Guess who leads the NFL in Interceptions?

[XPack]

I think the rookies earned it. Randall, Rollins, and Gunter all impressed. Otherwise I don't think we would have made the moves we did.

I'm guessing the list will be House, Williams, Hayward, Sheilds, in about 7 or 8 months from now. With a couple more rookies added to the mix.
And that's assuming we find room in the budget for Hyde. Which I'm not certain is in the plans. Unless he plays for 2-3mil, sucessful journeyman tweener salary.

I'm still undecided on the rookies. They do have potential, but we need to see how much translates on the field.

The games vs Titans and Redskins were lost due to secondary being absolute crap.

Anyway my point was more on overall team building around Rodgers. Letting people walk away and taking a gamble on secondary at this stage of Rodgers career is just nonsense. We have the league's best QB and if we can't give him a stable support now, we're literally throwing away SB opportunities (or at least making things hard for ourselves). I like MM/TTs stable approach, but this is the time to splash, give the best to and get the best from AR12.

 

[El Guapo]

So, uh, they secured the beast in Mike Daniels to a big extension that many were wary of at the time. They also locked up our reliable (except for one season) placekicker. They've got to do Lang's deal this year and you shouldn't be shocked if they work on extending Rodgers' contract. Money only goes so far and you can't sign anyone that you want like fantasy football.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

More specific, of letting the INT leader Hayward go... And also future moves I mentioned earlier of most likely letting Sheilds, and possibly Hyde go next year to continue the trend...

Well, Hayward had only three interceptions after his rookie season with the Packers. It doesn't make any sense to question the move in hindsight as it was the right move to let him walk this offseason.

I'm still undecided on the rookies. They do have potential, but we need to see how much translates on the field.

Anyway my point was more on overall team building around Rodgers. Letting people walk away and taking a gamble on secondary at this stage of Rodgers career is just nonsense. We have the league's best QB and if we can't give him a stable support now, we're literally throwing away SB opportunities (or at least making things hard for ourselves). I like MM/TTs stable approach, but this is the time to splash, give the best to and get the best from AR12.

Once again, the Packers don't play any rookies at cornerback this season. The salary cap forces teams to let players walk away and replace them with younger ones.

 

[weeds]

LOL the Actor. hayward looks just like lorenz tate lol

Had to Google him. I'm really lost on pop culture stuff. Musicians, actors, actresses, even athletes... Hell, most times I refer to Packer players by their numbers. So, I googled both him and Hayward...they DO resemble each other. I do recognize my family. There's something to be said for that.

 

[Poppa San]

Letting people walk away and taking a gamble on secondary at this stage of Rodgers career is just nonsense.

This past off season they DIDN'T gamble with the secondary. Stud #1 CB Shields and three players capable of playing opposite him and also covering the slot. They were set. You can't cover for #1-3 CBs being injured at the same time. Now it looks like #1 stud may be done. Big blow that needs to be carefully watched. Like losing Collins and Finley back in the day. Hopefully it is more like losing Sharpe allowed the rest of the WRs to shine.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

Sheilds is done IMO. He has basicly missed a year and a half on two weak looking concussions...

I'm wondering what Hyde will bring on the open market? Whats his value?

 

[Mondio]

I don't think Hyde will have a huge value. He's the type of veteran you get in FA for a decent price to help fill some holes or create some depth without breaking the bank.

I personally like him, even with his weaknesses, he's a guy that can do some things well for a defense, but he's not your shut down guy.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

This past off season they DIDN'T gamble with the secondary. Stud #1 CB Shields and three players capable of playing opposite him and also covering the slot. They were set. You can't cover for #1-3 CBs being injured at the same time.

As I've mentioned in other threads there's no doubt a drop-off in performance is to be expected when a team loses its top three cornerbacks but it shouldn't be as steep as it happened with the Packers this season.

I'm wondering what Hyde will bring on the open market? Whats his value?

Hyde has performed on a decent level over his first three seasons with the Packers but has regressed this year. I think the Packers could bring him for a moderate contract.

 

[Poppa San]

As I've mentioned in other threads there's no doubt a drop-off in performance is to be expected when a team loses its top three cornerbacks but it shouldn't be as steep as it happened with the Packers this season.

You of course can cite sufficient evidence of this happening to other teams where there wasn't a huge drop in coverage capability after the top 3CBs were out for multiple games at the same time. Once or twice IMO can be a statistical anomoly so I'd need to see 4-5 times of decent results from the #4-6 CBs being better than competent. Or are you waiting for a cheese delivery to go with your whine.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

You of course can cite sufficient evidence of this happening to other teams where there wasn't a huge drop in coverage capability after the top 3CBs were out for multiple games at the same time. Once or twice IMO can be a statistical anomoly so I'd need to see 4-5 times of decent results from the #4-6 CBs being better than competent. Or are you waiting for a cheese delivery to go with your whine.

I don´t have access to information to even come up with a list of teams that lost their top three cornerbacks for an extended period of time but I truly believe every player on an NFL roster should be capable of performing at least on an adequate level. Unfortunately the Packers backup cornerbacks weren´t up to the task at all.

 

[Mondio]

As I've mentioned in other threads there's no doubt a drop-off in performance is to be expected when a team loses its top three cornerbacks but it shouldn't be as steep as it happened with the Packers this season.



Hyde has performed on a decent level over his first three seasons with the Packers but has regressed this year. I think the Packers could bring him for a moderate contract.

I think he's regressed as well, but he has a fairly solid history, so I think he could be fine going forward as well for a moderate contract. I wonder if some of his regression this year is like we saw with Burnett trying to cover up for not having any safety playing next to him for a while? It's hard to judge this year with so much funk going on back there for much of the year. Hopefully things are stabilizing at the right time and we get a few more games from which to judge.

 

[OldSchool101]

Do we even know that the Packers offered him a contract? I can see why they wouldn't with Shields, Randall and Rollins and the need to spend money elsewhere. I also see Haywards side for leaving, even if the Packers made an offer, he had a better chance at seeing more snaps in San Diego at what was probably a lot more pay.

Although I understand wanting to "churn" players for salary cap reasons, IMO it was a mistake to let Hayward go with the relative inexperience we had behind Shields. In particular because of the known concussion history Shields already had. It likely we offered him low tender to try to steal him and he left for more $.
IMO, Not offering him any contract would be poor business especially considering the lack of raw experience of our secondary. But who knows what other factors are presented at the time of negotiating (personal variables etc..) that allow a player to walk or sign. We found that out with B.J.
I'm jealous after watching him make big plays all over the field a few weeks ago
I'd love to know the details if you ever find out

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Although I understand wanting to "churn" players for salary cap reasons, IMO it was a mistake to let Hayward go with the relative inexperience we had behind Shields. In particular because of the known concussion history Shields already had. It likely we offered him low tender to try to steal him and he left for more $.
IMO, Not offering him any contract would be poor business especially considering the lack of raw experience of our secondary. But who knows what other factors are presented at the time of negotiating (personal variables etc..) that allow a player to walk or sign. We found that out with B.J.
I'm jealous after watching him make big plays all over the field a few weeks ago
I'd love to know the details if you ever find out

Once again, Hayward mostly excelled while lining up in the slot for the Packers but struggled on the perimeter. With Hyde and Rollins under contract it was the right decision to let him walk away in free agency. It doesn´t make any sense to question the move in hindsight because he´s currently leading the league in interceptions.

 

[swhitset]

Once again, Hayward mostly excelled while lining up in the slot for the Packers but struggled on the perimeter. With Hyde and Rollins under contract it was the right decision to let him walk away in free agency. It doesn´t make any sense to question the move in hindsight because he´s currently leading the league in interceptions.

Honest question.... how is he rated this year beyond the interceptions? Picks are great, but if he is getting beat a lot that could still be a liability.

 

[Half Empty]

Over to you, Cap.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Honest question.... how is he rated this year beyond the interceptions? Picks are great, but if he is getting beat a lot that could still be a liability.

PFF has Hayward rated as the fourth best CB in the NFL this season. Considering the relatively cheap contract that Hayward received (considering how good a player he is) it was obviously a mistake to let him walk. He signed a three-year $15mn contract; that's nothing considering how important the slot corner is in today's NFL. Yeah, the Packers drafted young corners but Randall could easily be converted to an Earl Thomas-style safety (something it appears he might actually be better at than corner) and that frees up the logjam while making the secondary better overall. Yeah, Hayward was injury-prone but he was consistently a great corner when on the field and $5mn a year for an elite corner is just insanely cheap.

 

[swhitset]

PFF has Hayward rated as the fourth best CB in the NFL this season. Considering the relatively cheap contract that Hayward received (considering how good a player he is) it was obviously a mistake to let him walk. He signed a three-year $15mn contract; that's nothing considering how important the slot corner is in today's NFL. Yeah, the Packers drafted young corners but Randall could easily be converted to an Earl Thomas-style safety (something it appears he might actually be better at than corner) and that frees up the logjam while making the secondary better overall. Yeah, Hayward was injury-prone but he was consistently a great corner when on the field and $5mn a year for an elite corner is just insanely cheap.

I think the only place we differ is how you define a mistake. I agree with others on here that say that at the time the decision was made... that it was the correct one. To me, using hindsight to say that the Packers made a mistake is unfair and incorrect.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I think the only place we differ is how you define a mistake. I agree with others on here that say that at the time the decision was made... that it was the correct one. To me, using hindsight to say that the Packers made a mistake is unfair and incorrect.

No, I think at the time it was a mistake. Signing a very talented corner for $5mn per year is terrific value. There are basically no downsides to that kind of deal.

 

[swhitset]

No, I think at the time it was a mistake. Signing a very talented corner for $5mn per year is terrific value. There are basically no downsides to that kind of deal.

Except you are benefitting from hindsight by dubbing him a very talented corner. My recollection of his time in Green Bay was a guy who was decent in the slot and not very good on the outside.

 

[OldSchool101]

Honest question.... how is he rated this year beyond the interceptions? Picks are great, but if he is getting beat a lot that could still be a liability.

Once again, Hayward mostly excelled while lining up in the slot for the Packers but struggled on the perimeter. With Hyde and Rollins under contract it was the right decision to let him walk away in free agency. It doesn´t make any sense to question the move in hindsight because he´s currently leading the league in interceptions.

You're right on the hindsight comment. It's easy to Monday morning QB. But it doesn't mean us fans have to put our collective heads in the sand either.
We'll have to agree to disagree. Its not just the CB position I'm concerned with. You said yourself the dropoff when bringing up depth at the CB position seemed noticeably obvious.. and I think most would expect some drop off but not 40pts a game either (that's historically ridiculously bad)
It's becoming a pattern that we gamble at important position groups in what I'm only guessing is an effort to carry over $ or acquire compensatory picks. If you recall we also gambled at RB this year because week 1 regular season we had 2 halfbacks on the regular roster while we toyed with #3 and how did that work out? How is our running game this year?
We also tried this at QB a few years ago, which is the most valuable position group on a team and how easily we forgot already when we gambled with Callahan
Contingency planning is not TTs strong suit..he's a gambler (no Offense to Poker players everywhere )
The point I'm trying to make is Aaron isn't getting any younger and I feel sooner or later TT needs to put his chips on the table and solidify a few position groups with some experience through FA .. or we'll let several more years of AR prime slip away and be fighting over who gets the scraps of a weak division

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Hindsighting not resigning Heyward is an easy way to say "I told you so". I guess for those people now saying that the Packers should have resigned him, were you saying that before the Packers opted not to resign him? Most weren't:

https://www.packerforum.com/threads/who-do-we-re-sign.65085/

The other part of this is coming to the conclusion that Heyward would be having the same year in Green Bay as he is currently having in San Diego. He played 4 years for GB and when his contract was up, the Packer made their decision based on those 4 years, as well as their other personnel at the position and were not afforded a crystal ball into his 2016 season with San Diego. Hindsight.....probably should have kept Heyward, especially with all the injuries. Real Time Decision.....spot on.

 

[Poppa San]

And this will be another "TT doesn't know what he's doing, he sucks" example next off season. Always 20/20 that hindsight thing is. If Hayward were in GB this season he'd probably have missed 3-4 games with a groin or hammy anyway.

 

[PikeBadger]

And this will be another "TT doesn't know what he's doing, he sucks" example next off season. Always 20/20 that hindsight thing is. If Hayward were in GB this season he'd probably have missed 3-4 games with a groin or hammy anyway.

Lol, and most here were certain that the Sitton/Taylor swapout was going to be Ted's disaster this year. We were supposedly flush at CB and weak at ILB. Oh how things can change so quickly.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

No, I think at the time it was a mistake. Signing a very talented corner for $5mn per year is terrific value. There are basically no downsides to that kind of deal.

The downside would have been lesscap space while having Hyde and Rollins on the roster capable of playing in the slot.

You're right on the hindsight comment. It's easy to Monday morning QB. But it doesn't mean us fans have to put our collective heads in the sand either.
We'll have to agree to disagree. Its not just the CB position I'm concerned with. You said yourself the dropoff when bringing up depth at the CB position seemed noticeably obvious.. and I think most would expect some drop off but not 40pts a game either (that's historically ridiculously bad)
It's becoming a pattern that we gamble at important position groups in what I'm only guessing is an effort to carry over $ or acquire compensatory picks. If you recall we also gambled at RB this year because week 1 regular season we had 2 halfbacks on the regular roster while we toyed with #3 and how did that work out? How is our running game this year?
We also tried this at QB a few years ago, which is the most valuable position group on a team and how easily we forgot already when we gambled with Callahan
Contingency planning is not TTs strong suit..he's a gambler (no Offense to Poker players everywhere )
The point I'm trying to make is Aaron isn't getting any younger and I feel sooner or later TT needs to put his chips on the table and solidify a few position groups with some experience through FA .. or we'll let several more years of AR prime slip away and be fighting over who gets the scraps of a weak division

As you've probably realized I've been critical of Thompson when thinking it was justified. I agree that the Packers made several questionable roster decisions this season but don't think Hayward was one of them.

Lol, and most here were certain that the Sitton/Taylor swapout was going to be Ted's disaster this year. We were supposedly flush at CB and weak at ILB. Oh how things can change so quickly.

Let's be real here for a moment. While Taylor has performed on a decent level, especially in pass protection, there's no doubt Sitton has been the better player this season not allowing a single sack or quarterback hit so far.

 

[swhitset]

Let's be real here for a moment. While Taylor has performed on a decent level, especially in pass protection, there's no doubt Sitton has been the better player this season not allowing a single sack or quarterback hit so far.

Let's get even more real lol.... Sitton missed several games due to injury while Taylor was on the field playing. I think that balances things out fairly well. Beyond that, I would say that, while as you say, Sitton may be still be the better player, the gap is no longer as wide as it once was, and Sitton's career is past its Apex while Taylor may still get better. All in all cutting Sitton has not been a disaster for the Packers.