Packers could be active participants in free agency· Page 5

Pack93z
Select Member

10 years ago

How many of those deals has Ted gambled on with a high dollar value. One comes to mind.. Woodson. It is not his MO... so I would not bank on him taking a risk with a high dollar FA which most people associate FA with.

Do I expect him to be more active.. probably.. but I don't see him chasing the top 10 free agent talent that are going to be above market value.

"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"

play2win
Senior Member

10 years ago

#42

Originally Posted by: Pack93z

Oh, no Pack93z. I'm right with you. I don't expect him to complete a high profile signing either , but I wish he would. Oh, man, do I!!!!

He did it with Woodson. He did it with Pickett. He can do it again, I hope!

BTW, I think "above market value" can be misleading. Market value for proven talent is just that, what teams are willing to spend. The bigger point is finding the value return, the return on investment. If we were to sign a top level FA, maybe we realize that return.

Ted is not Mike Sherman. I trust him here. He knows how important such a move would be.

Pack93z
Select Member

10 years ago

#43

BTW, I think "above market value" can be misleading. Market value for proven talent is just that, what teams are willing to spend. The bigger point is finding the value return, the return on investment. If we were to sign a top level FA, maybe we realize that return.

Originally Posted by: play2win

See, I view it as .... just because one team will pay it, doesn't make it market value.

"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

10 years ago

#44

See, I view it as .... just because one team will pay it, doesn't make it market value.

Originally Posted by: Pack93z

A good analysis I'd like to see is the free agents signed in the first 10 days, how many lived up to their potential? Or to be more fair and easier to analyze, did their performance decline or increase from the prior years of NFL service?

texaspackerbacker
Veteran Member

10 years ago

#45

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

Yeah, that's a very relevant issue. If you're talking about previous free agent signings, it ought to be easy to research. If you're talking about future ones, I would suggest checking the behavior on and off the field, as well as words of the guy. That, for example, is why I was/am opposed to re-signing Finley for big money. He seems like a prime candidate to revert to his old ways instead of playing like he did the year or so before his injury. I would liken it to a fat girl thinning down long enough to capture a husband - you just know she will get fat again.

Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.

Pack93z
Select Member

10 years ago

#46

Apparently he didn't like it when I asked him to move to safety... lol.

Charles Tillman has no interest in moving to safety

Posted by Josh Alper on February 19, 2014, 2:59 PM EST

Charles Tillman doesn’t know what city he’ll call home next season, but he’s quite sure which position he’ll be playing.

The 33-year-old impending free agent said on 670 The Score on Wednesday that he doesn’t “want to play safety anywhere” in 2014, quashing any idea that he’d follow Charles Woodson, Rod Woodson and other corners without the last name of Woodson in making the transition from cornerback in the latter stages of his career.

"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"

steveishere
Veteran Member

10 years ago

#47

The salary cap supposedly went up to 130m this year so that leaves GB with 32m I think at the moment. I could definitely at least see some competition level FA signings this year. There is a fairly deep market at some positions like DL and ILB that were pretty weak last year.

dhazer
Veteran Member

10 years ago

#48

The Buffalo Bills plan to place the franchise tag on impending free-agent FS Jairus Byrd if they are not able to reach a contract agreement with him before the start of free agency

Oh well that was on kffl

Just Imagine this for the next 6-9 years. What a ride it will be 🙂 (PS, Zero should charge for this)

dhazer
Veteran Member

10 years ago

#49

Originally Posted by: steveishere

http://www.kffl.com/hotw/nfl#sthash.Hy5Eq3uN.dpuf

Just Imagine this for the next 6-9 years. What a ride it will be 🙂 (PS, Zero should charge for this)

DakotaT
Select Member

10 years ago

#50

Originally Posted by: dhazer

We better be doing the same with Shields.

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

packerfanoutwest (4m) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (50m) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (51m) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (51m) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (58m) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (59m) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (1h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (2h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (2h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (3h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (3h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (3h) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (3h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (3h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (3h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (3h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (3h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (3h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (3h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (3h) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs

Zero2Cool (3h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (3h) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (3h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (3h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Zero2Cool (3h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what

Zero2Cool (4h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in

packerfanoutwest (4h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker

packerfanoutwest (4h) : if bucs win out they win their division

beast (4h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us

packerfanoutwest (4h) : falcons are already ahead of us

beast (4h) : Packers will get in

beast (4h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen

packerfanoutwest (4h) : they still are in the playoffs

packerfanoutwest (4h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7

Zero2Cool (6h) : We can say it. We don't play.

Mucky Tundra (7h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints

Mucky Tundra (7h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games

Mucky Tundra (7h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.

buckeyepackfan (8h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.

Mucky Tundra (17h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan

beast (17h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings

bboystyle (17h) : We just need to win Monday night and were in

Mucky Tundra (21h) : Or ties, but let's be real here

Mucky Tundra (21h) : Other scenario was Falcons+Rams losses

Mucky Tundra (21h) : Needed a Falcons loss for a Seahawk loss to clinch

buckeyepackfan (21h) : Am I wring in saying if Tge Vikings beat The Seahawks, The Packers clinch?

Mucky Tundra (21-Dec) : Agreed; you stinks

Zero2Cool (21-Dec) : I'm not beating anyone. I stinks.

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS