuggler]

Didn't see a thread about this. I don't have the details, but I'm pretty excited he's staying!

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

Glad we brought him back. I need figures though!

[smuggler]

Sam Shields got elite money because he was our best player in the secondary. Neal was not our best player in the linebacking corps, but he was pretty good.

[Bretsky]

Not like Ted was spending money elsewhere. Even if we overpay our own....at least we're filling the roster. Overall I like Neal and unlike the piece of manure Jones he's probably has the upside to be worth the money

[woodbuck27]

Not like Ted was spending money elsewhere. Even if we overpay our own....at least we're filling the roster. Overall I like Neal and unlike the piece of manure Jones he's probably has the upside to be worth the money

He deserved to be allowed to return.

He developed and hopefully is developing.

Welcome back for two seasons OLB/DE Mike Neal.

[3irty1]

The fact that the financial details for this one aren't available yet bodes well.

[Fritz]

I'm good with this one. I think this gives MM some of that flexibility he's talking about, and I think that Neal can get a little better than last year. Remember, he just started learning the OLB position last year. It's a piece of the puzzle - but yes, the puzzle is incomplete.

[run pMc]

M3 has mentioend Neal played best at 3-tech, which is weird since he was moved to OLB, so I'm not sure where/how they are planning to play him. I presume he'll push Perry for the OLB spot and on obvious passing downs move him inside to rush. Just a guess. Either way, I think he has a chance to improve and I'll be curious to see how "multiple"/"flexible" the defense gets with Neal.

Two years is a pretty good prove-it contract for GB and a good way for Neal to test FA again soon. Seems like a win-win, assuming he stays healthy and the money isn't crazy. I'd be surprised if he got more than Walden.

[pbmax]

The fact that the financial details for this one aren't available yet bodes well.

I was just thinking that. Kinda like James Jones last deal. Took 5 days to find out.

[denverYooper]

Tom Pelissero ‏@TomPelissero 10m
Mike Neal's deal with #Packers: 2 years, $8M, including a $2.5M signing bonus. Has $1.6M tied up in per-game roster bonuses.

[wist43]

I'm glad he's back too... it's with a grain of salt though. Everyone knows that we're not going to see any improvement out of the defense.

TT and MM are perfectly comfortable fielding a poor defense. In the mean time, Rodgers' window will begin closing soon... tick tock. At least we caught that fart in the wind a few years ago ;)

[Fritz]

I'm glad he's back too... it's with a grain of salt though. Everyone knows that we're not going to see any improvement out of the defense.

TT and MM are perfectly comfortable fielding a poor defense. In the mean time, Rodgers' window will begin closing soon... tick tock. At least we caught that fart in the wind a few years ago ;)

MM: Say, Ted, should we try to improve the defense this year?

TT: Nah. I'm comfortable fielding a poor defense. It doesn't bother me in the least.

MM: Me neither. I'm fine with our defense being poor. I don't care if they know how to tackle or anything.

TT: Cool.

[red]

i can picture that

but only if slocum and capers are on their knees in front of them, going to town

[wist43]

MM: Say, Ted, should we try to improve the defense this year?

TT: Nah. I'm comfortable fielding a poor defense. It doesn't bother me in the least.

MM: Me neither. I'm fine with our defense being poor. I don't care if they know how to tackle or anything.

TT: Cool.

I think we should bug TT's office... you rent a van, and we'll make it into a fake exterminator company. Undercover operation. I'll go in and do some spraying - when I get close to TT's office, you pull the fire alarm, and that should give me enough time to plant some microphones and cameras :)

[Cheesehead Craig]

I think we should bug TT's office... you rent a van, and we'll make it into a fake exterminator company. Undercover operation. I'll go in and do some spraying - when I get close to TT's office, you pull the fire alarm, and that should give me enough time to plant some microphones and cameras :)

Or, you could go running through the halls yelling "There's a FA visiting! He's in the Atrium right now!" and watch everybody go running. That way there's no fire alarm fines or anything.

[red]

but that wouldn't get TT out of his cave

he'd just laugh a say "foooooooools"

[pbmax]

Erik Walden, $8 mil guaranteed (I think the second $4 mil of that is an injury guarantee for this season's base salary) and $4 mpy for 4 years.

Neal, 2 years, $4 mpg, and $2.5 million signing bonus.


Packers win.

[Fritz]

I think we should bug TT's office... you rent a van, and we'll make it into a fake exterminator company. Undercover operation. I'll go in and do some spraying - when I get close to TT's office, you pull the fire alarm, and that should give me enough time to plant some microphones and cameras :)

No need. We already know what they're saying. I quoted them above, based on your observations.

[wist43]

No need. We already know what they're saying. I quoted them above, based on your observations.

Someone posted that Vance Walker is set of a visit... they're only doing that for PR.

Plausible deniability :)

[mraynrand]

I'm glad he's back too... it's with a grain of salt though. Everyone knows that we're not going to see any improvement out of the defense.

TT and MM are perfectly comfortable fielding a poor defense.

http://d3j5vwomefv46c.cloudfront.net/photos/thumb/824048605.gif?1385436006

[Pugger]

Not like Ted was spending money elsewhere. Even if we overpay our own....at least we're filling the roster. Overall I like Neal and unlike the piece of manure Jones he's probably has the upside to be worth the money

I hope you mean BRAD Jones and not Datone.

[wist43]

Brad Jones is an example of how TT overvalues "his guys".

He'll overpay someone like Jones, and put a substandard player on the field, before he'd pay market value for a better player that was freed up from another team.

Given Ted's MO, it truly is a miracle that we won that SB a few years back... we are slumping into the rut I always thought we would with TT's approach, i.e. a good team, that likely wouldn't be able to build a roster capable of winning it all simply b/c we only have one avenue of player procurement.

We were able to win the SB for a variety of reasons, namely Rodgers getting hot as hell, and playing a slate of teams in the playoffs that played the brand of football we can beat. Also, 2 of biggest contributors to that SB win were the only 2 FA's TT has ever signed - Woodson and Pickett. TT has shown he will never sign anyone like that again - so it's draft, after draft, after draft - filled in with resignings like Jones.

We got lucky to win that SB a few years back, and I'm certainly grateful for it, but I doubt we will have a legitimate shot at another one anytime soon. We have the QB, and I think if Rodgers stays healthy we have a "punchers chance"; but realistically, we are so weak on defense, mainly b/c of Capers (another TT failing), that we're really not a legit contender.

[run pMc]

Brad Jones is an example of how TT overvalues "his guys".

He'll overpay someone like Jones, and put a substandard player on the field, before he'd pay market value for a better player that was freed up from another team.

Given Ted's MO, it truly is a miracle that we won that SB a few years back... we are slumping into the rut I always thought we would with TT's approach, i.e. a good team, that likely wouldn't be able to build a roster capable of winning it all simply b/c we only have one avenue of player procurement.

We were able to win the SB for a variety of reasons, namely Rodgers getting hot as hell, and playing a slate of teams in the playoffs that played the brand of football we can beat. Also, 2 of biggest contributors to that SB win were the only 2 FA's TT has ever signed - Woodson and Pickett. TT has shown he will never sign anyone like that again - so it's draft, after draft, after draft - filled in with resignings like Jones.

We got lucky to win that SB a few years back, and I'm certainly grateful for it, but I doubt we will have a legitimate shot at another one anytime soon. We have the QB, and I think if Rodgers stays healthy we have a "punchers chance"; but realistically, we are so weak on defense, mainly b/c of Capers (another TT failing), that we're really not a legit contender.

I think TT was betting that Jones would continue to progress as an ILB after what he saw in his first year at that spot. Jones got hurt which didn't help, but he also didn't seem to show that progression. I wasn't gangbusters about signing him either -- it seems like he's about the same as the other suspects at ILB...borderline starter/backup types.

I'm hoping for one of three things: Jones bounces back and plays well, Barrington or Lattimore beats him out and produces, TT drafts an ILB (CJ Mosley?) who outplays him.

As for Neal, TT and M3 are making the same bet: that Neal continues to progress and hopefully ascend as a player. I'm a little more enthusiastic about the Neal signing, but they still have work to do to improve the roster. MIN's and CHI's defenses got better, and DET added Golden Taint.

[denverYooper]

Why did he resign? I thought he liked the midwest.

[SMBASS]

Why did he resign? I thought he liked the midwest.

I thought he, "re-signed". I didn't know that he actually, "resigned"? That's a shame. He's pretty young to be hanging up the cleats already. Lol...

[mraynrand]

Brad Jones is an example of how TT overvalues "his guys".

He'll overpay someone like Jones, and put a substandard player on the field, before he'd pay market value for a better player that was freed up from another team.

Given Ted's MO, it truly is a miracle that we won that SB a few years back... we are slumping into the rut I always thought we would with TT's approach, i.e. a good team, that likely wouldn't be able to build a roster capable of winning it all simply b/c we only have one avenue of player procurement.

We were able to win the SB for a variety of reasons, namely Rodgers getting hot as hell, and playing a slate of teams in the playoffs that played the brand of football we can beat. Also, 2 of biggest contributors to that SB win were the only 2 FA's TT has ever signed - Woodson and Pickett. TT has shown he will never sign anyone like that again - so it's draft, after draft, after draft - filled in with resignings like Jones.

We got lucky to win that SB a few years back, and I'm certainly grateful for it, but I doubt we will have a legitimate shot at another one anytime soon. We have the QB, and I think if Rodgers stays healthy we have a "punchers chance"; but realistically, we are so weak on defense, mainly b/c of Capers (another TT failing), that we're really not a legit contender.


I was always amazed how Capers was great in the 2009 season, got worse in the playoff, then turned it around in the 2010 season, only to have it fall apart in 2011 again. And this past year, again, for some reason, Capers couldn't keep it together and he cost the packers at least 4-5 games due to pure stupidity! Then, against SF, the idiot pulls Matthews, Neal, and Shields from the game and doesn't even suit up Jolly, even though they all played reasonably well during the year. Then he puts a rookie FA - Mulumba in there, gets him hurt, and won't play Perry. Brad Jones was shitty enough (THANKS TT!!!), but what does Capers do - pulls him for that fool Lattimore. Why didn't he put Francois in there??? And don't get me started on how he couldn't motivate Raji. Fucking Idiot Capers deserves to be hung from a tree by his testicles!!!!

[bobblehead]

Brad Jones is an example of how TT overvalues "his guys".

He'll overpay someone like Jones, and put a substandard player on the field, before he'd pay market value for a better player that was freed up from another team.

Given Ted's MO, it truly is a miracle that we won that SB a few years back... we are slumping into the rut I always thought we would with TT's approach, i.e. a good team, that likely wouldn't be able to build a roster capable of winning it all simply b/c we only have one avenue of player procurement.

We were able to win the SB for a variety of reasons, namely Rodgers getting hot as hell, and playing a slate of teams in the playoffs that played the brand of football we can beat. Also, 2 of biggest contributors to that SB win were the only 2 FA's TT has ever signed - Woodson and Pickett. TT has shown he will never sign anyone like that again - so it's draft, after draft, after draft - filled in with resignings like Jones.

We got lucky to win that SB a few years back, and I'm certainly grateful for it, but I doubt we will have a legitimate shot at another one anytime soon. We have the QB, and I think if Rodgers stays healthy we have a "punchers chance"; but realistically, we are so weak on defense, mainly b/c of Capers (another TT failing), that we're really not a legit contender.

Wist, you are sounding like a democrat defending obama. It doesn't matter the results, those are simply fluky things that vary. Our ideas are correct, and its a coincidence when the economy tanks and stays recessed like it did when Roosevelt did the exact same things Obama is doing.

TT didn't win a superbowl by "fluke". He built that team....you didn't build that team.

[red]

fyi

[Brandon494]

Gotta love crazy Republicans

https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSy68tSBjS7rTBhIZSQ01prHj7ciZPyy 1PIup5bPg1QYSFsvtz0

[red]

fyi

[wist43]

Wist, you are sounding like a democrat defending obama. It doesn't matter the results, those are simply fluky things that vary. Our ideas are correct, and its a coincidence when the economy tanks and stays recessed like it did when Roosevelt did the exact same things Obama is doing.

TT didn't win a superbowl by "fluke". He built that team....you didn't build that team.

What, lol...

The stars aligned, and we stole one.

If there were a team like SF or Seattle in the playoffs that year - we would have been knocked out. As it was, Philly and Atlanta were both finesse teams, and Chicago is Chicago, minus Cutler for most of the game. Still I think we had Chicago's number regardless. Then in the SB, we met a fading Steelers team who has fallen off completely since that loss.

In other words, we played to the best of our ability; we still had good defensive players onboard that were producing, i.e. Jenkins, Bishop, and Woodson; and we played a slate of teams that set up well of us, i.e. finesse teams that couldn't push us around with ease - like SF can.

Since the SB win, TT hasn't signed a single FA; he sent Jenkins, Bishop and Woodson packing, as well as Jennings from the offense - and hasn't replaced them; and he's sat back and watched while Capers plays one defense (the 2-4), and nothing else.

Add to that the fact that he is going to do nothing to bring in immediate help this year, and you're staring another wasted season straight in the eye. Rodgers will be another year older - and we'll rinse and repeat again next year. The best we can hope for is that some guys from the past couple of drafts step up - Hyde, Jones, Mulumba - and that TT and MM start to bark at Capers enough to get his head out of his ass.

If those players don't develop, we stand no chance whatsoever of advancing very far in the playoffs - and we're looking at another 2-3 years lost, b/c it will take that long for the next wave of draft picks to develop - rinse, repeat.

The bottom line is - TT doesn't mind having holes in the roster. Having holes at a given position will never compel him to break with his philosophy and sign a FA. He will live with the holes, and try to fill them with street FA's - then wait til the next draft - rinse, repeat.

[mraynrand]

What, lol...

The stars aligned, and we stole one.

If there were a team like SF or Seattle in the playoffs that year - we would have been knocked out.

except for the fact that we beat SF in the regular season. Don't EVER let facts get in the way of your mania!

[Carolina_Packer]

What, lol...

The stars aligned, and we stole one.

If there were a team like SF or Seattle in the playoffs that year - we would have been knocked out. As it was, Philly and Atlanta were both finesse teams, and Chicago is Chicago, minus Cutler for most of the game. Still I think we had Chicago's number regardless. Then in the SB, we met a fading Steelers team who has fallen off completely since that loss.

In other words, we played to the best of our ability; we still had good defensive players onboard that were producing, i.e. Jenkins, Bishop, and Woodson; and we played a slate of teams that set up well of us, i.e. finesse teams that couldn't push us around with ease - like SF can.

Since the SB win, TT hasn't signed a single FA; he sent Jenkins, Bishop and Woodson packing, as well as Jennings from the offense - and hasn't replaced them; and he's sat back and watched while Capers plays one defense (the 2-4), and nothing else.

Add to that the fact that he is going to do nothing to bring in immediate help this year, and you're staring another wasted season straight in the eye. Rodgers will be another year older - and we'll rinse and repeat again next year. The best we can hope for is that some guys from the past couple of drafts step up - Hyde, Jones, Mulumba - and that TT and MM start to bark at Capers enough to get his head out of his ass.

If those players don't develop, we stand no chance whatsoever of advancing very far in the playoffs - and we're looking at another 2-3 years lost, b/c it will take that long for the next wave of draft picks to develop - rinse, repeat.

The bottom line is - TT doesn't mind having holes in the roster. Having holes at a given position will never compel him to break with his philosophy and sign a FA. He will live with the holes, and try to fill them with street FA's - then wait til the next draft - rinse, repeat.

If TT has done such a mediocre to bad job on the defense, then how can you lay so much blame on Capers? He won with arguably better players at other stops he's had? I think I get it now...good players=good coach...mediocre to bad players=bad coach.

[smuggler]

Actually, Atlanta was a roadgrading power football team. WE were the finesse team that turned them on their side.

[mraynrand]

The bottom line is - TT doesn't mind having holes in the roster.

No, not at all! In fact, he enjoys them! That's why he drafts injury prone players. It's a fantastically elaborate and intricate scheme to prevent blame from being laid on his shoulders. He drafts injury prone guys, they get hurt and he says "doggone it, we woulda won it all AGAIN, if not for those crazy injuries!"

Crazy and crafty like a Fox, that TT!

[Carolina_Packer]

MM: Say, Ted, should we try to improve the defense this year?

TT: Nah. I'm comfortable fielding a poor defense. It doesn't bother me in the least.

MM: Me neither. I'm fine with our defense being poor. I don't care if they know how to tackle or anything.

TT: Cool.

I've lost track, is it Capers fault or MM/TT's fault?

[wist43]

I've lost track, is it Capers fault or MM/TT's fault?

Well, it's somebody's fault... most of PR won't acknowledge that there is any fault anywhere.

As I said, I like the players TT brought in - so, I go to the next link in the chain, which is Capers.

Not that complicated... besides, as others have pointed out, Capers has an MO everywhere he goes. Gets hired, first couple of years he's pretty good, but it's all downhill from there, and he gets fired in year 5.

[mraynrand]

Well, it's somebody's fault... most of PR won't acknowledge that there is any fault anywhere.


good lord. Strawmen again...

[woodbuck27]

No, not at all! In fact, he enjoys them! That's why he drafts injury prone players. It's a fantastically elaborate and intricate scheme to prevent blame from being laid on his shoulders. He drafts injury prone guys, they get hurt and he says "doggone it, we woulda won it all AGAIN, if not for those crazy injuries!"

Crazy and crafty like a Fox, that TT!

You must have gotten the crap kicked out of you a lot growing up.

[PlantPage55]

Actually, Atlanta was a roadgrading power football team. WE were the finesse team that turned them on their side.

This looks like it'll probably get glossed over, but it's a very good point. The only thing that separated them that year from a team like SF was a more dynamic QB. I've never been convinced that Matt Ryan will ever be a real franchise guy.

I don't believe a team "like" SF or Seattle would have stopped us that year either - though none of us could never prove it one way or another. After all, Pittsburgh was kinda like those teams too and we beat them pretty handily, really.

I think we were on such a tear that we couldn't be stopped. All I saw from our guys was laser-like focus, and that extended to our coaching staff, who called a handful of really brilliant games and handled all of the off-the-field pressure stuff absolutely perfectly. I was really impressed with MM's approach that year.

People like to say it was "luck", but getting "hot" is not the same as getting lucky. And it also undersells the quality job that everyone on our staff did, too.

Whether it's through retirement or a firing, MM and TT won't be in charge in a few years, I'd reckon, but I'll never take away or try to diminish what I saw as a very well-constructed run to our 13th championship.

As far as Mike Neal goes, I'm happy to see a relatively positive forum with regards to his signing. I'd like to point out something, just because I thought it was interesting:

Mike Neal 2013: 47 tackles, 5 sacks, 1 INT.
Lamarr Houston: 69 tackles, 6 sacks
Arthur Jones: 53 tackles, 4 sacks

Houston got $35 mil over 5 years, 15 mil guaranteed
Jones got 33 over 5 years, 10 guaranteed.

Seeing what we got Mike Neal for, I have to say I'm glad that TT stays away from the first few days of FA. Fans see Houston and Jones' names on a NFL.com "top FA" list and think they'll help our team. Well, they might have helped us, but what is the net gain? There's an opportunity cost of signing them and letting a guy like Neal go - or giving him less playtime - that goes deeper than just adding talent because you have the CAP space.

Don't get me wrong - I'm nervous as hell about the safety position. I'd have gone for SOMEONE out of that 1st day group, even if it was for more than you'd want to pay, because with Burnett as our only stable safety on the roster, the opportunity vs. cost is high.

I hope the safety thing works out for TT, because while I'd love an upgrade at ILB and NT - safety is the only place I can really say he's dropping the ball, talent-acquisition-wise.

[smuggler]

The reason Ted overvalues Brad Jones is that coverage linebackers who can also quasi-function against the run are VERY hard to come by. There are exactly zero of those players in the draft, by my count, unless you are counting CJ Mosley. The ENTIRE draft.

Jones is our nickel linebacker that we like to have cover tight ends, because Hawk is not much good at it. Ideally, on first and second down, BISHOP would have been out on the field, but Bishop's knee got destroyed. That's not Thompson's fault, and getting rid of our coverage linebacker does not help the situation. Because Brad Jones was so *important* to our defensive scheme, we paid to retain him.

It's not Ted overvaluing players. It's Ted protecting the team. If Jones were gone last season, the team would have been SO much worse. I know it's tough to imagine, because nobody actually likes having Brad Jones out there half the time, but it's damn true.

[Patler]

The reason Ted overvalues Brad Jones is that coverage linebackers who can also quasi-function against the run are VERY hard to come by. There are exactly zero of those players in the draft, by my count, unless you are counting CJ Mosley. The ENTIRE draft.

Jones is our nickel linebacker that we like to have cover tight ends, because Hawk is not much good at it. Ideally, on first and second down, BISHOP would have been out on the field, but Bishop's knee got destroyed. That's not Thompson's fault, and getting rid of our coverage linebacker does not help the situation. Because Brad Jones was so *important* to our defensive scheme, we paid to retain him.

It's not Ted overvaluing players. It's Ted protecting the team. If Jones were gone last season, the team would have been SO much worse. I know it's tough to imagine, because nobody actually likes having Brad Jones out there half the time, but it's damn true.

Yup. The same reason he always paid Brandon Chiller so well.

[Bretsky]

Yup. The same reason he always paid Brandon Chiller so well.


JAG Jones should have received about half of what Chiller; Chiller when healthy at his worst was better than JAJ on his best day IMO

I'm fine with Neal at that price because he does have upside

[3irty1]

I was a big supporter of Brad after his performance in 2012 but he's starting to flip me for two reasons. Number 1 is that he can't stay healthy which means he's contributing to the biggest problem the Packers have faced for 4 years running. Number 2 is that his strength is coverage but that goes to waste to some degree because his take on skills and discipline against the run are inconsistent enough to prevent aligning him over a TE.

[Carolina_Packer]

Well, it's somebody's fault... most of PR won't acknowledge that there is any fault anywhere.

As I said, I like the players TT brought in - so, I go to the next link in the chain, which is Capers.

Not that complicated... besides, as others have pointed out, Capers has an MO everywhere he goes. Gets hired, first couple of years he's pretty good, but it's all downhill from there, and he gets fired in year 5.

Just kiddin' with you, Wist. One thing we can agree on. We love the Packers. It's like your kids. You always love them, you don't always love what they choose to do!

Capers is like that teacher than you know has won awards, but they are not reaching your kid consistently. Everyone, including GM, coaches and players have their jobs to do. Players may be drafted for tendencies of working within a scheme, but good players can transcend schemes, take coaching and work within any scheme because they are capable of diagnosing plays pre-snap, communicating with teammates, taking good pursuit angles, winning one on one battles and making sure tackles. That you can fit into any scheme. Do we have enough of those types of players?

[mraynrand]

The reason Ted overvalues Brad Jones is that coverage linebackers who can also quasi-function against the run are VERY hard to come by. There are exactly zero of those players in the draft, by my count, unless you are counting CJ Mosley. The ENTIRE draft.

Jones is our nickel linebacker that we like to have cover tight ends, because Hawk is not much good at it. Ideally, on first and second down, BISHOP would have been out on the field, but Bishop's knee got destroyed. That's not Thompson's fault, and getting rid of our coverage linebacker does not help the situation. Because Brad Jones was so *important* to our defensive scheme, we paid to retain him.

It's not Ted overvaluing players. It's Ted protecting the team. If Jones were gone last season, the team would have been SO much worse. I know it's tough to imagine, because nobody actually likes having Brad Jones out there half the time, but it's damn true.

didn't help when Francois got hurt either. He was getting better than Jones in pass coverage.

[denverYooper]

Actually, Atlanta was a roadgrading power football team. WE were the finesse team that turned them on their side.

Hey man, don't bring uncomfortable facts in to the discussion.

[Bossman641]

What, lol...

The stars aligned, and we stole one.

If there were a team like SF or Seattle in the playoffs that year - we would have been knocked out. As it was, Philly and Atlanta were both finesse teams, and Chicago is Chicago, minus Cutler for most of the game. Still I think we had Chicago's number regardless. Then in the SB, we met a fading Steelers team who has fallen off completely since that loss.

In other words, we played to the best of our ability; we still had good defensive players onboard that were producing, i.e. Jenkins, Bishop, and Woodson; and we played a slate of teams that set up well of us, i.e. finesse teams that couldn't push us around with ease - like SF can.

Atlanta - 5th ranked scoring D
Chicago - 4th ranked scoring D
Pitt - 1 ranked scoring D

But hey, don't let the facts stop you

[pbmax]

Actually, Atlanta was a roadgrading power football team. WE were the finesse team that turned them on their side.

Don't mention the Jets game to him either.

[pbmax]

JAG Jones should have received about half of what Chiller; Chiller when healthy at his worst was better than JAJ on his best day IMO

I'm fine with Neal at that price because he does have upside

Brandon Chillar: 2010-2013 contract
CONTRACT: 4 yr(s) / $21,000,000
AVERAGE: $5,250,000
SIGNING BONUS: $2,000,000

Brad Jones
CONTRACT:3 yr(s) / $11,250,000
SIGNING BONUS $3,000,000
AVERAGE SALARY $3,750,000
GUARANTEED:$3,000,000


How about 71%?

[red]

Brandon Chillar: 2010-2013 contract
CONTRACT: 4 yr(s) / $21,000,000
AVERAGE: $5,250,000
SIGNING BONUS: $2,000,000

Brad Jones
CONTRACT:3 yr(s) / $11,250,000
SIGNING BONUS $3,000,000
AVERAGE SALARY $3,750,000
GUARANTEED:$3,000,000


How about 71%?

not good enough

50% or less

[mraynrand]

^^^ a see a plea bargain getting done here. time served

[run pMc]

This looks like it'll probably get glossed over, but it's a very good point. The only thing that separated them that year from a team like SF was a more dynamic QB. I've never been convinced that Matt Ryan will ever be a real franchise guy.

I don't believe a team "like" SF or Seattle would have stopped us that year either - though none of us could never prove it one way or another. After all, Pittsburgh was kinda like those teams too and we beat them pretty handily, really.

I think we were on such a tear that we couldn't be stopped. All I saw from our guys was laser-like focus, and that extended to our coaching staff, who called a handful of really brilliant games and handled all of the off-the-field pressure stuff absolutely perfectly. I was really impressed with MM's approach that year.

People like to say it was "luck", but getting "hot" is not the same as getting lucky. And it also undersells the quality job that everyone on our staff did, too.

Whether it's through retirement or a firing, MM and TT won't be in charge in a few years, I'd reckon, but I'll never take away or try to diminish what I saw as a very well-constructed run to our 13th championship.

As far as Mike Neal goes, I'm happy to see a relatively positive forum with regards to his signing. I'd like to point out something, just because I thought it was interesting:

Mike Neal 2013: 47 tackles, 5 sacks, 1 INT.
Lamarr Houston: 69 tackles, 6 sacks
Arthur Jones: 53 tackles, 4 sacks

Houston got $35 mil over 5 years, 15 mil guaranteed
Jones got 33 over 5 years, 10 guaranteed.

Seeing what we got Mike Neal for, I have to say I'm glad that TT stays away from the first few days of FA. Fans see Houston and Jones' names on a NFL.com "top FA" list and think they'll help our team. Well, they might have helped us, but what is the net gain? There's an opportunity cost of signing them and letting a guy like Neal go - or giving him less playtime - that goes deeper than just adding talent because you have the CAP space.

Don't get me wrong - I'm nervous as hell about the safety position. I'd have gone for SOMEONE out of that 1st day group, even if it was for more than you'd want to pay, because with Burnett as our only stable safety on the roster, the opportunity vs. cost is high.

I hope the safety thing works out for TT, because while I'd love an upgrade at ILB and NT - safety is the only place I can really say he's dropping the ball, talent-acquisition-wise.

+1

[3irty1]

Actually, Atlanta was a roadgrading power football team. WE were the finesse team that turned them on their side.

I love the Atlanta 2010 team as an example of the wrong way to build a team for the playoffs. They were the Bo Ryan Badgers of the NFL. Their philosophy on offense and defense was to burn clock, and not make mistakes. Their offense was run-heavy but didn't produce big plays. Their passing game earned Matt Ryan a reputation as a checkdown king. Their defense was schematically unaggressive and smothering. Preventing the big play at all costs and allowing relatively easy completions underneath forcing teams to take long time-consuming drives. They tried to make you beat them at their own game of efficiency.

Problem with that is that in a short game it only takes a few bad bounces of the ball for the better team to lose. This is why I could never respect the Alex Smith 49ers or Chiefs either. They are the kind of teams that may thrive during the regular season but need a ton to go right to collect some hardware. Good teams don't adopt underdog strategies.

[pbmax]

not good enough

50% or less

I might get close if we factor in cap inflation.

[wist43]

Atlanta wasn't a "road grader" team in '10, they were a ZBS team, and had smallish OL. They put up good rushing stats with Turner, but they certainly weren't a power team. I didn't fear their offense; and I thought their defense was vastly overrated.

As #1 playoff seeds go, they were as weak as they come.

As for Chicago, just throw that one out... b/c it's Chicago, we know each other so well, they might as well attend our team meetings, and we theirs.

As for Pitt - they were fading fast by the time they got to the SB, and they've not been very good since then.

We had a nice run there from game 13 in '10 on thru the 2011 season, which during late in that season, KC exposed us. It's been tough sledding ever since that KC game in '11. Physical power teams have consistently beaten us up... we seem to have gotten a little tougher of late though. MM has incorporated some power running, and Lacy has helped.

[wist43]

Don't mention the Jets game to him either.

I seem to remember we actually played 3-4 base most of the time in that game.

Get us out of that God-awful 2-4 alignment, and we have some decent players - that if used properly could make for a pretty good defense. As I've said all along, I like a lot of the players - so if I like the players, but our results suck, who do you look at for accountability?? It has to be Capers.

[mraynrand]

As for Pitt - they were fading fast by the time they got to the SB, and they've not been very good since then.

Fading fast with the #1 defense. But you don't look at stats like that.

[mraynrand]

I seem to remember we actually played 3-4 base most of the time in that game.

because they were a run heavy offense. Just like the Packers do now - they play 3-4 against running teams and on running downs. They use 2-4/1-5 on passing downs and rush Jones, Neal, Matthews and Perry or some combination of 1-3 of those guys and a LB or two and/or a safety.

[wist43]

Just kiddin' with you, Wist. One thing we can agree on. We love the Packers. It's like your kids. You always love them, you don't always love what they choose to do!

Capers is like that teacher than you know has won awards, but they are not reaching your kid consistently. Everyone, including GM, coaches and players have their jobs to do. Players may be drafted for tendencies of working within a scheme, but good players can transcend schemes, take coaching and work within any scheme because they are capable of diagnosing plays pre-snap, communicating with teammates, taking good pursuit angles, winning one on one battles and making sure tackles. That you can fit into any scheme. Do we have enough of those types of players?

I think Capers is a fine coach - I think he is capable of putting a good gameplan together, and producing good results.

But then there is Mr. Spraypaintedhair - call it a Jekyl and Hyde situation. Capers cannot be trusted - period. He is just as capable of putting together an absolute stinker of a gameplan and riding it all the way to defeat.

He's exactly the coach I thought he was, and I've said right from the beginning, that we won't be able to trust the guy - that certainly has proven to be true. He's put up some horrid numbers the past few years - I don't expect that to change.

[wist43]

Fading fast with the #1 defense. But you don't look at stats like that.

They had a good defense... I didn't say they were junk - they were just fading, and you could see some serious cracks in the armour.

As SB's go, it was a good matchup, and a good game.

We continued on a good run the next year - even though we fielded one of the worst defenses in NFL history; whereas the Steelers haven't been a threat since.

[bobblehead]

Atlanta wasn't a "road grader" team in '10, they were a ZBS team, and had smallish OL. They put up good rushing stats with Turner, but they certainly weren't a power team. I didn't fear their offense; and I thought their defense was vastly overrated.

As #1 playoff seeds go, they were as weak as they come.

As for Chicago, just throw that one out... b/c it's Chicago, we know each other so well, they might as well attend our team meetings, and we theirs.

As for Pitt - they were fading fast by the time they got to the SB, and they've not been very good since then.

We had a nice run there from game 13 in '10 on thru the 2011 season, which during late in that season, KC exposed us. It's been tough sledding ever since that KC game in '11. Physical power teams have consistently beaten us up... we seem to have gotten a little tougher of late though. MM has incorporated some power running, and Lacy has helped.

Wist, you lose credibility here. KC "exposed" us? Seriously, we went 15-1. We let down for a game. We were not "exposed." You can't take a year we won the superbowl and discount every team we beat. No team, other than the '72? dolphins wins them all. Did you see seattle get exposed by AZ at home in about the same point in the season last year? AZ went in and knocked their dicks in the dirt. Totally outphysicalled them. The seahawks are a joke and just got on a run at the right time.

[bobblehead]

Fading fast with the #1 defense. But you don't look at stats like that.

Look at the run statistics from that season...don't think anyone was able to get rush yards against that old fading D that year.

[mraynrand]

Wist, you lose credibility here. KC "exposed" us? Seriously, we went 15-1. We let down for a game. We were not "exposed." You can't take a year we won the superbowl and discount every team we beat. No team, other than the '72? dolphins wins them all. Did you see seattle get exposed by AZ at home in about the same point in the season last year? AZ went in and knocked their dicks in the dirt. Totally outphysicalled them. The seahawks are a joke and just got on a run at the right time.

The '72 Dolphins might have lost to the Redskins if the pass to the gay guy in the end zone hadn't careened off the upright!

[mraynrand]

Neal before Zod!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFyHTU8tg_0

[wist43]

Wist, you lose credibility here. KC "exposed" us? Seriously, we went 15-1. We let down for a game. We were not "exposed." You can't take a year we won the superbowl and discount every team we beat. No team, other than the '72? dolphins wins them all. Did you see seattle get exposed by AZ at home in about the same point in the season last year? AZ went in and knocked their dicks in the dirt. Totally outphysicalled them. The seahawks are a joke and just got on a run at the right time.

To be sure a team can have a let down... as Seattle did; but the KC game was different b/c of the style of team they were. We don't match up with that style at all - physical power teams can simply beat us up - which is what KC did, and which is what SF has done to us 4 times since then.

I think TT/MM/Capers have gotten their head out of their ass a little bit when it comes to the overall finesse nature of the team, and have tried to address it by becoming more physical. Even Spraypaintedhair has actually been playing 3-4 base against power teams - whodda thunk??

We have gotten more physical from the beginning '12 to now. It was the KC that exposed us. I taped that game went thru the tape a few times, KC simply beat the living hell out of us physically - and that is not something that anything to do with a "let down". It was the style of play, and the fact that we couldn't match up to that style of play. SF has certainly proven that over the past couple of seasons.

[Fritz]

This looks like it'll probably get glossed over, but it's a very good point. The only thing that separated them that year from a team like SF was a more dynamic QB. I've never been convinced that Matt Ryan will ever be a real franchise guy.

I don't believe a team "like" SF or Seattle would have stopped us that year either - though none of us could never prove it one way or another. After all, Pittsburgh was kinda like those teams too and we beat them pretty handily, really.

I think we were on such a tear that we couldn't be stopped. All I saw from our guys was laser-like focus, and that extended to our coaching staff, who called a handful of really brilliant games and handled all of the off-the-field pressure stuff absolutely perfectly. I was really impressed with MM's approach that year.

People like to say it was "luck", but getting "hot" is not the same as getting lucky. And it also undersells the quality job that everyone on our staff did, too.

Whether it's through retirement or a firing, MM and TT won't be in charge in a few years, I'd reckon, but I'll never take away or try to diminish what I saw as a very well-constructed run to our 13th championship.

As far as Mike Neal goes, I'm happy to see a relatively positive forum with regards to his signing. I'd like to point out something, just because I thought it was interesting:

Mike Neal 2013: 47 tackles, 5 sacks, 1 INT.
Lamarr Houston: 69 tackles, 6 sacks
Arthur Jones: 53 tackles, 4 sacks

Houston got $35 mil over 5 years, 15 mil guaranteed
Jones got 33 over 5 years, 10 guaranteed.

Seeing what we got Mike Neal for, I have to say I'm glad that TT stays away from the first few days of FA. Fans see Houston and Jones' names on a NFL.com "top FA" list and think they'll help our team. Well, they might have helped us, but what is the net gain? There's an opportunity cost of signing them and letting a guy like Neal go - or giving him less playtime - that goes deeper than just adding talent because you have the CAP space.

Don't get me wrong - I'm nervous as hell about the safety position. I'd have gone for SOMEONE out of that 1st day group, even if it was for more than you'd want to pay, because with Burnett as our only stable safety on the roster, the opportunity vs. cost is high.

I hope the safety thing works out for TT, because while I'd love an upgrade at ILB and NT - safety is the only place I can really say he's dropping the ball, talent-acquisition-wise.


This is a thoughtful, reasonable post. What it's doing in the middle of this thread, I do not know.

[Zool]

Look at the run statistics from that season...don't think anyone was able to get rush yards against that old fading D that year.

2010 Steelers Playoff stat cherry picking by me

Ravens
16-30 125 passing yards
18carries 35 rushing yards
12 first downs
3 TOs

Jets
20-33 233 passing yards
20carries 70 rushing yards
17 first downs
1 TO

Packers
24-39 304 passing yards
13carries 50 yards
15 first downs
0 TOs

[Pugger]

This looks like it'll probably get glossed over, but it's a very good point. The only thing that separated them that year from a team like SF was a more dynamic QB. I've never been convinced that Matt Ryan will ever be a real franchise guy.

I don't believe a team "like" SF or Seattle would have stopped us that year either - though none of us could never prove it one way or another. After all, Pittsburgh was kinda like those teams too and we beat them pretty handily, really.

I think we were on such a tear that we couldn't be stopped. All I saw from our guys was laser-like focus, and that extended to our coaching staff, who called a handful of really brilliant games and handled all of the off-the-field pressure stuff absolutely perfectly. I was really impressed with MM's approach that year.

People like to say it was "luck", but getting "hot" is not the same as getting lucky. And it also undersells the quality job that everyone on our staff did, too.

Whether it's through retirement or a firing, MM and TT won't be in charge in a few years, I'd reckon, but I'll never take away or try to diminish what I saw as a very well-constructed run to our 13th championship.

As far as Mike Neal goes, I'm happy to see a relatively positive forum with regards to his signing. I'd like to point out something, just because I thought it was interesting:

Mike Neal 2013: 47 tackles, 5 sacks, 1 INT.
Lamarr Houston: 69 tackles, 6 sacks
Arthur Jones: 53 tackles, 4 sacks

Houston got $35 mil over 5 years, 15 mil guaranteed
Jones got 33 over 5 years, 10 guaranteed.

Seeing what we got Mike Neal for, I have to say I'm glad that TT stays away from the first few days of FA. Fans see Houston and Jones' names on a NFL.com "top FA" list and think they'll help our team. Well, they might have helped us, but what is the net gain? There's an opportunity cost of signing them and letting a guy like Neal go - or giving him less playtime - that goes deeper than just adding talent because you have the CAP space.

Don't get me wrong - I'm nervous as hell about the safety position. I'd have gone for SOMEONE out of that 1st day group, even if it was for more than you'd want to pay, because with Burnett as our only stable safety on the roster, the opportunity vs. cost is high.

I hope the safety thing works out for TT, because while I'd love an upgrade at ILB and NT - safety is the only place I can really say he's dropping the ball, talent-acquisition-wise.

The ONLY reason IMO the Steelers stayed close in that SB was because our WRs kept dropping passes and most importantly Woodson got hurt.

[Bossman641]

To be sure a team can have a let down... as Seattle did; but the KC game was different b/c of the style of team they were. We don't match up with that style at all - physical power teams can simply beat us up - which is what KC did, and which is what SF has done to us 4 times since then.

I think TT/MM/Capers have gotten their head out of their ass a little bit when it comes to the overall finesse nature of the team, and have tried to address it by becoming more physical. Even Spraypaintedhair has actually been playing 3-4 base against power teams - whodda thunk??

We have gotten more physical from the beginning '12 to now. It was the KC that exposed us. I taped that game went thru the tape a few times, KC simply beat the living hell out of us physically - and that is not something that anything to do with a "let down". It was the style of play, and the fact that we couldn't match up to that style of play. SF has certainly proven that over the past couple of seasons.

I'm sure it had nothing to do with the OL being down their top 3 tackles.

And on the other side of the ball, they had 139 rushing but averaged under 4 ypc. That game was lost by the battered OL.

[woodbuck27]

+1



That was a solid post by PlantPage55.

[Bretsky]

I might get close if we factor in cap inflation.


I already factored in cap inflation and I was being liberal with my JAG numbers
50% would be 2.5MIL a year; that is still too high

[3irty1]

I already factored in cap inflation and I was being liberal with my JAG numbers
50% would be 2.5MIL a year; that is still too high

2.5M is extremely close the the average NFL salary. Special teams play alone can earn you that cash. Brad Jones is a injury prone shit bird, but I think the hyperbole has run its course.

[woodbuck27]

I think Capers is a fine coach - I think he is capable of putting a good gameplan together, and producing good results.

But then there is Mr. Spraypaintedhair - call it a Jekyl and Hyde situation. Capers cannot be trusted - period. He is just as capable of putting together an absolute stinker of a gameplan and riding it all the way to defeat.

He's exactly the coach I thought he was, and I've said right from the beginning, that we won't be able to trust the guy - that certainly has proven to be true. He's put up some horrid numbers the past few years - I don't expect that to change.

and yet he survives...."only" in this Green Bay Packers...We're ALL FAMILY" thingy .... can this sort of thing go on and on and .....on.

[bobblehead]

To be sure a team can have a let down... as Seattle did; but the KC game was different b/c of the style of team they were. We don't match up with that style at all - physical power teams can simply beat us up - which is what KC did, and which is what SF has done to us 4 times since then.

I think TT/MM/Capers have gotten their head out of their ass a little bit when it comes to the overall finesse nature of the team, and have tried to address it by becoming more physical. Even Spraypaintedhair has actually been playing 3-4 base against power teams - whodda thunk??

We have gotten more physical from the beginning '12 to now. It was the KC that exposed us. I taped that game went thru the tape a few times, KC simply beat the living hell out of us physically - and that is not something that anything to do with a "let down". It was the style of play, and the fact that we couldn't match up to that style of play. SF has certainly proven that over the past couple of seasons.

I simply don't buy it. NYG beat us in the playoffs, but go back a few weeks and we beat them up. They were a very physical team that went on to win the big one, but week 10 (or so) we punked them. There are a number of reasons teams win or lose games, and physicality has a lot to do with it, but its not the beginning and end of every story. If we played KC the very next week after they beat us that season vegas would have made the line -14.