D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
Of the top 10 free agent spending teams this season, guess how many even made the playoffs? THREE
From those three, guess how many are still playing? ZERO
Gotta a link to the top 10 teams???
Of the top 10 free agent spending teams this season, guess how many even made the playoffs? THREE
From those three, guess how many are still playing? ZERO
Top 5 FA CB signings from last off-season:Of the top 10 free agent spending teams this season, guess how many even made the playoffs? THREE
From those three, guess how many are still playing? ZERO
Yep...It's a giant reach to begin to justify Raji's numbers. As I said, I love the guy and it kills me but he has just sucked. Forget the numbers...how about the eye test? I have no idea how anyone that's watched the Pack play could not see it.
Boldin and Harvin were two pretty huge pickups but they were through trade so they wouldn't count in a 'free agency only' review.
I do get your point which is why I'm very much against signing a guy like Byrd who will command a lot of money. I just want some guys looking for their second contract, who haven't received a lot of playing time (maybe they were behind a good player on the old team), that can compete for a starting role and, if injuries occur, won't leave us with first and second year guys as the only backups.
Once again you only tell half of the story. It's true that only three of the top 10 spending teams in free agency made the playoffs and that none of them is playing now.
BUT five of them improved their record during the 2013 season while one of them had the same. In 2012 only one of those teams made the playoffs, losing in the wild-card round.
I'm trying to find information on the most active teams in free agency over the past 5 years. That's the most telling and that's the point! Like I said 100 times now, there is ZERO doubt in my mind that both Seattle and San Fran are about to start to spin back down next year thanks to them not building out there rosters past this year and over-signing FA!
The goal is not to win more games. It's to win the Super Bowl!
You complain that the Packers season is lost if we don't get further into the playoffs
I don't know how many times this needs to be said, Ted Thompson rosters for long term success, not "more wins this year".
I'm totally sure you said that about the Patriots in the early 2000s as well.
Within one post you name winning the Super Bowl as the only goal, still bash me for not being satisfied with a early playoff exit.
That's true. The problem though is that it's although build for early playoff exits. And even if the Seahawks and Niners will hit rock bottom in a few years there will be other teams around build for one or two Super Bowls ending another Packers season too early.
Just a yes or no here captain-be 100% honest:
If you are a betting man, if the Packers were a healthy, would they have beaten the 49ers two weeks ago?
And regarding the comment about winning verses winning Super Bowls. AGAIN- how else can a logical person look at this, than to say, the Packers are THREE YEARS removed from winning the Super Bowl. THREE YEARS. No- Ted doesn't look to win "more" games, he looks to win every game!!!!!!!!
It's not as easy as that as that would be pure speculation. I think there's a good chance that we would have beaten the Niners, but it's not a given.
That's three years of losing although having the best QB in the league. The offense is fine and probably will be for years. On the defensive side of the ball mistakes have been made though and it has cost the Packers.
First letting Jenkins go was a wrong decision. Collins injury was a freak accident, but TT has had three years now to at least find a decent replacement but has failed miserably. The same can be said about the OLB position opposite Clay. After Woodson was let go the defense seemed to lack a true leader, but no replacement was brought in. Seems like he overpaid last year for Burnett and Jones.
Regardless... We know the Packers just won a SB three years ago. Right? We agree at the VERY LEAST, that the Packers can play San Fran even if healthy. Right? San Fran is playing for the NFC Championship Sunday. How, would any logical person knowing these facts, suggest Ted Thompson's roster approach needs to be changed? I'm sorry, it just makes no sense.
Meanwhile, you named those teams that increased their wins this year. How many of those teams do you think will be in the playoffs next year? Don't know about you, but I'm picking the Packers to be there.
It's fine for me if you want to speculate about "what if..." and be glad that we could have beat the Niners or any other team in the playoffs, we have lost four in a row to them, going 2-7 against playoff teams over the last two regular seasons. TT's approach is fine most of the time, but he has to use free agency this offseason to improve the team (look it up, most beat writers think that way as well).
You came up with the highest spending teams in 2013 and how many of them are still playing, I just pointed out that wasn't a fair evaluation of the free agent impact because those teams were even worse the year before.
And BTW, why do you have to post so much stuff in either CAPITALS or bold??? That doesn't make you more credible.