Ed Reed?

Seriously, Mods are sick of me reporting people, anybody wanna do it for me?

I never said I was satisfied with our current level of Safety play or that our defense does not need to improve you ignominious instigator. Things were perfectly civil until you decided to type your personal brand of ignorance. Burnett has potential, but Jennings DEFINITELY needs to be upgraded. I actually have Safety in our top 3 positional needs. If you're quite finished trying to bad mouth me for the sake of your own ego, you can simmer down and start being a productive member of this forum.

Lol, because reporting people is childish and immature?

Just because you disagree with someone doesn't mean you can report another person. I was civil, your ignorance was too big for this thread that it had to be dealt with.

Seriously, who says "derrrr I don't want Ed reed because he's not good anymore" when clearly the stats say other wise. Now that's IGNORANCE. That's why it's so annoying...

AND I am not trying to bad mouth anyone, it's just members on this forum that distort the facts need to be corrected.

Reed is still one of the most productive safeties around. I defy you to quote me as saying otherwise. I just said that I didn't want him. I don't know how much longer he will be productive given his age (bodies have to break down eventually, and Reed is one neck/knee injury away) or how much he will want considering he knows his production and is about to play in a SB.

Ed reed graded out as the 59th safety in the nfl last season by PFF. He graded out 17th in the league in pass coverage.

I'd rather try and lure Brian Dawkins or Rodney Harrison out of retirement..... we need an assassin back there. An intimidator. Chuck Cecil. Cecil, though, would be fined, suspended, and banned within 3 weeks with today's NFL rules.

Come on guys, we all know by now that Ted Thompson does not bring in HIGH PRICED free agents. Please, let's stop wasting time on those things..... don't point to Woodson either because Teddy HAD to spend a ton of money that off-season with the cap space the way it was.
Now it's the opposite, we have to let some good talent go because we need to FREE UP DOLLARS to retain our own superstars Matthews and Rodgers.

You want a miracle at safety? Pray for Nick Collins to magically be healed. He was our superstar, just entering his prime.
****** football gods.

I spent long hard hours in prayer before during and after that surgery. I would almost sell our Doc for a seedy sleazeball if it meant Collins suited up for us for one more season. Almost.

Let's give Woodson an entire year at Safety and see if we still feel the same way after next season about safety. I'm more concerned about D-end than safety.

We're gonna have safety issues, 99% guaranteed. The problem at safety isn't so much the players as it is the rules. With these rules, the NFL has effectively clipped their wings.

There's no disagreement the defense needs a culture change, but Packer fans also need to be realistic. We simply can't afford to sign big names like Reed AND keep the guys we need to keep, like Rodgers, Matthews, and Raji. Hell, we're probably going to lose Jennings to free agency because we can't afford his deal, so where are we supposed to find the money to sign Reed?

I personally think they don't want the Jennings deal bc it will be viewed as a bad deal by the time it's all over.

I think if the Packers thought the deal was worth it they could shed some money to keep him on board. But to be completely honest, Jennings earned somewhere in the neighborhood of 7 million last year for 481 yards and 5 TDs.

Given the youth at WR, plus the somwhat known security of having Nelson, Jones, and Cobb as proven pass catchers. I don't see the need to pay that much money for Jennings.

Not to be a pessimist about the whole defense, but I dont think there is ONE area that needs improvement. I think when you look at the defense as a whole they are OK.

The problem in my eyes is there isnt enough playmakers, whether is a DL that can get some pressure and collapse the pocket, a linebacker that can stiffen up against the big tightends, or a ball-hawking safety I think they are all valid arguements.

2010 when the Packers won the super bowl, the defense had those difference makers... Tramons interception in Philly to seal the game, Atlanta to break it open. Mathews and Jenkins sack on Matt Ryan, Shields in the Chicago game, and of course Nick Collins Super Bowl TD, and Mathews strip fumble. Along the way to that season Woodson was just dominate in his case for Defensive Player of the Year. I remember him knifing in on a goaline situation and making a one of the best takles I had ever seen from a defensive back on a goaline situation.

Those type of plays are the ones that kill drives, force punts, and turnovers. And I think the Packers over the past two years are lacking that type of play. Tramon is a shell of himself, no safety has replace Collins playmaking ability, and the DL misses Jenkins. Until some players at any level can pick up that intensity or play making ability the Packers are going to have a hard time with sufficient players...

Jesus sake guys, why does the forum have to become a slanging match ?? So somebody has a different opinion !!

Sorry !!! my bad

I don't think either are dirty players. They've both been in the league for quite some time. When they started, hits to the head weren't illegal. Just an old habbit if you ask me. You act like people purposely make those illegal hits. It's just a part of the game. Hard hitting players hit hard, it's that simple. As long as there are physical players in the league, it's going to happen. Heck I've seen plays where there was no helmet to helmet contact and a player still gets fined. Just ask Reggie Nelson of the Bengals. Anyway, I'm way off track. Reed would never play in Green Bay. If Green Bay does decide to dabble in FA, it wont be Revis or Reed. You have to be realistic here folks. We'll pick up somebody that nobody as ever heard of and he won't play. Seems legit. All I'm looking forward to right now is draft day. Here's to hoping Ted doesn't draft 3 TE's again...

That cannot be allowed. This is a Packer forum. Everything must be viewed through green&gold colored glasses. Everything at 1265 Lombardi Ave is on the up&up and the current residents are the best ever at what they do. You've been on the board long enough to know that by now. I'll let you off with a warning this time and chalk it up to a brain cramp.

Warning accepted. I`m sorry

oh I forgot to add..........thrrrppppppppppp

this is hilarious

that obviously didnt hurt winning a SB did it ? he'll probably shoot for New Orleans..?

FIXED IT for ya

look, I'm a 47 year old adult. I am a Packer fan but not some myopic fool who hates other teams or players for stupid contrived reasons. The fact is, Ed Reed is a great player. And your -fixed- antics are quite stupid and childish and not the least bit funny..just real dumb. He may well want to finish his career near home

ram29, go out and buy yourself a sense of humor would ya. Geez lighten up. And....for a "47 year old adult" you sure are good at being mature with the name calling.

I'd love to see another safety start opposite Burnett but Reed will be 35 at the beginning of the upcoming season and he'll cost how much? (He made more than $7M in 2012.) At this point I don't know if Woodson is the right guy to start at safety. IMO he will have to modify his play and become more disciplined. And he'll also have to take a big paycut. That's why IMO the #1 need on D is a pass rushing DL and #2 is a safety.