Should we sign Eric Reid?

[swhitset]

If you are talking about the overtime touchdown throw in the NFCCG against the Seahawks, you have a couple of things wrong....the throw was to Kearse and Williams had him very well covered, was just a great throw and catch. Watch it again to verify it. But I know....saying he just watched it from 3' aways makes your story sound good.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

I'm sure he was talking about the two point conversion in regulation.

 

[pacmaniac]

Nobody wants Reid. We should be able to get him really cheap.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

of course. since they're keeping Rodgers they need figure out a way to make it work for a stud player sometime. what's he got...3-4 years left? if they can't, or won't, because of the cap (his crazy contract), they might as well trade him now. 10-6, 9-7, with him will be a lot more frustrating than 8-8 without him but with a lot more cap room for the future.

The Packers wouldn't win eight games without Rodgers. Once again, it's ridiculous how often posters around here suggest to trade him while he's the only legitimate chance for the team to win another championship.

Yeah that would be a much better option then relying on kentrell Brice as the 3rd safety. But that also depends on if pettine plans on using Jones as a nickel linebacker

Reid would be a much more expensive option than Brice as well though.

If you are talking about the overtime touchdown throw in the NFCCG against the Seahawks, you have a couple of things wrong....the throw was to Kearse and Williams had him very well covered, was just a great throw and catch. Watch it again to verify it.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

Williams should have never opened up the inside to Kearse on that play. LeRoy Butler agrees with me about it.

 

[Mondio]

maybe he shouldn't have, maybe a safety was supposed to be back there too, maybe not. Either way, it was still good coverage and if he had taken away the inside and he goes to the outside, a pass over the outside shoulder on pinpoint target is still a completed pass. Maybe it's a more difficult throw, but it it's as on target as the other one, it's still a TD. There was an open point of the field to throw to no matter where he went and a perfect pass is hard to defend. Regardless of if he let him have the inside position to easily, he was still in a good defensive coverage overall. Like I said, I'd take that type of coverage from every guy on the field and we'd have a dominating pass defense because it's going to result in incompletions, defenses, or INTs more often than a perfect pass completed.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

maybe he shouldn't have, maybe a safety was supposed to be back there too, maybe not. Either way, it was still good coverage and if he had taken away the inside and he goes to the outside, a pass over the outside shoulder on pinpoint target is still a completed pass. Maybe it's a more difficult throw, but it it's as on target as the other one, it's still a TD. There was an open point of the field to throw to no matter where he went and a perfect pass is hard to defend. Regardless of if he let him have the inside position to easily, he was still in a good defensive coverage overall. Like I said, I'd take that type of coverage from every guy on the field and we'd have a dominating pass defense because it's going to result in incompletions, defenses, or INTs more often than a perfect pass completed.

Aside of it being a much more difficult throw there would have been no way for Kearse to catch the ball with Tramon being as close if he had to take the outside route. The Seahawks receiver might have even been forced to defend the pass to not result in an interception by Williams.

 

[Mondio]

I see throws to the outside completed in tight coverage every week in the NFL, any pass put on point is difficult to defend. Still, I'd take coverage like that every play from all our guys any day and I still think we'd have an outstanding pass defending team.

 

[brandon2348]

To blame T. Willams for that loss is just stupid. I was at the game and it was all but over at that point. Momentum had swung full circle and it was at the point where anything that could go wrong was gonna. If Jordy catches that dime right in his hands against Buffalo were probably not even playing that game in that stupid stadium.

Lots of blame to go around.

 

[C-Lee]

Stop talking about that damn game, I'm still so triggered.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Stop talking about that damn game, I'm still so triggered.

In case you want to "relive" it

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[C-Lee]

In case you want to "relive" it

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

You're a *********!

 

[Mondio]

Stop talking about that damn game, I'm still so triggered.

I can't lie, I felt sick all over again when I saw that play. Sorry

 

[BrokenArrow]

Memory can play tricks:

He was caught flat footed, maybe he had his eyes elsewhere at the moment the ball was released, he was late to react. Certainly a bad play, but not what you described.

I'm well aware of how the play unfolded. The point is if he hadn't had his head up his *** he would have been able to break that up. He looked like a lost high school kid on that play. He assumed with R. Wilson on the opposite side of the field that L. Wilson was out of the play. He was late to react when the ball was thrown up for grabs in his direction and when he did react, he badly mistimed his jump. It was fundamentally poor from any perspective.

I suppose you might see it as a situation where if he had batted the ball down then the Packers still march down the field, still kick the FG, and win. That's entirely unpredictable not knowing how Seattle's defense would have played protecting only a 1 point lead.

I suspect it would not have been much different than them trying to protect a 3 point lead to avoid overtime. Either way, the Seahawks are trying to prevent us from getting in FG range. I suppose you doubt Rodgers' ability to drive 45 yards with 1:25 seconds and 3 timeouts in his pocket? I'm taking Rodgers every time in that scenario against any defense in NFL history.

It was a collective collapse with more memorable moments than the C-D brain fart. Singling out one gaffe over another is pointless in an overwhelming team "effort".

I think you've forgotten the context here. We're not talking about who is at fault for losing that game. That was hashed to death years ago. We're talking about the quality of play from our safeties and I pointed out a very specific example that stands out in my mind as to when I first started to question C-D's effort and ability. The fact that there were other things that contributed to that loss is irrelevant. If that play happened in the first game of the season that ended up being a blowout win for us, I would still point it out.

 

[gbgary]

The Packers wouldn't win eight games without Rodgers. Once again, it's ridiculous how often posters around here suggest to trade him while he's the only legitimate chance for the team to win another championship.

maybe the first year with Darnold (or whoever they'd pick), but with a complete off season with a ton of cap room, to add real talent to the team, 10-6 is entirely possible and maybe more. his current contract has prevented them from putting a good enough team around him and i fear the next will do the same. and remember it's not just QB money that's going up and adding cap pressure. silverstein's article and trade talk here is just food for thought.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

maybe the first year with Darnold (or whoever they'd pick), but with a complete off season with a ton of cap room, to add real talent to the team, 10-6 is entirely possible and maybe more. his current contract has prevented them from putting a good enough team around him and i fear the next will do the same. and remember it's not just QB money that's going up and adding cap pressure. silverstein's article and trade talk here is just food for thought.

Sounds like the formula they are using in Cleveland.

I could actually see trading Rodgers, if the Packers were a .500 team with him, but they aren't. If he stays healthy and they can improve the defense, there isn't any reason (besides a ton of injuries) this team shouldn't have a shot at the Superbowl. Picking up a bevy of picks, just might improve the defense faster, but it would totally have the offense looking like the one we saw Brent Hundley running last year.

 

[swhitset]

I can't lie, I felt sick all over again when I saw that play. Sorry

I refuse to watch it.

 

[hallzi43]

Seeing how many teams struggle each year with bad quarterback play it just makes me lol that anyone would even begin to think about trading Rodgers...

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Seeing how many teams struggle each year with bad quarterback play it just makes me lol that anyone would even begin to think about trading Rodgers...

All one needs to do is point those people to the Packer teams pre Favre and Rodgers and they might begin to get a clearer picture of the Packers without a FHOF QB.

 

[swhitset]

All one needs to do is point those people to the Packer teams pre Favre and Rodgers and they might begin to get a clearer picture of the Packers without a FHOF QB.

I'm not sure that anybody foolish enough to suggest such a thing could be reached with any argument no matter how obvious it may seem.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Still, I'd take coverage like that every play from all our guys any day and I still think we'd have an outstanding pass defending team.

I'm not sure the Packers would have an outstanding pass defense by giving up 35-yard touchdown passes on each play.

I suppose you doubt Rodgers' ability to drive 45 yards with 1:25 seconds and 3 timeouts in his pocket? I'm taking Rodgers every time in that scenario against any defense in NFL history.

The Packers offense had struggled before their last drive though having gained 23 or less yards on six of their previous seven drives while scoring a total of only three points.

his current contract has prevented them from putting a good enough team around him and i fear the next will do the same. and remember it's not just QB money that's going up and adding cap pressure.

Rodgers' contract hasn't prevented the Packers from putting together a talented roster. As an example the Vikings allocated more cap space to the quarterback position in 2017 than Green Bay did. Poor drafting and a lack of impact veteran acquisitions over the past few years are to blame for the team's lack of overall talent on the roster.

 

[swhitset]

I'm not sure the Packers would have an outstanding pass defense by giving up 35-yard touchdown passes on each play.



The Packers offense had struggled before their last drive though having gained 23 or less yards on six of their previous seven drives while scoring a total of only three points.



Rodgers' contract hasn't prevented the Packers from putting together a talented roster. As an example the Vikings allocated more cap space to the quarterback position in 2017 than Green Bay did. Poor drafting and a lack of impact veteran acquisitions over the past few years are to blame for the team's lack of overall talent on the roster.

you put too many things into one post lol.... prevents me from hitting agree sometimes .... your last paragraph about Rodger's contract is spot on though.... Not saying the rest was wrong... just didn't need an "agree" for emphasis.

 

[BrokenArrow]

The Packers offense had struggled before their last drive though having gained 23 or less yards on six of their previous seven drives while scoring a total of only three points.

I don't get your point. What does that have to do with HCD spectacularly blowing a play that any decent NFL safety should have made?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

I don't get your point. What does that have to do with HCD spectacularly blowing a play that any decent NFL safety should have made?

I clearly replied to this quote from you:

I suppose you doubt Rodgers' ability to drive 45 yards with 1:25 seconds and 3 timeouts in his pocket? I'm taking Rodgers every time in that scenario against any defense in NFL history.

 

[BrokenArrow]

I clearly replied to this quote from you:

I suppose you doubt Rodgers' ability to drive 45 yards with 1:25 seconds and 3 timeouts in his pocket? I'm taking Rodgers every time in that scenario against any defense in NFL history.

And that reply had pretty much nothing to do with that statement.