what would you trade for Richard Sherman?

[RRyder]

[QUOTE="brandon2348, post: 718342, member: I have no concerns about Richard Sherman being able to help our secondary and being the missing piece back there.

[/QUOTE]

You really have "NO" concerns that Sherman would be the missing piece?

Like none?

Not that we don't run the same coverage scheme as Seattle? Or even similar?

Or that Sherman doesn't follow #1s across the field?

Really no concerns?

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

We have never really "picked Sherman apart". Last year Adams beat Lane and Jordy beat Shead. Sherman gave up a few plays but nothing major here.

In 2015 Jones beat Sherman for a TD on a post route. Other then that Sherman played pretty well in that game.

I've watched almost every Seattle game over the last 4-5 years. Sherman is the real deal and if you insert him into Sherman, House, Burnett, Dix then we almost certainly emerge as one of the top secondaries in the NFL. Maybe the best if our young guys develop adequately.

I really don't understand why some people are obsessed with bringing in a recently non productive ADRIAN Peterson with checkered past who doesn't fit our system in but think bringing in Sherman would be a huge mistake. Makes zero sense to me

I don't mean to downplay Sherman. I was just pointing out the belief that Thomas is the real MVP of that secondary.
Though it's very true Sherman is a elite cb. Even Carrol said last year Sherman was off. I'm generalizing as usual, saying that we were picking on Sherman, and picked him apart. That wasn't true by the stats. Buy in general, GB was having much more success with him than in the past. To the point of him becoming frustrated... and since you watched every Seattle game recently... is he getting exposed more than usual second half of last season?

 

[brandon2348]

I don't mean to downplay Sherman. I was just pointing out the belief that Thomas is the real MVP of that secondary.
Though it's very true Sherman is a elite cb. Even Carrol said last year Sherman was off. I'm generalizing as usual, saying that we were picking on Sherman, and picked him apart. That wasn't true by the stats. Buy in general, GB was having much more success with him than in the past. To the point of him becoming frustrated... and since you watched every Seattle game recently... is he getting exposed more than usual second half of last season?

To dissect it you are correct that Thomas is the one that stirs the drink back there and he is ultimately required for that whole thing to function optimally. Going from Earl Thomas to Steven Terrell obviously made a huge impact however I didn't see Sherman getting "exposed" consistently like I saw our guys getting "exposed". Once again Sherman was playing with an MCL sprain so that affected him a bit too I imagine. He was still very good in red zone with all of this. The guys that really got "exposed" for the Seahawks last year in the secondary were Steven Terrell and Jeremy Lane.

The bottom line here is I don't see a player in decline. At least not for the next couple years.

 

[brandon2348]

[QUOTE="brandon2348, post: 718342, member: I have no concerns about Richard Sherman being able to help our secondary and being the missing piece back there.

You really have "NO" concerns that Sherman would be the missing piece?

Like none?

Not that we don't run the same coverage scheme as Seattle? Or even similar?

Or that Sherman doesn't follow #1s across the field?

Really no concerns?[/QUOTE]

I believe he makes our secondary elite and at this point in the free agency game is the move that gives the Packers the best chance to compete for a world Championship. We are standing here at this point because Thompson has turned his back thus far at upgrading the position.

I wouldn't think Capers would be up all night trying to fit Richard Sherman into making the defense better. Sure, there will be some adjusting but this whole notion that Sherman can only play cover 3 on the left side of the field is completely false.

 

[brandon2348]

[QUOTE="brandon2348, post: 718342, member: I have no concerns about Richard Sherman being able to help our secondary and being the missing piece back there.

You really have "NO" concerns that Sherman would be the missing piece?

Like none?

Not that we don't run the same coverage scheme as Seattle? Or even similar?

Or that Sherman doesn't follow #1s across the field?

Really no concerns?[/QUOTE]

Come playoff time I would feel way way better having Sherman lined up on Julio Jones and Dez Bryant then having Randall, Rollins or any of these other clowns we have lined up on them.

 

[sschind]

[QUOTE="brandon2348, post: 718342, member: I have no concerns about Richard Sherman being able to help our secondary and being the missing piece back there.

You really have "NO" concerns that Sherman would be the missing piece?

Like none?

Not that we don't run the same coverage scheme as Seattle? Or even similar?

Or that Sherman doesn't follow #1s across the field?

Really no concerns?[/QUOTE]


Just because 1 team uses a player in one way doesn't mean he can't play a different way with another team. What Sherman does or doesn't do in Seattle and how Seattle uses him doesn't mean he wouldn't work out for the Packers.

If you are going to limit your talent search to players who played in a system similar to yours you are going to miss out on a lot of talent

 

[RRyder]

You guys have completely glossed over the him not following around #1s part, in favor of saying he'd transition to our scheme, but more importantly you've glossed over the "NO CONCERNS" part. Like it or not he has played in a very specific scheme and it's not a sure thing he'd transition to ours. (And yes sschind you should definitely be factoring what systems they've played in when deciding whether to trade assets for a guy)

Those are concerns, when referencing him being the missing piece, and if you don't have them then all your advocating for is a big splash move or big name

 

[brandon2348]

You guys have completely glossed over the him not following around #1s part, in favor of saying he transition to our scheme, but more importantly you've glossed over the "NO CONCERNS" part.

Those are concerns, when referencing him being the missing piece, and if you don't have them then all your advocating for is a big splash move or big name

Then lets taper it down to way less concerns then now. He is a "big name" and yes it is a "splash move" and while there are no guarantees in any moves I like the probabilities of having Sherman as our current no.1 corner then any of the guys we have at this time on the roster.

I would of been happy with bringing Mo Claiborne in on a 1 year deal so I'm not necessarily looking for a "splash move" or a "big name" but want the Packers to have the best chance possible to compete for a World Championship. Claiborne and others that were available would of fit exactly what the Packers do and they were passed over so here we are.

Once again Thompson failing thus far to address the need at corner has Sherman in the conversation as an answer for the Packers at corner.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Once again Thompson failing thus far to address the need at corner has Sherman in the conversation as an answer for the Packers at corner.

Some of us (me included) keep saying "Thompson Failed" to address the need at CB. In most of our eyes, he did fail, but in his eyes, he didn't fail, if he didn't see the need as we perceive it to be and thus he probably wasn't trying to sign a #1 CB. Semantics and mindset maybe, but important in the conversation about people putting too much hope that Sherman is a Packer in 2017.

I hate to be a Debbie Downer, but this is possibly one of the biggest reasons I don't see TT even taking a sniff of Sherman. If TT (not us fans) actually thought a #1 CB was needed, he wouldn't have waited or banked on someone like Sherman all of a sudden becoming available after Free Agency or in the draft. Throw on top of that that Sherman comes with a much bigger price than any of the top FA CB's that TT could have tried to sign. Now maybe TT was working behind the scenes and taking a run at all the top FA CB's and struck out, but I haven't read one thing that leads me to believe that Ted Thompson himself sees a need for a #1 CB.

 

[Mavster]

What's up with the constant under rating of players that aren't Packers,? The dude basically leads in every major statistical category for corners since he came into the league

 

[brandon2348]

Some of us (me included) keep saying "Thompson Failed" to address the need at CB. In most of our eyes, he did fail, but in his eyes, he didn't fail, if he didn't see the need as we perceive it to be and thus he probably wasn't trying to sign a #1 CB. Semantics and mindset maybe, but important in the conversation about people putting too much hope that Sherman is a Packer in 2017.

I hate to be a Debbie Downer, but this is possibly one of the biggest reasons I don't see TT even taking a sniff of Sherman. If TT (not us fans) actually thought a #1 CB was needed, he wouldn't have waited or banked on someone like Sherman all of a sudden becoming available after Free Agency or in the draft. Throw on top of that that Sherman comes with a much bigger price than any of the top FA CB's that TT could have tried to sign. Now maybe TT was working behind the scenes and taking a run at all the top FA CB's and struck out, but I haven't read one thing that leads me to believe that Ted Thompson himself sees a need for a #1 CB.

Yup, and this is precisely why he shouldn't be GMing the Green Bay Packers any longer. I'm fine with him scouting around and evaluating talent but he shouldn't be making the "big decisions" in regards to building a championship team.

 

[brandon2348]

What's up with the constant under rating of players that aren't Packers,? The dude basically leads in every major statistical category for corners since he came into the league

Yeah, he is on his way to the HOF but isn't good enough to play on the last rated pass D in the NFL. It's like give me a break.

 

[Poppa San]

What's up with the constant under rating of players that aren't Packers,? The dude basically leads in every major statistical category for corners since he came into the league

Obviously you haven't been here long enough to realize, if they aren't a Packer they're crap. Unless they are a UFA and TT doesn't sign them. Then they are the missing link to a perennial Lombardi trophy winning dynasty. If Ted doesn't sign them, then he is a tightwad if they sign elsewhere for less than the very top at their position. But if TT does sign them , then they were overpaid if they got more than league minimum. Don't even TRY to argue a street free agent is comparable to an unrestricted free agent.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Yup, and this is precisely why he shouldn't be GMing the Green Bay Packers any longer. I'm fine with him scouting around and evaluating talent but he shouldn't be making the "big decisions" in regards to building a championship team.

I think as far as the CB situation goes, TT has a LOT on the line right now. Unlike some years, when there are random views as to what the Packers need, this one appears to be a glaring need by everyone but him. So the chambers may be loaded, but I don't foresee any triggers will be pulled until this one plays out. If there aren't any major moves between now and the start of the season and the CB's play poorly, this could be TT's final year. However, if the reverse happens, I expect a long line of us, as well as the media getting ready to eat a big plate of Crow. I would be fine eating a big serving of Cajun Crow while I watch the Packers bring home a Lombardi.

 

[RRyder]

Yeah, he is on his way to the HOF but isn't good enough to play on the last rated pass D in the NFL. It's like give me a break.

A: Dont stamp his ticket to the HoF just yet.

B: Nobody has said he wouldn't upgrade the secondary.

C: It's a matter of price point in conjunction with whether you believe his skills would fully translate to a different scheme.

D: It's not binary. You can think he's a damn good player and not want to give up a 1st rounder or, the much more likely, a 1st and a 3rd for him.

 

[brandon2348]

I think as far as the CB situation goes, TT has a LOT on the line right now. Unlike some years, when there are random views as to what the Packers need, this one appears to be a glaring need by everyone but him. So the chambers may be loaded, but I don't foresee any triggers will be pulled until this one plays out. If there aren't any major moves between now and the start of the season and the CB's play poorly, this could be TT's final year. However, if the reverse happens, I expect a long line of us, as well as the media getting ready to eat a big plate of Crow. I would be fine eating a big serving of Cajun Crow while I watch the Packers bring home a Lombardi.

Well of all the so called contenders we have way more cap space then the others and its not close except Oakland who does have Carr on a rookie contract so that will change.

It feels as though if the Packers win a Super Bowl it would be in spite of Thompson. He has had every chance to level the playing field for the Packers and truly make it our QB is better then yours every week.

 

[Dantés]

Every defensive coordinator in the league should be able to use Sherman in a way for him to be able to perform at an elite level.

I don't think we know enough about Sherman to say that. He's spent the majority of his career playing zone coverage in a defensive system with elite safeties. He's freaking awesome at it. But we can't just assume that, because of that, he'd be elite in any scheme. I highly doubt that's true.

 

[thequick12]

I don't think we know enough about Sherman to say that. He's spent the majority of his career playing zone coverage in a defensive system with elite safeties. He's freaking awesome at it. But we can't just assume that, because of that, he'd be elite in any scheme. I highly doubt that's true.

is dude really not able to play man coverage? I don't know enough about him but it seemed he played some man coverage in the few games I've seen especially against Nelson in that 2014 opener I believe it was

 

[brandon2348]

is dude really not able to play man coverage? I don't know enough about him but it seemed he played some man coverage in the few games I've seen especially against Nelson in that 2014 opener I believe it was

He can play man and has. He has been used in the slot on Larry Fitzgerald and responded well. He also has been matched up on TE's such as Vernon Davis in his prime and Jimmie Graham in specific situations and has responded well there too. He can come up and make tackles in the run game too.

As much as I liked Sammie Shields Sherman would be our best cornerback since CW.

The only knock on Sherman is smaller and faster, quicker receivers can give him trouble outside from time to time so this is where he would need to be matched up correctly.

 

[brandon2348]

A: Dont stamp his ticket to the HoF just yet.

B: Nobody has said he wouldn't upgrade the secondary.

C: It's a matter of price point in conjunction with whether you believe his skills would fully translate to a different scheme.

D: It's not binary. You can think he's a damn good player and not want to give up a 1st rounder or, the much more likely, a 1st and a 3rd for him.

I think a 1st and 3rd is too much and apparently so does the rest of the NFL. I'm totally fine waiting for the price to come down as the draft nears.

 

[Dantés]

is dude really not able to play man coverage? I don't know enough about him but it seemed he played some man coverage in the few games I've seen especially against Nelson in that 2014 opener I believe it was

Of course he can. But is he the same elite corner in that kind of system. I'm going with no.

 

[sschind]

What's up with the constant under rating of players that aren't Packers,? The dude basically leads in every major statistical category for corners since he came into the league

I honestly think that in Sherman's case, for some fans, its because he plays for the Seahawks. If he played for the Colts or the Bengals I don't think there would be as much of the under rating going on. Its just that the Seahawks have been a huge challenge for us recently and that brings animosity and the unwillingness to admit that some of their players may have talent. That might just mean admitting they didn't just get lucky when they beat us. I think some fans will always denigrate players of our top rivals.

Another interesting phenomena is that it seems to reverse itself as soon as that player starts distancing himself from the team. If Sherman were to come out and say he hates it in Seattle and wants out I think you would see a lot more Packer fans saying he would be a good fit. The whole enemy of my enemy thing.

 

[sschind]

You guys have completely glossed over the him not following around #1s part, in favor of saying he'd transition to our scheme, but more importantly you've glossed over the "NO CONCERNS" part. Like it or not he has played in a very specific scheme and it's not a sure thing he'd transition to ours. (And yes sschind you should definitely be factoring what systems they've played in when deciding whether to trade assets for a guy)

Those are concerns, when referencing him being the missing piece, and if you don't have them then all your advocating for is a big splash move or big name

How is it any different, other than being opposite ends of the spectrum, between having no concerns he can make the transition and being certain he can't make the transition. Factoring in systems is different than ignoring him because you assume the guy can't make a change.

 

[sschind]

Obviously you haven't been here long enough to realize, if they aren't a Packer they're crap. Unless they are a UFA and TT doesn't sign them. Then they are the missing link to a perennial Lombardi trophy winning dynasty. If Ted doesn't sign them, then he is a tightwad if they sign elsewhere for less than the very top at their position. But if TT does sign them , then they were overpaid if they got more than league minimum. Don't even TRY to argue a street free agent is comparable to an unrestricted free agent.

obviously you have been around here too long

And we don't want you to leave because its also obvious that you get it.

 

[GreenBaySlacker]

I don't know how I got on the opposition side of this idea. I think we should just pay the 1St (and 3rd next year?). Add a draft , couple guards, a rb and a olb. Call it a offseason....

Sherman and house replace shields and Hyde, bringing our cb group back to a strength instead of a weakness.