Hamlin signs with cowboys

[Charles Woodson]

Dono if this has been posted butt


Hamlin signing gives Cowboys potent safety pairing
By Len Pasquarelli
ESPN.com

Unrestricted free agent safety Ken Hamlin, who returned in 2006 from a devastating head injury that limited him to just six games with the Seattle Seahawks the previous season, on Friday reached a contract agreement with the Dallas Cowboys.

Ken Hamlin
Safety
Seattle Seahawks

Profile
2006 SEASON STATISTICS
Tot Solo Ast FF Sack Int
96 75 21 1 2 3

Hamlin, 26, will sign a one-year, $2.5 million contract. The four-year veteran, who spent his entire career with the Seahawks before going into the free agent market earlier this month, was one of the top unrestricted players remaining.

The former Arkansas standout, who visited earlier this week with Cowboys officials and coaches, was rated as the No. 22 player available in free agency by ESPN.com. He was one of only three players among the top 30 free agents still unsigned.

The addition of Hamlin, who will pair with Pro Bowl strong safety Roy Williams, should provide Dallas with one of the top safety tandems in the league. Hamlin will likely play free safety, which will enable Williams to play closer to the line of scrimmage. That will permit the Cowboys to better camouflage Williams' deficiencies in pass coverage.

"Definitely, it will let Roy do his thing," Hamlin said.

Locating a viable free safety, and a solid complement to the physical Williams, has been a problem for the Cowboys. The team began last season with rookie Pat Watkins playing the position, then switched to Keith Davis, who started all 16 games in 2005.

Hamlin isn't a pure ballhawk, but possesses more free safety-type attributes than Williams, and can play the middle of the field, which should improve the Dallas coverage scheme.

A second-round choice in the 2003 draft, Hamlin has 298 tackles, eight interceptions, 22 passes defensed, four sacks, four forced fumbles and one recovery in 54 games. In 2005, he was involved in a fight outside a Seattle night spot and suffered a fractured skull and other head injuries that forced him onto the non-football injury list after just six games. Hamlin returned to start all 16 games in 2006 and recorded a career-best 96 tackles, along with three interceptions, eight passes defensed, and two sacks.

In addition to the Cowboys, he was pursued by New Orleans, but clearly wanted to sign with Dallas after visiting there this week.


http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2809953

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

That sucks!

[gbpackfan]

What a shock. Another FA signs with a team OTHER then the Packers. TT has really let Packer nation down during the FA period. His draft better be a FUCKING MASTER-PIECE!

[Travbrew]

Yes this sucks, but...Do we know if Hamlin even wanted to play in GB? I know for most it's all about the Benjamins, but not everyone. Maybe he has an aversion to the cold? I know a guy who is allergic to the cold. His face wrinkles up and he looks like the joker (nicholson) every time the temp drops below 45 degrees. It's kinda funny actually. Anyway, yes a little disappointing. Maybe TT isn't doing the job everyone wants. BUT HE'S FUCKLOADS BETTER THAN THE LAST DIPSHIT WE HAD.....PERIOD.

[Bretsky]

What a shock. Another FA signs with a team OTHER then the Packers. TT has really let Packer nation down during the FA period. His draft better be a FUCKING MASTER-PIECE!


I HATE MARCH

[packers11]

1 year... 2.5 mil... Thats a joke... I'd rather overspend on him than still have (manuel) the turtle out on the field...

[Bretsky]

1 year... 2.5 mil... Thats a joke... I'd rather overspend on him than still have (manuel) the turtle out on the field...


Maybe he wasn't a good person. I give up.

Some TT defenders stated they'll really be upset if we make no efforts for this guy and he goes somewhere else. He did and was not expensive. No surprised here with how it turned out

[LEWCWA]

I am a little disappointed, that the Pack didn't go after this guy. The more I think about it though, if he is such a good player, why does he only command 1 year at 2.5? We will have to see!

[prsnfoto]

This makes no sense every article I have read said he is bad in coverage like manuel but more of a beast in the box so Len this would make them a very good tandem against the rush but the worst in football against yhe pass, can you imagine two Manuels on the field at once? That being said he was cheap and would have been an upgrade over the other waste of space.

[Bretsky]

This makes no sense every article I have read said he is bad in coverage like manuel but more of a beast in the box so Len this would make them a very good tandem against the rush but the worst in football against yhe pass, can you imagine two Manuels on the field at once? That being said he was cheap and would have been an upgrade over the other waste of space.


IMO he's a heck of a lot better than Manuel. I've stated all along I liked Grant; but we'd have to have a GM willing to want to sign him first

[KYPack]

Hamlin is a similar player to Manuel. I think he's a little better in space, but not a huge improvement.

How about the Cowboys?

Ol' Wade better get that pass rush revved up, they got a hole back there big time!

They could have the slowest S tandem in the league!

[MadtownPacker]

Yup, and with the Pack headed to TX this season getting moss would make this a sure win cuz he hates the cowboys. He always had big games against them just like the ones he had at Lambeau.

Hamlin aint no big deal. I think Lynch will be gone and maybe TT gets a safety anyways.

[Partial]

Good. I am glad we don't have him. He's a liability. You guys are getting so bitter that you'd settle for anything at this point. That is a bad attitude.

[Bretsky]

Good. I am glad we don't have him. He's a liability. You guys are getting so bitter that you'd settle for anything at this point. That is a bad attitude.


He's much better than Manuel, but you are right. Anybody with expectations that TT would sign a solid starter or two via free agency with his 22 or so MIL in available cap space is frustratedl The sad part is Hamlin was the highest rated FA that is still out there by most ratings. Teams moved fast to sign the quality that they wanted this year.

[Partial]

Good. I am glad we don't have him. He's a liability. You guys are getting so bitter that you'd settle for anything at this point. That is a bad attitude.


He's much better than Manuel, but you are right. Anybody with expectations that TT would sign a solid starter or two via free agency with his 22 or so MIL in available cap space is frustratedl The sad part is Hamlin was the highest rated FA that is still out there by most ratings. Teams moved fast to sign the quality that they wanted this year.

So, because he is better than Manual does that constitute signing him to a long term deal making him the starter for years to come? I'd like to think we could do better.

Next year, we'll have money again, but most other teams will not since they went nuts this year. That means we'll have a greater selection of players. Plus, we'll have a better understanding of what we do and don't have.

[The Leaper]

Hamlin is the same player as both Collins and Manual...he's a guy who plays better closer to the line of scrimmage. We need a COVERAGE safety...someone who can make some big plays back there when our DL gets pressure on the QB.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I think Collins is okay in coverage. He makes mistakes recognizing things, but he has the ability to cover--unlike Manuel. I don't think you can lump him in with the in the box safeties.

It wouldn't have taken a long-term overpaying to get Hamlin. Could have had him at a reasonable amount for one year. If it didn't work out, they could have moved on. If it did work out, problem solved at safety. I like building through the draft, but thought Thompson should have grabbed a couple of projected starters in FA.

[Patler]

There is something wrong with the Hamlin scenario. Supposedly, he is a good safety, but:

He received no interest early.
He received marginal interest now.
He signed a very cheap contract.
He signed a 1 year contract.
Seattle made no effort to retain him, that I heard about.

[retailguy]

So, because he is better than Manual does that constitute signing him to a long term deal making him the starter for years to come? I'd like to think we could do better.

Next year, we'll have money again, but most other teams will not since they went nuts this year. That means we'll have a greater selection of players. Plus, we'll have a better understanding of what we do and don't have.

Dallas signed him to a ONE year contract... Who would have to "tie him up for years to come"? Your point makes no sense. 1 year 2.5m is not a big contract. we need safety help.

[KYPack]

[
.

So, because he is better than Manual does that constitute signing him to a long term deal making him the starter for years to come? I'd like to think we could do better.

Next year, we'll have money again, but most other teams will not since they went nuts this year. That means we'll have a greater selection of players. Plus, we'll have a better understanding of what we do and don't have.[/quote]

I see RG got ya, but I gotta beat ya up, too, Partial.

The teams that went nuts this year won't be all broke next yr.

Teams couldn't manage the cap, so it has been raised. Even the stupid teams will still have money next year to sign some guys. Your model was true in the 90's, but they are gone with the wind now. The majority of teams will have $ to piss away on FA's every year.

I have some reservations about Hamlin. He's goofy, for one. He was out for the year once after being hit in the head with a pipe. And he wasn't on his way to church when he was assaulted.

[Bretsky]

Good. I am glad we don't have him. He's a liability. You guys are getting so bitter that you'd settle for anything at this point. That is a bad attitude.


He's much better than Manuel, but you are right. Anybody with expectations that TT would sign a solid starter or two via free agency with his 22 or so MIL in available cap space is frustratedl The sad part is Hamlin was the highest rated FA that is still out there by most ratings. Teams moved fast to sign the quality that they wanted this year.

So, because he is better than Manual does that constitute signing him to a long term deal making him the starter for years to come? I'd like to think we could do better.

Next year, we'll have money again, but most other teams will not since they went nuts this year. That means we'll have a greater selection of players. Plus, we'll have a better understanding of what we do and don't have.

I never said anything about a long term deal; but it'd be nice to upgrade some starting positions with the 22 Million we have under the pillow :wink:

Didn't we say next year last year when TT used all that money to frontload Woodson ? The next year concept only makes us worse this coming year and we're using the theory again. Plus, the cap could go up again next year so there is no guarantee that we will have a greater selection of players for any less money. And several teams still have money to spend now; we're just in the top 4. I just don't buy into this theory anymore.

Cheers,
B

[Bretsky]

I think Collins is okay in coverage. He makes mistakes recognizing things, but he has the ability to cover--unlike Manuel. I don't think you can lump him in with the in the box safeties.

It wouldn't have taken a long-term overpaying to get Hamlin. Could have had him at a reasonable amount for one year. If it didn't work out, they could have moved on. If it did work out, problem solved at safety. I like building through the draft, but thought Thompson should have grabbed a couple of projected starters in FA.


:bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: :bow:

[packers11]

I liked Grant > Hamlin... But oh well :?

By the way, turn that turtle upside down... ITS DRIVING ME CRAZY!!!

[Patler]

We already know what the cap will be in 2008. It's $116 million. Same increase as for 2007.

[Packnut]

Hamlin is a good player. The only reason he did'nt get the big contract is because he did suffer a very serious head injury. Signing a 1 year contract is the same as Johnson. Prove your health and then collect a big check.

You guys can spin it anyway you want but the fact is Manuel sucks and anyone who says different does'nt know squat about football. It was'nt just 1 incident. People have short memories and forget the number of times he got burned because either he bit on PA or is just to damn slow.

Those counting on Underwood were the same ones who claimed Walker needed more than a year cause the injury is so serious. Now because it fits their spin, it's a different story. Underwood played well in pre-season, which really means very little.

At the start of FA, Thompson had the money to upgrade this position and almost every saftey out there would be an up-grade. He did'nt and that constitutes FAILURE on his part. Drafting a saftey will give no help next season cause rookies need to learn. So IF Underwood is not our saviour, then we are condemed to another season of WR's running free in our secondary. How ANY Teddy lover can put a positive spin on this is beyond me......................

[Fritz]

I would have to agree with Patler on this one. Hamlin did not get much if any early interest, and once he did it was minimal - as several TT critics have pointed out, the contract is pretty minimal by NFL standards. These are red flags for me. I just don't believe that TT is "cheap" - the dude forked over ten mil to Woodson last year, extended Franks's contract, Kampman's, Jenkins's, Harris's. No, in March it's not sexy to imagine how much better Colledge and Spitz are going to be, or to imagine Marviel Underwood rehabbing furiously or Culver working out. I know that. But those scenarios provide the Packers with better opportunities to become a much better team than TT running out and signing a new guy just because he's new, which is essentially (in my opinion) what is at work here. When people start complaining bitterly that TT lost out on a fullback that the Cleveland Browns cut, the it seems to me the desire for someone new - anyone new - is the driving force. New is sexy, new is exciting, but new may not be what makes this team better.

We'll see next year.

[Bretsky]

I would have to agree with Patler on this one. Hamlin did not get much if any early interest, and once he did it was minimal - as several TT critics have pointed out, the contract is pretty minimal by NFL standards. These are red flags for me. I just don't believe that TT is "cheap" - the dude forked over ten mil to Woodson last year, extended Franks's contract, Kampman's, Jenkins's, Harris's. No, in March it's not sexy to imagine how much better Colledge and Spitz are going to be, or to imagine Marviel Underwood rehabbing furiously or Culver working out. I know that. But those scenarios provide the Packers with better opportunities to become a much better team than TT running out and signing a new guy just because he's new, which is essentially (in my opinion) what is at work here. When people start complaining bitterly that TT lost out on a fullback that the Cleveland Browns cut, the it seems to me the desire for someone new - anyone new - is the driving force. New is sexy, new is exciting, but new may not be what makes this team better.

We'll see next year.

I too agree with Patler and think there is something more than meets the eye on Hamlin.

Either injury concerns or he's not a great person. One or the other.

I never pounded for Hamlin early on; I really liked Grant and a couple others. The whiners (I'd be one of these) are frustrated because TT has not shored up any starting holes we have with FA going into he draft and had and have a ton of money to do so. The defenders say there is nobody now anyways. Hamlin was the best guy left so that's probably what brought on even more frustration. And now that nearly all of the projected starters are signed, the defenders are pretty close to right. Most of the quality has been signed by those who decided to play.

[Patler]

Hamlin is a good player. The only reason he did'nt get the big contract is because he did suffer a very serious head injury. Signing a 1 year contract is the same as Johnson. Prove your health and then collect a big check.

You guys can spin it anyway you want but the fact is Manuel sucks and anyone who says different does'nt know squat about football. It was'nt just 1 incident. People have short memories and forget the number of times he got burned because either he bit on PA or is just to damn slow.

Those counting on Underwood were the same ones who claimed Walker needed more than a year cause the injury is so serious. Now because it fits their spin, it's a different story. Underwood played well in pre-season, which really means very little.

At the start of FA, Thompson had the money to upgrade this position and almost every saftey out there would be an up-grade. He did'nt and that constitutes FAILURE on his part. Drafting a saftey will give no help next season cause rookies need to learn. So IF Underwood is not our saviour, then we are condemed to another season of WR's running free in our secondary. How ANY Teddy lover can put a positive spin on this is beyond me......................

A few inaccuracies in your post.

Hamlin has already played a full season after his injury. His recovery has already been demonstrated. Just like Green, Hamlin should have been able to cash in this year. He couldn't. There must be a reason.

Just because you and I may differ on our assessment of Manual doesn't mean that I don't "know squat about football". In fact, perhaps I do, but you don't! :D

I don't think anyone is absolutely counting on Underwood, but apparently his recovery has gone well (unlike Walker's at this time) and he has rehabbed under the Packer staff supervision (again unlike Walker). I suspect TT has a good idea of were Underwood is at.

It's not just Underwood, there are several other young safeties with some promise. Only one has to step up and be a player. Culver, Bigby, Peprah are all young guys who could make a move, not to being all pro, but at least to being a legitimate starter.

I think you suffer a bit from the "grasses is greener on the other side of the fence" syndrome. A lot of the FAs out there may not be any better than the young guys coming on.

Maybe TT is a failure, maybe not. At this point I certainly don't know, and I suggest that neither do you. Last year everyone ranted and raved about TT not signing a veteran O-lineman. Maybe one could have helped, but the long term outlook for the O-line is decent right now, just one year later. Could be the same thing for safeties when we look back at it next year.

[esoxx]

The acid test for TT comes on the opening day of the regular season. If Manual trots out as a starting safety, there will be hell to pay.

[Packnut]

Hamlin is a good player. The only reason he did'nt get the big contract is because he did suffer a very serious head injury. Signing a 1 year contract is the same as Johnson. Prove your health and then collect a big check.

You guys can spin it anyway you want but the fact is Manuel sucks and anyone who says different does'nt know squat about football. It was'nt just 1 incident. People have short memories and forget the number of times he got burned because either he bit on PA or is just to damn slow.

Those counting on Underwood were the same ones who claimed Walker needed more than a year cause the injury is so serious. Now because it fits their spin, it's a different story. Underwood played well in pre-season, which really means very little.

At the start of FA, Thompson had the money to upgrade this position and almost every saftey out there would be an up-grade. He did'nt and that constitutes FAILURE on his part. Drafting a saftey will give no help next season cause rookies need to learn. So IF Underwood is not our saviour, then we are condemed to another season of WR's running free in our secondary. How ANY Teddy lover can put a positive spin on this is beyond me......................

A few inaccuracies in your post.

Hamlin has already played a full season after his injury. His recovery has already been demonstrated. Just like Green, Hamlin should have been able to cash in this year. He couldn't. There must be a reason.

Just because you and I may differ on our assessment of Manual doesn't mean that I don't "know squat about football". In fact, perhaps I do, but you don't! :D

I don't think anyone is absolutely counting on Underwood, but apparently his recovery has gone well (unlike Walker's at this time) and he has rehabbed under the Packer staff supervision (again unlike Walker). I suspect TT has a good idea of were Underwood is at.

It's not just Underwood, there are several other young safeties with some promise. Only one has to step up and be a player. Culver, Bigby, Peprah are all young guys who could make a move, not to being all pro, but at least to being a legitimate starter.

I think you suffer a bit from the "grasses is greener on the other side of the fence" syndrome. A lot of the FAs out there may not be any better than the young guys coming on.

Maybe TT is a failure, maybe not. At this point I certainly don't know, and I suggest that neither do you. Last year everyone ranted and raved about TT not signing a veteran O-lineman. Maybe one could have helped, but the long term outlook for the O-line is decent right now, just one year later. Could be the same thing for safeties when we look back at it next year.

As far as our difference of opinion on Manuel, I prefer to deal in FACT and what my eyes have seen. When debating a point, it does help one to have facts on their side as compared to opinion. Then again, if some people incorperated facts into their arguements, I'd have ANOTHER heart attack!(note: comment not directed at you).

I read virtually everything on the net from former players who are now analysts to everything that's said in the ESPN chats. Yes, some of them are idiots but not all. I have never read a negative on Hamlin's character or play on the field. In fact, EVERYTHING I've read states Hamlin is a very good saftey with above avg cover skills. Now I could post everything that the "experts" have said about Hamlin but think that would be reduntant. I would rather challenge the nay-sayers to post all the negatives stated about him.

As for his injury, he suffered head trauma so your point about the injury factor not having to do with teams shying away from him is wrong. He has a concussion risk associated with him. This was on ESPN and also in a Seattle newspaper posted on the ESPN local newspaper site.

Now as far as the "young guys" go, that is subjective to opinion since there is NOTHING to go on in their NFL playing history. They might turn out great or they might turn out busts. Now since we already have one saftey with question marks (Collins), I prefer to have someone with QUALITY PROVEN NFL PLAYING EXPERIENCE at the other position. May-be it does'nt bother you to watch oppossing WR's running wild in our secondary but it bugs the hell outta me! When it comes to our saftey pass coverage from 2006, ANY grass is greener on the other side. Again, not my opinion but FACT! Re-run the tape my friend. As painfull as it is to watch, it speaks volumes.

As for your point about Thompson, I am not one (contrary to popular opinion) to criticize his every move. He deserves credit for signing Woodson, helping to free up cap space (even if it is'nt used) and re-signing Kampman and Jenkins to name a few. However, he has made his share of mistakes and while batting .500 in baseball is astounding, it does'nt quite cut it for an NFL GM.

Last but not least, my opinions here are well documentated and for the most part more times than not, end up being correct. I was one of the few who argued with the Favre bashers after the 2005 season that he still had some gas in the tank and his 2006 season was proof of that. I argued with almost everyone here that Walker would recover from his injury ahead of time and was right about that. I also argued with almost everyone here that he would not only play but produce. I believe the #'s he posted with a terrible QB and then with a rookie QB were quite an accomplishment. I said he was still a blue chip WR and most experts share that opinion. Finally, when the debate was raging about which coach to hire, I was all over Payton and the guy ends up being HC of the year. These are just a few examples. I believe my record speaks for itself............

[Patler]

As far as our difference of opinion on Manuel, I prefer to deal in FACT and what my eyes have seen. When debating a point, it does help one to have facts on their side as compared to opinion. Then again, if some people incorperated facts into their arguements, I'd have ANOTHER heart attack!(note: comment not directed at you).

I read virtually everything on the net from former players who are now analysts to everything that's said in the ESPN chats. Yes, some of them are idiots but not all. I have never read a negative on Hamlin's character or play on the field. In fact, EVERYTHING I've read states Hamlin is a very good saftey with above avg cover skills. Now I could post everything that the "experts" have said about Hamlin but think that would be reduntant. I would rather challenge the nay-sayers to post all the negatives stated about him.

As for his injury, he suffered head trauma so your point about the injury factor not having to do with teams shying away from him is wrong. He has a concussion risk associated with him. This was on ESPN and also in a Seattle newspaper posted on the ESPN local newspaper site.

Now as far as the "young guys" go, that is subjective to opinion since there is NOTHING to go on in their NFL playing history. They might turn out great or they might turn out busts. Now since we already have one saftey with question marks (Collins), I prefer to have someone with QUALITY PROVEN NFL PLAYING EXPERIENCE at the other position. May-be it does'nt bother you to watch oppossing WR's running wild in our secondary but it bugs the hell outta me! When it comes to our saftey pass coverage from 2006, ANY grass is greener on the other side. Again, not my opinion but FACT! Re-run the tape my friend. As painfull as it is to watch, it speaks volumes.

As for your point about Thompson, I am not one (contrary to popular opinion) to criticize his every move. He deserves credit for signing Woodson, helping to free up cap space (even if it is'nt used) and re-signing Kampman and Jenkins to name a few. However, he has made his share of mistakes and while batting .500 in baseball is astounding, it does'nt quite cut it for an NFL GM.

Last but not least, my opinions here are well documentated and for the most part more times than not, end up being correct. I was one of the few who argued with the Favre bashers after the 2005 season that he still had some gas in the tank and his 2006 season was proof of that. I argued with almost everyone here that Walker would recover from his injury ahead of time and was right about that. I also argued with almost everyone here that he would not only play but produce. I believe the #'s he posted with a terrible QB and then with a rookie QB were quite an accomplishment. I said he was still a blue chip WR and most experts share that opinion. Finally, when the debate was raging about which coach to hire, I was all over Payton and the guy ends up being HC of the year. These are just a few examples. I believe my record speaks for itself............

Being a bit defensive, perhaps?? :D

You comments about Hamlin don't follow. First you wrote:


Hamlin is a good player. The only reason he did'nt get the big contract is because he did suffer a very serious head injury. Signing a 1 year contract is the same as Johnson. Prove your health and then collect a big check.

Now you write:


As for his injury, he suffered head trauma so your point about the injury factor not having to do with teams shying away from him is wrong. He has a concussion risk associated with him. This was on ESPN and also in a Seattle newspaper posted on the ESPN local newspaper site.

On the one hand you suggest his low contract was a one year thing as he recovered from injury to "then collect a big check." But he already had his year to prove that, and he did not collect. Your second post more accurate identifies the real problem...he will be a concussion risk for the rest of his playing days and may never see a big money, long term contract. In fact, an article out of Seattle at the end of the year indicated the team would let him leave because although his numbers were good, he was not the same player, didn't tackle the same as before etc. As I recall, it was touch and go with him for a day or two as to if he would live after his injury. I'm not sure he is a good investment.

It's easy to just blame Manual everytime you saw him trailing a play, and it is easy to fault the safeties when plays go long. Not all were his fault. Against the Bears, Harris admitted that the long one seemingly surrendered by Manual was actually his fault. Another toward the end of the year was clearly on someone else, maybe Harris, because Harris dropped coverage to pick up no one, after completely missing the guy when he tried to hold him up on his release off the line. Manual scrambled to get to the guy Harris released, but couldn't. Again, Manual looks to be the culprit, but likely was not. Several times linebackers released guys outside,when clearly they should have forced them inside toward the coverage picking them up.

I'm not a big fan of Manuals by any means, but there was more wrong in the pass coverage last years then just one safety. If they get it worked out, they guys they have may be fine. If they don't get it worked out, it won't matter who is back there, be it Mark Roman, Marquand Manual or someone else. It looked the same as the 2004 backfield coached by Schottenheimer and Washington, but the only hold-over player from 2004 was Harris. Three new players, same result.

I argued after 2004 that Roman was not as bad as it seemed, and I think he showed that in 2005 (not that he was great by any means). Similarly, Manual is not as bad as he was made to look at times last year.

[retailguy]

The acid test for TT comes on the opening day of the regular season. If Manual trots out as a starting safety, there will be hell to pay.

Perhaps. The sad thing is it will be impossible to do anything about it at that point. For 2007 anyhow.

[vince]

I was one of the few who argued with the Favre bashers after the 2005 season that he still had some gas in the tank and his 2006 season was proof of that. I argued with almost everyone here that Walker would recover from his injury ahead of time and was right about that. I also argued with almost everyone here that he would not only play but produce. I believe the #'s he posted with a terrible QB and then with a rookie QB were quite an accomplishment. I said he was still a blue chip WR and most experts share that opinion. Finally, when the debate was raging about which coach to hire, I was all over Payton and the guy ends up being HC of the year. These are just a few examples. I believe my record speaks for itself............You and Arrigo are the Packer-world finalists for the "throw enough shit against the wall, something's bound to stick" award. The only difference is that Arrigo just throws shit about future transactions. You throw shit about anything and everything, but it's always shit.

You sure were right when you ranted about how TT ran Favre into retirement because of the direction he's taken the team, weren't you? Oh yeah, Favre decided to come back for another year, BECAUSE HE"S EXCITED ABOUT THE DIRECTION OF THIS TEAM.

Remember that one, nut?

Then you completely miss the point about the entire Walker situation, seemingly understanding nothing whatsoever about the team concept and the future problems that giving in to the ridiculous selfish tactics he employed would have on the rest of the team.

You consistently state your opinions as "FACT"s, apparently not understanding what a fact is, and denigrate anyone who could possibly disagree with you - actually believing in your mind that you possess the end-all be-all self-righteous, holy goddessness of opinions on all things Packers.

Give us all a break, nut - please. Your self righteous schpeal has worn out.

[Patler]

Last but not least, my opinions here are well documentated and for the most part more times than not, end up being correct. I was one of the few who argued with the Favre bashers after the 2005 season that he still had some gas in the tank and his 2006 season was proof of that.

Vince's reply reminded me that I wanted to check this statement, because I didn't remember a big difference between Favre '05 and Favre '06. Other than ints., he was the same QB in '06 as he was in '05.

'05/ '06

attempts - 607/613
completions - 372/343
yards - 3881/3885
TDs - 20/18
Ints. - 18/29

What did he really prove in '06 that wasn't shown in '05?
Nothing. Fewer interceptions, but a significant drop in completion %.

So what insight did you give us? That Favre was the same in '06 as in '05?

Quite frankly, his inconsistent accuracy last year worries me a little. He was often late or behind receivers on routes that were his bread and butter throws for years. I think it was Marino (maybe Simms) who said the first thing that goes is accuracy, and it happens most in the off-season. You pick up the ball in the fall, and suddenly it won't go where it is supposed to, and it never comes back I am anxious to see if this happens to Favre. I hope not yet..

[MJZiggy]

I thought the first thing to go was the legs??

[esoxx]

The acid test for TT comes on the opening day of the regular season. If Manual trots out as a starting safety, there will be hell to pay.

Perhaps. The sad thing is it will be impossible to do anything about it at that point. For 2007 anyhow.

True. However, I feel if Manual does indeed start and the Packers stagger about and finish south of .500, TT's honeymoon is over and things will get ugly in Packerland.

It's one thing to put stumblebums like Klemm & Whittacker at guard and call them "starters." He got a mulligan for that and no one really knew how they would perform.

But we know how Manual performs, and he won't get a mulligan this time around.

[Packnut]

As far as our difference of opinion on Manuel, I prefer to deal in FACT and what my eyes have seen. When debating a point, it does help one to have facts on their side as compared to opinion. Then again, if some people incorperated facts into their arguements, I'd have ANOTHER heart attack!(note: comment not directed at you).

I read virtually everything on the net from former players who are now analysts to everything that's said in the ESPN chats. Yes, some of them are idiots but not all. I have never read a negative on Hamlin's character or play on the field. In fact, EVERYTHING I've read states Hamlin is a very good saftey with above avg cover skills. Now I could post everything that the "experts" have said about Hamlin but think that would be reduntant. I would rather challenge the nay-sayers to post all the negatives stated about him.

As for his injury, he suffered head trauma so your point about the injury factor not having to do with teams shying away from him is wrong. He has a concussion risk associated with him. This was on ESPN and also in a Seattle newspaper posted on the ESPN local newspaper site.

Now as far as the "young guys" go, that is subjective to opinion since there is NOTHING to go on in their NFL playing history. They might turn out great or they might turn out busts. Now since we already have one saftey with question marks (Collins), I prefer to have someone with QUALITY PROVEN NFL PLAYING EXPERIENCE at the other position. May-be it does'nt bother you to watch oppossing WR's running wild in our secondary but it bugs the hell outta me! When it comes to our saftey pass coverage from 2006, ANY grass is greener on the other side. Again, not my opinion but FACT! Re-run the tape my friend. As painfull as it is to watch, it speaks volumes.

As for your point about Thompson, I am not one (contrary to popular opinion) to criticize his every move. He deserves credit for signing Woodson, helping to free up cap space (even if it is'nt used) and re-signing Kampman and Jenkins to name a few. However, he has made his share of mistakes and while batting .500 in baseball is astounding, it does'nt quite cut it for an NFL GM.

Last but not least, my opinions here are well documentated and for the most part more times than not, end up being correct. I was one of the few who argued with the Favre bashers after the 2005 season that he still had some gas in the tank and his 2006 season was proof of that. I argued with almost everyone here that Walker would recover from his injury ahead of time and was right about that. I also argued with almost everyone here that he would not only play but produce. I believe the #'s he posted with a terrible QB and then with a rookie QB were quite an accomplishment. I said he was still a blue chip WR and most experts share that opinion. Finally, when the debate was raging about which coach to hire, I was all over Payton and the guy ends up being HC of the year. These are just a few examples. I believe my record speaks for itself............

Being a bit defensive, perhaps?? :D

You comments about Hamlin don't follow. First you wrote:


Hamlin is a good player. The only reason he did'nt get the big contract is because he did suffer a very serious head injury. Signing a 1 year contract is the same as Johnson. Prove your health and then collect a big check.

Now you write:


As for his injury, he suffered head trauma so your point about the injury factor not having to do with teams shying away from him is wrong. He has a concussion risk associated with him. This was on ESPN and also in a Seattle newspaper posted on the ESPN local newspaper site.

On the one hand you suggest his low contract was a one year thing as he recovered from injury to "then collect a big check." But he already had his year to prove that, and he did not collect. Your second post more accurate identifies the real problem...he will be a concussion risk for the rest of his playing days and may never see a big money, long term contract. In fact, an article out of Seattle at the end of the year indicated the team would let him leave because although his numbers were good, he was not the same player, didn't tackle the same as before etc. As I recall, it was touch and go with him for a day or two as to if he would live after his injury. I'm not sure he is a good investment.

It's easy to just blame Manual everytime you saw him trailing a play, and it is easy to fault the safeties when plays go long. Not all were his fault. Against the Bears, Harris admitted that the long one seemingly surrendered by Manual was actually his fault. Another toward the end of the year was clearly on someone else, maybe Harris, because Harris dropped coverage to pick up no one, after completely missing the guy when he tried to hold him up on his release off the line. Manual scrambled to get to the guy Harris released, but couldn't. Again, Manual looks to be the culprit, but likely was not. Several times linebackers released guys outside,when clearly they should have forced them inside toward the coverage picking them up.

I'm not a big fan of Manuals by any means, but there was more wrong in the pass coverage last years then just one safety. If they get it worked out, they guys they have may be fine. If they don't get it worked out, it won't matter who is back there, be it Mark Roman, Marquand Manual or someone else. It looked the same as the 2004 backfield coached by Schottenheimer and Washington, but the only hold-over player from 2004 was Harris. Three new players, same result.

I argued after 2004 that Roman was not as bad as it seemed, and I think he showed that in 2005 (not that he was great by any means). Similarly, Manual is not as bad as he was made to look at times last year.

Not being defensive at all. Just stating my position for the record so that at some point in time we can re-visit. As far as Hamlin, when it comes to a concussion risk, one season of proof ain't gonna cut it. I thought this is fairly obvious but I guess it's not to everyone. Most teams view head injuries much different than say a torn ACL. I never disputed the severity of his injury or the fact that he is high risk. However, a one year contract takes the risk away imo.

Now onto Mr Manuel and your defense of him. Do you remember all the glowing reports from Teddy right after he signed Manuel? Let me refresh your memory. "FIELD GENERAL" was used by Mr Thompson several times. Manuel's strength according to Teddy was to make everyone be in the right place and be assignment sure. That did not happen. This is FACT my friend-not my opinion. Now, please don't tell me Manuel did'nt have a big problem with biting on play action several times last season cause if you did, you'd be lying.

May I also refresh your memory about a certain little article which I believe was from either JSO or Packernews.com about the "friction" in the Packer secondary and the inuendo was that Harris and Woodson did'nt care for Manuel.

If that ain't enough, then for goodness sake let's just use our God given ability to judge his play on what we actually saw last season. Manuel is SLOW. It's that simple. He always seemed to be a step late. To be honest, I am stunned that you would defend his play at all. Your better than that. :shock:

[Packnut]

Last but not least, my opinions here are well documentated and for the most part more times than not, end up being correct. I was one of the few who argued with the Favre bashers after the 2005 season that he still had some gas in the tank and his 2006 season was proof of that.

Vince's reply reminded me that I wanted to check this statement, because I didn't remember a big difference between Favre '05 and Favre '06. Other than ints., he was the same QB in '06 as he was in '05.

'05/ '06

attempts - 607/613
completions - 372/343
yards - 3881/3885
TDs - 20/18
Ints. - 18/29

What did he really prove in '06 that wasn't shown in '05?
Nothing. Fewer interceptions, but a significant drop in completion %.

So what insight did you give us? That Favre was the same in '06 as in '05?

Quite frankly, his inconsistent accuracy last year worries me a little. He was often late or behind receivers on routes that were his bread and butter throws for years. I think it was Marino (maybe Simms) who said the first thing that goes is accuracy, and it happens most in the off-season. You pick up the ball in the fall, and suddenly it won't go where it is supposed to, and it never comes back I am anxious to see if this happens to Favre. I hope not yet..

As far as answering vince, it's a waste of my time cause only a fool argues with a fool. However, out of respect I will clarify for you. When it comes to Favre, stats don't tell the story cause it was pretty obvious he had 1 freaking WR to throw to in 2005 and 2006. The difference was, he did cut down on his picks and at least tried to be more careful despite the lack of talent and experience around him.

Now let's go back to the end of the 2005 season. I recall Theisman, Jaworski and Salsbury all but claiming Favre dead. Is'nt that correct? They were pretty brutal in their criticism. Now, did those viewpoints change during the 2006 season? Your damn right they did. Why did they change? The stats were not all that different. The talent level around him did'nt change much. Yet, damn near everyone's opinion on a national level changed. Now you hear things like "Favre can play another few years". A far cry from them throwing the dirt on his coffin after 2005.

Now if I was wrong as you and vince claim, why did the perception change so much from 2005 to 2006? Obviously, Brett's play had to improve, otherwise their opinion's would not have changed. Is'nt that fairly obvious and quite logical? C'mon, you can do better than this....... :P

[vince]

Last but not least, my opinions here are well documentated and for the most part more times than not, end up being correct. I was one of the few who argued with the Favre bashers after the 2005 season that he still had some gas in the tank and his 2006 season was proof of that.

Vince's reply reminded me that I wanted to check this statement, because I didn't remember a big difference between Favre '05 and Favre '06. Other than ints., he was the same QB in '06 as he was in '05.

'05/ '06

attempts - 607/613
completions - 372/343
yards - 3881/3885
TDs - 20/18
Ints. - 18/29

What did he really prove in '06 that wasn't shown in '05?
Nothing. Fewer interceptions, but a significant drop in completion %.

So what insight did you give us? That Favre was the same in '06 as in '05?

Quite frankly, his inconsistent accuracy last year worries me a little. He was often late or behind receivers on routes that were his bread and butter throws for years. I think it was Marino (maybe Simms) who said the first thing that goes is accuracy, and it happens most in the off-season. You pick up the ball in the fall, and suddenly it won't go where it is supposed to, and it never comes back I am anxious to see if this happens to Favre. I hope not yet..

As far as answering vince, it's a waste of my time cause only a fool argues with a fool. However, out of respect I will clarify for you. When it comes to Favre, stats don't tell the story cause it was pretty obvious he had 1 freaking WR to throw to in 2005 and 2006. The difference was, he did cut down on his picks and at least tried to be more careful despite the lack of talent and experience around him.

Now let's go back to the end of the 2005 season. I recall Theisman, Jaworski and Salsbury all but claiming Favre dead. Is'nt that correct? They were pretty brutal in their criticism. Now, did those viewpoints change during the 2006 season? Your damn right they did. Why did they change? The stats were not all that different. The talent level around him did'nt change much. Yet, damn near everyone's opinion on a national level changed. Now you hear things like "Favre can play another few years". A far cry from them throwing the dirt on his coffin after 2005.

Now if I was wrong as you and vince claim, why did the perception change so much from 2005 to 2006? Obviously, Brett's play had to improve, otherwise their opinion's would not have changed. Is'nt that fairly obvious and quite logical? C'mon, you can do better than this....... :P

Patler brings facts about Favre's performance. You try to deflect them with media hyperbole.

I brring facts about some of your recent posts (You remember when you said your opinions are docmented?) You try to deflect them with unsubstantiated personal attacks.

Some things probably will never change. Your shit ain't stickin', nut.