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!
  2. Big Announcement Coming for 2015 Football Season!!

    Be on the look out for a big Packer Forum announcement when the schedule is released. Full details coming soon... Update: Announcement to be released on MONDAY!

Packers talking to James... Tory James CB

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Pack93z, Apr 11, 2007.

  1. porky88

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Ratings:
    +0
    Why are the last five on there. Did they contribute to the Patriots last year? No they didn't. Have they done anything this year yet? I was referring to last year mostly and yes this year as well.

    They are new additions this year. It's flawed to have them on there considering New England has two 1sts and a 3rd this year to get impact players out of.

    You forgot Ben Watson, Nick Kaczur, Mike Wright, Tully Banta-Cain (though he's gone)

    As for this season. Let's look at their projected starting line up.

    QB: Tom Brady - Draft pick
    RB: Laurence Maroney - Draft Pick
    FB: Heath Evans - Free Agent
    WR: Donte Stallworth - Free Agent
    WR: Wes Welker - Free Agent
    TE: Ben Watson - Draft Pick
    OT: Matt Light - Draft pick
    OT: Nick Kaczur - Draft pick
    OG: Logan Mankins - Draft pick
    OG: Steve Neal - Draft Pick
    C: Dan Koppen - Draft Pick

    DE: Richard Seymour - Draft Pick
    DT: Vince Wilfork - Draft Pick
    DE: Ty Warren - Draft Pick
    LB: Adalius Thomas - Free Agent
    LB: Teddy Bruschi - Draft Pick
    LB: Mike Vrable - Free Agent
    LB: Rosevelt Colvin - Free Agent
    CB: Asante Samuel - Draft Pick
    CB: Ellis Hobbs - Draft Pick
    SS: Rodney Harrison - Free Agent
    FS: Artrell Hawkins - Free Agent

    15 to 6. Linebacker and Receiver seems to be the areas they went after in free agency. You also have to factor in they have two first round draft picks this year and a 3rd as well and they'll for sure get value out of those. They did pickup nice depth with Washington and Brady but for the most part their starters are draft picks. I’m not saying free agency didn’t play a role. Everything does and I’m also upset the Packers didn’t do much in free agency this year but the Patriots built their team through the Draft and used free agency to put the icing on the cake. Most teams do.
     
  2. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0

    The overall team is a mix. You can spin it how you want. Most teams in the NFL have more draft picks playing for them then FA. That includes bad teams but everyone wants to use NE as an example because it fits. Guys like Harrison, Scott, Dillon, Vrabel, Colvin, etc play/played a HUGE role on that team.

    The "building through the draft" thing is the most ignorant excuse ever. Why does it make a difference where you get the guys from? Aren't FA drafted by other teams at one time? What benefit does it give to draft them yourself?

    You field the best team possible no matter if they come from the Draft, Free Agency, off the Street, out your ***, Out of the sky, or you make them in your basement. Thats how you build a winning team period.

    Tell me the benefit of drafting a guy over bringing in a FA who was drafted by another team?
     
  3. Lare

    Lare Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Messages:
    705
    Ratings:
    +0

    No offense, but you may want to consider taking some courses in reading comprehension.

    Where did I say free agent pickups is the only way to make a team better?

    Where did I say the Packers aren't getting better?

    Where did I say anybody on the team sucks?

    What I did say is that the Packers haven't been that successful lately in making themselves better. By that I refer to their overall record of 12-20 over the last two years. Can they improve this year and be more successful? Sure, but at this point no-one can say that for sure.

    Of course, regardless of what I write I'm sure you'll read into this what you want it to say.
     
  4. porky88

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Ratings:
    +0
    So I’m ignorant because of my opinion. Even though it’s backed up with facts. Whine about it all you want but don’t deny the fact that this decade teams have succeeded by building through the NFL Draft and building from talent within. Whether the Packers are successful as the Ravens, Colts, Patriots, Buccaneers, and Steelers is yet to be determine. My guess right now is no because while you have to build through the Draft you still need to fine quality players in free agency as well. I think it‘s more so 75 to 25. Time is running out in my opinion.

    I’ve said on the board before you build the core of your team through the Draft and when the time comes to strike, you hit it big in free agency. To me that’s what New England is doing. With the NFC up for grabs I would of liked to of seen GB make two or three key signings or some sort of trade. I’m holding out hope that Moss gets cut the Packers do try and land him. I don’t feel good about the possibility but I’m not ignorant enough to say it’s not going to happen either especially if Oakland does take Calvin Johnson.

    I am not saying you do everything through the Draft but I think you get started with the Draft and you build your foundation that way. You keep arguing as if free agency is the foundation of the NFL. You can chase that ghost with Dan Snyder if you want. Ted Thompson and the Packers Front Office is not doing anything out of the ordinary. In fact his plan is very simple and is pretty much a copy of the recent Super Bowl teams. It’s whether or not he is as successful as some of the other teams that will define him. Currently I’m not in the boat but I’m not drowning in the ocean either. I think he's going about this the right way. He needs to get the right players though to be successful.
     
  5. all about da packers

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Ratings:
    +0
    Well most players brought in from Free Agency are in their 30s.

    The thing with some of the players the Pats signed is that they got a bit lucky. You look at someone like Harrison, a lot of people were saying he was done. Pats took a risk, and it paid off in the long term.

    Look at someone like Sharper. It was rumoured that the Pats had an interest, but he eventually signed with Minny. He was very good last year, but look at this year. The Packers thought he wasn't the player he once was, and thus not worth 4.5 million. After the initial year at Minny, he's proving the Packers right.

    Look at the Pats 2 years ago. Signed Monty Beisel, LB age 28 from the Chiefs, to a 3-4 year contract. He started for them most of the year, but in the last off-season he got cut.

    Other team's Free Agents aren't always a sure thing. Usually if a player is going to be of some use to the team, they'll sign him to an extension. The free agent pool is usually lacking of good young talent that was able to contribute on a good team.

    Also, I agree at some point you need to sign players that may be a risk if you are to make a run. But pyle, let's be honest do you expect the Packers to make a serious run next year? I don't. This team is still too young, and truth be told we still don't have enough depth. I'd much rather we wait a year or two before making risky signings, allowing us to get some more depth on the roster.


    Also, I have been thinking if Manuel being a bust has made TT shy away from exploring Free Agents that have high price demands. I think the Packers are at a delicate stage, they took a huge step forward and a couple of bad signings could really set them back.

    I'm willing to wait it out though, and see what happens. That's why I'll be watching the 49ers with so much interest, because they clearly have adopted a mind set on bringing in the top tier FAs and adding a draft class around those to compete. If the Packers stink it up, and 49ers don't... I think a lot of us will be saying "Lucy (er Ted), you got some 'splanin to do".
     
  6. Lare

    Lare Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Messages:
    705
    Ratings:
    +0
    I agree with both the last couple of posts but I guess this begs a couple of questions.

    1. How does a team know when it's time to make the push by adding those last couple of FA's they feel will put them over the top?

    2. Will TT have enough time to get to that stage under his present plan taking into account the still present holes that need filling and the overall youth on the team?
     
  7. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0
    I never said you were IGNORANT Porky I said the "building through the draft" saying is IGNORANT. Don't turn it into something else.

    I am going to try to keep this simple.

    What team/teams start more FA than drafted players?

    Tell me the benefit of drafting a guy over bringing in a FA who was drafted by another team?
     
  8. all about da packers

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Ratings:
    +0
    Lare, I'm not trying to call you out or anything but I wonder if you are going too much by the overall record.

    It is terrible, I'll agree with you on that. But a breakdown might be more indicative of the progression the Packers have made... 4-12 to 8-8.

    I just don't think you can place too much emphasis on the overall record at this point because TT has only been here 2 years. You have to take the message the overall record conveys (which is TT is a **** GM) with the message the individual year-by-year breakdown conveys (TT is on the right path, this team is improving talent wise).

    The records contradict, and I'd say at this point you can't say either way that they won't improve. Last year they did, both record wise and talent wise. Going on past record though (IE Ted's first year to his second), the talent level will improve though. However, I do agree the sample size is too small to make any definitive conclusions. But the progress is encouraging.
     
  9. Lare

    Lare Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Messages:
    705
    Ratings:
    +0
    You have a valid point aadp, but I think in order to use the progression theory we also have to take into account the fact that the team went from 10-6 to 4-12 under TT's first year of control. Sure, there's many factors that went into that but we can't just ignore it either.

    So the obvious question is how/why did the Packers improve last year? Better talent? Probably, but IMO it's way too early to tell if rookies were starting because they were good or merely because there was nobody better. We also should consider the easy schedule and the fact the team stayed healthier than is usually the norm.

    I just think the team is at a defining stage this year. If they stay healthy again and still aren't successful, it's going to be pretty hard to blame it on anything other than the lack of talent and the guy picking that talent. You give a team $70 million in salary cap money and 35 draft picks in three years and they still can't improve, that's telling me there's a problem somewhere.

    All-in-all, I think we'll have a much better idea of TT's abilities and the future of this team after the upcoming season.
     
  10. porky88

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Ratings:
    +0
    The Packers are right in the middle putting them in a tough situation. They went 8-8 which is encouraging but I think most would say they overachieved. I am one of them. I think this year if they can reach the playoffs or at least contend again like they did last year then they should make an impact in the 2008 market. That’s what I would do but honestly I would’ve been a lot more active in this years class as well. Guys like Justin Griffin and Eric Johnson would have been good additions.

    To me it boils down to this year. The NFC is very weak so there is absolutely no reason why this team shouldn't be in the playoff hunt in the final weeks of the season. I’m pretty confident he’ll be GM for at least one more off season no matter what but beyond that he could be gone if this team doesn’t produce.

    :twocents:
     
  11. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0

    Quit being so LOGICAL LARE!

    You are not allowed to mention the 2005 season because that wasn't TT's fault. We had injuries and Sherman screwed us by only building a 10-6 team!

    But.....You are are allowed to mention the 8-8 2006 season. However you can no longer talk about the injuries that were the excuse in 2005 when factoring in if they improved in 2006.
     
  12. all about da packers

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Ratings:
    +0
    I agree with you Lare and Porky, I think this is the defining year of TTs era as the man in charge of the Packers.

    Pyle, I disagree with you. I'll be the first to say TT was a moron for signing relatively unknown players who seemingly never saw the field when we were decimated by injuries. That is all on him, and he deserves to be held accountable. I'm not saying 05 wasn't TT's fault. It was, but to be honest he shouldn't deserve ALL the blame (but in terms of not getting some more experienced guys, yeah he deserves blame for inadequate talent replacement).

    Last year though, we saw some improvements in that regard. Specifically, after Ferggie and K-Rob went down, he signed Holiday.
     
  13. porky88

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Ratings:
    +0
    I obviously went by last season.

    Washington started more last year and actually will start more this year. I came up with 15. The finished 5-11.

    The Minnesota Vikings counting Brad Johnson started 14 non draft picks and finished 6-10.

    The Atlanta Falcons started 12 and finished the season 7-9.

    The Cleveland Browns started 12 and finished the season 4-12.

    The Miami Dolphins started 13 and finished the season 6-10.

    Let’s look at the 12 playoff teams before I hear the those only fit your argument.

    The Dallas Cowboys started 9 free agents and won 9 games. They started 12 draft picks.

    The Seattle Seahawks started 6 free agents and won 9 games.

    Including Jeremiah Trotter and Jeff Garcia the Eagles started 6 free agents and finished the season 10-6 with the NFC East Title.

    Including Brandon Short the N.Y. Giants started 9 free agents and finished the season with 8 wins.

    The New York Jets started 6 free agents and finished the season with 10 wins.

    The New England Patriots started 6 free agents and finished the season with 12 wins.

    The Kansas City Chiefs started 9 free agents and finished the season with 9 wins.

    This is the stat of the year. The Indianapolis Colts started 1 Free Agent and finished the season with 12 wins and won the Super Bowl.

    The Chicago Bears started 10 free agents and finished the season with 13 wins.

    The New Orleans Saints started 13 free agents and finished the season with 10 wins. Most of them on the Defense.

    The Baltimore Ravens started 6 Free Agents and finished the season with 13 wins.

    The San Diego Chargers started 6 Free Agents and finished the season wit 14 wins.

    Out of the 12 playoff teams only the Saints started more free agents than draft picks. One could say they were the worst team lin 2005 so they had to but then look at the New York Jets.

    I did not look up every team. In the end it comes down to how good of a talent evaluator the Packers scouting department and the teams above are. I do not believe this is a simple coincidence. I think it’s a copy cat league and for the most part teams are setting the foundation through the draft and building from within.

    As to your other question you save money, age is always a concern, a lot of free agents are sometimes coming off of injury. It depends on the players. Like I said before I’d gladly take a Justin Griffin and Eric Johnson. Nate Clements is a great player but not for the price he’s asking for. You can’t buy a Super Bowl.
     
  14. porky88

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Ratings:
    +0
    I did not look this one up myself. Someone else posted the records of the teams the Pack beat in 2004 and not one had a winning records. So the decline begun at least a year prior to Ted Thompson arriving and perhaps that is a reason why Mike Sherman was dismissed from General Manager and Ted Thompson was brought in.

    http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/gnb2004.htm

    This plus the lost to the 8-8 Vikings, 2004 was very deceiving by just looking at the standings.
     
  15. Zero2Cool

    Zero2Cool I own a website

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,903
    Ratings:
    +8
    Saying : a word or phrase that particular people use in particular situations.

    Excuse : serve as a reason or cause or justification of.





    When talking about ignorance theres one person who exemplifies the definition to a T. I don't have to provide a pyle of evidence for anyone to figure out whom it may be.



    My interpretation of the now infamous "build through the draft" is this.
    You get your teams core players from the draft. The foundation of the team. Something to build on.

    I'm not a General Manager though, so I can't much say.
     
  16. all about da packers

    all about da packers Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2005
    Messages:
    7,033
    Ratings:
    +0
    So zero, the questions that I think pyle would have (and phrased in much more passive language :p ) is...

    Do you not sign any other Free Agents to help your roster until you have an established core? I'd think the Packers would have that by now.
     
  17. Zero2Cool

    Zero2Cool I own a website

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,903
    Ratings:
    +8
    Ahh, no. You pick up FA that help your core get established. Which the Packers have done. But the priority of building the team is through the draft, not FA.
    Through FA, they have been getting depth players for a price they deem reasonable instead of overpricing for players with more talent.
    The Packers aren't a couple players away from SB contention so why break the bank over them when you will end up losing your developed or developing core players due to lack of financial assets?

    This year was a weak FA crop and good players got paid excellent player money. I don't mind over pricing a player or two here and there, but to do it year in and year out is foolish in my view.

    Many people are taking for granted what the Packers have done already. Harris, Jenkins, Cole and the rest who's names escaped me. (jus got done bitching out the landlord for being a slacker, bleh) The Packers have made moves and they are for the most part in the direction to better the team. Some have not worked out, (see Manuel).
     
  18. Pack93z

    Pack93z You retired too? .... Not me. I'm in my prime

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2005
    Messages:
    4,855
    Ratings:
    +22
    Okay so then by this logic, because of an easy schedule last year we should have shown progress by schedule alone. So did we really improve. We certainly didn't show it in the Jets and Patriots game. But AADP said what needed to be said in his posts, Ted has blame in the youth and lack of veterans on this team. Point blank, I hope like hell that we improve because I am a Packer fan, it is in my blood.

    Again, Ted has made good moves and made some bad moves, the jury is out on him and his vision for building this team. This should be a defining year and if like those that agree with Ted it shouldn't be an issue because of his eye for talent and his prudent steering of this franchise in the right direction.

     
  19. porky88

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Ratings:
    +0
    The Packers overachieved last year. They certainly showed improvement as the year went on though. For the most part getting rid of Flannigan, Rivera, and Sharper has turned out to be the right moves as all seem to be well at the pinnacle of their career. It's whether or not Thompson's eye for the young talent is good enough to get this team in the playoffs and most importantly is trust in Mike McCarthy and the coaching staff to develop it.
     
  20. PackOne

    PackOne Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Messages:
    2,013
    Ratings:
    +4
    I don't think they overacheived. In fact, if anything, they lost a couple they had in the bag. Everyone gets blown out once in awhile. I remember a Packer team about 11 years ago that got blown out huge at Indy.
     
  21. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0

    This makes no sense. They were declining in talent because they beat bad teams like they should of?

    So fast forward to 05 when we went 4-12. If the 2004 team was declining in talent what the hell happened in 2005?
     
  22. tromadz

    tromadz Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    The begining of a rebuilding process.
     
  23. pyledriver80

    pyledriver80 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Messages:
    2,391
    Ratings:
    +0

    Oh, ok, I was just curious. How long exactly does it take to rebuild?
     
  24. porky88

    porky88 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2006
    Messages:
    3,991
    Ratings:
    +0
    How about they couldn't beat the teams that had talent. Like Philadelphia, Jacksonville, and Indianapolis. The Eagles crushed them that year and that was the NFC representative in the Super Bowl. How about they were embarrassed in the playoffs against the 8-8 Minnesota Vikings. To me that was the start of the “end” and it carried over in 2005. Haven’t you used that exact same argument to criticize the current Green Bay Packers who went 8-8 and beat one team with a winning record. You can’t bash the Packers for not beating a team with a winning record this year and then praise them in 2004 for doing the exact same thing.
     
  25. PackOne

    PackOne Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2006
    Messages:
    2,013
    Ratings:
    +4
    If your the Saints ... not that long.
     

Share This Page