Pack93z
  • Pack93z
  • Select Member Topic Starter
8 years ago
....,even if it is best for the organization and team, to be just a bit envious and mildly disappointed that for your team, you have the draft to look forward to in the offseason and not much else?

There is little to get excited about in terms of free agency when your team will most likely sit idle again in free agency. As if it is an afterthought until late in the cycle anyway.

To be clear, I am more in favor of the draft, develop and resign philosophy, but I have more of a use for free agency to bolster the roster than the current administration.


"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"
Porforis
8 years ago
Absolutely not. We all want this team to win it all and be successful in the long haul. We may disagree on how the Packers should go about accomplishing the above, but none of us have a crystal ball that tells us which FAs will pan out and which ones will bust, who to draft, who's going to get injured, etc etc etc.
Zero2Cool
8 years ago
I have a few ebb flow moments. Draft is fun. Training Camp is fun. Exhibition season I cringe hoping for 100% healthy. The first 12 games of the season are more "meh" to me than anything. The final four is when I get juiced up and ready to hit it up for the playoffs.

What we as spoiled fans of an NFL team can look forward to is a ticket to the six team conference dance every year (7 times in a row) where anything can happen. I'll take that over signing players that were no longer wanted by their team and inking them to a fat contract.

I would have liked the Packers to get Vernon Davis, even if he had flopped similarly with the Packers as he did with Broncos.
UserPostedImage
PackFanWithTwins
8 years ago
I am hopeful that Ted will find the right FAs to sign this year and actually give a little extra effort towards reaching the final goal of the season. I think this is the season to do that because of the players who will be FA next year. We have the cap space to sign players not at short term fill, but as long term additions. I can see a couple options for ILB.


The world needs ditch diggers too Danny!!!
OlHoss1884
8 years ago
The problem with most free agency is that you have to overpay to land anyone worth landing, and then hope they fit in as expected. I don't think, on the whole, it works out well for most teams.
Ted Thompson seems to take the same approach with FA as he does with the draft...grab a value guy. Peppers, for example, came relatively cheap.

The problem is that there are times when there is some glaring hole that needs to be addressed, and a second tier guy may fill in nicely where a draft pick might need time to develop. These guys might still add value as backups after you do insert a draftee.

Right now I think we need help at ILB, and the draft looks really thin there, so I could see adding a guy to fill in.

Beyond that I don't see any FA that look like must have guys who would be worth the money.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits" --Albert Einstein
steveishere
8 years ago

The problem with most free agency is that you have to overpay to land anyone worth landing, and then hope they fit in as expected. I don't think, on the whole, it works out well for most teams.

Ted Thompson seems to take the same approach with FA as he does with the draft...grab a value guy. Peppers, for example, came relatively cheap.

The problem is that there are times when there is some glaring hole that needs to be addressed, and a second tier guy may fill in nicely where a draft pick might need time to develop. These guys might still add value as backups after you do insert a draftee.

Right now I think we need help at ILB, and the draft looks really thin there, so I could see adding a guy to fill in.

Beyond that I don't see any FA that look like must have guys who would be worth the money.

Originally Posted by: OlHoss1884 



Maybe not must have guys but I wouldn't have a problem with them signing a guy like Derrick Johnson who is older but can still play. He probably won't cost much, won't require anything long term and gives the team the ability to let some young guys that they like develop a year at that position.
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
8 years ago
I would enjoy this time of the year if GB had been more aggressive in the FA market. It serves to fuel the "what if" lull.

In the past I would have liked to see Uncle Teddy pick up a FA or two to fill the glaring weakness. Someone who is not a street FA or UDFA. My contention was it didn't matter if other teams failed when they signed big named players to big contracts. Uncle Teddy is a better evaluate of talent than they are and generally a player he signed would have worked out.

I have come to the conclusion he is scared. Never signing a high risk/ high reward player means never being wrong. He will nickle and dime away with third level talent that others will try and pawn off as 2nd level talent and point to the couple of players he has signed in 11 years as proof he does indeed acquire FAs.

Uncle Teddy is "the man" because he has been able to rely on a golden armed QB who will no doubt end up in the HoF. Aaron is under contract through the 2019 season. I see Uncle Teddy retiring after 2017. That is two years before Rodger's contract expires. If the team fades like it did after Lombardi stepped down then it won't be "his fault" because his replacement will have been in place for 2 years and it therefore must be the new GM's fault. After all everything was perfect when he left.
UserPostedImage
Barfarn
8 years ago

I would enjoy this time of the year if GB had been more aggressive in the FA market. It serves to fuel the "what if" lull.

In the past I would have liked to see Uncle Teddy pick up a FA or two to fill the glaring weakness. Someone who is not a street FA or UDFA. My contention was it didn't matter if other teams failed when they signed big named players to big contracts. Uncle Teddy is a better evaluate of talent than they are and generally a player he signed would have worked out.

I have come to the conclusion he is scared. Never signing a high risk/ high reward player means never being wrong. He will nickle and dime away with third level talent that others will try and pawn off as 2nd level talent and point to the couple of players he has signed in 11 years as proof he does indeed acquire FAs.

Uncle Teddy is "the man" because he has been able to rely on a golden armed QB who will no doubt end up in the HoF. Aaron is under contract through the 2019 season. I see Uncle Teddy retiring after 2017. That is two years before Rodger's contract expires. If the team fades like it did after Lombardi stepped down then it won't be "his fault" because his replacement will have been in place for 2 years and it therefore must be the new GM's fault. After all everything was perfect when he left.

Originally Posted by: wpr 



Here’s the top 20 non franchised FAs by Walter football in 2015; GB signed 2; which others should scaredy cat Ted have signed? Ted Also locked up the best FA DL for 2016, a player as good as Suh, half the price. In 2014 he signed the 2nd best FA CB on the market for 40% of the best one; who incidentally is back on the list after a 1 year/$25M rental.

Of the top 20 FAs that switched teams, NOT ONE...NOT A SINGLE ONE lived up to their contract...NOT ONE!!!! And many just outright sucked!

Free agency is high risk/no reward almost ever! It is a joke; it’s a living personification of a sit-com; it shows just how stupid the average NFL GM is. I loved the Byron Maxwell for Carey Williams “free agent trade” between Seattle and Philly. Both teams over paid and both teams got a crap guy in return. Williams was just cut after game 11 [no injury], this signing by Schneider was out right stupid, $7M just pissed away; but Maxwell was good in Seattle; he just couldn’t adapt to Philly’s styles or was not the player we thought sans Thomas and Chancellor. Thank God for Ted and Wolf teaching his this!

1. Revis
2. Suh
3. McCourty*
4. Cobb*
5. Demarco Murray
6. Brandon Flowers*
7. Orlando Franklin
8. Jerry Hughes*
9. Julius Thomas TE [80(targ)-46-455-9.9-5 and 7 drops w/ a QB that threw for 10% more yards than AR] He would have been so much better than Rich Rodgers...NOT. If Rodgers is a "glaring weakness" what is Julius Thomas?
10. Mike Iupati
11. Terrance Knighton
12. Antonio Cromartie
13. Kareem Jackson*
14. Rodney Hudson*
15. Bulaga*
16. Orakpo
17. Brandon Graham*
18. Nick Fairley
19. Greg Hardy
20. Torrey Smith
*signed w/ old team.


wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
8 years ago

Here’s the top 20 non franchised FAs by Walter football in 2015; GB signed 2; which others should scaredy cat Ted have signed? Ted Also locked up the best FA DL for 2016, a player as good as Suh, half the price. In 2014 he signed the 2nd best FA CB on the market for 40% of the best one; who incidentally is back on the list after a 1 year/$25M rental.

Of the top 20 FAs that switched teams, NOT ONE...NOT A SINGLE ONE lived up to their contract...NOT ONE!!!! And many just outright sucked!

Free agency is high risk/no reward almost ever! It is a joke; it’s a living personification of a sit-com; it shows just how stupid the average NFL GM is. I loved the Byron Maxwell for Carey Williams “free agent trade” between Seattle and Philly. Both teams over paid and both teams got a crap guy in return. Williams was just cut after game 11 [no injury], this signing by Schneider was out right stupid, $7M just pissed away; but Maxwell was good in Seattle; he just couldn’t adapt to Philly’s styles or was not the player we thought sans Thomas and Chancellor. Thank God for Ted and Wolf teaching his this!

1. Revis
2. Suh
3. McCourty*
4. Cobb*
5. Demarco Murray
6. Brandon Flowers*
7. Orlando Franklin
8. Jerry Hughes*
9. Julius Thomas TE [80(targ)-46-455-9.9-5 and 7 drops w/ a QB that threw for 10% more yards than AR] He would have been so much better than Rich Rodgers...NOT. If Rodgers is a "glaring weakness" what is Julius Thomas?
10. Mike Iupati
11. Terrance Knighton
12. Antonio Cromartie
13. Kareem Jackson*
14. Rodney Hudson*
15. Bulaga*
16. Orakpo
17. Brandon Graham*
18. Nick Fairley
19. Greg Hardy
20. Torrey Smith
*signed w/ old team.


Originally Posted by: Barfarn 



It has been discussed 1000 times. If you love Uncle Teddy that is fine with me. I am not pointing at any one season. I am looking at a 12 year career. In 12 years there has been enough players available that could have helped GB. He simply will not sign FAs no matter who they are. Even the talking heads on tv have started to notice this. I don't give them a lot of credit one of their off camera interns probably pointed this out to them.

I refuse to consider signing a team's own player as a legitimate FA signing. It's not. It is, for whatever reason, not getting the deal done while the player was still under contract. If a GM can't sign his best players back he isn't much of a GM to begin with.

Here are the FA's Uncle Ted has signed in 12 years:

Major free agent signings 
Position Name Contract Details Year
DT Ryan Pickett Signed a four-year, $14 million contract 2006
CB Charles Woodson Signed a seven-year, $52.7 million contract 2006
RB Cedric Benson Signed a one-year, $825,000 contract 2012
DE Julius Peppers Signed a three-year, $30 million contract 2014

All but Benson worked out. And he was injured so perhaps that one would have worked out too and perhaps he was yet another RB that lost it all in a big hurry.

It's 10 years ago so I don't really remember a lot of teams lining up to pick up Pickett but I am willing to say there were just for the sake of giving Teddy his due.

No one but GB and Tampa were in contention for Woodson. That makes the other GMs stupid and Teddy sharp because Woodson didn't want to come to GB at all.

Benson was a bust bit then I don't blame him for trying. It didn't really cost anything.

Peppers was a good move but I doubt Teddy would have made him an offer if the Bears hadn't screwed up and released him. Meaning there was no draft compensation implications for the bears or against GB. That made the signing "cheaper" and less risky.

Whoever wrote the article for Wiki somehow considers Guion a "major" signing too. I don't he isn't. It is pretty sad when a journeyman roll player is considered a major signing. He has filled a need but that doesn't make it a major deal.

2 FAs in 2006 were large parts of the 2010 team. Which is my point. Supplementing with the occasional FA helps. Since then practically nothing.

Well there was SATURDAY in 2012!!!! Too bad Teddy didn't have a plan when they realized in 2011 that the didn't want to pay Wells big money.
UserPostedImage
Porforis
8 years ago
I know this has been discussed 1000 times but it's ridiculous to make a sweeping statement like "He didn't sign enough FAs" and refusing to bring even a single example of someone he could have signed to the party. I literally have not seen one of 6 posters engaged in a solid 10 pages worth of conversation over the last couple weeks bring up diddly despite literally a dozen direct requests by 3 different posters to provide said example in a very non-confrontational manner.

I'm not in the "Ted's a deadbeat" camp but I refuse to believe there's not several obvious examples of missed opportunities during Ted's tenure. I seriously do not get the point of having these abstract philosophical conversations (and putting a notable amount of effort into them) without any attempts to tie it back into the realm of the actual world. You clearly want to discuss the subject and put some effort into it since you're bringing up specific examples of people Ted DID sign and analyzing those signings. Why not put a fraction of that effort into explaining why you believe what you believe? Saying that Ted signed these guys and you don't think they're big signings doesn't really address the statement that during Ted's tenure there have been enough players that could have helped Green Bay.

Sorry, I'm just perplexed.
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    Zero2Cool (2h) : Merry Christmas!
    beast (11h) : Merry Christmas 🎄🎁
    beast (19h) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game
    packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : both games Watson missed, Packers won
    Martha Careful (24-Dec) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!
    Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol
    buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier
    buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol
    Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Jacobs gonna be OK???
    Zero2Cool (24-Dec) : Watson gonna be OK???
    packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath
    packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.
    packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?
    bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.
    bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?
    bboystyle (23-Dec) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference
    Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network
    beast (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
    bboystyle (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
    beast (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I see what you did there Mucky
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : dammit. 3:25pm
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
    Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
    Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Yeah baby!
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
    beast (23-Dec) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
    packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : ok I stand corrected
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
    beast (23-Dec) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
    beast (23-Dec) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
    Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
    beast (23-Dec) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
    beast (23-Dec) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
    beast (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
    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
    10m / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

    23m / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    15h / GameDay Threads / bboystyle

    20h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    22h / Random Babble / beast

    24-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    23-Dec / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

    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

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