Welcome to your Green Bay Packers Online Community!

Since 2006, PackersHome has been providing a unique experience for fans.
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
8 Pages«<45678>
Options
View
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline mi_keys  
#76 Posted : Thursday, February 20, 2014 8:15:04 PM(UTC)
mi_keys

Rank: 3rd Round Draft Pick

Posts: 1,477
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 199
Applause Received: 340

Originally Posted by: play2win Go to Quoted Post
Again, we did not beat one team with a winning record last year, and we ranked 31st in the NFL on defense. Until we get a defense other teams have to contend with, we will remain pretenders.


We were 25th in yards and 24th in points.

http://www.nfl.com/stats...TATS&qualified=false

QCHuskerFan wrote:
And in 2013, the #17 Defense (ranked even lower than the feeble Packers, by the way) beat the #3 Defense for the Super Bowl title. So evidently, Defense doesn't always win. Sorry.

But you were right in 2012. The #27 D beat the #31 D for the title. Clearly, Defense wins championships based on this! What's that? You mean 2 teams ranked in the worst 6 defensive teams in the league played in the Super Bowl??? Heresy!

In 2011 Super Bowl, the Packers won with the #5 D!!! Of course the Steelers lost and their D was ranked... #2.

What's this mean? Absolutely nothing.

The 2013 Houston Texans had the #7 ranked defense! And won 2 games.

In 2013, the #6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, & 18 teams did not make the playoffs. The #19 team did and made it all the way to the Super Bowl.

Again? Nothing.

Seattle was the first team to win the Super Bowl in the last 10 years without a prototypical Franchise QB. Does that mean that the Patriots, Broncos, Saints, Steelers, Packers are all going to drop their studs and go with the new trend of young, short and average at QB? I doubt it, but I might be wrong.

Yes, the D needs to get better. But not at the cost of the future.


I'm not going to spend the time right now to pull up the statistics on defense winning titles. This was discussed at length on the forum some years ago and members went back through every single season from 1967 through to the (at the time) present. Defense was the better indicator for success and overwhelmingly so.

I will say, you are focused on yards, which is the wrong statistic. Points win games. Points are what matter. Not surprisingly, points paint a much better picture of a defense's strength and how successful teams have been. By the way, your #7 Texans were #24 in points. Real power house that is.

Also, the bit about "prototypical franchise quarterbacks" is a farce. If we go back to 2000, Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson, Ben Roethlisberger (twice), Eli Manning (twice), Joe Flacco and Russell Wilson have all been a part of Super Bowl winning teams.

Dilfer and Johnson are shit; Flacco and Eli Manning are average. Roethlisberger set the record for worst QB rating (22.6) in a Super Bowl when he won "his" first (though sexy Rexy now holds that distinction with his 7.1) and was shit for the first 58 minutes of "his" second win. He's one of the most overrated QBs of all time thanks to his two rings. He's good, but he doesn't touch the status of the elite quarterbacks; and it's quite rich that you bring up the Steelers when their titles were won largely on the back of their defenses. Russell Wilson is fine. If those are your "prototypical franchise quarterbacks" then half the league has one.

And even when we look at the elite quarterbacks, they often had elite defenses accompany them when they won Super Bowls. Brady's 2001, 2003 and 2004 Pats had the 6th, 1st and 2nd ranked scoring defenses. Rodgers' Packers has the 2nd scoring defense.

The QB may be the most important single position in the game, but the defense is still the more important side of the ball. It's time we fixed ours.
Born and bred a cheesehead
thanks Post received 3 applause.
yooperfan on 2/21/2014(UTC), play2win on 2/21/2014(UTC), DoddPower on 2/22/2014(UTC)
Offline DakotaT  
#77 Posted : Thursday, February 20, 2014 11:07:11 PM(UTC)
DakotaT

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Posts: 7,255
Joined: 8/18/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 622
Applause Received: 1,298

Originally Posted by: Mucky Tundra Go to Quoted Post
Atlanta traded their 1st, 2nd, 3rd round picks in 2011 and their 2012 1st and 4th rounders to get Julio Jones.

Got bounced in the wild card in 2011, lost in the NFC title game in 2012 and 2013...well, they're drafting at the #6 spot this year.


Just rewatched the Atlanta game where Rodgers burned Atlanta down in 2010. My absolute favorite Packer game. We have never played at that level since and we absolutely squashed the hopes of that team and Matty Choke.
UserPostedImage
thanks Post received 3 applause.
play2win on 2/21/2014(UTC), nerdmann on 2/21/2014(UTC), DoddPower on 2/22/2014(UTC)
Offline steveishere  
#78 Posted : Friday, February 21, 2014 6:26:54 AM(UTC)
steveishere

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2013

Posts: 1,562
Joined: 7/28/2012(UTC)

Applause Given: 39
Applause Received: 805

One thing I will so though is this will probably end up being one of the deepest draft classes in recent history because of the record number of underclassmen who have declared. The problem though is a lot of those guys won't be first round pick material because they came out too early. This is the reason I would be fine with seeing some trade backs this year assuming the board is saturated with talent at our picks. There is a lot of talent that's going to be sitting there in those mid rounds that would have taken higher picks to get next year.

I would probably be fine moving some mid round picks from next year to get some of those guys though I still have a hard time thinking there's going to be 2nd/3rd rounders on the board worth a 1st from next year. Would have to be a damn sure thing. It just doesn't really seem to me like when teams have traded future 1st round picks it's worked out that well.
thanks Post received 1 applause.
musccy on 2/21/2014(UTC)
Online play2win  
#79 Posted : Friday, February 21, 2014 7:52:29 AM(UTC)
play2win

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

United States
Posts: 2,783
Joined: 3/29/2012(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee

Applause Given: 1,076
Applause Received: 725

Originally Posted by: musccy Go to Quoted Post
From the Seahawks' depth chart online, here is their starting D's roster's draft position/year.

Bryant - #121 2008
McDaniel - undrafted FA 2006
Mebane - #85 2007
Clemons - undrafted FA 2003
Irvin - #15 2012
Wagner - #47 2012
Smith - #242 2012
Sherman - #154 2011
Maxwell - #173 2011
Chancellor - #133 2010
Thomas - #14 2010

Every starter behind their DL is from their last 4 draft classes, and only 2/11ths of their defense is from the 1st RD. So why must the Packers trade up into Rd 1 to get a top-notch defense?


Dude, you are talking about a 3-4 year window of team building to make SEA the winner it was last season. Is that how long you want to wait, till Rodgers has maybe one or two years left? Not me.

The problem we face is we are currently poised offensively, and incredibly deficient defensively. We just need to add the best playmakers we can to turn that around and be a very, very solid team. I would prefer we did that this offseason, as opposed to stretching it out over however many years, by making some bold moves with draft day trades and FA signings or player trades to add the right players. I don't mind pushing all the chips in at this point. It could be really good for this team.
Online play2win  
#80 Posted : Friday, February 21, 2014 7:57:00 AM(UTC)
play2win

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

United States
Posts: 2,783
Joined: 3/29/2012(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee

Applause Given: 1,076
Applause Received: 725

Originally Posted by: steveishere Go to Quoted Post
One thing I will so though is this will probably end up being one of the deepest draft classes in recent history because of the record number of underclassmen who have declared. The problem though is a lot of those guys won't be first round pick material because they came out too early. This is the reason I would be fine with seeing some trade backs this year assuming the board is saturated with talent at our picks. There is a lot of talent that's going to be sitting there in those mid rounds that would have taken higher picks to get next year.

I would probably be fine moving some mid round picks from next year to get some of those guys though I still have a hard time thinking there's going to be 2nd/3rd rounders on the board worth a 1st from next year. Would have to be a damn sure thing. It just doesn't really seem to me like when teams have traded future 1st round picks it's worked out that well.


steve, the shotgun approach could work this draft, given it seems loaded with talent. Ted would have to really hit. I thought last year's draft was quite possibly his best ever at the time. Out of the 11 players drafted last year, we received significant contributions from 3: Lacy, Bakhtiari and Hyde.
Offline QCHuskerFan  
#81 Posted : Friday, February 21, 2014 8:25:06 AM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Posts: 220
Joined: 12/30/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 64
Applause Received: 100

Originally Posted by: mi_keys Go to Quoted Post
We were 25th in yards and 24th in points.

http://www.nfl.com/stats...TATS&qualified=false



I'm not going to spend the time right now to pull up the statistics on defense winning titles. This was discussed at length on the forum some years ago and members went back through every single season from 1967 through to the (at the time) present. Defense was the better indicator for success and overwhelmingly so.

I will say, you are focused on yards, which is the wrong statistic. Points win games. Points are what matter. Not surprisingly, points paint a much better picture of a defense's strength and how successful teams have been. By the way, your #7 Texans were #24 in points. Real power house that is.

Also, the bit about "prototypical franchise quarterbacks" is a farce. If we go back to 2000, Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson, Ben Roethlisberger (twice), Eli Manning (twice), Joe Flacco and Russell Wilson have all been a part of Super Bowl winning teams.

Dilfer and Johnson are shit; Flacco and Eli Manning are average. Roethlisberger set the record for worst QB rating (22.6) in a Super Bowl when he won "his" first (though sexy Rexy now holds that distinction with his 7.1) and was shit for the first 58 minutes of "his" second win. He's one of the most overrated QBs of all time thanks to his two rings. He's good, but he doesn't touch the status of the elite quarterbacks; and it's quite rich that you bring up the Steelers when their titles were won largely on the back of their defenses. Russell Wilson is fine. If those are your "prototypical franchise quarterbacks" then half the league has one.

And even when we look at the elite quarterbacks, they often had elite defenses accompany them when they won Super Bowls. Brady's 2001, 2003 and 2004 Pats had the 6th, 1st and 2nd ranked scoring defenses. Rodgers' Packers has the 2nd scoring defense.

The QB may be the most important single position in the game, but the defense is still the more important side of the ball. It's time we fixed ours.


Sorry I didn't quote the statistics that you deem most important. I will learn from my mistake.

I am not and have never said that Defense was not important.

WHAT I AM SAYING IS THAT DEFENSE IS NOT IMPORTANT ENOUGH TO MORTGAGE OUR FUTURE ON ONE ROLL OF THE DICE AND TRADE FUTURE #1 PICKS AWAY.
blank
thanks Post received 2 applause.
musccy on 2/21/2014(UTC), DakotaT on 2/23/2014(UTC)
Offline steveishere  
#82 Posted : Friday, February 21, 2014 8:25:32 AM(UTC)
steveishere

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Gold: 2013

Posts: 1,562
Joined: 7/28/2012(UTC)

Applause Given: 39
Applause Received: 805

Originally Posted by: play2win Go to Quoted Post
steve, the shotgun approach could work this draft, given it seems loaded with talent. Ted would have to really hit. I thought last year's draft was quite possibly his best ever at the time. Out of the 11 players drafted last year, we received significant contributions from 3: Lacy, Bakhtiari and Hyde.


It's loaded with talent but not necessarily the top heavy kind of talent. A lot of the talent are more unproven underclassmen that don't have as much film on them as the more veteran guys. Those guys are going to be available in the mid-later rounds. Like I said there is a record number of underclassmen in this draft that NFL teams haven't done years of scouting on like other players so a lot of good players that would have been drafted much higher in a year or two are going to fall through the cracks and be available but you have to be able to find them. If there's ever a draft to have more picks this is it.
Offline musccy  
#83 Posted : Friday, February 21, 2014 8:43:24 AM(UTC)
musccy

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Posts: 1,933
Joined: 5/7/2009(UTC)
Location: Pennsylvania

Applause Given: 162
Applause Received: 149

Originally Posted by: play2win Go to Quoted Post
Dude, you are talking about a 3-4 year window of team building to make SEA the winner it was last season. Is that how long you want to wait, till Rodgers has maybe one or two years left? Not me.

The problem we face is we are currently poised offensively, and incredibly deficient defensively. We just need to add the best playmakers we can to turn that around and be a very, very solid team. I would prefer we did that this offseason, as opposed to stretching it out over however many years, by making some bold moves with draft day trades and FA signings or player trades to add the right players. I don't mind pushing all the chips in at this point. It could be really good for this team.


Do you know how many Pro Bowlers there have been from the first round of the last two drafts? 9...COMBINED, and of that only 3 defensive players (Eric Reed 2013, Luke Kuechly 2012, Dontari Poe 2012) so the likelihood of the Packers selecting the immediate solution to solve all our deficiencies for 2014 is extremely unlikely, and all it does is hurt future years (Julio Jones trade has already been mentioned, Ricky Williams, RG3 trade...I could go on).

If you can prove that the immediate splash has and will work, I'm all ears. I just don't see compelling evidence that moving up into round 1 is either stable for the long term, or that it's even all that effective in the short term.
Online play2win  
#84 Posted : Friday, February 21, 2014 9:12:57 AM(UTC)
play2win

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

United States
Posts: 2,783
Joined: 3/29/2012(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee

Applause Given: 1,076
Applause Received: 725

Originally Posted by: musccy Go to Quoted Post
Do you know how many Pro Bowlers there have been from the first round of the last two drafts? 9...COMBINED, and of that only 3 defensive players (Eric Reed 2013, Luke Kuechly 2012, Dontari Poe 2012) so the likelihood of the Packers selecting the immediate solution to solve all our deficiencies for 2014 is extremely unlikely, and all it does is hurt future years (Julio Jones trade has already been mentioned, Ricky Williams, RG3 trade...I could go on).

If you can prove that the immediate splash has and will work, I'm all ears. I just don't see compelling evidence that moving up into round 1 is either stable for the long term, or that it's even all that effective in the short term.


Yeah, you could indeed go on. Me too... Pretty easy to list all the failed trades, but I know what you are saying. No one can prove anything at this point regarding sure locks to turn our team and defense around.

I was just thinking if Ted wanted to trade away from next year's draft to land a particular player that he wanted, I wouldn't mind seeing it happen. I'm throwing a lot of trust Ted's way in saying that. At least, he would be doing something proactive in an attempt to help his team contend in 2014.

Can he somehow bounce into R1 twice? Who knows, but he did it in 2009, and it paid big dividends. Maybe there is someone special sitting there still at the top of R2 that he wants. I wouldn't have a problem with him trading away picks to get the specific players he thinks will help turn this defense around.

Also, wouldn't it be cool to add a serious WR talent to our roster, some 6-5 dude who catches everything…? If we make a trade, we could pull something like that off while still adding the defensive talent we need. Especially so if we utilize FA correctly.

It really is such a complete crap shoot. I'm just hoping Ted can take the crap out of the shoot… and land some top talents. This is another reason why I want him to get a good FA, or make a trade for a veteran top talent or two. We could use a big infusion of playmakers on D. And, as steve mentioned, maybe the correct move is down, if they can indeed land the players they want and need. Who knows?

Can you imagine if we had drafted both Reid and Kuechly with trades up? That's kind of what I'm getting at. I would not mind seeing that kind of impact added to this Packers team, even if it meant Ted had to trade away from next year.
Offline musccy  
#85 Posted : Friday, February 21, 2014 9:38:33 AM(UTC)
musccy

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Posts: 1,933
Joined: 5/7/2009(UTC)
Location: Pennsylvania

Applause Given: 162
Applause Received: 149

Originally Posted by: play2win Go to Quoted Post


Can you imagine if we had drafted both Reid and Kuechly with trades up? That's kind of what I'm getting at. I would not mind seeing that kind of impact added to this Packers team, even if it meant Ted had to trade away from next year.


Of course that'd be great right now, but if you knew that those two were going to be the best of the 2012 draft back in April of 2012, then props to you, you knew what no other GM did because no other GM traded up for two pro bowlers.

Justin Harrell, Jamal Reynolds, and Sherrod haven't worked for the Packers...they were drafted roughly the same position in the draft so theoretically they're just as likely to pan out as Kuechly and Reid but clearly they didn't. The Browns and Redskins didn't anticipate Weeden and RG3 to have the struggles they've had.

If Ted does a modest trade up, or makes some modest moves in FA, I'm not going to call for his head, but...
Offline mi_keys  
#86 Posted : Friday, February 21, 2014 10:13:52 PM(UTC)
mi_keys

Rank: 3rd Round Draft Pick

Posts: 1,477
Joined: 8/8/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 199
Applause Received: 340

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan Go to Quoted Post
Sorry I didn't quote the statistics that you deem most important. I will learn from my mistake.


Sorry, but I wasn't the one that determined points, not yards, win football games 130+ years ago.

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan Go to Quoted Post
I am not and have never said that Defense was not important.

WHAT I AM SAYING IS THAT DEFENSE IS NOT IMPORTANT ENOUGH TO MORTGAGE OUR FUTURE ON ONE ROLL OF THE DICE AND TRADE FUTURE #1 PICKS AWAY.


Caps

That's great. I'm not in the trade away future draft picks camp either or mortgage the current draft for one big move in the first round. I still found that first post I quoted to be bs.


Source for image:
http://maddox.xmission.com/hatemail.cgi?p=1
Born and bred a cheesehead
thanks Post received 1 applause.
wpr on 2/21/2014(UTC)
Online play2win  
#87 Posted : Saturday, February 22, 2014 12:52:19 PM(UTC)
play2win

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

United States
Posts: 2,783
Joined: 3/29/2012(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee

Applause Given: 1,076
Applause Received: 725

Originally Posted by: musccy Go to Quoted Post
Of course that'd be great right now, but if you knew that those two were going to be the best of the 2012 draft back in April of 2012, then props to you, you knew what no other GM did because no other GM traded up for two pro bowlers.

Justin Harrell, Jamal Reynolds, and Sherrod haven't worked for the Packers...they were drafted roughly the same position in the draft so theoretically they're just as likely to pan out as Kuechly and Reid but clearly they didn't. The Browns and Redskins didn't anticipate Weeden and RG3 to have the struggles they've had.

If Ted does a modest trade up, or makes some modest moves in FA, I'm not going to call for his head, but...


Really man? I never said anything of the sort that I knew those players would be great. Just imagining how great it would have been for Ted to have known and to have made the moves to get them…

I would love for Ted to get some true impact players like that added to our D.
Offline QCHuskerFan  
#88 Posted : Saturday, February 22, 2014 6:08:07 PM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Posts: 220
Joined: 12/30/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 64
Applause Received: 100

Originally Posted by: mi_keys Go to Quoted Post
We were 25th in yards and 24th in points.

http://www.nfl.com/stats...TATS&qualified=false



I'm not going to spend the time right now to pull up the statistics on defense winning titles. This was discussed at length on the forum some years ago and members went back through every single season from 1967 through to the (at the time) present. Defense was the better indicator for success and overwhelmingly so.

I will say, you are focused on yards, which is the wrong statistic. Points win games. Points are what matter. Not surprisingly, points paint a much better picture of a defense's strength and how successful teams have been. By the way, your #7 Texans were #24 in points. Real power house that is.

Also, the bit about "prototypical franchise quarterbacks" is a farce. If we go back to 2000, Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson, Ben Roethlisberger (twice), Eli Manning (twice), Joe Flacco and Russell Wilson have all been a part of Super Bowl winning teams.

Dilfer and Johnson are shit; Flacco and Eli Manning are average. Roethlisberger set the record for worst QB rating (22.6) in a Super Bowl when he won "his" first (though sexy Rexy now holds that distinction with his 7.1) and was shit for the first 58 minutes of "his" second win. He's one of the most overrated QBs of all time thanks to his two rings. He's good, but he doesn't touch the status of the elite quarterbacks; and it's quite rich that you bring up the Steelers when their titles were won largely on the back of their defenses. Russell Wilson is fine. If those are your "prototypical franchise quarterbacks" then half the league has one.

And even when we look at the elite quarterbacks, they often had elite defenses accompany them when they won Super Bowls. Brady's 2001, 2003 and 2004 Pats had the 6th, 1st and 2nd ranked scoring defenses. Rodgers' Packers has the 2nd scoring defense.

The QB may be the most important single position in the game, but the defense is still the more important side of the ball. It's time we fixed ours.


Based on Scoring Defense, in the 2013 Super Bowl, the #12 team beat the #2 team. Based on yardage, the #17 team beat the #3. Clearly, points tell a much different story...

In that same year, the Seahawks were the #1 Scoring Defense. #2 was the 49ers. #3 was the Bears. Wait. What? But the Bears didn't even make the playoffs. Neither did the #6 or #7 Scoring D. How can that be when the most important thing is defense?

In 2012, 10 of the top 12 Scoring Offenses made the playoffs. The only 2 that didn't were the Saints and Giants. Those 2 teams had won 2 of the previous 3 Super Bowls. So essentially 100% of the top Scoring offenses in 2012 were relevant.

In 2013, 9 of the top 12 Scoring Offenses and Scoring Defenses were in the playoffs. Doesn't appear that Defense is the more important side.

I bet the Ravens wish they knew that you didn't think Flacco was a franchise QB before they gave him that huge contract. Bet they'll check with you next time.

Knowledgeable football people would consider Roethlisburger, Manning and Flacco to be franchise QB's. All they've done is win 5 of the last 9 Super Bowls. The fact that you don't isn't surprising.

The trend in the NFL for the last 20 years has been to encourage offense. To deny that is ridiculous. To state that Defense is more important than Offense is ludicrous.


blank
Offline musccy  
#89 Posted : Saturday, February 22, 2014 6:35:46 PM(UTC)
musccy

Rank: 2nd Round Draft Pick

Posts: 1,933
Joined: 5/7/2009(UTC)
Location: Pennsylvania

Applause Given: 162
Applause Received: 149

Originally Posted by: play2win Go to Quoted Post
Really man? I never said anything of the sort that I knew those players would be great. Just imagining how great it would have been for Ted to have known and to have made the moves to get them…

I would love for Ted to get some true impact players like that added to our D.


I don't get the point you're trying to make. Of course it'd be nice to have Kuechly and Poe - 31 other teams feel the same way right now.

Are you trying to say "in a dream world it'd be nice if they were in Packer's uniforms" or that Ted should have known better and moved up and selected them?



Online play2win  
#90 Posted : Sunday, February 23, 2014 6:23:17 AM(UTC)
play2win

Rank: 1st Round Draft Pick

United States
Posts: 2,783
Joined: 3/29/2012(UTC)
Location: Milwaukee

Applause Given: 1,076
Applause Received: 725

Originally Posted by: musccy Go to Quoted Post
I don't get the point you're trying to make. Of course it'd be nice to have Kuechly and Poe - 31 other teams feel the same way right now.

Are you trying to say "in a dream world it'd be nice if they were in Packer's uniforms" or that Ted should have known better and moved up and selected them?





I guess it would be more in line with the "in a dream world" scenario. Hey, this is a discussion, and a man can dream can't he? Actually, maybe it is a bit of both. As a GM of one of the best teams in the NFL, and with all of the resources they pour into talent evaluation, maybe Ted might have known better to make a bold move, rather than sitting back in a more comfortable, conservative stance.

The bigger point attached to this is imagining if Ted had actually traded up into those prime spots to take those players, and how differently we may have fared. We could have been a much more balanced team, and could have been more of a true contender last season and the season before.

We could stand to add impactful players much like those mentioned. They rarely fall in your lap. But really, this is all speculation amongst us fans, looking back with the benefit of hindsight.

I was simply thinking, wow, what it may have been like had we made some bolder moves and added players like that to this D. Thinking of what this team might be now. The difficult part is looking at what this team is now, and seeing many players added over the last 3 years not panning out, and the holes left to fill in this roster.

Daniels is an exception. Hayward may have some promise based on his rookie year play. Datone Jones could be an ace in the hole if he develops (but I haven't seen anything to make me feel confident that he will be special). Hyde looks like a safe player added to our D, with a bit of a speed limitation. Josh Boyd seems promising after the little bit he got to play.

Nick Perry? The guy has gone MIA far too often. R1 2011
Jerel Worthy? He didn't do much before his ACL, now he's a year out and I don't hold out hope that he will be a big contributor, and I hope I'm wrong there. R2 2011
Sam Barrington - I'm really hopeful he shows something next season. R7 2013
Nate Palmer - Same. R6 2013
McMillian is gone. R4 2012
Manning is gone. R5 2012
Davon House. What do you say? R4 2011
DJ Smith is gone. R6 2011
Ricky Elmore is gone. R6 2011
Lawrence Guy is gone. R7 2011

So, that's ONE player who has contributed and developed pretty well within that 3 year span. Mike Daniels, going into his 3rd year with the team. Another, Casey Hayward, showed incredible promise as a rookie, then was lost to injury his entire 2nd season. Datone didn't really play. Hyde played a lot and shows promise. Boyd hardly played. These are our best 5 players added to our D over this 3 year span.

10 players either are no longer with the team (5), or have failed to contribute (5).

Don't you think Ted maybe should have known better? It is his job to know. How is this shotgun thing working, adding all those picks? Right now, I would say it is not working. I would rather we added (at least) one true impact player per year on D with a more aggressive approach. Yeah, take some chances, trade away a bit to move up and get the goods.

Otherwise, we are left with players like Nick Perry as the best of a very sorry looking group of 10 players Ted chose to take in the manner he prefers. All ten of them could be classified as failures.

Ted needs to do a better job, period. The staff also needs to do a better job of getting these players developed. I thought it was a travesty Datone Jones hardly saw the field last season.
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest (3)
8 Pages«<45678>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error

Recent Topics
30m / Green Bay Packers Talk / DarkaneRules

44m / Announcements / dfosterf

1h / Random Babble / MontanaBob

2h / Fantasy Sports Talk / buckeyepackfan

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DarkaneRules

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Dulak

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DarkaneRules

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DarkaneRules

20h / Random Babble / porky88

21h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DarkaneRules

21h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DarkaneRules

21h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DarkaneRules

29-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / Dexter_Sinister

28-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / 68md

28-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / warhawk


Tweeter

Copyright © 2006-2014 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.