Agree with a lot of what's been said.
OLB is a priority, but the good news is that this upcoming draft has a lot of good OLB prospects. Hopefully TT can find one to compliment Matthews on the other side.
I also hope that Nick Collins can somehow return. I think we quickly forget just how good he was before he got hurt. Burnett has made some nice strides, but he's no Collins.
Wasn't really big on resigning Wells, but the center position is pretty important in this kind of offense. He's certainly deserving and worthy of an extension.
Resigning Finley and Flynn are luxuries we can't afford. Keeping Driver and Clifton are other examples.
The other thing is don't be surprised if DJ Smith is our starting ILB next year instead of Hawk.
The only other thing I will say is that I strongly disagree that our RBs are solid or worth keeping. Based on what? The reality is that Starks really has had 4-5 good games in his entire career (mostly to end 2010), Grant isn't getting any younger, and Green and Saine are totally unproven. Next to OLB, I'd say getting an explosive RB that can break long runs is a priority- even as a change of pace back.
Very simple
cut clifton, driver, walden
resign wells and franchise finley
let lee, bush, grant go in free agency
go defense heavy in draft
Sign a free agent in the secondary
cut clifton, driver, walden
resign wells and franchise finley
let lee, bush, grant go in free agency
go defense heavy in draft
Sign a free agent in the secondary
Ronell Lewis looks intriguing to me. A OLB that is nasty and likes to hit.Ronell Highlights
quote:Originally posted by Satori:
Packer Update has a series of new articles including this one on 6 Packers who probably won't be back next year:
http://packerupdate.net/?p=16130
He also has a post on his views for fixing the defense
Thanks for the heads up... Love that site.
quote:Originally posted by kworst:
cut clifton, driver, walden
I'm glad to see you've come around on Neal.
quote:Originally posted by Tschmack:
The only other thing I will say is that I strongly disagree that our RBs are solid or worth keeping. Based on what? The reality is that Starks really has had 4-5 good games in his entire career (mostly to end 2010), Grant isn't getting any younger, and Green and Saine are totally unproven.
Really? I personally think that this may be the deepest group talent-wise they've had in awhile. I can't speak for the blitz pickup stuff. Starks seems like bruiser with some shake, Saine looks like a nice combo platter and I liked what I saw of Green early on. I will agree with the unproven comment however.
As far as COP like maybe Percy Harvin, I wonder if Cobb could evolve into that person?
Really, the biggest obstacle to solid running game is M3. I just don't think it is in his M.O. to fully commit. Can't fault the offensive production during his tenure however...
quote:Originally posted by kworst:
cut clifton, driver, walden
Mikes Strength will pull him through. His goal is to get a sack in 2014 but he will be able to bench press 800 pounds by then
Agreed. If TT didn't sign him based, in part at least, on age last year, it sure ain't happening this year. We can talk free agency for months. The reality is that TT has 12 picks and that's where the defensive reinforcements will come from. That and any player development through offseason workouts.
http://www.dallasnews.com/spor...draft-downgraded.ece
From Gosselin review the Packers did not get much from the 2011 draft. This could be a reflection of TT drafting poorly, the result of drafting 32nd, having a stack team, or not identifying the teamâs weakness, or some combination of factors.
Of course with perfect hindsight TT could have done a better job, but without Newhouseâs unexpected improvement Sherrod would have played a lot more and Rodger would have been put in jeopardy all season long. If Ted did not draft Sherrod and Newhouse did not develop the Packers and Rodgers would have been in a world of hurt.
Drafting Cobb fixed their return problem, the result is that Ted to do list is shorter then it would be otherwise. This year he can concentrate on fixing the defense front seven.
From Gosselin review the Packers did not get much from the 2011 draft. This could be a reflection of TT drafting poorly, the result of drafting 32nd, having a stack team, or not identifying the teamâs weakness, or some combination of factors.
Of course with perfect hindsight TT could have done a better job, but without Newhouseâs unexpected improvement Sherrod would have played a lot more and Rodger would have been put in jeopardy all season long. If Ted did not draft Sherrod and Newhouse did not develop the Packers and Rodgers would have been in a world of hurt.
Drafting Cobb fixed their return problem, the result is that Ted to do list is shorter then it would be otherwise. This year he can concentrate on fixing the defense front seven.
quote:Originally posted by Hungry5:
Personally, I don't see it happening
Eagles' defense was nothing to crow about, so I don't see them releasing a guy who could still help them. They may ask him to restructure and hope he does so, but release Jenkins now? Not sure they would do that.
quote:
This is why you wait three years before grading a draft.
Onto a different angle of discussion: Flynn. Could the Packers put a transition tag on him? Use it as a poison pill thing to force some other team to give up a pick. After reading that article about the Packers wanting to get a deal done with Finley without using a tag made me wonder if the Packers were planning to tag someone else.
I wouldn't be surprised if that "someone else" was Scott Wells.
Tagging and trading Flynn is harder than it sounds and the odds are that the only compensation GB would get for him is a comp pick after he leaves via UFA... and even then we can only hope for a 3rd.
Tagging and trading Flynn is harder than it sounds and the odds are that the only compensation GB would get for him is a comp pick after he leaves via UFA... and even then we can only hope for a 3rd.
quote:Originally posted by turnip blood:
Drafting Cobb fixed their return problem, the result is that Ted to do list is shorter then it would be otherwise. This year he can concentrate on fixing the defense front seven.
Agreed. I also saw Cobb as Driver's replacement at WR. He may not be a #1 or #2, but with Jennings and Jordy, he could be a deadly #3 with his speed and YAC potential.
Tori Gurley is going to be a star.
quote:Originally posted by turnip blood:
Onto a different angle of discussion: Flynn. Could the Packers put a transition tag on him? Use it as a poison pill thing to force some other team to give up a pick. After reading that article about the Packers wanting to get a deal done with Finley without using a tag made me wonder if the Packers were planning to tag someone else.
No. He's not a restricted free agent. He's unrestricted. Only tag that applies is Franchise.
Edit: Just to be a little more clear on this, the transition tag is a option on unrestricted free agents, however,it does not apply for picks. There is no draft pick compensation attached. The only benefit with the transition tag is the guaranteed salary is lower and the tagging team has 10 days to match any offer given to the tagged player.
quote:Starks was 6 for 43 and Grant was 8 for 33...
True, but wasn't Grant's first carry, which was the first Packer offensive play of the day, for 18 yards? Leaving him at 7 for 15 the rest of the game.
Starks also had one monster run that accounted for most of his yardage.
quote:Originally posted by KonKrete:
Edit: Just to be a little more clear on this, the transition tag is a option on unrestricted free agents, however,it does not apply for picks. There is no draft pick compensation attached. The only benefit with the transition tag is the guaranteed salary is lower and the tagging team has 10 days to match any offer given to the tagged player.
That is what I thought. So if Ted wanted to play hardball he could use the transition tag, then he has 10 day to match any offer. Ted then could sign Flynn to the offer the other team made. Not that Ted would want to keep Flynn it would in effect be a sign and trade deal. If it worked.
I was just spitballing with my question.
I'm a big fan of Starks but for some reason he is just awful when he gets to the third level of the defense. The finish on that 29 Yard Run was disappointing to say the least.quote:Originally posted by YATittle:
Starks also had one monster run that accounted for most of his yardage.
Starks reminds me more of a fullback than as a prototypical running back. Not quite fast enough, not quite shifty enough, not quite good enough vision. Put bigger shoulder pads on him, add 10 pounds and see what he can do.
Yeah, that finish to the run was just 1 of the 100 things I just shooked my head at that day.
It was a bizarroworld type day, out of sync and stupid decisions all day long.
It was a bizarroworld type day, out of sync and stupid decisions all day long.
quote:Originally posted by Fandame:
Starks reminds me more of a fullback than as a prototypical running back. Not quite fast enough, not quite shifty enough, not quite good enough vision. Put bigger shoulder pads on him, add 10 pounds and see what he can do.
Problem is he blocks like a kicker.
To me that was the most disappointing loss in the history of the franchise. The difference between the potential and the actual performance had never been so great in the history of the franchise . From 1 to 53 to the coaching staff they all laid an egg. I can try to respect the donkeys in the Superbowl based on the efforts of Elway and Davis. The Jennings fumble gift was a miracle returned for the Rice fumble travesty and they threw it away with a misguided onsides attempt not five minutes later. They tried so hard to run the Giants out of the building that they ran themselves out of the building. Next season can't start soon enough.quote:Originally posted by trump:
Yeah, that finish to the run was just 1 of the 100 things I just shooked my head at that day.
Since we have a good team already to build on, I wonder if TT should trade up more in the draft for quality over quantity rather than trading back and picking up more draft picks? It worked with Matthews but I guess you never know. Maybe he thinks the more guys he drafts the more likely it is that some of them will make the cut. But, can't complain too much about TT evaluating talent and drafting.
I think we may need more "quantity" on defense than some think. Just gotta hit on a few players though and replace people like Lee, Wilson, Walden, Wynn, etc. with dudes that can play.
I was really surprised by guys like Walden, Shields, Peprah and Wilson. All of those guys took a huge step back this year when you expected all to be better. And you had to expect that Green, Raji and Williams to be at least as effective as last year. Other than Bishop and CMIII, no other player really improved their game (Burnett too, but only b/c of injury). Just a weird year for the GB defense.
quote:To me that was the most disappointing loss in the history of the franchise. The difference between the potential and the actual performance had never been so great in the history of the franchise . From 1 to 53 to the coaching staff they all laid an egg.
I agree 100% except we can't know of the Philbin impact.
I think Starks slipped on that run.
quote:Originally posted by Packy:
Since we have a good team already to build on, I wonder if TT should trade up more in the draft for quality over quantity rather than trading back and picking up more draft picks?
Picks are like gold to TT and unless he's targeting a specific player he won't move up. The defense needs lots of help and the more picks for TT to work with the better.
quote:Originally posted by michiganjoe:
at least it isn't about delivering newspapers silent killer
I agree with this. This team has more holes than I think we realize. And even though there are obvious specific needs, I am still of the belief that you still roll with best player available. What I do want is him to please explore cheap free agents or make a training camp trade or two if he has a big question mark unit.
CMIII, Finley, Sitton, Bishop, Rodgers, Jennings, Collins, and Nelson were all selected right around where the Packers are picking this year. I dont think TT sees trading up as the right choice unless a specific player falls that he rated much higher (ie: CMIII and Burnett).
I agree with CB, to a point. This team is not as set as we think on offense. Let's be honest, the offense had as much to do with the loss as the defense. Drops, fumbles and poor protection relate to all facets of the offense. We like to think the WR's are the best, but based on last game they're not. I still think this offense is missing that safety valve that knows how to convert a third down (and won't drop it). Could be a WR (ie: Welker), TE (ie: Jason Witten), or RB (ie: Sproles).
I agree with CB, to a point. This team is not as set as we think on offense. Let's be honest, the offense had as much to do with the loss as the defense. Drops, fumbles and poor protection relate to all facets of the offense. We like to think the WR's are the best, but based on last game they're not. I still think this offense is missing that safety valve that knows how to convert a third down (and won't drop it). Could be a WR (ie: Welker), TE (ie: Jason Witten), or RB (ie: Sproles).
my only concern on offense is back up Olinemen. Can't have enough quality depth there.
The caveat would be picking a backup QB later. That seems to work well. Also, if Green didn't show them what they wanted as a third down back or they are not comfortable with his recovery, I can see Ted spending a third or forth on a running back.
Which ultimately means he'll take a running back in the first and won't take an offensive lineman until the 6th.
The caveat would be picking a backup QB later. That seems to work well. Also, if Green didn't show them what they wanted as a third down back or they are not comfortable with his recovery, I can see Ted spending a third or forth on a running back.
Which ultimately means he'll take a running back in the first and won't take an offensive lineman until the 6th.
quote:I agree with CB
Welcome to Dumbville. Population: 2
quote:Originally posted by El-Ka-Bong: Also, if Green didn't show them what they wanted as a third down back or they are not comfortable with his recovery, I can see Ted spending a third or forth on a running back.
I like Saine in that role from what I saw this year in is short stint.