One Exec "Packers Have Much Work To Do"

[Scott Campbell]

Over at footballsfuture.com you'll find guys posting there who are fans of other teams who seem to think Jennings a top 5 WR.

And I think you'll also find a lot of people that don't think he's a top 5 WR. If he were a consensus top 5 WR, he'd be much easier to pay.

[Scott Campbell]

Maybe one million and exactly whats that going to add to the team?

Roughly $1M.

I suspect cap people aren't flippant with any 7 figure salaries.

[Pugger]

And I think you'll also find a lot of people that don't think he's a top 5 WR. If he were a consensus top 5 WR, he'd be much easier to pay.

I don't understand this sentence at all.

[Patler]

Just like you guys thought Sitton would make top dollar? Buluga is nice and all but he's no Joe Thomas.

I didn't say it was chump change but look for buluga to get a simliar deal which will not break the bank.

I don't expect any Packer except Rodgers to get a "top dollar" contract if by that you mean in the top 5 contracts around the league. The Packers have always been comfortable paying their best players somewhere near the #10 level. Even so, those are expensive contracts that you can't just throw at everybody. Anyone who demands to be in the top 5 will not likely remain a Packer, unless he is a truly special player.

[Scott Campbell]

I don't understand this sentence at all.

It he were a clear cut top 5 WR with significant drop off to the next tier of receivers, then it would be easier to justify a blockbuster contract. But as it stands there a bunch of top 20 WR's that when compared with Jennings, you could flip a coin.


Is he better than Hakeem Nicks? Maybe.
Is he better than DeSean Jackson? Maybe.
Is he better than Steve Smith? Maybe.
Is he better than AJ Green? Maybe.

Etc., etc., etc..........



Though I suspect the more important question will be - how big of a drop off is there between Jennings and the rest of our WR's? If it's really significant, then I expect it will be easier to justify the money Jennings will likely command in FA.

[Brandon494]

Isn't that what I just said that you disagreed with? A veteran leaving and a rookie or first contract guy taking his place. Locking up your superstars. Hmmmm.... maybe you should actually read what people are posting.

I didn't even quote you so hmm maybe someone else should read what people are posting

Actually I take that back I did quote you but I was disagree with you think I we resign those guys the rest of our starters will be 5th round draft picks and then with the way TT drafts maybe some will.

[pbmax]

If I read Wist's argument correctly this is his salient point, no?

In which case, yes, the body of evidence increasingly suggests this.

This has been wist's point for a while. In fact, prior to this thread, wist felt the entire Packer org going back to Wolf has not drafted well for defense. He seems to have exempted the DBs in this thread.

But there is another contention in this thread, that Thompson actively ignores defense with his top picks and only seeks top talent on offense. Its demonstrably false, but that hasn't stopped the claim from being made.

There is an issue with Thompson and any one specific area of need. With his philosophy, an under performing unit will take time to remake since he tends not to draft for need. Something like this happened on the O line, which solved with time and a number of picks over 4 years (Sitton, Lang, Bulaga). Filling holes on the DL might take time, though unlike the O line, a single position, RDE, would do wonders for the unit.

[Brandon494]

Calvin
Fitz
Welker
R. White

Then there's about 10 or 15 guys that seem pretty interchangeable to me.

Welker? OK I'm done

[Scott Campbell]

Welker? OK I'm done

Yeah, he's a slot guy. But after a certain number of years we can no longer avoid acknowledging his production.

[ND72]

well this thread has gotten contentious.

[Scott Campbell]

well this thread has gotten contentious.

As it always has, and will, when faced with tough decisions.

[Brandon494]

Your seriously think Welker is on Jennings level?

Can Jennings play Welker's role? Of course

Can Welker play Jennings' role? Nope

Welker is a product of system he plays in which is why NE will never pay him the type of money Jennings will get.

[Patler]

Brandon Marshall MUST be better than Jennings. He has single-handedly converted the Bears into Super Bowl favorites!

[Scott Campbell]

Your seriously think Welker is on Jennings level?

Can Jennings play Welker's role? Of course

Can Welker play Jennings' role? Nope

Welker is a product of system he plays in which is why NE will never pay him the type of money Jennings will get.

Fine. You don't like Welker. There's still 10 guys you can pretty much sub with Jennings. And that's why he's not a consensus top 5 WR.

[Scott Campbell]

Brandon Marshall MUST be better than Jennings. He has single-handedly converted the Bears into Super Bowl favorites!

There's no disputing the guys talent. And part of his value in Chicago is that there is such a significant drop off to the next best WR on that roster.