Packers Re-Sign Mike Neal

[mraynrand]

The reason Ted overvalues Brad Jones is that coverage linebackers who can also quasi-function against the run are VERY hard to come by. There are exactly zero of those players in the draft, by my count, unless you are counting CJ Mosley. The ENTIRE draft.

Jones is our nickel linebacker that we like to have cover tight ends, because Hawk is not much good at it. Ideally, on first and second down, BISHOP would have been out on the field, but Bishop's knee got destroyed. That's not Thompson's fault, and getting rid of our coverage linebacker does not help the situation. Because Brad Jones was so *important* to our defensive scheme, we paid to retain him.

It's not Ted overvaluing players. It's Ted protecting the team. If Jones were gone last season, the team would have been SO much worse. I know it's tough to imagine, because nobody actually likes having Brad Jones out there half the time, but it's damn true.

didn't help when Francois got hurt either. He was getting better than Jones in pass coverage.

[denverYooper]

Actually, Atlanta was a roadgrading power football team. WE were the finesse team that turned them on their side.

Hey man, don't bring uncomfortable facts in to the discussion.

[Bossman641]

What, lol...

The stars aligned, and we stole one.

If there were a team like SF or Seattle in the playoffs that year - we would have been knocked out. As it was, Philly and Atlanta were both finesse teams, and Chicago is Chicago, minus Cutler for most of the game. Still I think we had Chicago's number regardless. Then in the SB, we met a fading Steelers team who has fallen off completely since that loss.

In other words, we played to the best of our ability; we still had good defensive players onboard that were producing, i.e. Jenkins, Bishop, and Woodson; and we played a slate of teams that set up well of us, i.e. finesse teams that couldn't push us around with ease - like SF can.

Atlanta - 5th ranked scoring D
Chicago - 4th ranked scoring D
Pitt - 1 ranked scoring D

But hey, don't let the facts stop you

[pbmax]

Actually, Atlanta was a roadgrading power football team. WE were the finesse team that turned them on their side.

Don't mention the Jets game to him either.

[pbmax]

JAG Jones should have received about half of what Chiller; Chiller when healthy at his worst was better than JAJ on his best day IMO

I'm fine with Neal at that price because he does have upside

Brandon Chillar: 2010-2013 contract
CONTRACT: 4 yr(s) / $21,000,000
AVERAGE: $5,250,000
SIGNING BONUS: $2,000,000

Brad Jones
CONTRACT:3 yr(s) / $11,250,000
SIGNING BONUS $3,000,000
AVERAGE SALARY $3,750,000
GUARANTEED:$3,000,000


How about 71%?

[red]

Brandon Chillar: 2010-2013 contract
CONTRACT: 4 yr(s) / $21,000,000
AVERAGE: $5,250,000
SIGNING BONUS: $2,000,000

Brad Jones
CONTRACT:3 yr(s) / $11,250,000
SIGNING BONUS $3,000,000
AVERAGE SALARY $3,750,000
GUARANTEED:$3,000,000


How about 71%?

not good enough

50% or less

[mraynrand]

^^^ a see a plea bargain getting done here. time served

[run pMc]

This looks like it'll probably get glossed over, but it's a very good point. The only thing that separated them that year from a team like SF was a more dynamic QB. I've never been convinced that Matt Ryan will ever be a real franchise guy.

I don't believe a team "like" SF or Seattle would have stopped us that year either - though none of us could never prove it one way or another. After all, Pittsburgh was kinda like those teams too and we beat them pretty handily, really.

I think we were on such a tear that we couldn't be stopped. All I saw from our guys was laser-like focus, and that extended to our coaching staff, who called a handful of really brilliant games and handled all of the off-the-field pressure stuff absolutely perfectly. I was really impressed with MM's approach that year.

People like to say it was "luck", but getting "hot" is not the same as getting lucky. And it also undersells the quality job that everyone on our staff did, too.

Whether it's through retirement or a firing, MM and TT won't be in charge in a few years, I'd reckon, but I'll never take away or try to diminish what I saw as a very well-constructed run to our 13th championship.

As far as Mike Neal goes, I'm happy to see a relatively positive forum with regards to his signing. I'd like to point out something, just because I thought it was interesting:

Mike Neal 2013: 47 tackles, 5 sacks, 1 INT.
Lamarr Houston: 69 tackles, 6 sacks
Arthur Jones: 53 tackles, 4 sacks

Houston got $35 mil over 5 years, 15 mil guaranteed
Jones got 33 over 5 years, 10 guaranteed.

Seeing what we got Mike Neal for, I have to say I'm glad that TT stays away from the first few days of FA. Fans see Houston and Jones' names on a NFL.com "top FA" list and think they'll help our team. Well, they might have helped us, but what is the net gain? There's an opportunity cost of signing them and letting a guy like Neal go - or giving him less playtime - that goes deeper than just adding talent because you have the CAP space.

Don't get me wrong - I'm nervous as hell about the safety position. I'd have gone for SOMEONE out of that 1st day group, even if it was for more than you'd want to pay, because with Burnett as our only stable safety on the roster, the opportunity vs. cost is high.

I hope the safety thing works out for TT, because while I'd love an upgrade at ILB and NT - safety is the only place I can really say he's dropping the ball, talent-acquisition-wise.

+1

[3irty1]

Actually, Atlanta was a roadgrading power football team. WE were the finesse team that turned them on their side.

I love the Atlanta 2010 team as an example of the wrong way to build a team for the playoffs. They were the Bo Ryan Badgers of the NFL. Their philosophy on offense and defense was to burn clock, and not make mistakes. Their offense was run-heavy but didn't produce big plays. Their passing game earned Matt Ryan a reputation as a checkdown king. Their defense was schematically unaggressive and smothering. Preventing the big play at all costs and allowing relatively easy completions underneath forcing teams to take long time-consuming drives. They tried to make you beat them at their own game of efficiency.

Problem with that is that in a short game it only takes a few bad bounces of the ball for the better team to lose. This is why I could never respect the Alex Smith 49ers or Chiefs either. They are the kind of teams that may thrive during the regular season but need a ton to go right to collect some hardware. Good teams don't adopt underdog strategies.

[pbmax]

not good enough

50% or less

I might get close if we factor in cap inflation.

[wist43]

Atlanta wasn't a "road grader" team in '10, they were a ZBS team, and had smallish OL. They put up good rushing stats with Turner, but they certainly weren't a power team. I didn't fear their offense; and I thought their defense was vastly overrated.

As #1 playoff seeds go, they were as weak as they come.

As for Chicago, just throw that one out... b/c it's Chicago, we know each other so well, they might as well attend our team meetings, and we theirs.

As for Pitt - they were fading fast by the time they got to the SB, and they've not been very good since then.

We had a nice run there from game 13 in '10 on thru the 2011 season, which during late in that season, KC exposed us. It's been tough sledding ever since that KC game in '11. Physical power teams have consistently beaten us up... we seem to have gotten a little tougher of late though. MM has incorporated some power running, and Lacy has helped.

[wist43]

Don't mention the Jets game to him either.

I seem to remember we actually played 3-4 base most of the time in that game.

Get us out of that God-awful 2-4 alignment, and we have some decent players - that if used properly could make for a pretty good defense. As I've said all along, I like a lot of the players - so if I like the players, but our results suck, who do you look at for accountability?? It has to be Capers.

[mraynrand]

As for Pitt - they were fading fast by the time they got to the SB, and they've not been very good since then.

Fading fast with the #1 defense. But you don't look at stats like that.

[mraynrand]

I seem to remember we actually played 3-4 base most of the time in that game.

because they were a run heavy offense. Just like the Packers do now - they play 3-4 against running teams and on running downs. They use 2-4/1-5 on passing downs and rush Jones, Neal, Matthews and Perry or some combination of 1-3 of those guys and a LB or two and/or a safety.

[wist43]

Just kiddin' with you, Wist. One thing we can agree on. We love the Packers. It's like your kids. You always love them, you don't always love what they choose to do!

Capers is like that teacher than you know has won awards, but they are not reaching your kid consistently. Everyone, including GM, coaches and players have their jobs to do. Players may be drafted for tendencies of working within a scheme, but good players can transcend schemes, take coaching and work within any scheme because they are capable of diagnosing plays pre-snap, communicating with teammates, taking good pursuit angles, winning one on one battles and making sure tackles. That you can fit into any scheme. Do we have enough of those types of players?

I think Capers is a fine coach - I think he is capable of putting a good gameplan together, and producing good results.

But then there is Mr. Spraypaintedhair - call it a Jekyl and Hyde situation. Capers cannot be trusted - period. He is just as capable of putting together an absolute stinker of a gameplan and riding it all the way to defeat.

He's exactly the coach I thought he was, and I've said right from the beginning, that we won't be able to trust the guy - that certainly has proven to be true. He's put up some horrid numbers the past few years - I don't expect that to change.