Where did that defense come from?

[Mondio]

I remember a lot of people saying the exact same thing about the Broncos during the 2014 season yet they're undefeated after seven games.

While participating in free agency doesn't guarantee success completely ignoring it doesn't either.

and they have a super bowl title already? Seasons not even half over. They have a great defense. Let's see if it can get them to a title. We're 6-1, with the ability to play much, much better than we did last sunday. I still like our chances.

The take home message is, there are a lot of ways to win. A whole **** load. Peruse the "winner and losers" of FA last year. Most of the "winners" are on the verge of being out of playoff contention already other than the Packers. How are all those FA acquisitions working out for Miami? The Bills? the Jets? The seahawks, the Colts? Obviously FA is the cure to all that ills

 

[DaveRoller]

Could not agree more that "participating in FA doesn't guarantee anything," "participating heavily in FA doesn't automatically result in a super bowl," and Denver has not won anything yet.

Then again, as we know in Green Bay relying almost entirely on one's own players does not guarantee anything either.

Can't wait to see how Brady & Belichek attack that Denver D.

Will they find success? If they do, will free agent acquisitions Dion Lewis (RB), LeGarratte Blount (RB), Danny Amendola (WR), Brandon LaFell (WR), and Scott Chandler (TE) play any role?

 

[Deleted member 6794]

and they have a super bowl title already? Seasons not even half over. They have a great defense. Let's see if it can get them to a title. We're 6-1, with the ability to play much, much better than we did last sunday. I still like our chances.

Who said anything about the Broncos having won the Super Bowl already??? I like the Packers chances this season as well that doesn't change me wanting Thompson to use free agency and trades to selectively acquire talent though.

The take home message is, there are a lot of ways to win. A whole **** load. Peruse the "winner and losers" of FA last year. Most of the "winners" are on the verge of being out of playoff contention already other than the Packers. How are all those FA acquisitions working out for Miami? The Bills? the Jets? The seahawks, the Colts? Obviously FA is the cure to all that ills

The last two Super Bowl winners extensively used free agency and trades. The team has to be smart about it though just like when re-signing their own free agents.

 

[Mondio]

Could not agree more that "participating in FA doesn't guarantee anything," "participating heavily in FA doesn't automatically result in a super bowl," and Denver has not won anything yet.

Then again, as we know in Green Bay relying almost entirely on one's own players does not guarantee anything either.

Can't wait to see how Brady & Belichek attack that Denver D.

Will they find success? If they do, will free agent acquisitions Dion Lewis (RB), LeGarratte Blount (RB), Danny Amendola (WR), Brandon LaFell (WR), and Scott Chandler (TE) play any role?

never said it did. I would note that I wouldn't trade any of our players for a single one of those FA's, other than Amendola. The rest? who are they going to supplant on this team? We're thin at TE no doubt, but Chandler is nothing special. Maybe we get rid of Lacy and starks so we can have more FA running backs? Get rid of Jordy, Randall, Adams so we can get some more FA wr's? not sure what the point is?

 

[PackerDNA]

How is it that you would be replacing Nelson, Lacy, etc?
More like you add good, more impactful players at the cost of not resigning guys like Quarless, Neal and Perry.

 

[Mondio]

How is it that you would be replacing Nelson, Lacy, etc?
More like you add good, more impactful players at the cost of not resigning guys like Quarless, Neal and Perry.

Let me ask you, why do you think the Patriots have all these starting RB's ,WR's etc that are FA's in the first place?

 

[PackerDNA]

Let me ask you, why do you think the Patriots have all these starting RB's ,WR's etc that are FA's in the first place?

I would think because they're masters at finding what they need when they need it without locking themselves into crippling long term contracts.
Is there a successful team that turns it's roster over more then them? They go about their roster the way they play; completely without fear.

 

[DaveRoller]

and participating in FA doesn't guarantee anything. those cap numbers are nice for denver, but don't show you anything. I love numbers (eye roll)

and I never said they're in cap hell, I said they're done. They are all in for this year. After this year they won't have a qb and unless they get extremely lucky that alone will be enough to make this their last chance at success.

My bet is they either have a large roster turnover coming up shortly, or they will be signing guys to big renewals and will have a heavier cap burden. What good is a lower cap number going into next year if they have 5 guys that are going to be signed to big contracts or be gone somewhere else? Von Miller, Free agent, Their starting left tackle, free agent along with the back up at the position, #2 WR Caldwell is a free agent, newly signed Vernon Davis is a free agent, both Running backs are free agents ( one unrestricted, one restricted)

Starting Defensive end Wolfe is a UFA, antonio smith is a ufa, Starting ILB is a RFA, Starting Guard Mathis is a FA and backup RT is a UFA

participating heavily in FA doesn't automatically result in a super bowl. and it usually results in short term, fleeting success as it isn't a recipe for longevity and cohesiveness in a team. So post your cap numbers and infer what you think I am saying about it. We'll see how it turns out. I think Denver is done after this year, and I don't think they'll last to the Super Bowl anyway. Their QB can do it for a game, in 4 weeks and a few hits from now he'll be fluttering passes and unless the D can win every game, they'll be done.

The patriots seem to be one team that beats the odds more often than not. Exceptions don't prove rules.

Who said anything about the Broncos having won the Super Bowl already??? I like the Packers chances this season as well that doesn't change me wanting Thompson to use free agency and trades to selectively acquire talent though.

The last two Super Bowl winners extensively used free agency and trades. The team has to be smart about it though just like when re-signing their own free agents.

Actually the last 4 Super Bowl winners (Giants, Ravens, Seahawks, and Patriots) all extensively utilized free agency and trades.

 

[Mondio]

I would think because they're masters at finding what they need when they need it without locking themselves into crippling long term contracts.
Is there a successful team that turns it's roster over more then them? They go about their roster the way they play; completely without fear.

interesting, I'd say it's because they can't draft a guy that can fill the position. So who would you rather GB didn't draft so they could sign Blount? When you've drafted guys like Randall, Jordy, Adams, etc, you don't have any need to sign guys like Amendola. So, we don't draft Starks, we don't draft Lacy, now we can sign Blount and that other guy. And if we had a guy like Gronk, i'd say we'd be in a better position to pick up a FA guy to play #2 and feel pretty good about it.

 

[Mondio]

Actually the last 4 Super Bowl winners (Giants, Ravens, Seahawks, and Patriots) all extensively utilized free agency and trades.

and since the Giants and Ravens have paid their QB's what has been their success rate of Super bowls and FA? Jury is out on Seahawks at 4-4 this year, but they have a tough row to *** this season, let's see how they do going forward. Until then, they have won exactly the number we have recently and were the granted one of the strangest finishes ever to an NFL game to be gifted a chance to play in a 2nd one. and then there's the Patriots, the exception everybody wants to use as the rule.

 

[DaveRoller]

Let me ask you, why do you think the Patriots have all these starting RB's ,WR's etc that are FA's in the first place?

I would imagine that the Patriots acquired all these FA's (not just starting but contributing) because they want to win another Super Bowl.

I also imagine that when Belichek sees a void in his roster, say like the Packers have had at safety (Jerron McMillian/M.D. Jennings), ILBer (for years), TE, etc., he does not believe that the draft is the only avenue to filling that void.

In fact, in addition to their FAs, NE has made more trades for players than any other team in the NFL the past several years.

Don't really understand why trading for and signing veteran FAs (including middling ones) is seen by some as an improper way to build a roster.

 

[PackerDNA]

interesting, I'd say it's because they can't draft a guy that can fill the position. So who would you rather GB didn't draft so they could sign Blount? When you've drafted guys like Randall, Jordy, Adams, etc, you don't have any need to sign guys like Amendola. So, we don't draft Starks, we don't draft Lacy, now we can sign Blount and that other guy. And if we had a guy like Gronk, i'd say we'd be in a better position to pick up a FA guy to play #2 and feel pretty good about it.

If you're looking at just the Pats, outside of Gronk and a couple of guys on D, I'd probably rather have our guys than theirs. For example, you name Blount. No way I'd rather have him than Lacy.
I guess it comes down to a team's philosophy, and how good a job they do in getting players that fit that model. To me, the Pats go after guys who are smart, disciplined, and fit a precise role they have for them. Amendola and Edelman are outstanding for them in those roles. Would they be as effective on other teams in other systems? I doubt it.
Which brings us full circle. A GM has 3 basic tools in the toolbox; draft, free agency, and trades. To not employ all is shortchanging your team.

 

[Mondio]

I would imagine that the Patriots acquired all these FA's (not just starting but contributing) because they want to win another Super Bowl.

I also imagine that when Belichek sees a void in his roster, say like the Packers have had at safety (Jerron McMillian/M.D. Jennings), ILBer (for years), TE, etc., he does not believe that the draft is the only avenue to filling that void.

In fact, in addition to their FAs, NE has made more trades for players than any other team in the NFL the past several years.

Don't really understand why trading for and signing veteran FAs (including middling ones) is seen by some as an improper way to build a roster.

i never said it was "improper". But there's always cost and it's easy to sit here after 1 loss 7 weeks in to play armchair GM. So they sign Jarius Byrd that year for safety to a big contract. How does that turn out for us? Who do we not have now because of him? and we certainly didn't get benefit from him because he was on IR that year. Remember? and let's not forget, we had one of the best safeties at the time and on his way to being one of the best ever I think, have his career cut short because of injury. But hey, let's "blame" Ted Thompson.


and this year it was all about a FA ILB, and the guy talked about most was signed by the patriots after nobody else in the entire league wanted him and then he was cut by them too. Gee, we really missed out on that. We had one of the leagues up and coming TE's have his career taken away, a draft pick by the way, but hey, let's blame Thompson for not using FA.

The Patriots have been very good at what they do. Congrats, there are a lot of other teams that sign away and trade like crazy too. Where are they? WHere are the Miami dolphins this year? and just for fun, let's say NE loses Gronk for the year, where do you think they are?

Lots of ways to win, GB has the horses to get it done. Do you forget we put an absolute *** whipping on the Pats last year? We're pretty good too, but they play the games and things happen.

 

[PackerDNA]

Mondio, you make a lot of good points, and I agree with your basic premise/point. It's just that sometimes I get the impression that you cherry pick too much to make them.
For example, in your post above, you use injuries- specifically Jarius Bird- as an argument against free agency (if I read that right).
If a guy has a long history of missing time with injuries- Bulaga, anyone?- it's a consideration. But you don't reject the guy out of hand because he might get hurt the season you sign him. That could happen to anyone; there's no way to know.
I 'll use Joe Johnson as an example. At the time, a lot of people thought the Packers biggest 'get over the hump' need was DE. Johnson had been hurt in the past, but if I recall correctly was coming off a healthy all-pro season. Many considered him to be the best all around DE in the game at the time. He ended up playing 2 or 3 games for the Packers, in which he did nothing, got hurt, and didn't play again.
Sherman was- and at times still is- crucified for the signing. But how was he, or anyone else at the time, to know that Johnson was already done when he signed?
You do your due dilligence and roll the dice. Sometimes I get the impression TT is too reluctant to do so.

 

[Mondio]

I chose byrd, because that's who every armchair GM was complaining about. he was the #1 Safety in FA that year. I fully agree, you win some you lose some. That's my point. There's always things can happen and things always DO happen. Your defense is a weakness and your offense is poised to set league records. Then you lose your #1 WR, your #2 gets injured, your #3 misses a few weeks, your #4 misses a few weeks, your starting tackles both get injured but can mostly play thru it, one was barely servicable before. Your Starting RB has an ankle injury, your back up has a hip injury.

If the Pats lose Gronk, i doubt anybody is talking about how FA is how they won their super bowl. If the Bronco's don't win it this year, FA will have done them nothing because they have a lot of starters that will be FA next year and won't have a QB.

Of course TT is reluctant, you know your own players better than you know others. I don't blame him. A lot of big name FA's this year aren't doing much for their new teams. and even when you do "win" there's a cost. Who didn't you draft because of them? Who won't get signed? What other hole does it create and how big? I'd say Ted is pretty good. I'd like to see other guys that could help us too, but there's always a cost, short term or long, there's always a cost.

We ran into a tough Giants team in a 15-1 year, I still think we were pretty good. Sure I'd like a superbowl, but give me 15-1 every year, I'll take my chances in the playoffs. I don't care what anybody says. and the Giants were a couple fluke plays from not winning anything. Seriously, without once in a lifetime catches, they don't win and who's talking about them? Maybe all of us because they wouldn't have overpaid for a seriously overrated QB with a family name, but them's the breaks.

I would have like Owen Daniels this year, but wasn't terribly upset we didn't get him. He wasn't Finley, so I doubt he would ever have been a big part of this offense anyway. I expected more from Rodgers, outside of a ST play and 1 drop, he has done ok with his receiving opportunities and I don't know if Daniels was a huge step up from what Quarless gives us, but he got hurt and now Rodgers is playing as many snaps as the QB practically.

 

[Mondio]

we sign revis, who don't we have now because of that? Jordy? Cobb? Maybe not having Jordy would be a good thing seeing he's on IR anyway, or maybe Revis blows out a knee again? How long to replace an all pro safety? well I'd say nobody at the time was playing like Collins. it's not as if a team doesn't continually rotate thru needs, it's always about replacement and needing to replace one of the best safeties to ever play in Packer uniform doesn't just happen and it doesn't just stop all the other needs coming up at other positions. He could hit like a linebacker, and fly faster than anyone on the field. He could cover absolutely everything and any pass hanging up there was picked because he could get to it. Those guys aren't just replaced. and we 2 young guys that looked promising. Most everyone at the time agreed. Then they got into year 2 and everyone could see they weren't promising and they were gone. We then drafted another safety.

How long to replace Finely? as long as it takes. It reminds me of when he was drafted and I had a patient just *****ing about Ted Thompson and the draft and why he couldn't get us a TE. I said he just did, wait and see. He was up and down and now out. Lots of talent, some work out, some don't. FA fixes this how? they always work? I'd say heading into this year, I had some pretty good expectations from Rodgers as a pass catching TE. I still do, though it's been disappointing so far much like a lot of other players have been.

Sure I'd rather have a super bowl than a regular season win, but doesn't change the fact our drafted team spanked a team "built on FA" that happened to win the super bowl that year. I would love to not have every fluke that can happen in an NFL game happen to us so we would have had that opportunity to beat them again. I think we would have.

and now I go to look at the post to address some other things and it's gone? Oh well, that's all I have then

 

[JP Doyal]

As soon as Shields went out I knew Manning was gonna attack Rollins. They literally ran the same short post route to Thomas all night.

 

[DaveRoller]

I chose byrd, because that's who every armchair GM was complaining about. he was the #1 Safety in FA that year. I fully agree, you win some you lose some. That's my point. There's always things can happen and things always DO happen. Your defense is a weakness and your offense is poised to set league records. Then you lose your #1 WR, your #2 gets injured, your #3 misses a few weeks, your #4 misses a few weeks, your starting tackles both get injured but can mostly play thru it, one was barely servicable before. Your Starting RB has an ankle injury, your back up has a hip injury.

If the Pats lose Gronk, i doubt anybody is talking about how FA is how they won their super bowl. If the Bronco's don't win it this year, FA will have done them nothing because they have a lot of starters that will be FA next year and won't have a QB.

Of course TT is reluctant, you know your own players better than you know others. I don't blame him. A lot of big name FA's this year aren't doing much for their new teams. and even when you do "win" there's a cost. Who didn't you draft because of them? Who won't get signed? What other hole does it create and how big? I'd say Ted is pretty good. I'd like to see other guys that could help us too, but there's always a cost, short term or long, there's always a cost.

We ran into a tough Giants team in a 15-1 year, I still think we were pretty good. Sure I'd like a superbowl, but give me 15-1 every year, I'll take my chances in the playoffs. I don't care what anybody says. and the Giants were a couple fluke plays from not winning anything. Seriously, without once in a lifetime catches, they don't win and who's talking about them? Maybe all of us because they wouldn't have overpaid for a seriously overrated QB with a family name, but them's the breaks.

I would have like Owen Daniels this year, but wasn't terribly upset we didn't get him. He wasn't Finley, so I doubt he would ever have been a big part of this offense anyway. I expected more from Rodgers, outside of a ST play and 1 drop, he has done ok with his receiving opportunities and I don't know if Daniels was a huge step up from what Quarless gives us, but he got hurt and now Rodgers is playing as many snaps as the QB practically.

Mondio, it appears you want the Pack to win as much as I do.

I also realize we see things differently when it comes to adding veterans to the roster through free agency & trades and no additional argument is going to sway our respective positions, so I am going to just tap out now (and that is why I deleted my prior post, just beating a dead horse).

 

[Mondio]

Mondio, it appears you want the Pack to win as much as I do.

I also realize we see things differently when it comes to adding veterans to the roster through free agency & trades and no additional argument is going to sway our respective positions, so I am going to just tap out now (and that is why I deleted my prior post, just beating a dead horse).

but beating that horse is all we have till Sunday gives us new horses or new hope

 

[Shawnsta3]

As soon as Shields went out I knew Manning was gonna attack Rollins. They literally ran the same short post route to Thomas all night.

Randall got injured along with Shields in the first half. You must mean Randall?

 

[OldSchool101]

I think we saw what worked in Denver Sunday night that confirmed what Ive been echoing all year. In conjunction with an aggressive pass rush blitz, a man to man full press is generally more effective than zone coverage. We can't afford to play loose off the line during blitz packages and we need to rely more on our Talented Safeties to make plays beyond the short to mid range routes. Until I see back to back penalties for harassing an opponents receivers we are not being aggressive enough off the line when rushing 5+

 

[Shawnsta3]

This is truly a misconception, participating in free agency doesn´t automatically result in a team being in cap hell. They have to make smart decisions but that´s the same when re-signing own FAs. Just as an example as of right now the Packers have committed $102 million towards the cap for the 2017 season (24 players) compared to the Broncos $70 million (19).

Future cap numbers aside, I think this Broncos team is all in on a championship this year. With this very likely being Manning's last year coupled with the free agents Elway bought last offseason and being the only team to make a significant trade at the deadline for a player on an expiring contract that signals to me Elway has pushed his chips to the middle of the table, most likely a smart move at that.

Not to say they can't win in the near future if Peyton somehow retuns, Osweiller steps in and plays nicely or they find a different QB, but I think their championship window is this year. A common observer could notice the sense of urgency there this year.

 

[Un4GivN]

and participating in FA doesn't guarantee anything. those cap numbers are nice for denver, but don't show you anything. I love numbers (eye roll)

and I never said they're in cap hell, I said they're done. They are all in for this year. After this year they won't have a qb and unless they get extremely lucky that alone will be enough to make this their last chance at success.

My bet is they either have a large roster turnover coming up shortly, or they will be signing guys to big renewals and will have a heavier cap burden. What good is a lower cap number going into next year if they have 5 guys that are going to be signed to big contracts or be gone somewhere else? Von Miller, Free agent, Their starting left tackle, free agent along with the back up at the position, #2 WR Caldwell is a free agent, newly signed Vernon Davis is a free agent, both Running backs are free agents ( one unrestricted, one restricted)

Starting Defensive end Wolfe is a UFA, antonio smith is a ufa, Starting ILB is a RFA, Starting Guard Mathis is a FA and backup RT is a UFA

participating heavily in FA doesn't automatically result in a super bowl. and it usually results in short term, fleeting success as it isn't a recipe for longevity and cohesiveness in a team. So post your cap numbers and infer what you think I am saying about it. We'll see how it turns out. I think Denver is done after this year, and I don't think they'll last to the Super Bowl anyway. Their QB can do it for a game, in 4 weeks and a few hits from now he'll be fluttering passes and unless the D can win every game, they'll be done.

The patriots seem to be one team that beats the odds more often than not. Exceptions don't prove rules.

What good is leaving 10 million sitting on the table when you clearly don't have the best talent in the league... Or not so much so that you couldn't use more?

It's the same problem I have with their game on Sunday, they gave up. Good enough.

 

[Mondio]

signing people to spend money isn't a good strategy, especially when we have a lot of people up next year and carrying over some cap money will come in handy for one. 2nd, I don't think there are any teams that are clearly more talented than GB. I think we're up there in terms of talent, some are injured, some aren't playing up to par, they're figuring things out and are still 6-1. They certainly don't have the best player at every position, but then no team does, nor will they.

 

[Packerlifer]

http://www.packers.com/team/howbuilt.html