So,...what should the Packers do about Mike Neal????

[woodbuck27]

Hmmm...

LDE -- Perry
LDT -- Daniels
RDT -- Pickett
RDE -- D. Jones

SAM -- Neal
MLB -- Lattimore
WLL -- Matthews

LCB -- Williams
RCB -- Shields
SS -- Burnett
FS -- Hayward

If Ryan Pickett has more left in his tank !?

If the guy's on the ends of the DL kick in in a bigger way (in 2014) !?

If Mike Neal demonstrates faith rewarded in terms of his upside !?

If Jamari Lattimore grows/produces more !?

If Clay Matthews concentrates more on football and less on his image and is available for 12-16 games !?

If Morgan Burnett rewards Ted Thompson for the contract that "he did sign" !?

If Casey Hayward can pick it up after his injury in 2013 and demonstrate his potential in the Packers defensive backfield !?

If Ted Thompson and Russ Ball can ink a happy; or lot's to $$$$$$$'s Sam "Big BUCKS" Shields $$$$$$$'s !?

If Tramon Williams accepts a pay cut with incentives !?

Then if we get 75% of the above... that might be very good, Maxie the Taxi.

GO PACK GO !

[Patler]

New contract for Shields maybe, but under the franchise tag? Doubt it. Tag for a corner is 11-12 million. Shields is not worth that kind of money even if for only a year. Only player I see that might be tagged is Raji. If they can tag him as DT then his number will be around 9 mil (not far off what they reportedly offered him). I think it would be dumb to just let Raji walk...Tag him and keep him for another year or trade him if possible. Seriously doubt Shields gets tagged and I seriously doubt Shields is coming back if he's not signed by the start of free agency. Clock is ticking for him to remain a packer imo.

You might be right. I see it differently, however. The Packers have shown a willingness to overpay players for a year or two, just not long term. Franchise tag for a corner has been projected at $11.25M for 2014. I think they could swallow that for a year in the same way they overpaid Finley for two years.

I think Raji played his way out of consideration for a franchise tag. If the guy disappears in his contract year, what's going to happen to him playing under the tag?

[PaCkFan_n_MD]

You might be right. I see it differently, however. The Packers have shown a willingness to overpay players for a year or two, just not long term. Franchise tag for a corner has been projected at $11.25M for 2014. I think they could swallow that for a year in the same way they overpaid Finley for two years.

I think Raji played his way out of consideration for a franchise tag. If the guy disappears in his contract year, what's going to happen to him playing under the tag?

Still don't think they will pay Shields close to 12 mil even if for only a year. He just isn't worth it....not even close.

You bring up a valid point about Raji disappearing in his contract year. He seemed to have the attitude that he disappears because the scheme doesn't allow him to shine (the same scheme he register 6 sacks with in 2010). If we tag him and he's forced to play another year under Capers will he do the same thing for another year? Possibly. It could go either way. We could tag him and some other team goes off his whole body of work and offers us a trade. Or we tag him and no team offers a trade. At that point does Raji risk not playing his ass off again? Consecutive years of lack luster play and pouting and another year removed from his prime might lose him millions on the open market the year after. I have a feeling he was hoping his lackluster effort this past year would be his ticket out.

"Effort will release it's reward only after you refuse to quit." - love that quote. Tag Raji imo.

[woodbuck27]

You might be right. I see it differently, however. The Packers have shown a willingness to overpay players for a year or two, just not long term. Franchise tag for a corner has been projected at $11.25M for 2014. I think they could swallow that for a year in the same way they overpaid Finley for two years.

I think Raji played his way out of consideration for a franchise tag. If the guy disappears in his contract year, what's going to happen to him playing under the tag?

Raji is history and Green Bay. Either that or TT and Russ ball get him very on the cheap.

Sam Shields will get his former offer upped but that may not be enough. It should have been a done deal by now.

It's not a done deal unless TT springs "$$$$$$$'s a boat load of cash $$$$$$$'s" for a serious need to retain Sam Shields or not. !? It's not looking good as it stands.

I hope that changes soon. Otherwise the next question is:

How easily can TT replace Sam Shields and an aging Tramon Williams?

A different question arises from that first one:

How close are we to seeing Ted Thompson forced to "Blow Up the Secondary"?

GO PACK GO !

[gbgary]

you can't fix every position in one year. if tt doesn't pay some of these guys for at least the short term, if they'll accept it, the d will be even weaker. if next season's faces on d are drastically different it's gonna be a long disappointing season.

[woodbuck27]

you can't fix every position in one year. if tt doesn't pay some of these guys for at least the short term, if they'll accept it, the d will be even weaker. if next season's faces on d are drastically different it's gonna be a long disappointing season.

TT has to simply tear up the old... REALLY OLD not a plan.

[pbmax]

You might be right. I see it differently, however. The Packers have shown a willingness to overpay players for a year or two, just not long term. Franchise tag for a corner has been projected at $11.25M for 2014. I think they could swallow that for a year in the same way they overpaid Finley for two years.

I think Raji played his way out of consideration for a franchise tag. If the guy disappears in his contract year, what's going to happen to him playing under the tag?

Still don't think they will pay Shields close to 12 mil even if for only a year. He just isn't worth it....not even close.

You bring up a valid point about Raji disappearing in his contract year. He seemed to have the attitude that he disappears because the scheme doesn't allow him to shine (the same scheme he register 6 sacks with in 2010).

While I am not high on Raji's future prospects here, his role in 2010 was decidedly different than this year. He was specifically asked to stay with his man in the traditional 3-4 lineman role. Which he did. And he was removed from nickel pass rush to limit his snaps. Its hard to hold his sack total against him when he wasn't on the field for passing downs.

And its not as if the Packers replaced his pass rush. Datone Jones became invisible as the year went on. Daniels came on but they had to resort to putting Neal back at DT at the end of the year.

Raji can be rightly said to be terrible at playing off blocks and getting too locked up with an O lineman. That is part of what makes him a bad fit in this defense. His strength is quickness and penetration and they asked him not to do those things. That plus his price makes me think he is gone. However, he is still apparently the second best big guy on the team (to Pickett) and that does give him some value to Thompson unless they are sold on Boyd.

[red]

does raji have value to the team if they let pickett walk and move raji full time to the NT?

if they leave him in his current role then he's just a giant waste of money, but could he become a solid NT, or have they already tried that and he failed?

[pbmax]

does raji have value to the team if they let pickett walk and move raji full time to the NT?

if they leave him in his current role then he's just a giant waste of money, but could he become a solid NT, or have they already tried that and he failed?

I am not sure he wants the job but physically he can do it. Pickett had much the same rep coming out of college and to the Packers. Had not quite realized his potential, too eager to take off, suspect motor. He was considered an expensive and not quite as rock steady replacement for Grady Jackson.

So he could grow into the role. But I think Raji needs a disappointment in his career first before he is going to be ready for that. I think he wants a payday and 1 gapping with pass rush duties in a 4-3 is his ideal situation now.

Neither Pick not Raji are the physical ideal for their positions in the 3-4. Starting over might not be a bad thing.

[woodbuck27]

While I am not high on Raji's future prospects here, his role in 2010 was decidedly different than this year. He was specifically asked to stay with his man in the traditional 3-4 lineman role. Which he did. And he was removed from nickel pass rush to limit his snaps. Its hard to hold his sack total against him when he wasn't on the field for passing downs.

And its not as if the Packers replaced his pass rush. Datone Jones became invisible as the year went on. Daniels came on but they had to resort to putting Neal back at DT at the end of the year.

Raji can be rightly said to be terrible at playing off blocks and getting too locked up with an O lineman. That is part of what makes him a bad fit in this defense. His strength is quickness and penetration and they asked him not to do those things. That plus his price makes me think he is gone. However, he is still apparently the second best big guy on the team (to Pickett) and that does give him some value to Thompson unless they are sold on Boyd.

RE: UFA B.J. Raji:

A fifty pond bag of potatoes has more value to Ted Thompson unless a) and one of b) and/or c) happen:

a) He's paid more money that $8 Million$ /Season...or less plus performance based incentives.

B) He's moved to NT

c) TT forces MM to force DC Dom Capers to go to a Base 4-3 'D' or Fires him !

[red]

Neither Pick not Raji are the physical ideal for their positions in the 3-4. Starting over might not be a bad thing.

what do you mean by that PB?

not fat enough, or not tall enough?

i don't see anything in the draft that looks like a decent NT

however, there is one free agent that just jumped off the screen at me, and he wouldn't cost a lot. a guy i loved coming out of college, but its never clicked in the pros

mount cody is a free agent

thats a guy that can eat up multiple blockers. i saw him push back a quadruple team in college

[call_me_ishmael]

I would like a big 6'7"ish NT. Yes, they are rare, and it's questionable whether you want height there. I want long arms and power. Size is gonna win. It really is too bad JH didn't work out. 320 and 6'5" would have been an amazing NT.

[woodbuck27]

I would like a big 6'7"ish NT. Yes, they are rare, and it's questionable whether you want height there. I want long arms and power. Size is gonna win. It really is too bad JH didn't work out. 320 and 6'5" would have been an amazing NT.

Really tall ie 6'-7 " is a good thing?

Please explain why you believe that's the case.

Thanks.

[call_me_ishmael]

Really tall ie 6'-7 " is a good thing?

Please explain why you believe that's the case.

Thanks.

I'd settle for 6'4" or 6'5". Just stick of these squatty bastards. The taller they are, the longer arms they are. Natural power. I have never been a fan of the short NTs some around here like. I recall discussing with Lurker about how he thought it was desireable. I don't really think that it is. Jay Ratliff was quite tall, for example, and there have been many stud NTs that are tall. John Henderson is one that comes to mind. When they are tall with long arms, weight is less of an issue IMO.

I tend to think the days of really fat linemen are coming to an end. A tall-but-fit 310 lbs would be more than sufficient in the middle I would think.

[smuggler]

It makes sense... if a guy has a really broad reach and good hand technique, he covers more ground than a guy with a lesser wingspan, no matter how fatty he is. The higher center of gravity is definitely not desirable, however.