5 Moves for Every NFC North Team over the Offseason

[Pokerbrat2000]

The Packers shouldn't go all in this year but take more risks than in previous seasons.

The good news is, they really shouldn't have to go all in. While I don't expect them to have a top 5 defense in 2017, just 2 decent FA's (OLB and CB) could be enough to field a lot stronger defense than we saw in 2016. With that and a similar offense that we saw the last half of 2016, the Packers should be in good shape.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The good news is, they really shouldn't have to go all in. While I don't expect them to have a top 5 defense in 2017, just 2 decent FA's (OLB and CB) could be enough to field a lot stronger defense than we saw in 2016. With that and a similar offense that we saw the last half of 2016, the Packers should be in good shape.

True, unfortunately I'm not convinced Thompson will take any more risk than over the past few years though.

 

[Mondio]

No doubt TT needs to open things up in FA, but Rodgers isn't so near the end that you start mortgaging the 2018-2020 cap to make a huge push this season. Sustainability still matters.

I agree. While the "right" move could pay off, a big move like the Saints and Byrd a few years ago will slam the window shut on this team 3-4 years early. Like Poker says, we don't need a top 5 D. A few solid additions, or just some solid play from some healthier players and our offense playing like they are capable of and should play, this team will go places.

Though I'd like to see "more" happen, the best approach is going to still make sure the decisions make sense financially as well. I still don't think we should be one of those 1st day buyers at the start of FA.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I agree. While the "right" move could pay off, a big move like the Saints and Byrd a few years ago will slam the window shut on this team 3-4 years early. Like Poker says, we don't need a top 5 D. A few solid additions, or just some solid play from some healthier players and our offense playing like they are capable of and should play, this team will go places.

I truly hope the front office doesn't believe that improved health is all that's needed at cornerback for them to perform on a decent level. There's no doubt the talent has to be significantly improved at the position as well.

 

[PackerDNA]

It's basically the same argument. Free agency is good if used properly, bad if you make a few big moves that don't pan out.
Massaging the cap isn't a bad thing if you do it right. They're going to redo/extend Rodgers contract anyway, aren't they? So do it and clear up 8 or 10 M in cap space. It's all how you do it, how you structure things. There are no absolutes, which is usually where such discussions end up; FA is bad! Do anything with the cap or contracts to add cap space, and you'll destroy the team for the next decade! TT is the greatest! No, TT sucks and is an idiot!
No one way or the other. Make good decisions.

 

[Half Empty]

It's basically the same argument. Free agency is good if used properly, bad if you make a few big moves that don't pan out.
Massaging the cap isn't a bad thing if you do it right. They're going to redo/extend Rodgers contract anyway, aren't they? So do it and clear up 8 or 10 M in cap space. It's all how you do it, how you structure things. There are no absolutes, which is usually where such discussions end up; FA is bad! Do anything with the cap or contracts to add cap space, and you'll destroy the team for the next decade! TT is the greatest! No, TT sucks and is an idiot!
No one way or the other. Make good decisions.

All good, right down to the end. Who determines which are the good decisions?

 

[PackerDNA]

All good, right down to the end. Who determines which are the good decisions?

The people whose job it is to make good deci.......
Oh, you mean Thompson.
Oh well.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

All good, right down to the end. Who determines which are the good decisions?

Winning the Super Bowl is a pretty good indicator that good decisions have been made.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

All good, right down to the end. Who determines which are the good decisions?

Time is usually what determines if the decision made was a good one. Rarely have I seen the Packers make a move that isn't debated by one side or another on whether it is a "good decision" at that point in time.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

Its not an excuse. Its common sense that if your bruiser gets tired, you get another rb for a rotation.....like most every other team in the nfl....

 

[Dantés]

Its not an excuse. Its common sense that if your bruiser gets tired, you get another rb for a rotation.....like most every other team in the nfl....

Lacy being overworked is only an excuse if it didn't actually happen. The problem is that it really didn't.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

Lacy being overworked is only an excuse if it didn't actually happen. The problem is that it really didn't.

You remember me argue for about a month straight about the packers drafting melvin gordon, a couple years ago??? Go back and read the reasoning. I will give a quick rundown. We get a change of pace. We have insurance for one rb or the other, if one were to go down. And still have a starter quality rb... It gives us leverage for the negotiations for now, with lacy. But most important, you have a legit rotation to keep guys fresh, because rbs take a beating. And i was worried lacy's punishing running style was going to break him down. I said a second starting rb would lower his carries without a drop in tallent.
All in all i think the logic is painfully obvious. Despite the facts gordon was picked before us, and we had a stud entering his 3rd year at the time...

 

[Dantés]

You remember me argue for about a month straight about the packers drafting melvin gordon, a couple years ago??? Go back and read the reasoning. I will give a quick rundown. We get a change of pace. We have insurance for one rb or the other, if one were to go down. And still have a starter quality rb... It gives us leverage for the negotiations for now, with lacy. But most important, you have a legit rotation to keep guys fresh, because rbs take a beating. And i was worried lacy's punishing running style was going to break him down. I said a second starting rb would lower his carries without a drop in tallent.
All in all i think the logic is painfully obvious. Despite the facts gordon was picked before us, and we had a stud entering his 3rd year at the time...

It would be painfully obvious if overworking Lacy was a huge problem. It wasn't. He was 21st in carries per game. They gave him a light workload. He couldn't handle it.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

You missed the point. His punishing running style will always lead to injuries. Lowing his carries is only skewing the odds in our favor. But a 2nd starting rb for insurance for WHEN lacy gets hurt, helps our team keep a strong ballance when it happens.

It also fixes the problem of lacy's accusation of not being in good enough shape to play more than 5 runs. Its ok if he takes himself out if he is ready to come back in 5 plays later when the other rb gets done burning his candle from both ends

 

[Reggie White Cheese]

A sports betting company in Vegas just revealed the Pack as the number 1 to get AP.. i thought it was just a flap of the gums could it be a reality?
z

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

A sports betting company in Vegas just revealed the Pack as the number 1 to get AP.. i thought it was just a flap of the gums could it be a reality?
z

What are the odds they are posting? I might bet the house on the "no" side of that bet.

 

[Reggie White Cheese]

What are the odds they are posting? I might bet the house on the "no" side of that bet.

http://www.sportsline.com/insiders/25780572/surprising-favorite-emerges-to-land-adrian-peterson/

Odds on favorite

Not hyping it just providing information. Also an article posted said don't believe the hype. Chose what you want to adhere.

Either way the Pack have holes and I rather see a plethora of defensive replacements and upgrades

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

What are the odds they are posting? I might bet the house on the "no" side of that bet.

We dont have a rb under contract other than montgomery. Say we already decided lacy wasnt coming back... For what ever reason. Right or wrong...

We need a rb. Badly. Actually two. A mid round rookie will be a good prospect to groom... But who better to split carries with montgomery, than a first ballot hall of famer with a good qb in front of him for the first time since favre? Something to prove to mn. And a legit chance at a ring...

Before you say he is washed up and done... Remember he came back from a nasty knee injury and hit 2000 yds. Dominated. On a whole different level...

How sure are you he wont finish his career looking like the hofer that he is?

Im starting to really like the idea... Only question is how much cheese is he wanting?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

You remember me argue for about a month straight about the packers drafting melvin gordon, a couple years ago??? Go back and read the reasoning. I will give a quick rundown. We get a change of pace. We have insurance for one rb or the other, if one were to go down. And still have a starter quality rb... It gives us leverage for the negotiations for now, with lacy. But most important, you have a legit rotation to keep guys fresh, because rbs take a beating. And i was worried lacy's punishing running style was going to break him down. I said a second starting rb would lower his carries without a drop in tallent.
All in all i think the logic is painfully obvious. Despite the facts gordon was picked before us, and we had a stud entering his 3rd year at the time...

I remember you advocating for drafting Gorson in the first round of the 2015 draft. With Lacy being the undisputed starter entering that offseason as well as the Packers offense being centered around Rodgers and the passing game it wouldn't have made any sense to add another running back in the first round. BTW Gordon's career average of 3.7 yards per carry isn't impressive at all.

We dont have a rb under contract other than montgomery. Say we already decided lacy wasnt coming back... For what ever reason. Right or wrong...

We need a rb. Badly. Actually two. A mid round rookie will be a good prospect to groom... But who better to split carries with montgomery, than a first ballot hall of famer with a good qb in front of him for the first time since favre? Something to prove to mn. And a legit chance at a ring...

Before you say he is washed up and done... Remember he came back from a nasty knee injury and hit 2000 yds. Dominated. On a whole different level...

How sure are you he wont finish his career looking like the hofer that he is?

Im starting to really like the idea... Only question is how much cheese is he wanting?

Peterson rushing for more than 2,000 yards happened five years ago when he still was in his prime though. With him turning 32 before the start of the season I prefer to pass on him, especially as he most likely will ask for a decent amount of money.

 

[brandon2348]

Peterson doesnt fit the offense. They'd be better of taking a shot on Jamal Charles.

 

[Dantés]

You missed the point. His punishing running style will always lead to injuries. Lowing his carries is only skewing the odds in our favor. But a 2nd starting rb for insurance for WHEN lacy gets hurt, helps our team keep a strong ballance when it happens.

It also fixes the problem of lacy's accusation of not being in good enough shape to play more than 5 runs. Its ok if he takes himself out if he is ready to come back in 5 plays later when the other rb gets done burning his candle from both ends

He average 14 carries in 2016. How low do you want them to go?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Peterson doesnt fit the offense. They'd be better of taking a shot on Jamal Charles.

Charles is on the wrong side of 30 as well and has had significant injuries each of the past two seasons. I prefer the Packers to go younger at the position.

 

[brandon2348]

Charles is on the wrong side of 30 as well and has had significant injuries each of the past two seasons. I prefer the Packers to go younger at the position.

I understand this. Was just saying Charles would fit the offense better and would probably come cheaper if the they wanted to go that route.

I would prefer the Packers to draft a RB as well.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I would prefer the Packers to draft a RB as well.

As well as either re-signing Lacy to a short term deal with no guarantees or adding another veteran to the position.

 

[Sky King]

Two words: Ted Thompson