Letting Players Walk: Packers' Track Record is Pretty Good· Page 2

TheKanataThrilla
Veteran Member

5 years ago

Hyde and Hayward.....just what I have said in the past. Letting good players go, and trying to fill those voids in the draft. Kids coming out of college rarely make a huge impact right away. Some not for several seasons. So you let known good guys leave for “best player available” hopes. Hopes that may never develop.
I know you can’t keep everyone. And I agree that better 1year early then 1 year late. But guys that are good and not over the hill, you need to hold onto if you want a shot at a championship.

Originally Posted by: Cheesey

But Randall and Rollins both had decent rookie years which made losing Hayward and Hyde palatable. Hayward was injured quite a bit and Hyde was decent, but got big bucks by the Bills for what he provided to Green Bay. Unfortunately that was likely because he was not in the correct position.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member Topic Starter

5 years ago

#12

Have you actually seen any team do that for an entire season? Or even 8 games?

Originally Posted by: beast

Asking a loaded question says more about the one asking, and the one asked.

I know they it's a fairly common short term strategy to deal with certain players it certain teams, but I haven't seen (or if I did, didn't realize it) that any team has consistently done it the majority of multiple back to back to back games.

I believe the reason for that is because it can create even more problems with different half of the field working differently than the other, so just get the WRs to cross, and the guy in man wants to stay in man, and the guy in zone wants to stay in zone... so now you can two guys on one WR and a WR running free and wide open.

Originally Posted by: beast

My point is if you have someone who is good at Man and someone who is good at Zone, there are options to utilize both.

Random thought ... When Jets had Darrelle Revis and locked him on someone, did they play zone or man? I am not saying Hayward or Shields were Revis level, just using an example that I think most can be familiar with.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member Topic Starter

5 years ago

#13

Originally Posted by: Cheesey

The (speculating based on actions taken) belief was they had reached their ceiling with the Packers. And they drafted (more speculating) best player available and that made Hyde and Hayward expendable. If you have youth coming in that you perceive to have a higher ceiling than those who are commanding large contracts and have hit their ceiling, your decision is made for you.

I'm not at all upset about Hyde or Hayward. Hyde I thought was a great utility guy. Hayward I thought was over rated by us Packers fans.

Jared Cook ... that guy I would have liked to have retained. Something fishy happened there. I read reports the Packers offered something similar to Raiders and because the Packers didn't offer it fast enough, Cook was pissed and left. Remind me of Cullen Jenkins situation.

Cheesey
Preferred Member

5 years ago

#14

Zero, I also thought something was goofy with Cook.
But I sure wish it wouldn’t have ended the way it did.

beast
Select Member

5 years ago

#15

Asking a loaded question says more about the one asking, and the one asked.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

Except that wasn't a loaded question, I was serious wondering and if someone said yes (and we could find proof), my inner football need would be so darn excited...

As I said, I looked hard for it, and only could find VT Tech that had done it over the long term if every snap for multiple games (and they did it for years), but I haven't seen anywhere else even attempt it other than short term.

I believe because it creates system eras, in which another team in theory could easily take advantage of, though VA Tech wanted you to take those chances as they bet you couldn't complete them on their talented DBs, but I'm not sure that would work in the pros.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

I get your point, and really like and enjoy the out of the box thinking, but while there are options, considering that an extremely extremely rare option, I don't think the coaches believe it's a smart option for some reason.

Revis and Cromartie basically always locked up in man coverage, they weren't zone guys at all...

Of course, by definition, locking someone up on a WR is man coverage, because you stick with them in man coverage, you stick with your zone in zone coverage... which is why mixing the two clash against each other when used at the same time.

beast
Select Member

5 years ago

#16

Jared Cook ... that guy I would have liked to have retained. Something fishy happened there. I read reports the Packers offered something similar to Raiders and because the Packers didn't offer it fast enough, Cook was pissed and left. Remind me of Cullen Jenkins situation.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool

Cook, Jenkins and Jennings are rumored to all be cases of players/agents over valuing their free agency market... basically the players bet on themselves and loss (well Jennings might of been breaking even).

But Packers made their best offer to Cook and the agent held out trying to an even bigger contract, and Packers got their highest rated FA TE to sign for slighty higher deal than what Cook's group rejected... and Cook ended up taking a good bit less than he rejected with the Raiders.

Same thing with Jenkins, but that happened in season, and Jenkins was reported pissed with the low ball offer he received in season... turns out that low ball offer was more than anyone else would offer him come FA, and still pissed at the Packers he signed with the Eagles, who after they restricted his contact (or release him if he didn't), he earned less than the offer too.

Jennings reported turned down, I think 11 million per year... but based on Twitter from him and his family, they KNEW the Dolphins were going to sign him to a mega deal (Jennings 'sister was already semi publicly planning her trip to visit her brother in South Beach lol). because they REALLY needed a #1 WR, they had a lot of cap cash to spend and because Joe Philbin and Mike Sherman were head offensive guys with the Dolphins now...

One problem, GM had control and he preferred and got Mike Wallace instead...

Then Vikings got into the mix, and Packers offered him 10 million, Vikings offered less, but Jennings was upset at Packers, so they kept talking to the Vikings, and comparing the better Packers offer to them, and they ended up getting the Vikings to match the $10 million and Jennings signed with them.

Zero2Cool
Elite Member Topic Starter

5 years ago

#17

Sure is crazy how much the human element affects signing deals at times. I think we fans often times think it's 100% dollars.

If you're looking for some NFL game fix -- get the NFL Game Pass. It's free right now. You can watch any game you want dating back to 2012!

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

wpr (10h) : 7 days

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Trade, cut or keep

dfosterf (16-Apr) : that from Jaire

dfosterf (16-Apr) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : That someone ... likely the agent.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaire’s line of thinking at that moment.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that

dfosterf (16-Apr) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Jalen Ramsey wants to be traded. He's never happy is he?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : two 1sts in 2022 and two 2nd's in 2023 and 2024

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers had fortunate last three drafts.

dfosterf (15-Apr) : I may have to move

dfosterf (15-Apr) : My wife just told the ancient Japanese sushi dude not enough rice under his fish

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I think a dozen is what I need

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Go fund me for this purpose just might work. A dozen nurses show up at 1265 to provide mental health assistance.

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Maybe send a crew of Angels to the Packers draft room on draft day.

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I am the Angel that gets visited.

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Visiting Angels has a pretty good reputation

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : what

Martha Careful (14-Apr) : WINNING IT, not someone else losing it. The best victory though was re-uniting with his wife

Martha Careful (14-Apr) : The manner in which he won it was just amazing and wonderful. First blowing the lead then getting back, then blowing it. But ultimately

Zero2Cool (12-Apr) : I'm guessing since the thumb was broken, he wasn't feeling it.

dfosterf (10-Apr) : Looking for guidance. Not feeling the thumb.

Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : If they knew about it or not

Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : I don't recall that he did which is why I asked.

Zero2Cool (10-Apr) : Guessing they probably knew. Did he have cast or something on?

Mucky Tundra (10-Apr) : Did they know that at the time or was that something the realized afterwards?

Zero2Cool (9-Apr) : Van Ness played most of season with broken thumb

wpr (9-Apr) : yay

Zero2Cool (9-Apr) : Mark Murphy says Steelers likely to protect Packers game. Meaning, no Ireland

Zero2Cool (8-Apr) : Struggling to figure out what text editor options are needed and which are 'nice to have'

Mucky Tundra (8-Apr) : *CHOMP CHOMP CHOMP*

Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : WR who said he'd break Xavier Worthy 40 time...and ran slower than you

Mucky Tundra (2-Apr) : Who?

Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Texas’ WR Isaiah Bond is scheduled to visit the Bills, Browns, Chiefs, Falcons, Packers and Titans starting next week.

Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : Spotting ball isn't changing, only measuring distance is, Which wasn't the issue.

Zero2Cool (2-Apr) : The spotting of the ball IS the issue. Not the chain gang.

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

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

25 - 27

Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

22 - 24

Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM

Eagles

10 - 22