1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!

    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers. You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

Arrington or Woodson?

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Packman5, Apr 12, 2006.

  1. Packman5

    Packman5 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2006
    Messages:
    89
    Ratings:
    +0
    Lets say you were TT for a day and you could only sign 1 of these guys and we are for sure going to use the #5 pick in the draft (no trade downs) who do you think would turn this team around?
     
  2. Bobby Roberts

    Bobby Roberts Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2005
    Messages:
    770
    Ratings:
    +0
    Good question.

    I think Arrington would have more of an impact. He's a fast LB who likes to be free to make plays. GB's defense is built for him because the focus is to free up the LBs to make plays. Also, our DBs are fairly solid and can carry the load as is if necessary (with a mid-round CB pick in the mix). I would go after signing another CB yet though and it appears that Plummer is the next best option.

    At #5, it's all about the best player available. Forget about position. Doesn't matter if it's Leinhart, Ferguson, Williams, Hawk, Huff, Davis, or whoever, pick the top one available. As a fan, I'd like to see the biggest impact and I think the order of which player will provide the biggest impact is:
    1) Williams
    2) Davis
    3) Hawk
    4) Huff

    Whatever the case, this much cap room gives TT some good options. Too bad there aren't many left at OG or C.
     
  3. Robin Yount

    Robin Yount Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2005
    Messages:
    265
    Ratings:
    +0
    Our CBs are solid? Wow. What were you watching last year.

    If Arrington were consistent and consistently healthy I would say take him, but Woodson would add a dimension to our secondary that would help alot. Plus, we would pay too much for LA.
     
  4. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0
    I disagree, I say if we can have one we take Woodson. We can get Hawk in the draft.
     
  5. Bobby Roberts

    Bobby Roberts Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2005
    Messages:
    770
    Ratings:
    +0
    We can also get Huff in the draft...
     
  6. CalifPacker

    CalifPacker Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2005
    Messages:
    757
    Ratings:
    +1
    I'll take Arrington and draft Hawk.
     
  7. Bobby Roberts

    Bobby Roberts Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2005
    Messages:
    770
    Ratings:
    +0
    I watched Harris actually improve to be one of the best CBs in the league. I also watched Carroll develop and come on toward the end of the year to become a solid starter. Everyone gets down on Carroll, but he's got the talent to be a very good CB and he showed that as the year progressed.

    So you don't think we'd be overpaying to get Woodson?? I think either player would add a great addition to this club, but we have other FA options at DB (Plummer), while there isn't much at LB.
     
  8. Zero2Cool

    Zero2Cool I own a website

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,903
    Ratings:
    +8
    I watched Harris actually improve to be one of the best CBs in the league. I also watched Carroll develop and come on toward the end of the year to become a solid starter. Everyone gets down on Carroll, but he's got the talent to be a very good CB and he showed that as the year progressed.

    So you don't think we'd be overpaying to get Woodson?? I think either player would add a great addition to this club, but we have other FA options at DB (Plummer), while there isn't much at LB.[/quote:2lep707j]


    Al Harris? You mean the guy people ragged Sherman for picking up because he was the Eagles Nickel DB? Hmm sounds familar. (Sherman did that right.)
    People complained the Packers picked up a 'backup' instead of went after the other high priced name that was a potential 'superstar'
     
  9. mattresell

    mattresell Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Messages:
    424
    Ratings:
    +0
    1. Both guys play a position the team needs to fill - PUSH
    2. Corner is a position harder to fill - WOODSON
    3. Injury history - ARRINGTON
    4. Age - ARRINGTON
    5. Price - WOODSON (slightly)
    6. Previous performance - WOODSON (could be disagreement here)

    Overall, I'd say the two are pretty comparable, although I'd go with Woodson because he plays a premium position. You could make a good arguement either way.
     
  10. 4thand26

    4thand26 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2006
    Messages:
    1,555
    Ratings:
    +0
    Pay for Arrington
    Pray for Mario Williams.
    Draft CB/Nickel in 2nd round.
    D is set.

    TT is gambling on past ProBowlers on Offense. Could definately work. Would really help if somewhere along the line a quality G is released and signed by GB.
     
  11. bozz_2006

    bozz_2006 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    4,576
    Ratings:
    +652
    arrington. i think he adds a dimension to the team that can't be measured. intangibles, ya know. he's an athletic freak. he flies around and makes other players more excited, leading by example on the field. as bad as ahmad carrol was at the beginning of the year, his tendancy to maul WR's on the line and then either get burned or flagged, he improved a lot at the end of the year. he has the tools, just needs to learn the nuances. Woodson is getting old. he could be good for carrol's development, but i think harris could do this too. I WANT ARRINGTON. if we get arrington (fingers crossed) we could take mario in the draft, if he's still available (fingers crossed again). then we'll have 2 playmakers on the line, a great run-stopper in Picket, a playmaker in Arrington, a shut down corner in Harris, a developing corner in Carrol, and a solid safety in manuel. i hope this works out, i have high hopes for the defense. i hope we can shore up the problems in th O-line, which i'm not so optimistic about.
     
  12. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0
    Yeah we could get Arrington but I would only do this if we traded our 5 down to mid 1st round. There are lots of CB's like Huff,Jimmy Williams,Tye Hill,Youboty,Etc.

    Ifwe could swap picks with the Browns and get Faine we could move down to 12 get a CB and a Center.

    To me Huff is a bit of a gambler that gets beat deep because of it. I would rather take Williams. He is smarter and more consistent. Either would be fine though.

    I still would rather take Woodson over Arrington and draft Hawk however
     
  13. Greg C.

    Greg C. Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 31, 2005
    Messages:
    2,856
    Ratings:
    +0
    I would much rather have Arrington. Partly it's because Woodson would be replacing Carroll, who showed some promise toward the end of last season, while Arrington would be filling a position that is currently vacant. (Maybe we can get Hawk anyway, but you can't bank on getting any player in the draft unless you own the very first pick. Besides, I wouldn't mind seeing a linebacker corps made up of Arrington, Barnett, and Hawk.)

    Also, I'm not sure if Woodson is really that good anymore, due to his recent injuries. Both players have been malcontents to some extent, but Arrington at least gives the impression of a guy who really loves football but just got his head in the wrong space with the management and coaching staff there in Washington.
     
  14. tkpckfan

    tkpckfan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2005
    Messages:
    326
    Ratings:
    +0
    at first in the offseason i really didnt care about arrington as a possible packer he he even was considered. but now i have changed my opinion, i would really like to see this guy be a packer, i really hope we sign one of these guys, if not i sure hope after the draft and on to the june 1st cuts we sign someone we elite potential
     
  15. dannychau22

    dannychau22 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2005
    Messages:
    211
    Ratings:
    +0
    It looks like TT actually made an offer to woodson that he might accept. I read this on many different forums.

    Also, apparently Arrington has called Favre but noone knows what was said. He also said that if favre comes back he would be proud to be a packer. So if TT just frontload his contract we might be able get him. I say we give him most of his money in the first two and last two years of his contract so even if he gets injured it would not hurt our cap situation in the future.

    And for those who think that Lavar is an *** and is a cancer. He is actually a really good person who just demands alot of money, he does a lot of charities and is a fan favorite in washington. The only reason he was a hassle in washington was because they shafted him of his bonuses.

    _________________
     
  16. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0
    Noone said Lavar was in ***, but he does command alot of money. You don't pay someone because they are a nice guy.

    He wants to much, noone will give it to him, let him back off his own greatness and sign him for a fair price. If not let him go to some team willing to overpay
     
  17. dannychau22

    dannychau22 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2005
    Messages:
    211
    Ratings:
    +0
    We pay him because he has the perfect size and speed for the position, and he has been productive in the past, and if you watched the redskins playoff game you would know what i am talking about.
     
  18. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0
    Productive in THE PAST! He has not been Productive since 2003. Since then he has played in 17 total games with a little over 60 tackles, 1 sack, and 0 Int's. He has averaged just over 3 tackles a game in the last 2 years. Hell, Lenon gave us that. Not real good for a guy that is "supposedly, all over the field."

    I am not sure he is the 2000-2003 Lavar Arrington and there is no proof that he is. I do not, not like the guy or oppose him coming here to play but with those stats and the money he's asking it's no wonder noone will pay him.

    Bring em in, but don't overpay him. Thats all I ask. This "Bring him in at any cost" stuff is absurd. The guy has not shown whatsoever that he has recovered fully from his injury or if he can regain the form of the past.

    It will be the same guys stating "Bring em in at any cost" that will be ripping TT if he does not pan out.

    I like Arrington, but he's been a completely different player since the Injury.
     
  19. bozz_2006

    bozz_2006 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    4,576
    Ratings:
    +652
    i don't think anyone here said anything close to 'sign him at any cost'
     
  20. HatestheEagles084

    HatestheEagles084 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    Messages:
    1,423
    Ratings:
    +1
    I think us having low profile coaching will help Lavar's mood status if he signs here. Not saying our new coach and DC are second rate...but Joe Gibbs and Gregg Williams are two guys renowned for what they do, and maybe they wanted to do things their way at the expense of Lavar's strengths
     
  21. bozz_2006

    bozz_2006 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    4,576
    Ratings:
    +652
    joe gibbs is like my grandpa... his way or the highway. Lavar chose the highway. i think that was the right choice. when you have a player of his caliber, you have to play to his strengths. i hope we can do that (and if we don't get him, then i hope whoever does get him does NOT play to his strengths!)
     
  22. Packnic

    Packnic Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    2,454
    Ratings:
    +6
    i agree we dont need to over pay him.... but we do got some serious cash laying around....the highest lavar has been offered is 7 million i believe he wants 10-12.... i say if TT didnt offer him at least 8 million... you have my permission to bash him. and as far as woodson goes.... hes gonna get overpayed id rather have plummer
     
  23. bozz_2006

    bozz_2006 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    4,576
    Ratings:
    +652
    diito, packnic. does anybody know what type of penalties will be incurred if we DON'T make the minimum of the salary cap($85 million)?
     
  24. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    17,836
    Ratings:
    +3,483
    Well if going over it you have to pay fines and loose drafts picks, so I guess it would be similar?
     
  25. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    17,836
    Ratings:
    +3,483
    the NFL. Each Team shall be required to have a Team Salary of at least the Minimum Team Salary at the end of each League Year.

    *Extension Agreement 2/25/98

    (b) Nothing contained herein shall preclude a Team from having a Team Salary in excess of the Minimum Team Salary, provided it does not exceed the Salary Cap.

    (c) Any shortfall in the Minimum Team Salary at the end of a League Year shall be paid, on or before April 15 of the next League Year, by the Teams having such shortfall, directly to the players who were on such Teams’ roster at any time during the season, pursuant to reasonable allocation instructions of the NFLPA.

    (d) If the NFL agrees, or a judgment or award is entered by the Special Master, that a Team has failed by the end of the then current League Year to make the payments required to satisfy a Team’s obligations to pay the Minimum Team Salary required by this Agreement, then, in the event the Team fails promptly to comply with such agreement, judgment or award, the NFL shall make such payment on behalf of that Team (such funds to be paid as salary directly to the players on such Team at the direction of and pursuant to the reasonable allocation instructions of the NFLPA).
     

Share This Page