The Charles Woodson effect..

[rodell330]

Still one of the best safeties in the league and making plays. I'm curious to see how MM and Rodgers plan to attack the middle of the field with him roaming around on the back end. With really no speed at TE to stretch the seems vertically I'm sure he's licking his chops to pick Rodgers off.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I don't recall all the details as to why the Packers let Charles walk in FA (probably money) but I really miss his leadership and play making ability. I always thought he was THAT GUY that just made a defense better.

 

[Half Empty]

Age = big factor, even then.

 

[Shawnsta3]

With them being old teammates I'm sure Woodson will be dying to pick Rodgers off just for the competition between themselves. Though I'm sure he'd much rather be stuck with picking off his other former quarterbacks like Rich Gannon or maybe Matt Flynn next week compared to Rodgers. We miss you Woodson, but you'll definitely have your work cut out for you

 

[rodell330]

Age = big factor, even then.

Apparently not as big of a factor as TT made it. Look at his stats this year compared to the younger HaHa or Morgan Burnett....as a matter of fact look at our safety production since Woodson was released ...his stats are significantly better than Burnett,Haha, or whoever else has been back there.

 

[easyk83]

I don't recall all the details as to why the Packers let Charles walk in FA (probably money) but I really miss his leadership and play making ability. I always thought he was THAT GUY that just made a defense better.

He wanted too much money and his play as a converted safety didn't look too promising at first.

 

[C-Lee]

Yeah, he wanted too much money, but we should have paid him.

Oh well. Still love him.

 

[Half Empty]

Question was why they let him go. Don't think anyone looks back on it now as a good decision.

 

[rodell330]

Question was why they let him go. Don't think anyone looks back on it now as a good decision.

Nope, because it wasn't. Woodson could do it all. We don't have a guy like that on the back end. Haha can be a good player but Woodson took advantage of qbs mistakes 99% of the time. Haha literally should have 4 ints right now and I'll NEVER forget his blunder on the 2 point conversion last year in Seattle smh. And Burnett? Well he calls the secondary adjustments . That's all I really count on him for. Don't be shocked if you see Randall at Safety with Rollins and Shields manning the corner. Randall could be the ball hawk we need back there.

 

[Mondio]

and at the time there was hardly a soul saying it wasn't the right decision to let him go either. From his highlights this year, he looks like he's as good as he's ever been. Watching him his last season here, he was a step slow on so many plays it was fairly obvious he wasn't going to be back.

 

[Carl]

Nope, because it wasn't. Woodson could do it all. We don't have a guy like that on the back end. Haha can be a good player but Woodson took advantage of qbs mistakes 99% of the time. Haha literally should have 4 ints right now and I'll NEVER forget his blunder on the 2 point conversion last year in Seattle smh. And Burnett? Well he calls the secondary adjustments . That's all I really count on him for. Don't be shocked if you see Randall at Safety with Rollins and Shields manning the corner. Randall could be the ball hawk we need back there.

No reason Haha or Burnett should be replaced with Randall, especially with Randall becoming a stud at corner.

 

[TJV]

Hindsight is great. As I’ve posted before, we’d all be great GMs if we could go back in time knowing what we know today. Don’t get me wrong, I wish the Packers would have retained Woodson’s services in 2013 (the names M.D. Jennings and Jerron McMillian still send a chill up my spine) but at the time the decision was anything but clear-cut. According to a jsonline story, here’s what Woodson’s contract called for in 2013:

Woodson's 2013 base salary is $6.5 million and a roster bonus of $2.5 million comes the first day of training camp. The safety also is due a $1 million bonus through the 16-week season - $65,000 for each game he plays - with more potential money based on incentives. So, in sum, Woodson would count $9,437,500 against the salary cap next season, $10 million if he played all 16 games, and more with the incentives.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/agent-hoping-packers-keep-woodson-gi8lqql-189954001.html

Also keep in mind contract extensions had to be done for Aaron Rodgers and Clay Matthews in the spring of 2013. And more important than that, IMO some here need to be reminded of the context of Woodson’s career during that off season. Keep in mind he was going to be 37-years old in October of that year and here’s part of a jsonline story written at the end of January 2013:

But Woodson is clearly a declining player. Woodson suffered a broken collarbone against St. Louis in Week 7 and missed the final nine games of the regular season. That was the same injury Woodson suffered 20 months earlier in the Super Bowl.

In addition to a recurring injury for a 36-year old:

Counting the postseason, the Packers played nine games with Woodson and nine without him. In the nine games Green Bay had Woodson, it allowed an average of 247.6 passing yards and 366.6 total yards. Without Woodson, those numbers improved to 224.0 passing yards and 332.4 total yards per game. Opposing quarterbacks had a passer rating of 78.36 when Woodson played and a 72.56 rating when he was sidelined. Woodson was part of just two turnover plays this season. As 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick showed in the divisional playoffs, Woodson has lost a step. And that lack of speed makes it hard for the Packers to give Woodson the green light when it comes to freelancing.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/pack...y-question-for-packers-pk8grn7-188934491.html

One thing that made Woodson great was his instincts which led to his freelancing, playmaking ability. But since Woodson had to switch back to safety, Darren Perry expressed a concern about the need for greater discipline at the safety position. Put it all together: A soon to be 37 year old player who looked to be declining “just” had his collar bone broken again; a huge money and cap expenditure on Rodgers and Matthews, and concerns about whether or not Woodson would be disciplined enough to start at safety full time. But here’s the mistake I think the Packers made: Certainly they weren’t going to keep his current contract intact but they should have waived him and told him to bring back the best offer he received in UFA. That deal was about a $4.3M one-year contract with less than a $1M signing bonus. Matching that would have given the Packers insurance at the spot opposite Burnett. But hindsight is 20/20: what if Woodson would have suffered another broken collar bone in 2013?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Woodson always seemed to have a knack for finding the ball as well as forcing turnovers. If I am reading his stats correct, as a Packer he forced 15 fumbles and intercepted 38 balls in his 7 years in GB. Those are amazing numbers and ones we are definitely lacking from the current defense. Even yesterday, our star on defense, Clay Matthews came in almost blind on the QB and although he made a nice sack, he had a free shot at trying to knock the ball loose, but seemed to choose the crunching tackle instead.

Woodson was just an amazing instinctual player who also brought that energy to the other 10 guys on the field as well as the team.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/1442/charles-woodson

 

[Notso]

One of the painful truths of draft & develop is that it's better to let a guy go a year too early than a year too late. In Woodson's case, it ended up being several years too early but nobody could have seen that coming. The man has simply defied the aging process. I can't fault Thompson for this.

 

[red4tribe]

Woodson is an all time great player, no doubt. I certainly miss his ability to force turnovers.

That being said, while I have paid almost zero attention to the Raiders this year, I did browse one of their fan forums. Seems like they're saying that while Woodson is still getting the turnovers he has lost a lot of speed and has been beaten down the field a number of times. Not surprising that he relies more on instinct than speed now, given his age.

 

[Mondio]

Woodson always seemed to have a knack for the ball as well as forcing turnovers. If I am reading his stats correct, as a Packer he forced 15 fumbles and intercepted 38 balls in his 7 years in GB. Those are amazing numbers and ones we are definitely lacking from the current defense. Even yesterday, our star on defense, Clay Matthews came in almost blind on the QB and although he made a nice sack, he had a free shot at trying to knock the ball loose, but seemed to choose the crunching tackle instead.

Woodson was just an amazing instinctual player who also brought that energy to the other 10 guys.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/player/stats/_/id/1442/charles-woodson

He did, I loved the guy and still do. One of my favorite football players of all time, but at the time, there wasn't a lot of question about letting him go or keeping him for 10 million a year. He was upper 30's, and had broken his collar bone for the 2nd time and missed half the season. His last year for us, he dropped from 7 INT's to 1, had 1 FF and his average tackles per game dropped from the mid teens to 3.

He seems to have rebounded nicely in Oakland and I'm happy as hell for him. Very hardworker, and he deserves it, but there's no way he was a 10 million dollar a year player for us when we let him go, leadership or not.

 

[Powarun]

Wouldn't mind if Packers put up a huge lead, like 40, and in the fourth give Woodson a Pick 6 for the record books. Not a fan of how Strahan got the record yet would make an exeption for Woodson he is one heck of a player.

 

[Sky King]

Woodson had trouble keeping his legs under him during that last season he played here. The intellect was able to keep up just fine but the legs wouldn't always cooperate.

Even at that he would easily have outplayed M.D. Jennings had he been retained for at least another year. But, then again, who couldn't?

 

[Jerellh528]

I miss him. Definatley one of my all time favorite packers. He was a definite leader and playmaker on this defense for the entire duration here. Nothing but respect for him. Wish he didn't get injured during the Super Bowl so he could've played the whole game. Same with driver.

 

[El Guapo]

http://totalpackers.com/charles-woodson-may-be-open-to-renegotiating-his-deal/
This article from the week before Woodson was released quotes his agent as saying:

“They haven’t said anything to the contrary,” he said, “so we’re assuming he’s going to be back. There’s always a tradeoff. I’m sure there’s something we could work out if there’s more guaranteed money in the deal.”

Most agreed that he had lost a step and questioned whether he had the size for safety. Then his agent says 'if you guarantee the money, we're listening.' I doubt that TT and MM wanted to commit guaranteed money to a gamble at safety. Woodson made the decision clearer for the Packers.

 

[ivo610]

charles is top 5 in my favorite packers of all time and I agreed with letting him go at the time. I am happy to see him getting numbers in Oakland.

 

[Packerlifer]

http://www.packers.com/media-center/videos/Playing-with-and-against-Aaron-Rodgers/fead5cb1-fa3f-48c2-9600-108190651e05


Stroll down memory lane: https://video.search.yahoo.com/sear...=c718fb87462bbce23d657442b759ab72&action=view

 

[Half Empty]

Wouldn't mind if Packers put up a huge lead, like 40, and in the fourth give Woodson a Pick 6 for the record books. Not a fan of how Strahan got the record yet would make an exeption for Woodson he is one heck of a player.

With a lead like that, AR would most likely be on the bench, anyhow, but he definitely wouldn't be amenable to throwing a pick, even for the right cause.

 

[Mondio]

Don't cheapen any record. It's still one of my least favorite memories of one of the greatest QB's to ever play the game. and I feel badly for Strahan because he had nothing to do with it, yet his name will always be associated with it. I'm sure he'd have rather earned it, and he was good enough to do it too.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Why can't anyone understand that Charles Woodson isn't any good because he's over 30!!!! It's impossible for players over 30 to be any good!