Ahman Brooks coming for a visit

[wist43]

I don't think Fackrell can play; Clay will surely miss time; Perry will probably miss time... we certainly need more bodies.

That said, I think we're better off on the outside than inside - Thomas is our best ILB. I fully expect teams will exploit and expose Martinez and Ryan this year, the same as last. They're okay against the run, but terrible liabilities in the passing game.

We were 31st against the pass last year... don't think we can improve on that number too much - unless Daniels and the rest of the defensive lineman have awesome years.

We'll see.

[pbmax]

Biegel stashed on IR?

PUP

[pbmax]

I don't think Fackrell can play; Clay will surely miss time; Perry will probably miss time... we certainly need more bodies.

That said, I think we're better off on the outside than inside - Thomas is our best ILB. I fully expect teams will exploit and expose Martinez and Ryan this year, the same as last. They're okay against the run, but terrible liabilities in the passing game.

We were 31st against the pass last year... don't think we can improve on that number too much - unless Daniels and the rest of the defensive lineman have awesome years.

We'll see.

It would be well nigh impossible to be that bad again against the pass. I bet they are no worse than the mid 20s, which will be enough, APRH.

[wist43]

It would be well nigh impossible to be that bad again against the pass. I bet they are no worse than the mid 20s, which will be enough, APRH.

I was thinking (hoping) anywhere from 20-25... better than that and we could be better than 10-6.

Status quo?? And we likely do our usual 10-6, and 1-and done in the playoffs.

[HarveyWallbangers]

We were 31st against the pass--primarily because of CB play. We were 6th in sacks and 9th in sack percentage. Gunter was our #1 CB for much of the year. He may not make the team this year. There's little chance that House, a healthy Randall, a healthy Rollins, 1st round pick King, and improving Hawkins will be nearly as bad this year. Will be they be good enough to be part of a championship caliber team? Maybe not, but there's certainly reason for hope.

[RashanGary]

This year with House and an improved Randall, Rollins and Hawkins.... Plus the improvement of Clark and Lowry..... Plus the improvement of Brice (which means Burnett will be playing more ILB) could mean we're improved at 5 or 6 positions.

Now we have a decent backup OLB to cover some of those tracks.

I think we could be a top 10 defense this year. And a top 1 of 2 offense.


We have a legit chance at a SB victory this year.

[mraynrand]

I was wrong these last several years saying, "well Teds the most successful GM in the NFC. He's right again as always"

Now that this is happening I do see how posters who were clammering for a little more FA signings were right. Not a ton. Not huge money. But GB is a winner and winners want to come here. We could have been scooping up on aging winners who want a ring to supplement the couple areas of need each year.

Ted seems to have grown. And in hindsight, I was blinded by my view that he's so successful we can't critique him. He is so successful and I am glad we have him. But he's not perfect. I do think he's gotten better though this year.

And I'd love to win the SB this year and prove all you guys who have been saying this right! I'd love to win a couple more and then we're all right. The "Ted needed to grow" people were right. And the "ted is a top tier gm" people were right too. Let's all win

But for this moment, I lose and I was wrong. Good job guys. I tip my hat.

I don't really see much change in TT strategy. Going into week one in a must win game at home, the Packers have injuries to both starting OLBs and a backup. The other backup appears ineffective. This signing is as close to desperation as TT can get. But in typical fashion, TT didn't really overspend. TT is flexible to circumstances; it's just notable this year that circumstances forced his hand to play the FA market more than usual.

[Harlan Huckleby]

PUP

Right, but does addition of a starter mean no need to use Biegel this year? Just wondering. I am bothered more than most about a rookie missing training camp.

Ahh, you're saying Biegel is not part of opening day roster changes. True dat.

[ThunderDan]

I was thinking (hoping) anywhere from 20-25... better than that and we could be better than 10-6.

Status quo?? And we likely do our usual 10-6, and 1-and done in the playoffs.

Except we haven't been 1 and done in the playoff since the 2013 season but don't worry about the facts.

[mraynrand]

I was thinking (hoping) anywhere from 20-25... better than that and we could be better than 10-6.

Status quo?? And we likely do our usual 10-6, and 1-and done in the playoffs.

This is a Green Bay Packer website, not Cincinnati Bengals.

[call_me_ishmael]

I would argue the reason Ted turned over the roster is the players that he let go were simply not big/strong/fast enough. He needed to get better and there are a fixed number of roster spots. I applaud what Ted has done this year big time.

[pbmax]

I don't really see much change in TT strategy. Going into week one in a must win game at home, the Packers have injuries to both starting OLBs and a backup. The other backup appears ineffective. This signing is as close to desperation as TT can get. But in typical fashion, TT didn't really overspend. TT is flexible to circumstances; it's just notable this year that circumstances forced his hand to play the FA market more than usual.

Part of those 10 departures Patler noted were several flameouts on defense, positions that if those 2 or 3 poor drafts early in this decade (poor by Ted standards) would have been filled by guys on second or third contracts. (Datone Jones, Mike Neal, Jerel Worthy, etc.)

Some of this is that inevitable fallout. I think they expected Lang back, but the Lions threw injury concerns to the wind on their deal. They also were a year off (or worse) on Fackrell.

This is what the offseason looks like for a lot of teams, good and bad. Packers just normally have fewer roster holes.

[pbmax]

I would argue the reason Ted turned over the roster is the players that he let go were simply not big/strong/fast enough. He needed to get better and there are a fixed number of roster spots. I applaud what Ted has done this year big time.

I think this is true, but mainly in the DBs (and new hybrid safeties).

[pbmax]

This is a Green Bay Packer website, not Cincinnati Bengals.

Signing Ahmad Brooks got him confused.

[gbgary]

I would argue the reason Ted turned over the roster is the players that he let go were simply not big/strong/fast enough. He needed to get better and there are a fixed number of roster spots. I applaud what Ted has done this year big time.

everything he/they did was money related. filled the spots of the guys he let go with cheaper guys with equal or lessor talent in most cases (kendricks and brooks being exception). wouldn't be surprised if there's one more addition after the huge cut-down this weekend. hopefully the draft and (fingers crossed) better luck in the injury dept, will make the difference.