Packers' 2016 Offseason Notes

PackerBackerDPM posted:

...So yes the Broncos won the Super Bowl but now are without a QB or "the man" and are missing 2 key members of their D.  

Edit -  I'd love to see an instant upgrade at ILB and TE too but not at a risk to future.

You came pretty close to a point I was going to make; a possible downside to veteran FA acquisition may be the loss of the younger (D & D) players.
Of course, winning a SB can ease that pain somewhat, but it seems a team would eventually reach a point where young talent and depth is depleted at the expense of 'renting' a veteran for 1 to 2 years.
Agree with your ILB/TE point.

Not sure I can believe the report about Trevathan. If he really 'wanted' to consider the Packers, I would think his agent would've contacted the team. Indeed, they may have for all I know, but I would think his comments would've reflected that had it been the case. 

Not sure if this is news for some people or not.  That said...

Thinking

"Since the team has not been able to address that position in any meaningful fashion in the draft as of late, spending $6-7M for a 25 year old LB that was extremely productive last year, at a position which for years has sucked big floppy donkey dick and hurt this team, would have been nice."

is not the same as

"OMG I WANT EVERY SHINY FREE AGENT EVERY YEAR AND TO BE LIKE THE NEW YORK GIANTS OR THE DENVER BRONCOS OR WASHINGTON REDSKINS AS THEY ARE THE MODEL FRANCHISES. DURRRR"

Lots of space between those two positions.  Just sayin.  

Trevathan signs on the first day of Free Agency and the Packers didn't try to sign him? What was the hurry to sign?

Tdog posted:

just for kicks, tell me the TE/s and ILB/s he should have signed in FA?

You really want to make that argument here?  Again, I have not seen anyone, and especially the poster you were responding to, advocate turning the Packers into the off season champs like the Redskins of years gone by.  Some people are simply pointing out that (sorry to burst your bubble), there are indeed affordable options that aren't that risky in Free Agency.  Every year.  And, it's an area that Thompson doesn't go heavy in.

I don't want him to massively change his philosophy.  I haven't seen anyone suggest he massively change his philosophy.  I've seen people comment that it's an area that Thompson hasn't really used often to improve the roster.  I've seen people point out some FAs that they felt would fill a position of need. 

Fact is, anyone can list FAs that failed, anyone can list FAs that helped.  It's a circle jerk at this point.  I point out Owen Daniels could have been had easily and cheaply last year, you'll respond with DURRR JORDAN CAMERON BUST.  Yippie.  What I don't understand is why people get so goddamned defensive when suggesting that Thompson could utilize FA a bit more.  He's not your Dad.  Is he your dad?  He's not your dad...

No one is suggesting "ABANDON THE DRAFT AND DEVELOP PHILOSOPHY!  WE NEED NOTHING BUT VETERAN FAs!  WE'RE "ONE PLAYER AWAY! THOMPSON IS AN IDIOT AND SHOULD BE FIRED UNLESS HE SIGNS SHINY FREE AGENTS!" and if they did, I'll be right there shouting that down with you.  

But, likewise, it's absolutely just as inane to shout down anyone that simply suggests that a key acquisition here or there, in an spot of need every once in a while, be done through FA instead of almost exclusively through the draft.  And that's what a lot of this feels like.

I wouldn't trade Thompson for any NFL GM.  I absolutely want to be in the mix every year vs "GOING ALL IN" like Denver.  But, it's not heresy to suggest that Thompson could be better served by being a bit more aggressive in FA from time to time.  

I'll make that "argument" any ******** place anytime.  making blanket statements that TT isn't doing anything in FA without explaining who what when where and what price is asinine.  happens every year.   but go ahead, keep beating that head into the wall thinking you can make Ted sign FAs you think would put the GBP in the SB.  I'll just sit back and enjoy watching the games knowing that what I think isn't going to change one damn thing at 1265.  TT does sign FAs, and I don't care who's ******* dad he is.

All this pissing and moaning about signing free agents doesn't matter one iota

until Dom is ****canned

Tdog posted:

I'll make that "argument" any ******** place anytime.  making blanket statements that TT isn't doing anything in FA without explaining who what when where and what price is asinine.  happens every year.   but go ahead, keep beating that head into the wall thinking you can make Ted sign FAs you think would put the GBP in the SB.  I'll just sit back and enjoy watching the games knowing that what I think isn't going to change one damn thing at 1265.  TT does sign FAs, and I don't care who's ******* dad he is.

Keep on keeping on.  

Grave Digger posted:

...In the past when faced with glaring weaknesses that have proven can't be covered up with what he has, TT has invested highly in the position (Safety, OT, OLB, etc.). Won't be surprised to finally see an answer at ILB taken this draft.

Unfortunately, TT takes too damn long to address these glaring weaknesses. How long before he addressed the safety position? M.D. Jennings and McMillian? Seriously? How long have we been in need of inside linebackers? Especially one that can cover a RB or TE. At least 3 years for a good linebacker. Longer for one that can actually cover. How long have we needed a TE? Some of these problem areas have been neglected for too damn long!

Stop making sense CA. It will mess up too many people's narrative on this.

Also the teams that signed these FA's didn't automatically get better. Danny Trevathan won't solve Chicago's issues, Malik Jackson won't cause Jacksonville to turn the corner, etc. FA's are a crutch that generally bad teams use to help them become relevant in the short term...the GMs and HCs for Miami, Jax, Oakland, NYJ, etc. know that historically those teams are quick to clean house and start over. They need results NOW. Elway rented Manning for 4 years, he HAD to win a championship in that window so he bought a championship. He has a big rebuilding job in front of him in Denver now, Ted Thompson has a deep roster filled with young talent and a solid cap future to compete for championships for the long haul. Ted doesn't need to buy a potential championship, he owns a roster that will be championship contender for many more years with no rebuilding years in sight.

Grave Digger posted:

Danny Trevathan won't solve Chicago's issues, Malik Jackson won't cause Jacksonville to turn the corner, etc.

You forgot one.  Charles Woodson won't help Green Bay's defense.

Starks to pats???
They also brought in running back James Starks according to Adam Caplan of ESPN. In 2015, Starks rushed for 601 yards and two touchdowns on 148 carries.

http://www.theredzone.org/Blog...-visits/Default.aspx

Getting like a game day thread in here.

@TomSilverstein: The #Packers have agreed to a one-year deal with OLB Nick Perry, according to two NFL sources.

@TomSilverstein: Am told that #Packers OLB Nick Perry's one-year deal is worth $5 million.

@PackersNotes: As it turned out, Packers saved about $2.7M by not picking up Perry's [5th year] option.

God Damn TT! Wasting money in free agency again!

Perry's biggest obstacle has been health. Let's hope he stays healthy.

Oh, and I was told Petie in Seattle was really interested in Perry. So if nothing else,  you to the Hags

Lambeau Lobo posted:

 I don't understand it, because when he makes a splash in free agency, it frequently works out (see, e.g., Woodson, Pickett, Peppers, etc.).  He knows how to evaluate talent.  

And yet, many think he doesn't.

Hungry5 posted:

And yet, many think he doesn't.

TT's LinkedIn

PackerBackerDPM posted:

Ok, 1 for 2 in super bowls in the last 4 years, point being how many they going to play in for the next 5 without a QB and 2 key cogs on defense.  Say the Pack makes it to the superbowl this year and wins, that 2 for 2 in 6 years plus the future still is bright as hell the team in not stuck in cap hell.

How many will the Packers play in when Rodgers retires?

The same amount when Favre "retired".

Tdog posted:

just for kicks, tell me the TE/s and ILB/s he should have signed in FA?

Trevathan signed for less tha AJ Hawk got in 2011.

Karlos Dansby signed in the Factory of Sadness a couple years ago for around Hawk money.

Ladarius Green just signed a very reasonable deal with the Pittsburgh.

Five million dollars for Nick Perry?  Once again we see that Ted will do everything to keep his high draft picks on the roster regardless of how mediocre they prove to be.  At least the Packers will not need to use a high draft pick on a pass-rushing OLB as Perry has piled up an amazing 12.5 sacks over his four seasons.  I'm fully expecting the Packers to announce the new contract for B.J. Raji tomorrow.

And for those who have been pining for Clay Matthews to move back outside, sorry that's probably not going to happen this year.  Don't see Ted paying Perry 5 million per season with the idea that he's going to back up Matthews/Peppers.  Oh wait, since Ted used a first round pick on him maybe he will be happy with paying him 5 million to be a backup.

Despite my smart-ass comments above it sure looks like Neal's gone, Ted uses a high draft pick on an OLB (since the Perry deal was only for one season...it's a bandage type situation), if he hits on the pick then Peppers/rookie starts and Perry is a reserve.  If the rookie isn't ready to play, it's a Peppers/Perry combo until the rookie is ready to play.  Hard to see Matthews really factoring in at OLB now. 

Herschel posted:

Tdog posted:

just for kicks, tell me the TE/s and ILB/s he should have signed in FA?

Trevathan signed for less tha AJ Hawk got in 2011.

Karlos Dansby signed in the Factory of Sadness a couple years ago for around Hawk money.

Ladarius Green just signed a very reasonable deal with the Pittsburgh.

But A.J. Hawk was a first round pick.  Ted will do anything possible to keep his first round picks on the roster...see Nick Perry.  If you look hard enough, Justin Harrell's name is still probably on the roster somewhere.

Grave Digger posted:

The same amount when Favre "retired".

So Hundley is a Hall-of-Fame QB just waiting his turn?

@BenFennell_NFL: I'll take Perry at a bargained 5mil over the money Bruce Irvin is getting 4yr 37mil with a 12.5mil hit in first year

So less-overpaying for mediocrity is better than overpaying for decent? Not exactly high praise.

Lotta levels in that pic.

Out of all of their remaining FA's, Perry was the one I wanted back most. Well, Hayward would be the one but considering they spent their first 2 picks on CB's last year it was a long shot they'd retain him

At the very least, Perry gives them an excellent run-defender off the EDGE. He's still only 25(soon to be 26) and has shown flashes as a pass rusher. Certainly a better investment for another year than Raji or Neal IMO

Wish it was for more than 1 year though but oh well. Team still likely will address EDGE in the upcoming draft.

I'm ok with the Perry deal, as it's a one year, "prove yourself" deal. It doesn't commit the team long-term, and it gives them continuity at the position. Remember, Perry's only 26...he still could become the player we hoped he might be.

So, R.E.L.A.X... Stay cool, keep calm, and enjoy this Packers ride. We've got a super quarterback, and we're going to be in the mix. There are no guarantees of a Super Bowl victory...not for any team.

I think I've been reading Vic's column too much....lol...

Great landscaping

Irvin racked up 22 sacks in 4 years with that D line and a secondary that forced QBs to hold the ball. And that's worth $9.25 million per? 

No one in Seattle is losing sleep that he's moving on. Warning sign number 1 was Seattle declining his 5th year option after 2014.  

Thats overpaying for almost decent. 

Wow Perry for $5m.........can't say I like it.  I'd figure he'd be worth $3m per year on the market, tops.  Maybe 5th years the charm??

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/e...rs-wouldve-called-me

"I wish the Packers would've called me."

Thought these comments by Danny Trevathan were interesting. I didn't even know that he played at Kentucky. He'd be a nice young player to fill a position of need but I don't have any strong feelings one way or the other about not attempting to sign him.

just cursed himself, awesome

Bear fans have to love those comments from Trevathan. 

Perry earned that deal the last couple games. 3.5 sacks plus a forced fumble in the post season is worth another look.

Herschel posted:

PackerBackerDPM posted:

Ok, 1 for 2 in super bowls in the last 4 years, point being how many they going to play in for the next 5 without a QB and 2 key cogs on defense.  Say the Pack makes it to the superbowl this year and wins, that 2 for 2 in 6 years plus the future still is bright as hell the team in not stuck in cap hell.

How many will the Packers play in when Rodgers retires?

If I had a nickel for every time I have heard that (or a form of that) over my life time I would have retired 20 years ago.  Just put a blank where Rodgers name appears in the statement above.  When Bart Starr was the QB plenty of people said it then.  Yes even some Lynn Dickey fretted over when he would not longer be the QB.  Certainly when Brett Favre was the QB plenty of people, including my son, fans of other teams, and Packer fans alike said it then.  I have seen many QBs come & go in GB.  And now they say it about Aaron Rodgers.  If there is 2 things I have learned over my life, 1) football players at any position can't play forever.  2) If you have no input to the process, don't worry about it.  Worrying will just shorten your own life. 

Doesn't mean I am not a fan, but rather I am a fan that just tries to enjoy what the team provides.