36 Mil to Spend: TT is going to stay skimpy on spending...

[imscott72]

Re: FA's

I fail to understand the argument that signing anyone now impacts keeping the current players who will become free agents. Why is it a sure thing that any of those players mentioned will warrant a huge increase?

We don't know how well Kampman will adjust to playing OLB in a 3-4 so how can a value be put on him?

Yes, Collins improved his play. However, he was so awful the season before, how much did he really improve? He did have a ton of picks, but I also remember him dropping a few right in his hands. He also was responsible for some terrible plays. Also, again, what will be his value in a 3-4? I think it will not be easy for him. He's not an in the box saftey and he's not that good in one on one coverage (his problems covering TE's is well documentated.

Colledge? By Thompson's own admission and track record, he does not believe in breaking the bank for ANY offensive lineman.

Bigby? C'mon seriously! The guy had a great 1/3 of the last part of the 2007 season. Don't see huge money going there.

The Giants made some real good free agent moves and I'm sure they have good players with expiring contracts coming up too.

I guess the difference in opinions is some would rather settle for just being competitive for an extended period of time, and others (myself included) would like to make a SERIOUS run at at SB.

Is'nt that the whole purpose to all this? You do what it takes (spending money) and assemble the best team you can. Yes, it's inevitable that you can't sign everyone and you will lose good players at some point. Again though, you at least take your best shot at a championship. If you sign the right guys and have developed some form of depth and IF things go your way, you win a SB. Then, you re-tool-re-build or whatever and make another run a few years down the line. THAT is the NFL cycle.

This slow "turtle" like way (no pun intended) will not work for 3 specific reasons:

1- Contracts will always be expiring. It's life in the NFL. That is why the window to make a run is so short.

2-While your using the "turtle" approach, the other teams are using all the available tools at their disposal to also improve.

3-You must almost be perfect in drafting. For those of us who choose to live in reality, deal with facts and hold the GM to a high standard, Teddy is far from it. In 4 years, to date, he has drafted ONE IMPACT player. Jennings is the ONLY blue chip he has taken. THAT will not get it done.

Much to our dismay, the depth that we all believed Thompson had built, when put to the test failed miserably to wit 6-10.

How many playoff games has Dan Snyder won with his free spending?

How about Zigi Wilf?

When was the last time Jerry Jones won a playoff game because of his free spending?

Same tired crap from the "FA is a cure all" crowd.

No one is crying "sign everyone!" Signing a couple guys every year to shore up weaknesses isn't a crime however. You can't go into next season refusing to sign anyone because there are contracts expiring in the near future. The NFL is a "win now" league. If you don't win now, then your job is on the line. If we end up 8-8 or worse next season, I wouldn't want to be in TT's shoes.

[3irty1]

Re: FA's

Is'nt that the whole purpose to all this? You do what it takes (spending money) and assemble the best team you can. Yes, it's inevitable that you can't sign everyone and you will lose good players at some point. Again though, you at least take your best shot at a championship. If you sign the right guys and have developed some form of depth and IF things go your way, you win a SB. Then, you re-tool-re-build or whatever and make another run a few years down the line. THAT is the NFL cycle.

How come some teams manage to put good teams on the field every year? Are they awesome at signing free agents? You are right about one thing though, you've got to put a good team on the field and hope things go your way.

[cpk1994]

Re: FA's

I fail to understand the argument that signing anyone now impacts keeping the current players who will become free agents. Why is it a sure thing that any of those players mentioned will warrant a huge increase?

We don't know how well Kampman will adjust to playing OLB in a 3-4 so how can a value be put on him?

Yes, Collins improved his play. However, he was so awful the season before, how much did he really improve? He did have a ton of picks, but I also remember him dropping a few right in his hands. He also was responsible for some terrible plays. Also, again, what will be his value in a 3-4? I think it will not be easy for him. He's not an in the box saftey and he's not that good in one on one coverage (his problems covering TE's is well documentated.

Colledge? By Thompson's own admission and track record, he does not believe in breaking the bank for ANY offensive lineman.

Bigby? C'mon seriously! The guy had a great 1/3 of the last part of the 2007 season. Don't see huge money going there.

The Giants made some real good free agent moves and I'm sure they have good players with expiring contracts coming up too.

I guess the difference in opinions is some would rather settle for just being competitive for an extended period of time, and others (myself included) would like to make a SERIOUS run at at SB.

Is'nt that the whole purpose to all this? You do what it takes (spending money) and assemble the best team you can. Yes, it's inevitable that you can't sign everyone and you will lose good players at some point. Again though, you at least take your best shot at a championship. If you sign the right guys and have developed some form of depth and IF things go your way, you win a SB. Then, you re-tool-re-build or whatever and make another run a few years down the line. THAT is the NFL cycle.

This slow "turtle" like way (no pun intended) will not work for 3 specific reasons:

1- Contracts will always be expiring. It's life in the NFL. That is why the window to make a run is so short.

2-While your using the "turtle" approach, the other teams are using all the available tools at their disposal to also improve.

3-You must almost be perfect in drafting. For those of us who choose to live in reality, deal with facts and hold the GM to a high standard, Teddy is far from it. In 4 years, to date, he has drafted ONE IMPACT player. Jennings is the ONLY blue chip he has taken. THAT will not get it done.

Much to our dismay, the depth that we all believed Thompson had built, when put to the test failed miserably to wit 6-10.

How many playoff games has Dan Snyder won with his free spending?

How about Zigi Wilf?

When was the last time Jerry Jones won a playoff game because of his free spending?

Same tired crap from the "FA is a cure all" crowd.

No one is crying "sign everyone!" Signing a couple guys every year to shore up weaknesses isn't a crime however. You can't go into next season refusing to sign anyone because there are contracts expiring in the near future. The NFL is a "win now" league. If you don't win now, then your job is on the line. If we end up 8-8 or worse next season, I wouldn't want to be in TT's shoes.

Who says TT is refusing to sign anybody? If they aren't going to come in for a visit(ala Canty) then TT shouldn't try to sign the guy. ANd as for the "win now" mentality. Don't you think TT is aware of that? Don't you think TT knows his job will be on the line? You guys act like TT knows absolutely nothing and sticks a thumb up his ass. TT will sign players for fair deals, and will not overspend just to appease the bitching masses.

Free Agency is less than a week old and people are already bitching because he hasn't signed anyone. Remember that the Packers wanted Canty but he wouldn't come for a visit. Good call not to through money blindly at Canty. Also remember the FA you sign now mean you have to give up a Jennings or Kampman later. Refer to Waldo's post for a breakdown. You need to have patience.

[gbgary]

Re: FA's

Is'nt that the whole purpose to all this? You do what it takes (spending money) and assemble the best team you can. Yes, it's inevitable that you can't sign everyone and you will lose good players at some point. Again though, you at least take your best shot at a championship. If you sign the right guys and have developed some form of depth and IF things go your way, you win a SB. Then, you re-tool-re-build or whatever and make another run a few years down the line. THAT is the NFL cycle.

How come some teams manage to put good teams on the field every year? Are they awesome at signing free agents? You are right about one thing though, you've got to put a good team on the field and hope things go your way.

we keep barely missing signing this guy and that guy (supposedly). ted's gonna have to realize (especially now that Brett's gone) that he's going to have to pay a little more to get people to play in that "tiny hamlet in eastern wisconsin".

[Waldo]

Re: FA's

Is'nt that the whole purpose to all this? You do what it takes (spending money) and assemble the best team you can. Yes, it's inevitable that you can't sign everyone and you will lose good players at some point. Again though, you at least take your best shot at a championship. If you sign the right guys and have developed some form of depth and IF things go your way, you win a SB. Then, you re-tool-re-build or whatever and make another run a few years down the line. THAT is the NFL cycle.

How come some teams manage to put good teams on the field every year? Are they awesome at signing free agents? You are right about one thing though, you've got to put a good team on the field and hope things go your way.

we keep barely missing signing this guy and that guy (supposedly). ted's gonna have to realize (especially now that Brett's gone) that he's going to have to pay a little more to get people to play in that "tiny hamlet in eastern wisconsin".

Why sign guys that need more $$ to convince them to play for GB. Some of them might be better players on paper, but that doesn't mean they'll play better than the guys that want to be there on Sunday.

If a guy wants to play for GB, using TT's method they will come. If they are only looking for GB's wallet and really don't want to be there, TT's method weeds a lot of them out.

Proven time and time again, TT doesn't cheap out on contracts and treats his players well with $$. He's only "cheap" when it comes to the volume of players brought in via FA. When it comes to the compensation for an individual player that wants to sign with the Packers and the feeling is mutual, TT compensates them well.

TT's method has gotten a good deal of bang for his FA buck relative to most teams.

If Canty wanted to be a Packer, TT gave him a chance, he would be a Packer.

[chain_gang]

While Green Bay shouldn't be sacrificing their future for a boatload of high tier FA's, the lack of movement is troublesome for me, especially on the D side of the ball. While Capers is a proven coach, you have to have players that have experience in the system. Without that expect a slightly below average defense at best. Who on the D side of the ball has experience in a 3-4, a player that can help teach? I don't recall any. Yes you have the draft, but who in college plays a 3-4 defense? Virgina is the only one that really comes to mind for me. I really do believe we need some FA's on the D side of the ball, we need vets that have played in a 3-4 before. You can rely on coaching only so much, and while they may eventually get them "coached up", there will be a very steep learning curve, and that's where FA signings can help. A change of scheme is one of the few reasons to be very active in Free Agency, and if things don't pick up soon, you will be looking at possibly one of the worse defenses next year. In order to have a successful 3-4 D you need players that understand it, our biggest playmakers on D are getting older and have been in 4-3's for years. What's the saying you can't teach an ol' dog new tricks.

The D will eventually come around I'm sure, but if we don't begin actively shopping, I'm afraid u can almost write of the 2009 season as lost because of the D.

I agree you can't rely on FA for your whole approach, but when you lose 6 games by 5 points or less, your not that far away, and how many more games would they have won if they had been more active in FA last year? We'll never know, but I bet some of the 3pt or less games may have swung in our favor. While some say who? Who do you sign? That's too broad of a question, as you all know certain players perform better in certain schemes. We will never know how they would have performed in GB, but I do know that our staying away from FA last year, sure didn't help get us back to the playoffs, and that being the youngest team in the league for the 3rd year in a row didn't help us feel any better.

[Guiness]

Free Agency is less than a week old and people are already bitching because he hasn't signed anyone. Remember that the Packers wanted Canty but he wouldn't come for a visit. Good call not to through money blindly at Canty. Also remember the FA you sign now mean you have to give up a Jennings or Kampman later. Refer to Waldo's post for a breakdown. You need to have patience.

The Canty thing is really tough to sort out.

A month before FA, Canty was billed as a guy who could get the job done, play end in a 3-4, nothing special. As the date approched, he became the second best DL available, after Haynesworth. Although he wasn't billed as elite, he was the next best thing. Obviously, this made the Packers job of getting him much more difficult.

Why wouldn't he come for a visit? I'm guessing it was because of his contract demands. He (well, his agent) talked to GB, who wanted Canty to come in for a visit. I bet his agent said 'are you willing to go to $9mil/year' or something like that. GB would've said 'we don't know, we'd like to talk to him'. The agent would've replied 'I've got $8.5 from NYG, if the interview and everything goes well, would you be willing to top that?' GB couldn't commit to, or flat out said no, so the agent decided it wasn't worth coming.

I doubt there's any deeper, darker conspiracy, or that someone wasn't doing their job. GB has lots of tape on Canty, and after looking at it, they decided he wasn't worth what he was asking.

[cheesner]

Re: FA's

Why sign guys that need more $$ to convince them to play for GB. Some of them might be better players on paper, but that doesn't mean they'll play better than the guys that want to be there on Sunday.

If a guy wants to play for GB, using TT's method they will come. If they are only looking for GB's wallet and really don't want to be there, TT's method weeds a lot of them out.

Proven time and time again, TT doesn't cheap out on contracts and treats his players well with $$. He's only "cheap" when it comes to the volume of players brought in via FA. When it comes to the compensation for an individual player that wants to sign with the Packers and the feeling is mutual, TT compensates them well.

TT's method has gotten a good deal of bang for his FA buck relative to most teams.

If Canty wanted to be a Packer, TT gave him a chance, he would be a Packer.

Well put. Green Bay is not for every player. If a guy is looking for a nightlife or has a wife that wants upscale shopping he may not be happy. Or if his wife isn't happy, he isn't going to be either. I would rather have players who want to be in Green Bay and not guys who just came because there was more money.

[Patler]

For too many fans, whoever is perceived as the best available FA becomes a "must sign" regardless of the price. The ramifications of such a signing can be profound and prolonged. It becomes a new standard against which other players on the team judge themselves.

[cheesner]

Re: FA's

. . .

I guess the difference in opinions is some would rather settle for just being competitive for an extended period of time, and others (myself included) would like to make a SERIOUS run at at SB.

Is'nt that the whole purpose to all this? You do what it takes (spending money) and assemble the best team you can. Yes, it's inevitable that you can't sign everyone and you will lose good players at some point. Again though, you at least take your best shot at a championship. If you sign the right guys and have developed some form of depth and IF things go your way, you win a SB. Then, you re-tool-re-build or whatever and make another run a few years down the line. THAT is the NFL cycle.

This slow "turtle" like way (no pun intended) will not work for 3 specific reasons:

1- Contracts will always be expiring. It's life in the NFL. That is why the window to make a run is so short.

2-While your using the "turtle" approach, the other teams are using all the available tools at their disposal to also improve.

3-You must almost be perfect in drafting. For those of us who choose to live in reality, deal with facts and hold the GM to a high standard, Teddy is far from it. In 4 years, to date, he has drafted ONE IMPACT player. Jennings is the ONLY blue chip he has taken. THAT will not get it done.

Much to our dismay, the depth that we all believed Thompson had built, when put to the test failed miserably to wit 6-10.

There is a finite amount of talent available and a finite amount of money available. Finding the most bang for your buck is how you build a dominant team. There are players out there in FA who can make your team better, but will it justify the $$$$ spent? Signing FAs has many risks (team chemistry, contract envy, etc) and looking at its recent track record, it does not help your team. I believe your thinking is just the opposite. Singing FAs increases the likelihood of mere mediocrity. Think if we had signed Hutchinson 4 years ago at what he got from Minny. 6M per year IIRC. THat would be $24M or in other words - we would have no salary cap right now. Would Hutch have really made that much of a difference? Could we have gotten to the SB last season? We will never know, but I doubt we would have had that much improvement from his play.

TT has hit on more than just ONE impact player. I think Rodgers is already in the category and think a few more (Bigby, Collins, Nelson, . . .) could emerge soon.

The Packers had a pretty decent defense, but lack of coaching IMHO, led to downward trend in defensive performance. There may be some better players like Hawk who emerge under a new coach.

[imscott72]

Free Agency is less than a week old and people are already bitching because he hasn't signed anyone. Remember that the Packers wanted Canty but he wouldn't come for a visit. Good call not to through money blindly at Canty. Also remember the FA you sign now mean you have to give up a Jennings or Kampman later. Refer to Waldo's post for a breakdown. You need to have patience.

The Canty thing is really tough to sort out.

A month before FA, Canty was billed as a guy who could get the job done, play end in a 3-4, nothing special. As the date approched, he became the second best DL available, after Haynesworth. Although he wasn't billed as elite, he was the next best thing. Obviously, this made the Packers job of getting him much more difficult.

Why wouldn't he come for a visit? I'm guessing it was because of his contract demands. He (well, his agent) talked to GB, who wanted Canty to come in for a visit. I bet his agent said 'are you willing to go to $9mil/year' or something like that. GB would've said 'we don't know, we'd like to talk to him'. The agent would've replied 'I've got $8.5 from NYG, if the interview and everything goes well, would you be willing to top that?' GB couldn't commit to, or flat out said no, so the agent decided it wasn't worth coming.

I doubt there's any deeper, darker conspiracy, or that someone wasn't doing their job. GB has lots of tape on Canty, and after looking at it, they decided he wasn't worth what he was asking.

It's also pretty interesting to read Silverstein's breakdown on Canty's deal. They put a de-escalator in his contract to protect themselves from him becoming a chump and not taking care of himself. I wonder if he had the Cledius Hunt attitude at some point in time, because clearly it's something the Giants wanted to address.

[cpk1994]

For too many fans, whoever is perceived as the best available FA becomes a "must sign" regardless of the price. The ramifications of such a signing can be profound and prolonged. It becomes a new standard against which other players on the team judge themselves.

It's very obvious that Mike Sherman tought these fans nothing when he spent money like a drunken sailor.

[sharpe1027]

For too many fans, whoever is perceived as the best available FA becomes a "must sign" regardless of the price. The ramifications of such a signing can be profound and prolonged. It becomes a new standard against which other players on the team judge themselves.

Many of those same fans turn around and bitch about the Joe Johnson deals after-the-fact.

[Pugger]

I always wonder why some of these guys are FAs in the first place. If Canty is all that wonderful why was Dallas willing to let him walk? Did they have salary cap issues? Why is this Igor fella on the open market? Decent defensive linemen are in such high demand so it makes me wonder why a young D lineman like Igor is not being resigned by SD.

[imscott72]

If Canty is all that wonderful why was Dallas willing to let him walk? Did they have salary cap issues?

Yes..