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!

Mike Neal

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Ace, Mar 7, 2014.

  1. Ace

    Ace Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    Messages:
    672
    Ratings:
    +279
    http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/5879/mike-neal

    According to the Green Bay Press Gazette, TT has made a "meaningful offer" to Mike Neal but not enough to keep him from testing the market.

    Neal is a guy I would like to retain but not get into a bidding war for. Versitile guy who has never really been able to show fully what he can do due to injury. Testing the market is smart for him due to his versitility and I'm sure "meaningful offer" is just a fancy way of saying we low balled him. Have to hope the market is soft for him and he returns.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    4,344
    Ratings:
    +1,766
    Actually I don't care if he'll be back, would take him back for a reasonable deal.

    I'm totally sure though I don't want him to be the starter at OLB opposite Clay.
     
  3. Ace

    Ace Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    Messages:
    672
    Ratings:
    +279
    Agree with this. Want him back on the DLine
     
  4. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    4,344
    Ratings:
    +1,766
    Well, he's probably not big enough right now to play in base, wouldn't mind seeing him there in some subpackages though.
     
  5. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,847
    Ratings:
    +965
    Lol an offer? Just so he can play 6 or 7 games and then end up on IR? What's the point of having two Nick Perry's? Why is this guy so reluctant to bring in outside help vs resigning the same ol injury prone dudes? And overpaying them at that. Next up for an extension? Marshall Newhouse and it wouldn't shock me either.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Ace

    Ace Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    Messages:
    672
    Ratings:
    +279
    Why is everything always so negative with you? In Ted We Trust.
     
  7. rodell330

    rodell330 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Messages:
    2,847
    Ratings:
    +965
    Negative? Well you're entitled to your opinion good sir. FACT still remains Neal is injury prone and not a very good olb.
     
  8. Ace

    Ace Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2014
    Messages:
    672
    Ratings:
    +279
    I actually agree with this but jesus was a Newhouse reference necassary?? Ted will do the right thing just, just watch
     
  9. packfan1

    packfan1 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2014
    Messages:
    58
    Ratings:
    +17
    Rodell, FACT is Neal played all 16 games last year. FACT. How is that injury prone? If you are referring to 2 seasons ago when he was TOO BIG for his frame pushing 300lbs, then yeah I would agree with you....he was injury prone then because his body couldn't handle the weight the staff wanted him to have. One of our own coaches...wish I had the link said the same thing...that this weight of 265 is way more natural for his body to carry.

    As far as him not being a good outside linebacker, what evidence do you have to back that up? If that's just your opinion then say so, but don't base it as fact if you have nothing to back it up with. FACT: Neal's 1st season transitioning to OLB from DL he registered 5 sacks. Not too bad for a first year player making a transition. For many players 5 sacks is considered pretty good. For a player making a transition to a new position I would argue that it was very good. Not injury prone at his current weight, AND had a very good season last year at his new OLB position. Given it was his first year I would also argue that he is likely to get better with more practice at OLB. If you're going to be negative then say it's your opinion or back it up with some kind of fact. Thanks.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  10. packfan1

    packfan1 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2014
    Messages:
    58
    Ratings:
    +17
    I thought Neal was a decent/good rotational player last season at OLB getting 5 sacks. Hope he is back as we need depth at that position-and I believe he will get better with time. He also holds the edge well in the run game.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    4,344
    Ratings:
    +1,766
    Five sacks is decent for a guy who made the transition from DL to OLB. But by no means did he have a very good last season. He was terrible against the run and while he had some good games rushing the passer he wasn't able to consistently put pressure on the QB.

    He's a backup at best at OLB, he shouldn't start opposite Matthews.
     
  12. PackerFlatLander

    PackerFlatLander Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 27, 2013
    Messages:
    479
    Ratings:
    +293
    As a fellow and proud Purdue Boilermaker, even I can't justify shelling out mad bank for Mike Neal. Much like the BJ Raji situation ... I'd be fine with offering Neal a 1-year, incentive-laden deal based on playing time, to have him earn a bigger deal next year. Bottom line - Ted gambled and lost and this is a disturbing pattern. Exact same situation as Justin Harrell. The guy had two serious injuries in college and we drafted him high anyways. Not good.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3,617
    Ratings:
    +2,699
    Justin Harrell started 2 games and played in a total of 7 games his rookie season. He recorded 16 combined tackles. In his second season he started 0 games and played in 6, recording 12 combined tackles. He didn’t play his third season and in his fourth he played one game, recording no stats.

    Mike Neal played in 2 games his rookie season recording 3 tackles and a sack. He played in 7 games in his second season again recording 3 tackles. In his third season he played in 11 games, starting one and recorded 11 combined tackles and 4.5 sacks. Last season he played in every game, starting 10. He recorded 47 combined tackles, 5 sacks, 1 INT, 1 forced fumble and 1 pass defensed.

    How well Neal played and his worth to the Packers is up for debate (and is a matter of opinion). But the analogy that because of their injury history in college, Neal’s NFL career is similar to Harrell’s fails. Harrell’s career stats after 4 years in the league are 14 games played and 28 combined tackles. Neal’s career stats after 4 years in the league are 36 games, 64 combined tackles, 10.5 sacks, 1 INT, 1 forced fumble and 1 pass defensed. Beyond that regarding how injuries impacted their NFL careers, Harrell went from 7 to 6 to 0 to 1 games played and out of the league in four seasons. Neal has gone from 2 to 7 to 11 to 16 games played. As I said how well Neal played this season is up for debate. But there’s no credible argument that Neal is the kind of bust Harrell was or that pre-NFL injuries affected their NFL careers in a similar way.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  14. packfan1

    packfan1 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2014
    Messages:
    58
    Ratings:
    +17
    Never said he should start opposite Matthews. I said he was a good rotational player and that he likely will improve given more time at the position. What are you judging his last season on...that he didn't have a decent season for a guy making a transition to a new position? I didn't say he was a pro bowl type player at this point. Besides...Matthews was hurt most of last season and for a guy making the kind of money hes making, he's been hurt a lot. How many sacks did Matthews have last season? Neal had 5 which isn't bad for a rotational OLB. Neal also wasn't the greatest against the run at times, especially in space when he had to make a tackle....and there were a few times where he missed tackles, etc...but for the most part at his weight he is able to hold the edge against Offensive tackles. I also remember Neal closing quickly on Kapernick when Kapernick stepped up to escape the pocket. I see Neal getting better at the position. Perry is better at holding the edge, but I didn't think Neal was a liability holding it either.
     
  15. NelsonsLongCatch

    NelsonsLongCatch Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2008
    Messages:
    2,151
    Ratings:
    +596
    So it's a good idea to pay a guy for one halfway good year? His first three years in the league he played in 20 of 48 games, starting one game. In those twenty games he had 12 tackles and 5.5 sacks.

    http://www.nfl.com/player/mikeneal/496833/profile
     
  16. packfan1

    packfan1 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2014
    Messages:
    58
    Ratings:
    +17
    Well, that's the question isn't it. Depends on what you mean when you say "pay him". Pay him starter money, no definitely not. He's a guy I think will get a little better with time at the OLB position, and it's important to have depth there running the 3-4. If we can get him at a reasonable price as a rotational player, maybe a two-year deal then I say do it. If we don't re-sign him then we probably will need to fill that role through the draft, which can also be done.
     
  17. packfan1

    packfan1 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2014
    Messages:
    58
    Ratings:
    +17
    If we are asking him to play DL, then my personal opinion is to let him walk, because I think at 295+ weight he is injury prone. Not to say he wouldn't ever get injured again at his current weight because this is football, but I think the kind of nagging injuries he had are a lot less likely to happen to him at his current weight. But, again, the price cannot be exorbitant.
     
  18. PackerFlatLander

    PackerFlatLander Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 27, 2013
    Messages:
    479
    Ratings:
    +293
    I never said that Neal is quite the bust that Harrell was - that's not the case. My point was reaffirming that Ted used two very high draft picks on two players with multiple injuries in college. I have Purdue football season tickets and saw Neal play a lot ... and the guy is a strength specimen, but he was forced to play very hurt a lot at Purdue and now he still can't seem to shake the bad luck. He did hurt his knee in the 49ers playoff game two months ago.
     
  19. Einstein McFly

    Einstein McFly Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    Messages:
    360
    Ratings:
    +226
    It's too bad that we only have one years worth of him playing OLB. I think he showed a lot of promise, at least as a pass rusher and against the run. In coverage or in space he's pretty awful. For a team that's trying to put more athletic guys out there and be more versatile and give a lot of looks, a guy like Neal is a pretty good fit.

    Don't spend a lot of money, but a medium amount I'd be fine with. I'd rather resign these guys than just go out and get a ton of FA from elsewhere.
     
  20. Carl

    Carl Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2013
    Messages:
    1,547
    Ratings:
    +860
    Lacy is also a guy with injury concerns coming out of college. TT shouldn't pass on a guy due to injury history alone.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  21. OCBP

    OCBP Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2014
    Messages:
    337
    Ratings:
    +84
    Neal was a 2nd round draft choice. It amazes me that folks attempt to rationalize how good he is or why he isn't as good as he should be--injuries/adding weight, etc.

    He was a high draft choice--Step up and play. Geez. Harrell sucked and Neal is okay. However, he has not lived up to where he was drafted.
     
  22. ThxJackVainisi

    ThxJackVainisi Lifelong Packers Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3,617
    Ratings:
    +2,699
    You missed the point of my post. I posted:
    So I wasn't rationalizing how good he is or isn't. I was responding to this:
    I took this to mean PackerFlatLander thinks the reason neither lived up to expectations was their injury-history before being drafted continued into their NFL careers. IMO Neal may not have (so far) lived up to his draft position because he lacks the talent to, or because his body was "over-muscled" (for lack of a better term), or because he struggled with a significant shift in position, or some combination of the three. IMO only Justin Harrell fits the category of 'failed because he was injury prone (and Thompson had notice of that before he drafted him)'.
     
  23. captainWIMM

    captainWIMM Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    Messages:
    4,344
    Ratings:
    +1,766
    He was decent rushing the passer, but I don´t get why some people thinks he showed promise against the run. He was terrible defending the run.
     
  24. El Guapo

    El Guapo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    2,465
    Ratings:
    +1,398
    I think that too many of you are reading into the "meaningful offer" statement. That doesn't mean high dollars or a low-ball offer. I suspect that the conversation between TT and MM went something like...

    MM: He's a good player when healthy. I think he can improve but we've got questions.
    TT: So you would prefer that I sign him?
    MM: Only for a reasonable price, otherwise let him walk.
    TT: I'll make him a meaningful offer and see if he takes it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  25. PackerFlatLander

    PackerFlatLander Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 27, 2013
    Messages:
    479
    Ratings:
    +293
    Good point. Injured or not, TT's luck as of late on the defensive side of the ball, drafting players high, has not been stellar.
     

Share This Page