Join Our Green Bay Packers Interactive Community!

We have been providing fans with the best source of Packers information since 2006!
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
5 Pages«<2345>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Offline Rockmolder  
#46 Posted : Wednesday, April 3, 2013 8:45:44 AM(UTC)
Rockmolder

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2010

Netherlands
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 154
Applause Received: 258

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan Go to Quoted Post
Let's look at another downside of signing a FA. You get older in 2 ways. If Ted Thompson signed SJax, who gets cut? Green, Harris or Starks? Because one of them goes. Starks has starter talent allegedly. Green is still recovering allegedly. Harris (FA pickup) is intriguing. So not only is your starter old, but you have to cut a young, developing (hopefully) back. And you can't use a draft pick. So in a year or 2, when SJax is in a wheelchair (But still costing $), you have to replace him. But you have reduced options because now all of your backs are in the 4+ years of experience and most backs don't last past that mark.

So while many of us are not excited about our RB's, if we had signed Jackson, in 2 years, we might be sitting here with no viable RB. At least now, we have potential in some bodies. But I'm an optimist.


Sounds a little far fetched.

You cut just one of those running backs... The one with the least potential in your eyes. I figure it would've been Starks, because he's always injured, or Green, because he plays like Barry Sanders with Noah Herron talent.

That still leaves you with two guys on the roster, with the bright spot and change of pace back obviously being Harris at this point.

I'd go as far as saying that, had we signed Jackson, I would've held on Harris and let go of the rest, fill that up with a draft pick.

Lastly, when you start signing on talent and future potential alone, our WR roster would exist of Cobb, Ross, Boykin, Borel and Gurley.

Between that and our current group, I think I know who I'd rather have.
UserPostedImage
Online QCHuskerFan  
#47 Posted : Wednesday, April 3, 2013 8:56:45 AM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 12/30/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 84
Applause Received: 149

The 49ers lost in 2011 NFC Championship game to Giants. They brought in 3 high profile FA. Was it Randy Moss, Brandon Jacobs or Mario Manningham that made the impact that got them to the Super Bowl?

Oh wait. They all were underachievers. Manningham only played in 12 games, starting just 10. Jacobs and Moss are already gone. Wow. Jacobs cost $1.5 million and had about 5 carries for 7 yards. Missed most of the year with injuries and attitude. Moss was $2.5 million for 28 catches and 3 TD's.

A year later and the 49ers are having to replace those players as well as the normal attrition.

Offline Rockmolder  
#48 Posted : Wednesday, April 3, 2013 9:09:04 AM(UTC)
Rockmolder

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2010

Netherlands
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 154
Applause Received: 258

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan Go to Quoted Post
The 49ers lost in 2011 NFC Championship game to Giants. They brought in 3 high profile FA. Was it Randy Moss, Brandon Jacobs or Mario Manningham that made the impact that got them to the Super Bowl?

Oh wait. They all were underachievers. Manningham only played in 12 games, starting just 10. Jacobs and Moss are already gone. Wow. Jacobs cost $1.5 million and had about 5 carries for 7 yards. Missed most of the year with injuries and attitude. Moss was $2.5 million for 28 catches and 3 TD's.

A year later and the 49ers are having to replace those players as well as the normal attrition.



First of all, those weren't big signings. All of them were one year prove it deals with not that much money tied upto them, with the exception of Manningham, who put up 450 yards before wrecking his knee. Not great, but not a big blow at $7,3 million over two years.

Second of all, that doesn't prove your point as much as it proves that they were bad signings in hindsight.

Did Woodson, going towards his 30s when he signed with us hinder us in developping other corners? On the contrary. And he became the league DMVP and mentored guys like Williams and Shields.

You don't waste age by having a veteran play in a starter spot, you waste it by having a guy like Driver on the roster as your number five guy. You pump talent in from the bottom, you don't force them into starting spots in the hope that they'll be any good.

UserPostedImage
Online QCHuskerFan  
#49 Posted : Wednesday, April 3, 2013 9:28:30 AM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 12/30/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 84
Applause Received: 149

Originally Posted by: play2win Go to Quoted Post
That's where we may be differing a bit. I do not see an unproven rookie who winds up injured during is 2nd game played and thrown on IR as any kind of insurance for the following year. Speaking of which, Neal played in only 7 games in 2011 with ZERO sacks and 1 whole tackle.

I don't think Nick Perry is worthy of being counted on to hold up at OLB opposite Matthews either. We need a proper backup, and backup plan.

If Perry does return well from injury and proves his talents on our D, great. Same with Neal.

I'm still waiting... I mean, c'mon!!!!! Neal had 11 Tackles in 11 games last year? Wow... No wonder we sucked so bad in run D...


I am not arguing that Neal has worked. But he was the plan to replace Jenkins. Just because a plan doesn't work, doesn't mean it didn't exist and that it wasn't well thought out.

The Packers are not the Univ of Alabama. They don't have the luxury of 125 players on their roster. It is not possible to have high quality, starter ready backups at every position. Nobody does. The team has 42 real players on game day. They have to believe in Perry returning and excelling because they can't afford to spend big money on a backup to a #1 draft pick. Erik Walden got 8M guaranteed from the Colts! He was a backup that nobody on here wanted. Packers have to believe in Moses improving as their plan for Perry's replacement. That and a draft pick in 2013 and a UDFA.

I've already stated this winter that there is no worse situation, in my opinion, on our roster than backup QB. The gap between Aaron Rodgers and #2 makes the Grand Canyon look small. The consensus of this forum was "Oh well", "Harrell has improved", and "MM knows best". I am a lot more confident in the Packers plan to replace Perry than AR. But they can't have Tom Brady/ Drew Brees/ Manning on the bench for 'What if' purposes.
Online QCHuskerFan  
#50 Posted : Wednesday, April 3, 2013 9:32:45 AM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 12/30/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 84
Applause Received: 149

Originally Posted by: Rockmolder Go to Quoted Post
Sounds a little far fetched.

You cut just one of those running backs... The one with the least potential in your eyes. I figure it would've been Starks, because he's always injured, or Green, because he plays like Barry Sanders with Noah Herron talent.

That still leaves you with two guys on the roster, with the bright spot and change of pace back obviously being Harris at this point.

I'd go as far as saying that, had we signed Jackson, I would've held on Harris and let go of the rest, fill that up with a draft pick.

Lastly, when you start signing on talent and future potential alone, our WR roster would exist of Cobb, Ross, Boykin, Borel and Gurley.

Between that and our current group, I think I know who I'd rather have.


Cut Starks. What if Jackson gets hurt, Green proves not able to return from injury and Harris shows why 30 teams allowed him to sell cars for a living last fall? Now you have absolutely nothing and you have money tied up. That is not that far fetched a scenario.

Offline Rockmolder  
#51 Posted : Wednesday, April 3, 2013 9:40:19 AM(UTC)
Rockmolder

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2010

Netherlands
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 154
Applause Received: 258

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan Go to Quoted Post
Cut Starks. What if Jackson gets hurt, Green proves not able to return from injury and Harris shows why 30 teams allowed him to sell cars for a living last fall? Now you have absolutely nothing and you have money tied up. That is not that far fetched a scenario.



Starks get injured. Far more likely. Same problems.
UserPostedImage
Online QCHuskerFan  
#52 Posted : Wednesday, April 3, 2013 10:13:33 AM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 12/30/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 84
Applause Received: 149

Originally Posted by: Rockmolder Go to Quoted Post
First of all, those weren't big signings. All of them were one year prove it deals with not that much money tied upto them, with the exception of Manningham, who put up 450 yards before wrecking his knee. Not great, but not a big blow at $7,3 million over two years.

Second of all, that doesn't prove your point as much as it proves that they were bad signings in hindsight.

Did Woodson, going towards his 30s when he signed with us hinder us in developping other corners? On the contrary. And he became the league DMVP and mentored guys like Williams and Shields.

You don't waste age by having a veteran play in a starter spot, you waste it by having a guy like Driver on the roster as your number five guy. You pump talent in from the bottom, you don't force them into starting spots in the hope that they'll be any good.



They were big signings. They were typical signings of a team trying to fill perceived holes through FA. They weren't Peyton Manning, but they were big. 2 projected starters and a #2 RB. They were failures. Doesn't mean they weren't big. Those 3 players were 5% of their CAP last year.

Those signings are exactly my point. FA signings fail at a large rate. They are expensive. They are not necessary, unless you need to sell tickets.

The 49er sigings are typical of 90% of the players available in FA. Old, broken down, castoffs. Scott Wells? Ryan Grant? Daryn Colledge? Brandon Jackson? Those players were signed as FA by another team. How is that team doing with players that we cast off? Jeff Saturday and Anthony Hargrove, anyone? Those are the cast offs the Packers signed in 2012. How'd that work out? There are many more just like that. For every Peyton Manning, there are 100 Jeff Saturday's.

Woodson and Pickett were signed, not because they would get us over the top, but because the roster had major talent issues. Neither player had huge interest from lots of teams. In other words, they were perfect for Ted Thompson because their value was not artificially inflated.

Charles Woodson in Feb 2006 was not the Charles Woodson of 2009 or 2010 or 2011. He had not played a full season in 4 years due to injuries. He had only 2 INT's in the last 2 years. He had attitude issues with the Raiders management. It's easy to say it was a great signing, because it was. But the Packers were not signing a DMVP. They were signing a CB with an injury and attitude history that not a lot of other teams wanted to take a chance on. Worked out well!

I agree about pumping in talent from the bottom. But you don't find young talent in FA. Teams hold and develop young talent until it either doesn't develop or it becomes too expensive to keep. You don't find Heyward, Cobb, McMillian, Sitton in FA.
Online QCHuskerFan  
#53 Posted : Wednesday, April 3, 2013 10:17:37 AM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 12/30/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 84
Applause Received: 149

Originally Posted by: Rockmolder Go to Quoted Post
Starks get injured. Far more likely. Same problems.


Starks=$ 630,000

Jackson= $ 2,916,666

Not the same problems. That's 2.3M that can be used to sign AR.
Offline Rockmolder  
#54 Posted : Wednesday, April 3, 2013 10:43:49 AM(UTC)
Rockmolder

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2010

Netherlands
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 154
Applause Received: 258

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan Go to Quoted Post
Starks=$ 630,000

Jackson= $ 2,916,666

Not the same problems. That's 2.3M that can be used to sign AR.


And then we'll come back to the fact that Jackson is a better player and far less injury prone.

I get your point, but I just don't see how it could be better. You sound like someone who would eat wallpaper paste every day to eventually die with a huge savings account. No offense intented, and you make good points, but I don't see how you see those one year prove it contracts as big free agent signings. Or how, with our RBs your main point was that it'd hinder the growth of one of our running backs, but we're now somehow talking about saving money on FA signings.

We're consistently among the youngest teams with, relative to other competetive teams, quite a bit of cap room. I agree with you that quite a bit will be used towards signings Aaron Rodgers and CMIII, but one of two signings like a Jackson, Woodson, Boldin, Pickett, Welker, Talib, Dansby, Rolle, Posluszny... Those are just some of the top of my head. You're not going to get very far when you're trying to fill all kinds of gaps with FAs, but you can work out the little kinks.

Btw, broken down cast-offs? Scott Wells? How? And how did the Hargrove and Saturday signings really hurt us?

Lastly, I'm aware of Woodson's history. Steven Jackson wasn't a $8 million a year, high valued free agent, either. He's a RB nearing the end of his career... But he could be the piece that puts this team over the top and he didn't come at too bad a price.
UserPostedImage
Online QCHuskerFan  
#55 Posted : Wednesday, April 3, 2013 11:19:23 AM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 12/30/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 84
Applause Received: 149

Originally Posted by: Rockmolder Go to Quoted Post
And then we'll come back to the fact that Jackson is a better player and far less injury prone.

I get your point, but I just don't see how it could be better. You sound like someone who would eat wallpaper paste every day to eventually die with a huge savings account. No offense intented, and you make good points, but I don't see how you see those one year prove it contracts as big free agent signings. Or how, with our RBs your main point was that it'd hinder the growth of one of our running backs, but we're now somehow talking about saving money on FA signings.

We're consistently among the youngest teams with, relative to other competetive teams, quite a bit of cap room. I agree with you that quite a bit will be used towards signings Aaron Rodgers and CMIII, but one of two signings like a Jackson, Woodson, Boldin, Pickett, Welker, Talib, Dansby, Rolle, Posluszny... Those are just some of the top of my head. You're not going to get very far when you're trying to fill all kinds of gaps with FAs, but you can work out the little kinks.

Btw, broken down cast-offs? Scott Wells? How? And how did the Hargrove and Saturday signings really hurt us?

Lastly, I'm aware of Woodson's history. Steven Jackson wasn't a $8 million a year, high valued free agent, either. He's a RB nearing the end of his career... But he could be the piece that puts this team over the top and he didn't come at too bad a price.


Scott Wells. 32 yrs old. Played in 7 games for Rams in 2012 due to injury. Old? Check. Broken? Check. Cast off from Packers in 2012? Check.

Hargrove and Saturday didn't help. That's my point. Ted Thompson signed FAs.

It's a circular conversation because everything is related. It's not as simple as just signing the best 10 OT's in football to make sure you are covered against every possibility. You can't because there are financial limits and roster limits. So if you prioritize spending $3M on an old RB, then you cut $3M and youth from another area. Everything Ted Thompson does has repercussions.

Rumor has it that the Packers and Aaron Rodgers are $2M apart. So if Ted Thompson pays Jackson $2M, does that mean then that the Packers and Aaron Rodgers are $4M apart, because Ted Thompson used some of the 'limited' pool of money?

If all I cared about was the Packers winning the 2014 Super Bowl, I would want them to get every FA available. I am not willing to give up the future for today.

I recently spoke with my 20yr old daughter. In a 2 minute conversation, she mentioned she had 45 pairs of shoes, had just bought 2 more pairs and her cell phone was junk, but she didn't have the money to replace it. We talked about her priorities. If she hadn't blown money on shoes, she would be able to replace her phone. If Ted Thompson doesn't blow money on FA's, he can sign AR, CMIII, Raji, Sitton, Bulaga, etc. So what are your priorities, because you can't do it all? Do you want Jackson so you might win the SB this year or do you want Aaron Rodgers so you might win the SB every year? That's what Ted Thompson has to decide.
Offline Rockmolder  
#56 Posted : Wednesday, April 3, 2013 11:27:02 AM(UTC)
Rockmolder

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Bronze: 2010

Netherlands
Joined: 9/14/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 154
Applause Received: 258

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan Go to Quoted Post
Scott Wells. 32 yrs old. Played in 7 games for Rams in 2012 due to injury. Old? Check. Broken? Check. Cast off from Packers in 2012? Check.

Hargrove and Saturday didn't help. That's my point. Ted Thompson signed FAs.

It's a circular conversation because everything is related. It's not as simple as just signing the best 10 OT's in football to make sure you are covered against every possibility. You can't because there are financial limits and roster limits. So if you prioritize spending $3M on an old RB, then you cut $3M and youth from another area. Everything Ted Thompson does has repercussions.

Rumor has it that the Packers and Aaron Rodgers are $2M apart. So if Ted Thompson pays Jackson $2M, does that mean then that the Packers and Aaron Rodgers are $4M apart, because Ted Thompson used some of the 'limited' pool of money?

If all I cared about was the Packers winning the 2014 Super Bowl, I would want them to get every FA available. I am not willing to give up the future for today.

I recently spoke with my 20yr old daughter. In a 2 minute conversation, she mentioned she had 45 pairs of shoes, had just bought 2 more pairs and her cell phone was junk, but she didn't have the money to replace it. We talked about her priorities. If she hadn't blown money on shoes, she would be able to replace her phone. If Ted Thompson doesn't blow money on FA's, he can sign AR, CMIII, Raji, Sitton, Bulaga, etc. So what are your priorities, because you can't do it all? Do you want Jackson so you might win the SB this year or do you want Aaron Rodgers so you might win the SB every year? That's what Ted Thompson has to decide.


The $3 million you pay Steven Jackson is going to force us to let those guys go? I very much doubt it. That's why I said, in moderation. Had your daughted bought 3 pairs of shoes, she could still buy that new cellphone and then some.

It's not like I'm calling for us to sign a guy like Peppers, Williams or Wallace here.

Scott Wells was one of the best centers in the league for us. He gets injured once with his new team and he's a broken down, old cast-off. You're going to quite some extremes here.

Hargrove and Saturday didn't help in hindsight, but they didn't hurt us, either. There was next to no risk, with a possibility at a very good reward. I feel the same away about Jackson, be it the risk is a tad bit higher because he demands a slightly higher salary...

If you want to start with out of whack contracts, let's look at our own guys first. How on earth are we paying Finley $8 million for what he's doing?

UserPostedImage
thanks Post received 1 applause.
play2win on 4/3/2013(UTC)
Online QCHuskerFan  
#57 Posted : Wednesday, April 3, 2013 12:25:41 PM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 12/30/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 84
Applause Received: 149

Originally Posted by: Rockmolder Go to Quoted Post
Scott Wells was one of the best centers in the league for us. He gets injured once with his new team and he's a broken down, old cast-off. You're going to quite some extremes here.


Scott Wells was a somewhat above average center for the Packers for a number of years.

Scott Wells is, by NFL standards, old. The Packers elected not to resign him last year. He got hurt. Those are not 3 independent actions. Would the Packers have cut him if he was 25 and healthy? I doubt it. Now I won't say they knew he would get hurt. But he's 32. Playing a young man's game. As he gets older, is he more or less likely to get injured? This is simple math.

He will not get younger. He may return to health. Want to bet paychecks on his health going forward?

This is what FA is about. A GM rides a player as long as he thinks he can for an affordable price. Then, when the GM thinks the player is getting close to decreasing in performance relative to value, the player gets released. Some other GM may think the player has a year or 2 or 4 left. GM's are not fortune tellers. It's not a perfect science. One of them is going to be wrong.

It's not a complete coincidence that the 2 of the 3 players signed by 49ers in FA last year, ended up hurt. FA's are by rule, older players. Not always 31, like Scott Wells. But older. Older means more injury prone.

When the Rams signed Wells, their GM was gambling that he knew more than TT. The Rams were planning on Wells having a couple more good years. He may have yet, but 2012 was not one of them.

Online QCHuskerFan  
#58 Posted : Wednesday, April 3, 2013 12:37:41 PM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan

Rank: 6th Round Draft Pick

Joined: 12/30/2010(UTC)

Applause Given: 84
Applause Received: 149

Originally Posted by: Rockmolder Go to Quoted Post
The $3 million you pay Steven Jackson is going to force us to let those guys go? I very much doubt it. That's why I said, in moderation. Had your daughted bought 3 pairs of shoes, she could still buy that new cellphone and then some.

Hargrove and Saturday didn't help in hindsight, but they didn't hurt us, either. There was next to no risk, with a possibility at a very good reward. I feel the same away about Jackson, be it the risk is a tad bit higher because he demands a slightly higher salary...

If you want to start with out of whack contracts, let's look at our own guys first. How on earth are we paying Finley $8 million for what he's doing?



It's only $3M for Jackson. Or it could have been Canty. Or maybe both, because we 'need' both positions. If I was more computer savvy, I bet I could find 1 or 2 FA's last year that people on this board wanted signed. Then there will be next year. It's like an alcoholic having 1 drink. It's never just one. And suddenly those 2 FA's every year are the difference between signing CMIII or not. Discipline is what keeps Ted Thompson from blowing money on the 'Flavor of the Year'. And it is what has positioned us for a 5th consecutive year of playoff games.

Finley's contract, well, it's hard to justify. But Erik Walden got 8M guaranteed!?! Do you think someone wouldn't pay way more than 8M for Finley? He's young, relatively healthy, athletically freakish. But a headcase with the occasional dropsies. Someone would break the bank, I believe. I bet they will next year. I wish them luck.

I have issues with Hawk's contract and Brad Jones, also. I do not value our ILB's like Ted Thompson does. Williams is another one that I don't feel is good for us. But if he is going to make a mistake, I guess I would rather it be a player on which our staff knows everything. Instead of someone else's used car.

Offline Zero2Cool  
#59 Posted : Wednesday, April 3, 2013 12:41:37 PM(UTC)
Zero2Cool

Rank: Administration

Yahoo! Fantasy Football - Gold: 2009FleaFlicker Fantasy Football - Silver: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Silver: 2011ESPN NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2010Yahoo! NCAA March Madness - Bronze: 2013

United States
Joined: 10/13/2006(UTC)
Location: Green Bay, WI

Applause Given: 1,952
Applause Received: 2,173

Originally Posted by: QCHuskerFan Go to Quoted Post
It's only $3M for Jackson. Or it could have been Canty. Or maybe both, because we 'need' both positions. If I was more computer savvy, I bet I could find 1 or 2 FA's last year that people on this board wanted signed.


Click "Search" and you can get it done.

UserPostedImage
Offline DakotaT  
#60 Posted : Wednesday, April 3, 2013 12:44:13 PM(UTC)
DakotaT

Rank: Super Bowl MVP

Joined: 8/18/2008(UTC)

Applause Given: 661
Applause Received: 1,360

Originally Posted by: Rockmolder Go to Quoted Post


You don't waste age by having a veteran play in a starter spot, you waste it by having a guy like Driver on the roster as your number five guy. You pump talent in from the bottom, you don't force them into starting spots in the hope that they'll be any good.



Watch out, the real Packer fans will have your nuts for sacrilege like this, well maybe not you, but I get taken to the woodshed every time I dare breath a word about replacing the relics.
UserPostedImage
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
5 Pages«<2345>
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

Tweeter

Recent Topics
16m / Green Bay Packers Talk / yooperfan

28m / Green Bay Packers Talk / yooperfan

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / yinzer

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

5h / Green Bay Packers Talk / MintBaconDrivel

12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / nerdmann

12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DarkaneRules

13h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

13h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16h / Green Bay Packers Talk / texaspackerbacker

19h / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

20-Oct / Green Bay Packers Talk / QCHuskerFan