Chillar signs 4 year extension(Schefter reports)

quote:

Originally posted by Diggr14:
Guess that 32M in cap room was there for show and tell. If he went out and spent some of it

quote:

Originally posted by Diggr14:
I understand he uses it

Maybe you should read your own posts Diggr... so what is it? He doesn't use it or he uses it?

quote:

Guess you dont watch games with me. I am a huge packer fan.

I figured you were fat.

quote:

Originally posted by Diggr14:
I am a huge packer fan. But there are obvious problems with the team that should have been addressed.

Obvious problems? You make it sound like MM & TT are simply shrugging their shoulders and saying, "Oh well, we'll get 'em next year"

Every team has "obvious problems". It's part of the NFL now. You don't get to build dynasties anymore. This isn't the 70's & 80's. Players dont stay with the same team for a decade or longer. There are 31 other teams that have GM's and HC's that get paid too. All of them fighting to get good players and fill holes. You act like they don't exist.

So stop thinking you're above it all and better at GM'ing than TT. We're 9-4. If you're a "huge Packer fan" like you say you are, Enjoy the ride.

Kworstwiggy.

quote:

Originally posted by Diggr14:
I am a huge packer fan.

Haha, yeah right. I've never known anyone to have as much contempt for the team they supposedly root for than you do. You don't ever have anything positive to say about the team. All you do is criticize. Yeah, we get it, this team is not perfect. You can find problems on ANY team in the NFL if you look hard enough. Even the undefeated Saints have piss poor CB depth and the undefeated Colts have issues in the secondary. But only someone like you would go to a fan board and complain about it. The only thing that will make you happy is if the Packers go 0-16 just so you can come back to this board and start a thread titled "I was right, the Packers suck".

I hope you enjoy watching Packers games by yourself because I cannot imagine another fan wanting to ever watch a game with you.

I do enjoy the ride. Every Sunday. But in the meantime, there are obvious problems with this team from a personel standpoint and from a coaching standpoint. I bury my head in the sand on Sundays during the game and leave aside any angst that I have for the current regime. It's all about the wins for me no matter the day. Personally, I think this team should be much better than where we are. Heck, I see limited differences from us and the saints if we went out and shored up our offensive line.

Youre right, every team has some semblance of holes, but the good teams have done their due dilligence to fill them. I do not believe Ted has been doing that. I've been ignoring MM in this conversation, but the Penalties....and early season playcalling.. one thing I will admit is that the playcalling has been better of late. The last 5 games it has been better, im not just saying that because they have won the games, they really have made efforts to adapt. He has adjusted from the long passing game to a shorter passing game. Getting RG's YPC up to 4.2 from where it was has been a godsend to this team too. If you can fake the run, playaction is that much more effective.

quote:

Originally posted by CUPackFan:

quote:

Originally posted by Diggr14:
I am a huge packer fan.

Haha, yeah right. I've never known anyone to have as much contempt for the team they supposedly root for than you do. You don't ever have anything positive to say about the team. All you do is criticize. Yeah, we get it, this team is not perfect. You can find problems on ANY team in the NFL if you look hard enough. Even the undefeated Saints have piss poor CB depth and the undefeated Colts have issues in the secondary. But only someone like you would go to a fan board and complain about it. The only thing that will make you happy is if the Packers go 0-16 just so you can come back to this board and start a thread titled "I was right, the Packers suck".

I hope you enjoy watching Packers games by yourself because I cannot imagine another fan wanting to ever watch a game with you.

If you didnt live in Denver, I'd invite you to watch the game with me this week

quote:

Originally posted by Hungry5:

quote:

Originally posted by Diggr14:
Guess that 32M in cap room was there for show and tell. If he went out and spent some of it

quote:

Originally posted by Diggr14:
I understand he uses it

Maybe you should read your own posts Diggr... so what is it? He doesn't use it or he uses it?

That is just crap. I wrote a response to you. If you dont like it.. that's fine. But cutting it like that is just ridiculous. There is a big difference in using the cap at the end of the year and prior to the season. If you use it prior to the season.. you have better players on hand for that upcoming season. If you use it on the backend of the season, you parlay it into the next year. Since he does that every year, it is basically like he is lagging each year behind 15-30M in personnel dollars that could be used to effectively make the team a more viable superbowl contender. That is my argument. Like it or not, rebuilding teams use the cap money on the back end like we do to prepare for the next season. You rarely see superbowl winning teams take Ted's approach. That is typical for rebuilding teams. As I said before. I have no problem with this approach when you are rebuilding.. but when you have a legit shot at a superbowl... why not go for it?

in an attempt at civility, what response would be OK for you. You seem to be at one end of the spectrum where Ted and Mike are the worst we could have. B/c of that you are mocked mercilessly. Those who claim Ted and Mike are the greatest and can do no wrong get the same treatment. Since we are riding a win streak, it does appear Ted and Mike are doing more right than wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by Diggr14:
there are obvious problems with this team from a personel standpoint and from a coaching standpoint.

I can say that about the *******, the patriots, the cardinals, etc. It's objectivity I think you are missing. The Pack, like those other teams, have a repertoire of issues both good and bad. Earlier in the season this team had moments where they were not playing well at all which falls on the coach and GM. The same should go for the recent hot streak. Failure to look objectively (which I think you do often, and I am always right) is that the failures belong to one aspect, but none of the successes can possibly come from the same source. From the tone of your posts, the only acceptable answer is that these guys are turrible and must be replaced immediately. That is fine, but when the team itself chooses to ignore your position, you probably will get a reaction like we see here.

quote:

Originally posted by Diggr14:
You rarely see superbowl winning teams take Ted's approach.

Can you back this up in some way?

quote:

You rarely see superbowl winning teams take Ted's approach.

Yeah, the Steelers have a ton of FA signings. Next....

quote:

Originally posted by El-Ka-Bong:

Can you back this up in some way?

Absolutely, here is a great article by scout.com written in early 2007.. before the Patriots went on their 16-0 season. They did not win a superbowl, but they did something quite epic. The fact that they won 3 superbowls this decade should also bring high relavence to the usage of free agency, as well as the draft, and trading (moss/welker) as vehicles to build a superbowl contender.


http://nwe.scout.com/2/635795.html


Good article.

quote:

Originally posted by The Artist fka TD:

quote:

You rarely see superbowl winning teams take Ted's approach.

Yeah, the Steelers have a ton of FA signings. Next....

2008 - Pittsburgh's championship year

PITTSBURGH STEELERS-Signed LB Keyaron Fox, C Justin Hartwig, and RB Mewelde Moore. Re-signed DE Nick Eason, LB Andre Frazier, WR Nate Washington and LS Greg Warren. Agreed to terms with OL Chris Kemoeatu and OL Trai Essex.


versus

GREEN BAY PACKERS-Signed LB Brandon Chillar, LS Thomas Gafford and OT Joe Toledo. Re-signed S Atari Bigby.

That was as of April 18th of that year. There could have been more.


Notice at the start of this year, the Steelers were right up against the Cap. They maximize their usage in order to try and have the best year possible while protecting future years. Thanks for affirming my posts again Timberlake.

http://www.steelersdepot.com/b...-salary-cap-numbers/

quote:

PITTSBURGH STEELERS-Signed LB Keyaron Fox, C Justin Hartwig, and RB Mewelde Moore.

And which one of those guys played a HUGE part in winning it all??? Which one did they fork out the bucks too?

Thanks for proving MY point again. Can I call the Fog man?

quote:

Notice at the start of this year, the Steelers were right up against the Cap.

And I notice they are 6-7. Get the picture? Nope, you can't fix stoopid.

quote:

Originally posted by Diggr14:
If you use it prior to the season..

...you paint yourself into a corner in the event of injuries.
...you leave yourself no room to extend players whose play dictate such a move.
...you reward players before they perform for you.

Now that, is just crap. It wasn't about not liking what you wrote, it was about stupidity.

This thread. Wow.

I don't have a problem with what (I think) is Diggr's basic 'point'; that is, he thinks the Packers would be a better team with some FA acquisitions at positions of (perceived) need as soon as it is recognized. If I'm wrong, Diggr, I apologize. That's just how I 'read' your comments.
The problem I do have with that line of thinking is you're always assuming that these deals would indeed upgrade a position, and that's not a given. Way too many factors for that to be guaranteed; the biggest being injury. Haynesworth is a perfect example. Dawkins is a fair point; based on how well he has played so far, he indeed may have been an upgrade. However, it's not a coincidence that the Packers improvement on defense began when Bigby came back from injury, so who can say definitively?
I appreciate your opinion, Diggr, and will support your right to make it, but I'm sure as hell gald you're not our GM!
The rest of the (insert TT/MM/Sherman) is an idiot/genius blather is just...well, blather.

quote:

Originally posted by Diggr14:

quote:

Originally posted by El-Ka-Bong:

Can you back this up in some way?

Absolutely, here is a great article by scout.com written in early 2007.. before the Patriots went on their 16-0 season. They did not win a superbowl, but they did something quite epic. The fact that they won 3 superbowls this decade should also bring high relavence to the usage of free agency, as well as the draft, and trading (moss/welker) as vehicles to build a superbowl contender.


http://nwe.scout.com/2/635795.html


Good article.

It's a total fluff piece written by a Patriots homer. Typical.
Even that homer gets it wrong. He points out that the Patriots dominated the off-season, yet the Broncos who took the same approach that off-season did it the wrong way. Out of the list of players Homer mentions, Welker was the only one of signifigance. That was a good trade. Welker for a second turned out to be a bargain. Thomas should have been huge, (and he was wanted by many droolers here), but he was a FA bust.

As far as the Steelers. They signed a bunch of low-mid level FA's. The same thing TT generally does. As you approve of the way the Steelers build, then apparently you are happy with TT after all.

The one thing that kills me is you insist that being a player in FA would put the Packers over the top, yet FA has proven to NOT be the formula for building a team.

I think someone else suggested that maybe you need to sit back and enjoy the ride. I assert that is impossible for you. As long as the Packers are winning there is no way for you to revel in what your twisted mind perceives as being correct. You would rather see the Packers fail so that TT, MM or whomever will be fired. I truly believe you would rather see this happen then for the Packers to win it all. You can deny that all you want, but your posting seems to confirm what I say.

quote:

Originally posted by Timmy!:
I don't have a problem with what (I think) is Diggr's basic 'point'; that is, he thinks the Packers would be a better team with some FA acquisitions at positions of (perceived) need as soon as it is recognized. If I'm wrong, Diggr, I apologize. That's just how I 'read' your comments.
The problem I do have with that line of thinking is you're always assuming that these deals would indeed upgrade a position, and that's not a given. Way too many factors for that to be guaranteed; the biggest being injury. Haynesworth is a perfect example. Dawkins is a fair point; based on how well he has played so far, he indeed may have been an upgrade. However, it's not a coincidence that the Packers improvement on defense began when Bigby came back from injury, so who can say definitively?
I appreciate your opinion, Diggr, and will support your right to make it, but I'm sure as hell gald you're not our GM!
The rest of the (insert TT/MM/Sherman) is an idiot/genius blather is just...well, blather.

quote:

You rarely see superbowl winning teams take Ted's approach.

Yep, look at all the UFAs the Steelers had last year that made an impact on their Super Bowl win. The only ones that really played a lot were James Harrison and Willie Parker, and you already established that rookie free agents don't count (Bigby, Tramon Williams). None were these huge contract deals, minor guys which is similar to what TT does.

Colts in 06? Very free agents, their entire team was drafted except for the kicker. Out of the 22 starters I think 20 had been with the team their entire careers.

Steelers in 05? Same thing.

Patriots in 01, 03, 04? Sure they had Harrison and a few others, but none were these monster signings you keep harping on.

Giants did have a few in Pierce and Plexiglass.

quote:

Originally posted by Hungry5:

quote:

Originally posted by Diggr14:
If you use it prior to the season..

...you paint yourself into a corner in the event of injuries.
...you leave yourself no room to extend players whose play dictate such a move.
...you reward players before they perform for you.

Now that, is just crap. It wasn't about not liking what you wrote, it was about stupidity.

I'll add to that:
...leaves you room to cut an expensive player who aren't performing. Which is what TT did when he first got here.

Some other things about FA.
1) The player everyone wants has to want to come to GB.
2) The player in question has to be healthy enough to help. Some FA players are available because of injuries. See Joe Johnson as exibit A.
3) The player in question has to fit your scheme. If he doesn't, you over pay for a guy who hurts the team.

If all you had to do was sign FA to get to the SB, for a while there, the Washington Redskins should have won it every year. But, in contrast, had losing records each of those years.

Question for the savy innernetters, isn't the money for Chillar similar to what Seattle paid Colin Cole? If so, I like Chillar more than a backup DL.

I am a bit confused about something though.

I was told that the New York Giants and Washington Redskins were the big winners of Free Agency this off season. Much gnashing of teeth how we missed out on Chris Canty and Rocky Bernard. Amazement at how improved Washington would be with Haynesworth and Hall.

I was also told that the Green Bay Packers were the big losers of Free Agency. We missed out on these AWESOME DL like Canty, and we only signed Smith.

Yet, here we are, week 13, and the only team with a great chance at the playoffs is the Free Agency loser. The big winners of the Pat Bowlen Memorial Off Season Championship are 4-9 and 7-6.

Weird.

Werd

I appreciate everyone that wanted to debate this civilly, Thanks!!

I completely agree, you need to approach free agency and not go hog wild about it. But my point is, you can not ignore it especially when you have 15-32M in cap room each year open to start that said season. Each of these teams did not follow that line of thinking and made the minor tweaks in areas that they needed to do to make their teams as competitive as they can within reason prior to the season.

None of you could convince me the Packers did that prior to last season. Even this season (during the initial stretch where we went 4-4) I think most of you would have agreed with this premise. What happened since then? We solidified our RT via free agency and brought in a running back that could block on passing downs. Again, a minor tweak to the line, that was obviously needed. For a while there, it looked like Ted was going to let Tauscher go and not ask him to come in. I think alot of us thought that if they were doing that, that Mark was probably not ready to play b/c of injury. At least they got someone to come in and right the ship.

I think like the 6-10 season last year, as a collective here on x4, you guys are overreacting to the 9-4 start. Yes, im thrilled that we are on the cusp of the playoffs. But, im concerned that we havent beaten anyone that would qualify for the playoffs today except for Dallas, who will likely not make the playoffs IMO and be replaced by those terrible NYG that you guys love so much.

As I've said before, the next couple games here will be telling. Pittsburgh is an average team this season, but they are still superbowl champs, but the game Im really looking forward to is the AZ game. However, who knows what position AZ will be in week 17. They might have the division locked up and choose to mail it in to give themself a bye week heading into the WC. Ironically, we could be in the same spot too. If we win the next 2 and sit at 11-4 with the WC locked up, we could mail in week 17 as well.. We might not find out about this team until the playoffs.

quote:

Originally posted by Diggr14:
I appreciate everyone that wanted to debate this civilly,

quote:

Originally posted by Diggr14:
I cant respond to every single goofball on here

Between artist and the rest of the trolls... it occupies enough time.

give me a little break. I take constant bashing from the TT or die crowd on here

The Packers haven't beat anybody. It is easy to win NFL Games.

quote:

Originally posted by GBFanForLife:
The Packers haven't beat anybody. It is easy to win NFL Games.

I completely agree with your sarcasm. When you play as many cupcakes as we have.. yes. Many of us took notice with how easy our schedule was this year. In the preseason prediction thread.. alot of people predicted between 10-12 wins for this team.. and cited our schedule.

While a win is a win... and we will take it, it's hard to say we are better than some of these teams rolling around 7-6/6-7 that have played trecherous schedules. Albeit, we may be... I can't say with certainty that we are. Especially with how we struggled against decent teams to start this year off. Do I think things have galvanized to some extent... absolutely. Five wins in a row will do that to any team. But, should we be concerned still? I think so.

We're Nine and Four good as far as I am concerned. I don't care who we won against or who we lost against .. we're 9-4, and I'm enjoying the ride. We're on a five game roll and playing pretty good football .. what's not to be happy about?

You really think we looked good the last 2 weeks? I dont think we looked bad.

But a win is a win. I just hope they clean up the Penalties, the Red Zone Production, Special Teams, and the whole our QB still takes a pounding thing that we have going on. That and we really havent beaten a team that has been in that upper crust of teams.... that concerns me too.

Im happy we are 9-4 though. It's a hell of a lot better than 7-6... and worrying about other teams schedules. At this point.. we control our playoff qualification destiny.

Diggr,
If I were you, I'd just ****can this season and look to next where we still have a shot at going 16-0 and winning the SB.

Yeah .. plenty of things to clean up, but winning is the name of the game and the Packers are getting that accomplished.

As for playing an upper echelon team .. just got to play what the schedule deals you, and hope that when the playoffs start the Packers pick their level up to match the others teams they will face. I think the Packers have the talent to compete on offense and defense ... special teams is a concern.

Of course you havent.

quote:

Originally posted by grbaypack:


As for playing an upper echelon team .. just got to play what the schedule deals you, and hope that when the playoffs start the Packers pick their level up to match the others teams they will face.

Yeah. Agreed. I think im more concerned about us having beaten a upper echelon team. Really, the only teams 9-4 or better than we've played are Minnesota and Cincy... and we are 0-3. Thus my concern. As for the rest of the schedule. Line em up and knock em down. But we dont get to play the cupcakes in the playoffs.

Im writing this from the perspective that it's about winning divisions and winning superbowls.