Is TT content with what we have?

ivo610

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
16,588
Reaction score
2,250
Location
Madison
Raise your hand if you were part of the forum when everyone was furious for TT not signing any of the guys Philly signed.
 
H

HardRightEdge

Guest
Raise your hand if you were part of the forum when everyone was furious for TT not signing any of the guys Philly signed.

I was on the GBPG board then. I endorsed resigning Jenkins. Other than that, my only recommendation was that we package a bunch of picks to draft Von Miller.
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
25,353
Reaction score
4,083
Location
Milwaukee
Geee....How long has TT been GM and people STILL expect him to sign free agents??

When will people figure it out
 

Forderick

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 9, 2012
Messages
158
Reaction score
7
Geee....How long has TT been GM and people STILL expect him to sign free agents??

When will people figure it out

I hear you but the packers are at the stage where they should be taking some chances on some free agents this year and even last year, there is a ton of talent out there in this years free agent pool. Using some of those guys as a stop gap for 1-2 years isn't going to break the bank.

Ted has some packers fans convinced that free agency is terrible and a waste of time and money, well if done right it isn't at all.

We have glaring holes and 1 draft isn't going to fill it. So yes Ted needs to use free agency this year. We won the super bowl it seems on pure luck and guys overachieving. The Defence has regressed the last 2 years, and the offence has looked lost sometimes.

There are some notable guys who are 4 years into their NFL careers spending some money on those guys would be worth it.
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
25,353
Reaction score
4,083
Location
Milwaukee
I hear you but the packers are at the stage where they should be taking some chances on some free agents this year and even last year, there is a ton of talent out there in this years free agent pool. Using some of those guys as a stop gap for 1-2 years isn't going to break the bank.

Ted has some packers fans convinced that free agency is terrible and a waste of time and money, well if done right it isn't at all.

We have glaring holes and 1 draft isn't going to fill it. So yes Ted needs to use free agency this year. We won the super bowl it seems on pure luck and guys overachieving. The Defence has regressed the last 2 years, and the offence has looked lost sometimes.

There are some notable guys who are 4 years into their NFL careers spending some money on those guys would be worth it.

That post could been made last 4 years and can be made for the next 4 years
 

ExpatPacker

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 26, 2011
Messages
1,813
Reaction score
227
Location
A Galaxy Far, Far Away
The bottom line for me is that with our roster + last years draft picks, we are not a super bowl team. A very good team but not a super bowl team. Could FA help that? Is the upcoming contract situation with Rodgers and CMIII more of a concern than landing one or two solid FAs?

I don't know, and I don't know if Ted's lack of moves in FA again this year is a philosophy or something born of cap concerns.

I see other teams like us, e.g the Giants and the Patriots. The Giants got rid of a lot of guys who they thought weren't going to contribute much anymore, but they also went out and got a FA or two. The Patriots whiffed on Wes Welker but immediately went and signed Amendola. TT? Nothing. Does this mean he intends to keep Finley and possibly Jennings? If so then the lack of moves in FA would make sense.

If we had several high draft picks, meaning the 1st 3 rounds I'd be less critical, but we don't. We have our standard draft picks, late in the round and no extras. Are they going to produce some future solid starters? /shrug
 

lambeaulambo

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 30, 2010
Messages
2,548
Reaction score
699
Location
Rest Home
The problem with the draft is it is a crap shoot. Lately the pack has been miss firing on their picks. Resigning Jennings I think in 3 years would be fruitless. Finley has yet to show me anything except mouth and ping pong paddles for hands. Hawk and Kuhn are mysteries - how are they still on the team? Not understanding the defensive woes and watching film makes me think there is some blind loyalty going on when it comes to the DC. To say either line is above average is short sighted. The QB and OLB are the studs on the team. Here is an idea; find another pass rushing OLB on the other side of the field from our stud OLB, and get a few guys that can TACKLE on D. Get a LT that isnt an also ran or hurt 90 percent of the time to protect your stud QB. Do these things and I think you'll see this team turn on a dime.
 

El Guapo

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Messages
6,100
Reaction score
1,580
Location
Land 'O Lakes
Listen, the Packers time has come and gone. We were poised to win the Super Bowl (and did) back in the 2009-2011 timeframe. Now all of our starts from that period are due the big money: Rodgers, Matthews, Raji, Jennings, Finley, Woodson, etc....

Most teams in our position would be in a state of decline at this point, had they adopted more of a free-wheeling attitude in free agency. You cannot sustain an NFL dynasty in the modern era unless you are committed to drafting and promoting from within! Had we taken on a few of the Eagles-esque free agents to "get us over the hump" we would likely be belching them out at like the Eagles are doing today. We are still a viable playoff team, able to afford to extend Rodgers and Matthews contracts because TT is a spendthrift in free agency. Everyone clamoring for him to do it now is just wishing for doom in 2-3 years, just so they have a better-yet-guaranteeing shot at another SB title in the next 1-2 years.

I'm a Packer fan for the long haul. I'd much rather be the team that is perennially the talk of the NFC North, than the Vikings or Bears who pop up every 4-6 years for a short stint, only to unravel when free agent contracts again choke them into mediocrity. That approach is similar to yo-yo dieting. Fat then thin, fat then thin.

I'm still in favor of spending when on a FA here or there if it makes sense, but not just because every other team spent big $$ and we didn't.
 

Oshkoshpackfan

YUT !!!
Joined
Aug 14, 2012
Messages
3,286
Reaction score
260
Location
Camp Lejeune NC
getting a **** ton of FA's like the eagles did is indeed murder to your team. I think taking 1 or 2 guys that have NFL experience and maybe even knowledge of teams we would be playing, for a good price on a short contract is a good idea and can provide added depth and leadership. The eagles went about it in a panic mode way and took to many big names all at once which sucked up all their cash and those big time egos that came with the players didnt mesh well either.
 

TJV

Lifelong Packers Fanatic
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
5,389
Reaction score
954
Here is an idea; find another pass rushing OLB on the other side of the field from our stud OLB, and get a few guys that can TACKLE on D. Get a LT that isnt an also ran or hurt 90 percent of the time to protect your stud QB. Do these things and I think you'll see this team turn on a dime.
Somebody FedEx this to Thompson. I'll bet he has no idea it's this simple. Drafting Perry (OLB) and Sherrod (LT) were probably accidents - hey, I wonder why he didn't draft all pros at those spots instead, it must be easy, right? And I'm sure using the top 6 picks on D in the last draft had nothing to do with improving the D. :rolleyes:
 
OP
OP
rodell330

rodell330

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 18, 2012
Messages
5,611
Reaction score
493
Location
Canton, Ohio
I'm not saying the guy is a bad GM or doesn't know what he's doing but he's cheap and that's just the way i feel. You can't count on draft picks to take you to the promise land when some take yr's to become major contributors and some just don't pan out period. I see the oppertunity to bring in some help on defense..mainly OLB or at the safety spot but there has been nothing done to this point. Right now the Packers look like a fourth place team in the NFC ...maybe even fifth with what i've seen a couple of other teams do in the Conference. Seattle, Atlanta, or San Franciso look to be the favorites. It's going to be tough to beat those teams next year unless something is done imo. That's just the reality of it.
 

BorderRivals.com

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 12, 2012
Messages
594
Reaction score
77
Location
Minneapolis, MN
There is a diference between over spending and being cheap..TT is CHEAP imo. Improve the dang defense please!! The NFC is going to be no joke. Go get, Woodson back, Ed Reed, or even Urlacher, heck sombody to help the defense geeze. You face the Falcons now with Stevn Jackson and those Wr's and no pass rush and see what happens.

Rodell... all you do is bring up names - Gholdson, Woodson, Reed, Urlacher, etc. Because you've heard there name, the Packers must get them. Gholdson was prohibitively too expensive, so it's absolutely pointless to bring his name up. Woodson was a complete liability in coverage last season - he's old and slow. And Reed is past his prime as well - though I think he could be a potential decent signing IF the price is reflective of his declining play. And if Urlacher isn't being invited back to Da Bears - when their other LB's are also getting signed (see Nick Roach) - doesn't that say something about him?!

You obviously know my stance on S. Jax - I'm pissed we didn't get him. But that's because the fit and price made sense. The names you keep bringing up don't make sense for financial or level of play reasons. It seems the only way to please you is if the Packers sign players with big names, without care about the affect on the cap or if their play has declined.
 
OP
OP
rodell330

rodell330

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 18, 2012
Messages
5,611
Reaction score
493
Location
Canton, Ohio
Rodell... all you do is bring up names - Gholdson, Woodson, Reed, Urlacher, etc. Because you've heard there name, the Packers must get them. Gholdson was prohibitively too expensive, so it's absolutely pointless to bring his name up. Woodson was a complete liability in coverage last season - he's old and slow. And Reed is past his prime as well - though I think he could be a potential decent signing IF the price is reflective of his declining play. And if Urlacher isn't being invited back to Da Bears - when their other LB's are also getting signed (see Nick Roach) - doesn't that say something about him?!

You obviously know my stance on S. Jax - I'm pissed we didn't get him. But that's because the fit and price made sense. The names you keep bringing up don't make sense for financial or level of play reasons. It seems the only way to please you is if the Packers sign players with big names, without care about the affect on the cap or if their play has declined.


No, no, no, no, and NO. What i'm focused on is TEAM IMPROVEMENT, i just throw out those names because they are guy's who have pretty solid track records so of course they have big names. Heck if bringing back Nick Barnett, Atari bigby and Jolly will improve the defense bring them back! and none of those are "Names".
 

ivo610

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
16,588
Reaction score
2,250
Location
Madison
No, no, no, no, and NO. What i'm focused on is TEAM IMPROVEMENT, i just throw out those names because they are guy's who have pretty solid track records so of course they have big names. Heck if bringing back Nick Barnett, Atari bigby and Jolly will improve the defense bring them back! and none of those are "Names".

Urlacher is 34 and was the worst rated defensive player the bears had last season? How would he improve us?

Woodson, 36, same boat. Injury prone, slowing down, and a complete liability.

Ed reed, 34, declining player. Had a negative grade last season from PFF. Seems to have 1 foot out the door.

These are players that will command more $ than they deserve bc of their name.

Remember how Jeff Saturday went? Yeah that's how those guys would go. Best case
 
OP
OP
rodell330

rodell330

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 18, 2012
Messages
5,611
Reaction score
493
Location
Canton, Ohio
Urlacher is 34 and was the worst rated defensive player the bears had last season? How would he improve us?

Woodson, 36, same boat. Injury prone, slowing down, and a complete liability.

Ed reed, 34, declining player. Had a negative grade last season from PFF. Seems to have 1 foot out the door.

These are players that will command more $ than they deserve bc of their name.

Remember how Jeff Saturday went? Yeah that's how those guys would go. Best case

Still missing my point sir. It doesn't have to be ANY of those guy's that can help the team get better.
 

ivo610

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
16,588
Reaction score
2,250
Location
Madison
Still missing my point sir. It doesn't have to be ANY of those guy's that can help the team get better.

You named players, the ones that are only living off their rep and wouldn't help the team, if anything they would set us back.
 
OP
OP
rodell330

rodell330

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 18, 2012
Messages
5,611
Reaction score
493
Location
Canton, Ohio
You named players, the ones that are only living off their rep and wouldn't help the team, if anything they would set us back.

Fine. Rey Mauaga would be an upgrade over AJ Hawk and be cheaper as well. Patrick Chung would be an upgrade over Mcmillan or MD Jennings at safety and be cheaper then possibly bringing Woodson back. There, heres two nams that can help and not break the bank.
 

HyponGrey

Caseus Locutus Est
Joined
Mar 18, 2012
Messages
3,758
Reaction score
221
Location
South Jersey
I'm not saying the guy is a bad GM or doesn't know what he's doing but he's cheap and that's just the way i feel. You can't count on draft picks to take you to the promise land when some take yr's to become major contributors and some just don't pan out period. I see the oppertunity to bring in some help on defense..mainly OLB or at the safety spot but there has been nothing done to this point. Right now the Packers look like a fourth place team in the NFC ...maybe even fifth with what i've seen a couple of other teams do in the Conference. Seattle, Atlanta, or San Franciso look to be the favorites. It's going to be tough to beat those teams next year unless something is done imo. That's just the reality of it.
Didn't the Giants do it with just draft picks in 2011? Next year we have a bunch of contracts up anyway, we can just go into rebuild mode then... or we can stay "one FA away from a superbowl contender" and make the playoffs every year giving us a chance to actually make it to the bowl.

Man, if only we had better coaches that could actually develop all those garbage picks Thompson makes. :inlove:
 

HyponGrey

Caseus Locutus Est
Joined
Mar 18, 2012
Messages
3,758
Reaction score
221
Location
South Jersey
Fine. Rey Mauaga would be an upgrade over AJ Hawk and be cheaper as well. Patrick Chung would be an upgrade over Mcmillan or MD Jennings at safety and be cheaper then possibly bringing Woodson back. There, heres two nams that can help and not break the bank.
Chung has already been signed, and Malaluga would only be ever so marginally better and not necessarily cheaper (all for it if it saves money)
 

ivo610

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
16,588
Reaction score
2,250
Location
Madison
Chung has already been signed, and Malaluga would only be ever so marginally better and not necessarily cheaper (all for it if it saves money)

If you think Hawk is bad in coverage you haven't seen Malaluga. He's terrible. I believe he was rated the worst middle line backer in the league last season.

Why do people think that cinci with a ton of cap room would let him walk if he was any good?
 
OP
OP
rodell330

rodell330

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 18, 2012
Messages
5,611
Reaction score
493
Location
Canton, Ohio
If you think Hawk is bad in coverage you haven't seen Malaluga. He's terrible. I believe he was rated the worst middle line backer in the league last season.

Why do people think that cinci with a ton of cap room would let him walk if he was any good?


so worse case scenarion we sign Aj Hawk 2.0 for 2.5 mil per year less?
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top