Everyone likes potential. But if your day 1 picks are following a trend of taking 2-4 years to reach their potential, is that really a great return on investment?
The hard truth about this is that the NFL is structured with a hard cap and even if your projects land perfectly, you cannot get 8-10 years of quality play because even quality players break the bank out after 4 years of even serviceable play and you simply cannot afford to keep all your players...
I never did understand the taboo against older rookies. “He’s 25! You probably won’t even want to give him a second contract!”
Okay, so? If I get 4-5 really good cheap years out of him from 25-29, is that really a bad thing? Bo Nix has a 5 million dollar cap hit in 2026. Is Bo Nix being 26...
I never understood why we care so much about that.
Okay, so we need to wait 3-5 years for this player to even be good and this is supposed to be a good thing?
Sacks are part of it, yes, I think we can agree that 8.5 in three seasons is not adequate.
Pressure rate significantly improved in 2025, I’ll grant that, and if he can sustain that performance while playing every week I think he could be a higher end rotational player.
But I also take his 2025...
I guess that’s the hope. Boye Mafe got 3 years, 60M so I don’t think it’s totally out of left field. Pass rushers are expensive on one hand, and on the other, LVN hasn’t been very productive so you have to bake in some kind of projection to pay him.
So I’m sure they’re hoping to get something...
I like the Reed extension. The LVN 5th year option being exercised, not so much.
I am not saying that Gute is a bad GM, but this organization as a whole doesn’t weight past performance nearly heavily enough into their analysis of what a player will become. They don’t do it at the collegiate...
Can’t argue with that, really. The Packers aren’t elite, but they are successful. Either Gute is assembling good rosters and MLF isn’t taking them over the top or MLF is getting the most out of questionable rosters.
Well yes, you expect a drop off after Parsons, for sure. But there’s a difference between that and being non-existent.
Hopefully as @CarryTheG14 mentioned though, other guys who will see more opportunities without Gary here will give us an addition by subtraction boost.
One thing I struggle...
I don’t think anyone else is pulling back. I think Baltimore wanted Crosby, then got in the mix for Hendrickson, figured they could save their draft picks and still get a pass rusher, got cold feet and invented an excuse. Not a good look and I don’t think other teams will be following.
Well in a vacuum, I definitely think signing a player for market value beats signing the same player for the same market value plus high end draft capital. You could argue that Parsons waw more expensive than Love — 47M APY plus two 1sts plus Clark versus 55M APY for a late 1st.
But I agree...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.