More on Arrington :

WinnipegPackFan

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 23, 2005
Messages
1,943
Reaction score
0
Written by PackerChatters Staff
Friday, 21 April 2006
Packers and Giants appear most interested

The fact that free-agent linebacker LaVar Arrington was in New York Thursday undergoing a physical examination for the Giants doesn't necessarily mean the Green Bay Packers are out of the running for his services Tom Silverstein of the Milwaukee Journal sentinal reports.

It would, however, seem to indicate that Arrington is serious about completing a deal before the draft April 29-30. The Giants and Packers are the teams that appear to be the most interested in landing Arrington, although Jacksonville, Miami and Cincinnati also have shown interest.




Arrington was making his second visit to the Giants, who did not do an examination of his surgically repaired right knee the first time around and wanted to assess his physical condition. There was no indication Arrington was close to signing a contract with the Giants, but talks are expected to heat up this weekend as the former Washington linebacker attempts to land a big-money deal before the draft.

Logic says Arrington's agents, Kevin and Carl Poston, are trying to match the deal they negotiated for linebacker Julian Peterson, who signed a seven-year, $54 million contract with the Seattle Seahawks, including an $11.5 million signing bonus. It doesn't appear any of the interested teams are willing to go that high yet.

The Packers remain interested in Arrington and have had ongoing discussions with his agents. They apparently haven't made headway on a deal with Arrington, but they did agree to bring in another of Kevin Poston's clients, San Francisco linebacker Saleem Rasheed, for a free-agent visit.

Rasheed, a third-round pick of the 49ers in 2002 who has been mostly a backup and special teams player the past four seasons, made an official visit Wednesday. The 6-foot-2, 229-pound Rasheed has struggled with injuries, playing in 45 of a possible 64 regular-season games, four of them starts. Last year, he was inactive for seven games.

Neither Packers general manager Ted Thompson nor Kevin Poston responded to phone messages.

Whether the Packers were trying to create goodwill with the Postons by bringing in one of their clients or are truly interested in another linebacker is anyone's guess.

The Packers remain interested in another Poston client, Oakland cornerback Charles Woodson, but the Arrington deal seems to be on the front burner.

The Packers have looked at several speedy linebackers in free agency to help offset the loss of veterans Na'il Diggs and Paris Lenon.
Rasheed is built to play the weak-side position but probably would be a utility player. If the Packers are able to land Arrington they can play him at any of the two outside positions and would probably feel less inclined to draft a linebacker.

With Arrington on board, it could mean they would pass on Ohio State linebacker A.J. Hawk for an offensive player like Maryland tight end Vernon Davis.
 

gado35

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 14, 2006
Messages
115
Reaction score
0
Good article, thanks. I do think it is important to note that, as the article said, arringtons second visit doesnt mean much to where he is going to sign as much as it does that he wants to get signed before the draft. I think Hawk would be a great pick, but i was watching some clips on Vernon Davis today and all i have to say is that that guy is a beast. He ran under a 4.38 at the combine. For a man his size that is sick. Not to mention great target for Favre. Arrington by himself may not be the difference maker of why favre would come back, but i do think by signing him things will unwind in a way that bring favre back.
 

cheesey

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 25, 2005
Messages
1,000
Reaction score
3
Location
Wisconsin
Well, if TT wants to PROVE he wants to win now, now is the time for him to SHOW it by signing Arrington before the Giants do. I have backed TT through this stuff, but he needs to get this done in my view. The Packers could then go after another good player in the draft if he did. Guess we will see.
 

packedhouse01

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 5, 2005
Messages
1,560
Reaction score
1
There are several things here that need to be addressed. 1) we need an impact player. 2) we need a linebacker 3) we have the money to sign him

So what's the problem TT? Get this guy signed.
 

Bobby Roberts

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 15, 2005
Messages
770
Reaction score
0
packedhouse01 said:
There are several things here that need to be addressed. 1) we need an impact player. 2) we need a linebacker 3) we have the money to sign him

So what's the problem TT? Get this guy signed.

I'd like for us to sign Arrington also, but there are many considerations to take. LaVar is looking for a fair market deal, but his contract demands are greater than the market is willing to pay.

Reasons, the last couple of seasons have been very disappointing for him and he's had injury problems. He has done well in the past, but his most recent performances (the past 2 years) show a player who's not up to the same level from earlier in his career. Even so, he's seeking a contract on par with the someone at the same level as earlier in his career.

In the end, this contract play is necessary to bring Arrington's contract demands down into his actual market value. I'd like to see TT sign him to a front loaded deal that pays a little more than what other teams are offering. He could be a great addition to our defense for many years, but he could also turn out to be a Joe Johnson type of bust.
 

digsthepack

Cheesehead
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
2,486
Reaction score
0
Why isn't he signed, packedhouse? Perhaps because the draft is sending 2 and possibly 3 immediate starters at the LB position into the league. Hawk, Greenway, Sims and, possibly Hodge being a 4th.

I would like to see Arrington sign, provided the team believes he fits in well into what they are trying to accomplish defensively. Remember, this defense is not flashy and depends upon assignment-sure players. The knock on Arrington is that his freelancing gives up the big play a little too often. But, if he does not sign, we can draft a starter.
 

DakotaT

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 20, 2006
Messages
810
Reaction score
0
Location
Bismarck North Dakota
Has anybody else heard a rumor on Lavar that he has deteriorating ligaments in one of his knees. I think the Giants brought him in yesterday for an MRI not just a physical. The Giants were rumored to have asked Arrington to come off his price. (For the record, I have no links or proof, just pure speculation).
 

warhawk

Cheesehead
Joined
Dec 8, 2005
Messages
1,922
Reaction score
17
Location
Gulf Shores, Al
What bothers me is the situation in Washington where he apparantly got in the dog house and wasn't on the field full time. Now, big time players sometimes get in the dog house, but usually if they are awesome football players, they play.
For Washing ton to leave the guy on the sidelines as much as they did was either a huge sacrifice on their part, or, they didn't miss what he brought as much as you would think an impact player would be missed.

I know the guy is good. But if he DOES come down to reality price wise it will also bring the other teams after him into play and will come down to where he wants to go.
 

Zero2Cool

I own a website
Joined
Dec 12, 2004
Messages
11,903
Reaction score
4
Location
Green Bay, WI
Didn't wanna start a new thread. DEAL WITH IT.



GIANTS CHOP THREE

A league source tells us that the New York Giants have cut linebacker LaVar Arrington, offensive tackle Luke Petitgout, and running back Chad Morton.

Arrington gave up $4.4 million in earned but unpaid bonus money from the Redskins last year at this time for the ability to hit the free-agent market early. But his agents, the Postons, overpriced him, and he missed out on the early cash rush.

Arrington eventually signed a trumped-up seven-year, $49 million deal with the Giants, which was low on guarantees and high on incentives. A chronic knee problem marred the early stages of the season, and then he popped an Achilles' tendon and was lost for the year.

Petitgout, the team's starting left tackle at the start of 2006, fractured his leg on November 5 against the Bears and didn't return for the season. The Giants' first-round pick (19th overall) in 1999, Petitgout was under contract for the next two seasons, at salaries of $5 million per year.

Morton tore an ACL late in the season, the second such injury he has suffered in three years. He was signed through 2009, and was scheduled to earn a salary of $720,000 in 2007.
from PFT.com
 

Zero2Cool

I own a website
Joined
Dec 12, 2004
Messages
11,903
Reaction score
4
Location
Green Bay, WI
I dunno if I should be or not, but I'm surprised to see Arrington dumped.


Think its worth it to pick him up? Could he be used as a pass rush specialist?
 

Titletown088

Cheesehead
Joined
Feb 8, 2007
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
I dunno if I should be or not, but I'm surprised to see Arrington dumped.


Think its worth it to pick him up? Could he be used as a pass rush specialist?

I'd be for signing him at a cheap cost. TT was interested in him last year, but that was before hawk came around..
 

PackFanInSC

Cheesehead
Joined
Jul 30, 2006
Messages
563
Reaction score
0
I don't know that he would be willing to be a back-up and the only spot that may have competition would be Poppinga. That would definitely mean Taylor would have to go -- Unless the Moss for Hodge + 3rd rumor had validity.

Wouldn't hurt to bring him in for a look -- has same agent as Woodson and Favre tried to talk him into coming last year. How has his recovery gone?

Our needs are really more on the offense and the defensive backfield. It could free up someone else to be traded for an established player to meet those needs but I would think that any contract would have to be based on incentives just in case he flops like he did this year.
 

bozz_2006

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 25, 2006
Messages
4,576
Reaction score
283
Location
Grand Forks, ND
I would think that any contract would have to be based on incentives just in case he flops like he did this year.

exactly. and, contrary to what arrington may well be thinking, i doubt there are many teams who would sign him with the intention of playing him as a full-time starter at this point in his career.

PS it's better to burn out than to fade away!
 

porky88

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
3,991
Reaction score
0
Location
Title Town
I wouldn't want him even. I'm happy with our LB's and I'm very happy with the potential they have. Also they really grew together this year. Signing Arrington in my opinion would be a waste of good cap space because the one position I feel strongly about is LB.
 

Zero2Cool

I own a website
Joined
Dec 12, 2004
Messages
11,903
Reaction score
4
Location
Green Bay, WI
I wouldn't want him even. I'm happy with our LB's and I'm very happy with the potential they have. Also they really grew together this year. Signing Arrington in my opinion would be a waste of good cap space because the one position I feel strongly about is LB.

Yeah, you're probably right.
 

bozz_2006

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 25, 2006
Messages
4,576
Reaction score
283
Location
Grand Forks, ND
i think it would probably be a bad idea to get him, because of all the reasons you guys said, he's damaged goods, and he has an ego that i believe would prevent him from being even a moderately effectively player in a situational role. he has such a chip on his shoulder that if he isn't treated like God's gift to football, which he believes he is, he won't play for ****.
 

Zero2Cool

I own a website
Joined
Dec 12, 2004
Messages
11,903
Reaction score
4
Location
Green Bay, WI
I'm on the fence with this.

I think if he splits time with Poppinga and we can get him cheap I think it'd be a good idea.


As someone mentioned though, his ego is large and I think part time play with low pay will not go over well with him.
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
25,382
Reaction score
4,105
Location
Milwaukee
I'm on the fence with this.

I think if he splits time with Poppinga and we can get him cheap I think it'd be a good idea.


As someone mentioned though, his ego is large and I think part time play with low pay will not go over well with him.

he might not have any other choice tho???
 

Since69

Cheesehead
Joined
Oct 17, 2005
Messages
422
Reaction score
0
Arrington will be happiest in a non-regimented scheme (maybe a 3-4) where he can just roam and make plays on his own. That's what he wanted to do in Washington, and that's what got him benched - he half-assed it in practice because he felt the scheme limited him. In fact, he took less money than we offered to play for the Giants because they told him he be allowed to freelance.

Not a good fit for our system. Not at all.
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
25,382
Reaction score
4,105
Location
Milwaukee
A key factor in him signging with the Giants was being able to go up against his former team twice a year.

and wasnt there a real good friend of his that played on the Giants as well?
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Top