Colin Cole- "Top Priority"

[Patler]

That's not what McGinn suggests. He clearly states that it is a top priority of the Packers to get Cole re-signed before the start of the free agent signing period.

But if we think about it a bit, wouldn't this necessarily be the case? To wit:
1) The Packers have three UFAs: Tauscher, Mongtomery, and Cole
2) Tauscher is injured, his recovery is still in question, and he might be done. At the very least he promises to not get much interest from other teams.
3) Montgomery wasn't very good in the old scheme and doesn't project well to the new scheme, so he probable won't be resigned at all.
4) Free Agency hasn't started yet, so they can't sign anybody not currently on the team.
5) For the RFA guys, all we need to do is figure out what to tender them at, and then there's no rush.
6) For the ERFAs, we don't need to do anything right now.

So assuming the Packers had any interest in doing anything right now before free agency (other than "scouting"), wouldn't it have to be "resign Cole"? Since they're probably not going to resign Montgomery, they won't resign Tauscher for a while pending his recovery, and it won't take very long to figure out "We should tender Bigby, Hunter, Martin, Kuhn, and Humphrey with the second round tender" (probably none of those guys being worth a first round tender, and the lowest 'draft status' tender would basically be literally meaningless for Bigby, Hunter, Martin, and Kuhn since they were all undrafted; Bush and Bodiford may not be worth keeping.). Bigby may be worth a first round tender, though. The difference is about $700,000 and though Bigby isn't great he is a starter; aditionally Bigby, Collins, Rouse, and Peprah are a better group of Safeties than Nobody, Collins, Rouse, and Peprah.

To answer your question..No, it would not.

[Lurker64]

To answer your question..No, it would not.

Really, what I'm saying is that it's clear the Packers wish to retain Cole as they don't really have anybody else who can be counted on for backup NT and the draft is not especially deep at this position. If Cole hits FA, it's significantly less likely that they will be able to retain him as teams often overpay for mediocre big men (e.g. Tommy Kelly), and Cole is not likely to take a "home town discount" if a better offer is on the table. The Packers don't really have anything else significant to do before free agency starts (no other elite UFAs to resign, no RFAs with difficult tender decisions to make, etc.) So saying "it's the top priority" right now is sort of faint praise, since it doesn't have a lot of competition for "things the Packers ought to be concerned about".

Really, all I got out of the article from McGinn is "the Packers want to keep Cole." If they want to keep him, he ought to be their highest priority right now, considering the rest of what they have on their plate from a personnel department.

[Patler]

To answer your question..No, it would not.

Really, what I'm saying is that it's clear the Packers wish to retain Cole as they don't really have anybody else who can be counted on for backup NT and the draft is not especially deep at this position. If Cole hits FA, it's significantly less likely that they will be able to retain him as teams often overpay for mediocre big men (e.g. Tommy Kelly), and Cole is not likely to take a "home town discount" if a better offer is on the table. The Packers don't really have anything else significant to do before free agency starts (no other elite UFAs to resign, no RFAs with difficult tender decisions to make, etc.) So saying "it's the top priority" right now is sort of faint praise, since it doesn't have a lot of competition for "things the Packers ought to be concerned about".

Really, all I got out of the article from McGinn is "the Packers want to keep Cole." If they want to keep him, he ought to be their highest priority right now, considering the rest of what they have on their plate from a personnel department.

Until McGinn's article, everything else I read and heard seemed to indicate the Packers had little interest in signing Cole. Giving McGinn the benefit of the doubt, and considering that the Packers have some interest in re-signing Cole, I certainly would not refer to it as a "top priority," which carries the connotation of a significant detriment if not achieved.

I don't think replacing Cole with someone of equal talent will be that difficult. I think they may be just as happy to let him hit the FA market and see what his value is. Either they will sign him for what they think he is worth and he will recognize that from being on the market, or they will get a less expensive alternative. It avoids the risk of having a disgruntled player and avoids overpaying.

Basically, I don't look at re-signing Cole as a priority at all. If it works out, OK; if not, that's OK too for me.

[mraynrand]

Last year there was an article arguing that Cole's productivity was higher than either Jolly or Pickett. Just something to consider. I'm luke warm about Cole too, but productivity is just that. Upgrade is needed, but they could do worse.

[Lurker64]

Well, the thing about resigning Cole is that it basically means that you don't desperately need a backup NT, since you really only need three guys on the roster who can play NT: Starter, Backup, and a DE/NT guy. Pickett is the starter, and if a miracle happens and Harrell is healthy, he can be the DE/NT guy. So the backup position is needed.

If you resign Cole for the backup NT, this means that if they don't pick Raji in the first for whatever reason (he's gone, or somebody better isn't), they don't need to worry about reaching for a backup NT like Brace, Taylor, or Hill in the later rounds higher than he probably ought to be picked.

So from that perspective, it's certainly a reasonable thing to do. Cole isn't great, but it's generally best to address the draft from a position of "having few needs" just so you can always pick a guy who has the best shot at being an impact player.

[Patler]

Well, the thing about resigning Cole is that it basically means that you don't desperately need a backup NT, since you really only need three guys on the roster who can play NT: Starter, Backup, and a DE/NT guy. Pickett is the starter, and if a miracle happens and Harrell is healthy, he can be the DE/NT guy. So the backup position is needed.

If you resign Cole for the backup NT, this means that if they don't pick Raji in the first for whatever reason (he's gone, or somebody better isn't), they don't need to worry about reaching for a backup NT like Brace, Taylor, or Hill in the later rounds higher than he probably ought to be picked.

So from that perspective, it's certainly a reasonable thing to do. Cole isn't great, but it's generally best to address the draft from a position of "having few needs" just so you can always pick a guy who has the best shot at being an impact player.

Where we differ is that I don't see Cole as the #2 NT. If you sign him it is with the thought he will be the #3 guy, maybe a swing player, as MM thinks he can play DE too.

Even when younger and healthier, Pickett played better with fewer snaps. If he is to be a NT for the Packers, the backup will play a lot. I don't want Cole for that job.

I don't mind signing him, but not to be the #2 NT. Thus, I see no priority in getting him signed before FA starts.

[Waldo]

There's a fairly under the radar guy in this draft that is physically just like Harrell. A fast skinny NT that could swing between the DE and NT position. Dorell Scott of Clemson. 6'3", 315 (plays at 320), and not flabby, he ran the 3rd fastest 40 of the DT's (4.90). His tape isn't quite as good as Justin's, but unlike Justin, he's been relatively healthy throughout his career. His 40 probably pushed him into at worst the high 3rd, probably the 2nd, but I'd take him over the big slow pokes, Brace and Taylor, since he could feasibly add 20-30 lbs without becoming ridiculously slow. I've been trying to get all his #'s, but I know going into 2008 he put up 28 reps at Clemson, good enough for an interior T.

[MJZiggy]

315 lbs. and you're calling him skinny???

[Waldo]

315 lbs. and you're calling him skinny???

I wouldn't call him fat. Pretty skinny for an A gap tackle.

This is fat:

[Fritz]

315 lbs. and you're calling him skinny???

I wouldn't call him fat. Pretty skinny for an A gap tackle.

This is fat:

I'm still not sure why you don't care of the big, slow guys at nose tackle. It would seem that the ability to hold the point of attack would be the most important skill for a nose tackle to have. That said, wouldn't strength, weight, and leverage be the most important factors for a nose?

[Waldo]

All of the elite NT's can move well. And a good # were not 350 lbs coming into the league. Most were 300-320 lb coming into the league, with the frame to get much larger, but strong with quick feet.

Pickett was 300
Hampton was 314
Jenkins was 316
Williams was 305
Rodgers was 320

Wilfork was 323
Ngata was 338

Even if a guy can anchor against a semi, what is the point in blocking him if he's too slow to get to the back or QB? There needs to be a good reason to dedicate 2 blockers to a guy. He needs to be a threat to dominate. Domination is a combination of speed and power.

The offense would rather block the linebackers. The NT has to be strong enough and quick enough to stop them from doing so.

[texaspackerbacker]

The biggest complaint against Cole is that he seems to be weak at the point of attack. The second complaint is that he is slow.

As a backup NT, Cole will rotate with Pickett--assuming Pickett stays healthy. The most likely thing is that he rotates in on passing downs. Cole seems to penetrate pretty well. That not only is useful in rushing the passer, but also tends to compensate for not holding up well against blocks.

Cole reminds me a little bit of Jay Ratliff of the Cowboys--originally a stop-gap replacement, small and weak at the point, but turned out to be a damn fine NT. I'm not saying Cole is or will be as good as Ratliff; I'm just saying, you can be something other than the prototype, and still be decent.

[Waldo]

The biggest complaint against Cole is that he seems to be weak at the point of attack. The second complaint is that he is slow.

As a backup NT, Cole will rotate with Pickett--assuming Pickett stays healthy. The most likely thing is that he rotates in on passing downs. Cole seems to penetrate pretty well. That not only is useful in rushing the passer, but also tends to compensate for not holding up well against blocks.

Cole reminds me a little bit of Jay Ratliff of the Cowboys--originally a stop-gap replacement, small and weak at the point, but turned out to be a damn fine NT. I'm not saying Cole is or will be as good as Ratliff; I'm just saying, you can be something other than the prototype, and still be decent.

Except that Ratliff is every bit as quick as Maybin (faster than Hodge was straight line and side to side, plus he's extremely explosive), Cole makes old ladies is walkers look fast.

[KYPack]

This thread is kind of funny.

Cole's supporters are lukewarm about him and so are his detractors.

We sign him and then cut him if we find somebody better? Or is that dirty pool?

I really felt Cole was not that effective a 4-3 DT and a fish out of water in a 3-4. But he does have some skills and is 28. I doubt we can find better, unless we hit the lottery in the draft.

Where will your guy go in the draft, Waldo?

A 3?

[Waldo]

This thread is kind of funny.

Cole's supporters are lukewarm about him and so are his detractors.

We sign him and then cut him if we find somebody better? Or is that dirty pool?

I really felt Cole was not that effective a 4-3 DT and a fish out of water in a 3-4. But he does have some skills and is 28. I doubt we can find better, unless we hit the lottery in the draft.

Where will your guy go in the draft, Waldo?

A 3?

He was before today...a 3/4, but without knowing any other #'s than his 40, his combine might have pushed him into the late 2nd. Like I said, he's extremely similar physically and experience-wise to Harrell. Not a pass rushing specialist DT (a la Jerry), a quick run stuffer that is at home in the middle being double teamed.