2015-16 Non Packer Playoffs

[yetisnowman]

Tolbert was a re-sign. Tolbert was originally an undrafted free agent to SD
Ginn Jr. - Wasn't he washed out of the league? Carolina gave up on him in 2013 after Miami and SF. Ginn Jr. was also a year in ARI
Cotchery was a 10 year vet when picked up in 2014. Dude was born with 6 fingers on one hand. No wonder he catches the ball so well.

They weren't drafted by Carolina....hence free agent signings. Whether they were signed to more than one contract is irrelevant.

[Rutnstrut]

They weren't drafted by Carolina....hence free agent signings. Whether they were signed to more than one contract is irrelevant.

Exactly.

[smuggler]

Problem is that Tolbert, Cotchery, and Ginn are all basically average players. We need impact players.

[Patler]

They weren't drafted by Carolina....hence free agent signings. Whether they were signed to more than one contract is irrelevant.

Exactly.

Yet, in another thread, it seems that some don't think Peppers and Guion "count" as free agent signings because they were street free agents not subject to draft pick compensation consideration.

If we are looking at supplements to the "draft and develop" philosophy, I think you have to consider anyone not drafted. I tend to exclude undrafted rookie free agents signed originally by GB, because they are not much different than drafted players,except they could have signed with anyone. Maybe it is unfair not to consider a guy like Shields, who could have signed anywhere, but chose GB. I guess I think of them as totally developmental anyway.

But anyone whose rights were held by another team and signed with GB after clearing waivers or as FA not subject to waivers should be considered to some extent. Players like Tramon Williams and Tim Masthay, for example, who had some history with the NFL and were free to sign with any team they chose to. John Kuhn is still a FA acquisition, along with Tolzien. RFAs like Robert Thomas, too.

Starters or significant role players signed by GB as FAs under Thompson over the years include; Klemm, Jackson, Thomas, Roman, Pickett, Woodson, Manuel, Kuhn, Chillar, Walden, Peprah, Green, Goode, Saturday, Benson, Wallace/Tolzien/Flynn, Peppers, Guion, Masthay, Jones and Lovato. There may be more. Most of those were starters, at least 20 in 11 years. At least seven on the 2015 team, not including Tolzien who made no significant contribution in 2015.

[Fritz]

Yet, in another thread, it seems that some don't think Peppers and Guion "count" as free agent signings because they were street free agents not subject to draft pick compensation consideration.

If we are looking at supplements to the "draft and develop" philosophy, I think you have to consider anyone not drafted. I tend to exclude undrafted rookie free agents signed originally by GB, because they are not much different than drafted players,except they could have signed with anyone. Maybe it is unfair not to consider a guy like Shields, who could have signed anywhere, but chose GB. I guess I think of them as totally developmental anyway.

But anyone whose rights were held by another team and signed with GB after clearing waivers or as FA not subject to waivers should be considered to some extent. Players like Tramon Williams and Tim Masthay, for example, who had some history with the NFL and were free to sign with any team they chose to. John Kuhn is still a FA acquisition, along with Tolzien. RFAs like Robert Thomas, too.

Starters or significant role players signed by GB as FAs under Thompson over the years include; Klemm, Jackson, Thomas, Roman, Pickett, Woodson, Manuel, Kuhn, Chillar, Walden, Peprah, Green, Goode, Saturday, Benson, Wallace/Tolzien/Flynn, Peppers, Guion, Masthay, Jones and Lovato. There may be more. Most of those were starters, at least 20 in 11 years. At least seven on the 2015 team, not including Tolzien who made no significant contribution in 2015.

What you need to understand is that, on most fan forums and certainly this one, "free agent signings" means signing players who are well-known. When you read "Thompson hardly ever signs free agents" it means, in translation, "Thompson hardly ever signs free agents who are well-known."

[yetisnowman]

Yet, in another thread, it seems that some don't think Peppers and Guion "count" as free agent signings because they were street free agents not subject to draft pick compensation consideration.

If we are looking at supplements to the "draft and develop" philosophy, I think you have to consider anyone not drafted. I tend to exclude undrafted rookie free agents signed originally by GB, because they are not much different than drafted players,except they could have signed with anyone. Maybe it is unfair not to consider a guy like Shields, who could have signed anywhere, but chose GB. I guess I think of them as totally developmental anyway.

But anyone whose rights were held by another team and signed with GB after clearing waivers or as FA not subject to waivers should be considered to some extent. Players like Tramon Williams and Tim Masthay, for example, who had some history with the NFL and were free to sign with any team they chose to. John Kuhn is still a FA acquisition, along with Tolzien. RFAs like Robert Thomas, too.

Starters or significant role players signed by GB as FAs under Thompson over the years include; Klemm, Jackson, Thomas, Roman, Pickett, Woodson, Manuel, Kuhn, Chillar, Walden, Peprah, Green, Goode, Saturday, Benson, Wallace/Tolzien/Flynn, Peppers, Guion, Masthay, Jones and Lovato. There may be more. Most of those were starters, at least 20 in 11 years. At least seven on the 2015 team, not including Tolzien who made no significant contribution in 2015.

Yeah I am omitting waived players/scrapheap/practice squad retreads/etc. from the argument. That's not really my issue. It's the lack of activity when it comes to UFA's that produced on another team the previous year. I like that we are focused on draft/development but it's a little frustrating seeing two teams in the Super Bowl that have used free agency/trades to supplement their roster in a much more aggressive manor than Ted seems to think is prudent.

[Smidgeon]

What you need to understand is that, on most fan forums and certainly this one, "free agent signings" means signing players who are well-known. When you read "Thompson hardly ever signs free agents" it means, in translation, "Thompson hardly ever signs free agents who are well-known and in high demand during the early days of free agency."

Fixed.

[yetisnowman]

Problem is that Tolbert, Cotchery, and Ginn are all basically average players. We need impact players.

Well they are offensive starters/contributors, and Ginn has elite speed and caught 10 tds, and averaged 17 yds a catch so....I'm not sure if I would call that average. Dream scenario for me would be Trevathian and Kearse via free agency, and draft a TE and a scat back that can make plays. Won't hold my breath.

[mraynrand]

Well they are offensive starters/contributors, and Ginn has elite speed and caught 10 tds, and averaged 17 yds a catch so....I'm not sure if I would call that average. Dream scenario for me would be Trevathian and Kearse via free agency, and draft a TE and a scat back that can make plays. Won't hold my breath.

Ginn probably suffers from a bad history. He's played so bad in the past that it leaves this indelible mark on your memory. He's had a nice year, but he still drops too many passes. He's like 2xJamesJones.

[Patler]

Yeah I am omitting waived players/scrapheap/practice squad retreads/etc. from the argument. That's not really my issue. It's the lack of activity when it comes to UFA's that produced on another team the previous year. I like that we are focused on draft/development but it's a little frustrating seeing two teams in the Super Bowl that have used free agency/trades to supplement their roster in a much more aggressive manor than Ted seems to think is prudent.

So this year alone the Packers had at least three such starters who had produced on their previous teams, Peppers, Guion and Jones; although all three were released by their former teams and were free agents because of money (Peppers), effort/attitude/personality (Guion), and who knows (Jones).

[mraynrand]

The other thing about FA - IF you sign some vet, then you might not be able to keep say, Gunter this year or Shields in 2010.

[yetisnowman]

The other thing about FA - IF you sign some vet, then you might not be able to keep say, Gunter this year or Shields in 2010.

Fair point. Though I would argue Aaron's age should dictate a little more aggresive offseason activity the next few years. Holding on to younger guys with upside becomes less ideal as our window to make another title run begins to close. Not a cap expert by any means, but I thought we have flexibility in that regard.

[smuggler]

That is actually a very valid point. And it's a reason why Thompson should be more aggressive NOW, as you say, but also a validation of his reservation/conservative attitude in the past. (Why squander a great QB by spending when he's 27 and putting your team in cap hell in two seasons??).

[Patler]

Fair point. Though I would argue Aaron's age should dictate a little more aggresive offseason activity the next few years. Holding on to younger guys with upside becomes less ideal as our window to make another title run begins to close. Not a cap expert by any means, but I thought we have flexibility in that regard.

On the other hand, one could argue that if they had taken that approach in the last years of Favre's time in GB, they might not have had the pieces in place for the SB run in 2010 with Rodgers. A few old vets could have meant there was no room on the roster for an unheard of free agent like Tramon Williams in 2006/2007 when he played little. By 2010 he was a key contributor to the SB run. Of course, had the result been another SB or two while Favre was QB, we might not have cared. In the end, a "what might have been" is just like a "what might be," simply guess work for fans.

In the past, I argued that a GM should become more aggressive when the team is close and has a QB in place. I have argued that Wolf failed in that regard after the SB win, and I have been reaching the same opinion on TT for the years since 2010. However, our discussions the last few days have made me reconsider that position. Over the past 11 years, in terms of winning SBs, an aggressive approach has been no more successful for NE than TT's approach has been for the Packers. The aggressive approach by Seattle has succeeded once, too. Aggressive approaches by others have been no more, and some actually less successful.

I think different GMs have different styles, and they should remain true to themselves. In the end they have to be in the hunt to get the prize, and staying in the hunt by whatever means works for him is the best approach a GM can take.

[Bossman641]

Is anyone else getting concerned about free agency after this upcoming year?
Sitton, Lang, Bakhtiari, Lacy are all FA's that offseason