Zero2Cool
8 years ago
In other words, Mike wants him and knows Ted is going to low-ball the hell out of Jared Cook having any interest.

UserPostedImage
Bigbyfan
8 years ago
What qualifies as "low-balling" a player who has made tens of millions based on nothing more than potential? The guy is looking for his third team after being cut by the coach who drafted him. The fact that he is still available shows that he is most likely asking for more money than he's worth.
blank
musccy
8 years ago

What qualifies as "low-balling" a player who has made tens of millions based on nothing more than potential? The guy is looking for his third team after being cut by the coach who drafted him. The fact that he is still available shows that he is most likely asking for more money than he's worth.

Originally Posted by: Bigbyfan 



Good perspective, and I struggle to agree even though I know you're right.

What keeps gnawing at me, though, is there are now glaring needs either for starters or depth at TE, DL, ILB, WR, OL, G, and CB. If you could at least address one or two of those prior to the draft, it offers a little more peace of mind that the team isn't trying to draft an entire roster of needs.
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
8 years ago

Good perspective, and I struggle to agree even though I know you're right.

What keeps gnawing at me, though, is there are now glaring needs either for starters or depth at TE, DL, ILB, WR, OL, G, and CB. If you could at least address one or two of those prior to the draft, it offers a little more peace of mind that the team isn't trying to draft an entire roster of needs.

Originally Posted by: musccy 



Er. They also need improvement at OLB and P, in my opinion.

Not to mention the fact that if they did somehow manage to draft at all these positions of need, the likelihood is really small of all those 2016 draftees filling the extent of those needs in 2016 (even after accounting for "continuing improvement by those already on the roster").

And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Barfarn
8 years ago
Jared Cook has his house up for sale.

Cook was a community oriented guy in Tenn and then with Rams. His wife [Lana] and the community will have something to say about where Cook ends up. His oldest kid is a daughter who is 4, so she’s a little young to protest a move.

That said, if he was thinking about taking a 1 year prove it deal, with for example GB, one might think he’d hold off selling and uprooting his family until the following year. But, is seems the plan is to take his family wherever he goes.

This may mean he is waiting for a real multi-year deal.

Also, Cook is a southern boy. Born in Bama, raised in Suwanee GA, went to school at S. Carolina, then as a pro was in Tennessee and St. Louis; so not sure how far north of the Mason-Dixon line he’ll go. Cook’s community activism extends to his hometown, which is also where his mama still lives [She may have some input into where Cook goes as well].

Even more frightening [for those who want Cook to come to GB] is Lana is an assertive women, she is not a passive wall flower. She grew up in Jackson Tenn, went to Middle Tenn. State and met Jared in Nashville. And on November 15, 2014 tweeted “I’m not ready for winter.” If she is psychologically not ready for winter in November in St. Louis; she probably needed a cocktail of Xanax, Klonopin, Valium just thinking about Jared having spoken to Mike McCarthy more than once. Of course, she has no idea what winter is and undoubtedly the thoughts of moving to GB send shivers up and down her spine.

If Cook does not come to GB; it may have nothing to do with Ted [being “a tightwad”].
beast
8 years ago

What qualifies as "low-balling" a player who has made tens of millions based on nothing more than potential? The guy is looking for his third team after being cut by the coach who drafted him. The fact that he is still available shows that he is most likely asking for more money than he's worth.

Originally Posted by: Bigbyfan 



I think you just completely nailed that on the head... I think he hasn't signed with anyone because of of a number of reasons...

- For the first time in his life, he doesn't have a huge market (or at least we don't think he does, then again people didn't think Woodson did either and signed a pretty big deal late)

- GB has the best offer currently on the table and he doesn't want to come to GB for what ever reason (like say, maybe as talked above, he and his wife are southerns and don't like the cold... or again in the case of Woodson, kept hearing "The talk is always this is no place for a black man ")

- Waiting to see what happens in the draft (he might not want to sign with the Packers if they're going to draft the #1 TE in the draft... of course that works both ways... the Packers might not be as interested in the #1 TE (if available) if they have another vet TE signed)

- Thinking about retirement
UserPostedImage
beast
8 years ago

is there are now glaring needs either for starters or depth at TE, DL, ILB, WR, OL, G, and CB.

Originally Posted by: musccy 



Er. They also need improvement at OLB and P, in my opinion.

all those 2016 draftees filling the extent of those needs in 2016 (even after accounting for "continuing improvement by those already on the roster").

Originally Posted by: Wade 



If everyone is healthy, do the Packers really have needs at WR and CB, after all they basically have a stud vet (if fully healthy) and a whole lot of talented young guns who have shined at times.

The Packers might/will have needs at G and OLB next year, but while all the vets are signed as of right now, I think they're in decent position there.

So those list (to me) are down to TE, DL, ILB, OT and maybe P, RB and S

- At TE they have Rodgers, Backman and Henry who a number of people thought looked better than Backman in training camp (but didn't have as much upside potential if Backman devolops), but all are less than 3 years in and have shown nice potential to possibly grow some more.

- DL, Pennel, Boyd and Ringo... I'm not sure how much growth Boyd and Ringo have, and I don't fully trust Pennel right now, as I think he has two strikes in two years in the NFL, and one more and he's suspended for a year. Might take two more guys to help.

- ILB, Ryan, Barrington, Thomas and Palmer... surely not the best list, but I don't think it's as horrible as fans make it out to be... then again, maybe I'm thinking about them with Matthews in their aiding them... but Ryan and Barrington are good thumpers and Thomas seemed to take a step up in coverage and grew some. If you find the right guy (which the Packers have struggled at doing at ILB) it might just take one more good ILB to solidify the unit.

- OT... yeah... help is needed, there is just Tretter and Bulaga can't be trusted to play 16 games.

- RB... yeah Lacy is losing weight, but he's also going to be a FA and at times RBs get injured or banged up and need healthy depth to let them rest up.

- S... when everyone is healthy Safety position is (mostly) great... but as shown a bit by Burnett going down some last year early, if one of the starters is out the Packers are in some trouble as the depth isn't there... and all due respect to Hyde, he doesn't yet seem natural back at true Safety yet and might not ever be. Also I felt like Hyde had a down year at the nickel/dime role, and he's a FA and how the Packers haven't been resigning their back-up DB, he could be gone and they're yet with just Banjo.

So my list of needs (in order)
DL, OT/C*, ILB, DL, TE, S, OLB, RB, P, CB, G, WR, QB

* = I have C up with the OT because I think Tretter is currently the top back-up for both, and selecting one of the two positions would then (in theory) let Tretter focus in on the other.

Really Punter is the X-factor here... because they're (hopefully) only keep one... (I still find it hard to believe than Sherman kept two, then again, I guess that's what you get when your 3rd round rookie draft pick punter doesn't win the starting job)...

But if they get to the later rounds and some guy can clearly improve on Masthay, then maybe that goes up on the need board, if no one, then maybe drops off the board completely.

UserPostedImage
nerdmann
8 years ago
We don't have to draft a punter. Ted has a rolodex for that shit.

We'll need a NT, ILB and OT. Signing Cook solidifies some shit. Some depth at various positions would be cool. I like Crockett at RB, though. Montgomery is our "third down" guy.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
Fan Shout
beast (14m) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th
beast (15m) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
Zero2Cool (25m) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
bboystyle (37m) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed
Mucky Tundra (46m) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
Zero2Cool (1h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
beast (1h) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?
packerfanoutwest (1h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (2h) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (2h) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (2h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (2h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (2h) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (2h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (3h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (3h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (4h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (4h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (5h) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (5h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (5h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (5h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (5h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (5h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (5h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (5h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (5h) : 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 (5h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
Zero2Cool (5h) : I literally just said it.
packerfanoutwest (5h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't
Zero2Cool (5h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.
Zero2Cool (5h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.
packerfanoutwest (5h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what
Zero2Cool (5h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.
packerfanoutwest (5h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in
packerfanoutwest (5h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker
packerfanoutwest (5h) : if bucs win out they win their division
beast (5h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us
packerfanoutwest (5h) : falcons are already ahead of us
beast (5h) : Packers will get in
beast (5h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen
packerfanoutwest (6h) : they still are in the playoffs
packerfanoutwest (6h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7
Zero2Cool (7h) : We can say it. We don't play.
Mucky Tundra (9h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints
Mucky Tundra (9h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games
Mucky Tundra (9h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.
buckeyepackfan (9h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.
Mucky Tundra (18h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan
beast (19h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
37m / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

4h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Mucky Tundra

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.