Damn meds must not be working... I would've swore Wahle was released in 2005.
"But in order to get the cap space to keep Wahle the Packers had to, ummm....get rid of Wahle."
Umm, I still fail to see your point. The real question is whether the Packers have had enough room over the last few years to have made Wahle an attractive offer in '04. The answer is that they have, in fact, had that sort of room--again, they were indeed up against the cap in '04, but they could slightly backload some deals and look forward to the massive cap increases that everyone thought were on their way. Some people claim that Wahle wouldn't have accepted a competitive offer from the Packers. I'd like to see a link to a statement to that effect from Wahle or someone close to Wahle.
Umm, I still fail to see your point. The real question is whether the Packers have had enough room over the last few years to have made Wahle an attractive offer in '04. The answer is that they have, in fact, had that sort of room--again, they were indeed up against the cap in '04, but they could slightly backload some deals and look forward to the massive cap increases that everyone thought were on their way. Some people claim that Wahle wouldn't have accepted a competitive offer from the Packers. I'd like to see a link to a statement to that effect from Wahle or someone close to Wahle.
quote:Originally posted by Hungry5:
Damn meds must not be working... I would've swore Wahle was released in 2005.
I don't see you complaining about folks talking about the Pickett and Woodson signings last year. Aren't they yesterday's news, too, on your view?
quote:Phaedrues wrote: On Wahle? No. Better to have let him go and draft for his replacement.
I don't know why you'd argue that. The guy is good, young (by OL standards), and his deal is more than reasonable, at least comparatively.
quote:Originally posted by lukey:
they were indeed up against the cap in '04, but they could slightly backload some deals and look forward to the massive cap increases that everyone thought were on their way.
This is exactly what got us in trouble durning the Sherman era. Uh NO! You cant keep robbing peter to pay paul.
quote:Originally posted by lukey:
I don't see you complaining about folks talking about the Pickett and Woodson signings last year. Aren't they yesterday's news, too, on your view?
You think about WHY or the big reason Wahle was released and what you just stated above here.
1+1=2
quote:Originally posted by BackThePack:
..and here I thought it was 2007 and not 2003
People argued on this thread that Thompson is some sort of big-money free agency guru because his one move towards that end worked out. I argued that 1) It's not clear that the Woodson signing was better prospectively than the Johnson signing--though it certainly looks a lot better in retrospect and 2) Thompson's record on big money acquisitions includes the players on his own team who he neglected to make competitive offers to.
I know better than to think that this will end any Wahle horse-beating, but here's a quote and a link. It's to the JSO subscription site, so the link may not work for some:
That said, Wahle suggested that he was ready to get out of Green Bay regardless. "It wasn't all about the money," he said. "For me, personally, it was time to move on." Wahle declined to elaborate as to why he felt that way, but said it had nothing to do with Thompson.
Wahle Wanted Out, According to...Wahle
I'm still pissed about Craig Hentrich, by the way...
That said, Wahle suggested that he was ready to get out of Green Bay regardless. "It wasn't all about the money," he said. "For me, personally, it was time to move on." Wahle declined to elaborate as to why he felt that way, but said it had nothing to do with Thompson.
Wahle Wanted Out, According to...Wahle
I'm still pissed about Craig Hentrich, by the way...
quote:Originally posted by BackThePack:quote:Originally posted by lukey:
they were indeed up against the cap in '04, but they could slightly backload some deals and look forward to the massive cap increases that everyone thought were on their way.
This is exactly what got us in trouble durning the Sherman era. Uh NO! You cant keep robbing peter to pay paul.quote:Originally posted by lukey:
I don't see you complaining about folks talking about the Pickett and Woodson signings last year. Aren't they yesterday's news, too, on your view?
You think about WHY or the big reason Wahle was released and what you just stated above here.
1+1=2
That doesn't suggest to me that he was deadset on getting out of Green Bay. And really, even if Wahle would've declined a good offer from the Packers, that doesn't excuse Thompson from not offering such a deal.
Yes, it's true that Packers wouldn't have had nearly as much cap room over the last few years had they retained Walker and Wahle. Instead, they'd have Walker and Wahle. I think that would've been preferable.
Then you're simply refusing to believe not only those who relayed the story and facts of what was said to you, but also the statements of the guy himself. That being said, it's not worth debating at this point - you're going to believe what you choose, and that's that.
quote:Originally posted by lukey:
That doesn't suggest to me that he was deadset on getting out of Green Bay. And really, even if Wahle would've declined a good offer from the Packers, that doesn't excuse Thompson from not offering such a deal.
quote:Originally posted by JJSD:
Then you're simply refusing to believe not only those who relayed the story and facts of what was said to you, but also the statements of the guy himself. That being said, it's not worth debating at this point - you're going to believe what you choose, and that's that.
I hadn't seen that quotation before. Though even if you suppose that TT wouldn't have been able to renegotiate the deal, the Packers probably could've bit the bullet and eaten the bonus. Would've required redoing other deals, but that's done all the time.
quote:Originally posted by lukey:
I hadn't seen that quotation before. Though even if you suppose that TT wouldn't have been able to renegotiate the deal, the Packers probably could've bit the bullet and eaten the bonus. Would've required redoing other deals, but that's done all the time.
..and if everyone jumped off a bridge....
If you dont understand yet,you just dont keep pushing deals,contracts and money-bonus money back like that. Sooner or later it's going to bite you in the ass.
quote:Originally posted by BackThePack:quote:Originally posted by lukey:
I hadn't seen that quotation before. Though even if you suppose that TT wouldn't have been able to renegotiate the deal, the Packers probably could've bit the bullet and eaten the bonus. Would've required redoing other deals, but that's done all the time.
..and if everyone jumped off a bridge....
Yeah, hypothetical reasoning is just a bunch of BS. Actually, it's the foundation for all criticism of the decisions people actually make--if there are no hypothetical alternatives, there's no blame.
lukey
First, let's pretend that Wahle was lying when he said "It wasn't all about the money," he said. "For me, personally, it was time to move on."
Then, let's pretend (since we don't really know) that Thompson decided not to offer Wahle a contract that could have kept him in GB.
Then, let's remember that it happened over 2 years ago, that Wahle has moved on, that the Packers have moved on, and that every single person (except you) has moved on from this discussion!
First, let's pretend that Wahle was lying when he said "It wasn't all about the money," he said. "For me, personally, it was time to move on."
Then, let's pretend (since we don't really know) that Thompson decided not to offer Wahle a contract that could have kept him in GB.
Then, let's remember that it happened over 2 years ago, that Wahle has moved on, that the Packers have moved on, and that every single person (except you) has moved on from this discussion!
quote:Originally posted by lukey:quote:Originally posted by BackThePack:quote:Originally posted by lukey:
I hadn't seen that quotation before. Though even if you suppose that TT wouldn't have been able to renegotiate the deal, the Packers probably could've bit the bullet and eaten the bonus. Would've required redoing other deals, but that's done all the time.
..and if everyone jumped off a bridge....
Yeah, hypothetical reasoning is just a bunch of BS. Actually, it's the foundation for all criticism of the decisions people actually make--if there are no hypothetical alternatives, there's no blame.
Except that there's no accountability for suggesting a hypothetical, as it's after all, a hypothetical. Tangibility is what leads to blame, and to say so otherwise is not only conjecture at best, but intellectually dishonest at worst.
That being said, yes, hypothetical reasoning in this instance is a bunch of BS, because we only know the results of what TT did, and will never know what would've happened if your plan was followed. You can say that you believe it would've been better, but none of us can say that definitively.
Here's a nice article about the cap situation the Packers were in at the time. They were over the cap significantly at the time and needed to meet the deadline.
Cap Situation
Cap Situation
quote:Originally posted by MsPacman:
Here's a nice article about the cap situation the Packers were in at the time. They were over the cap significantly at the time and needed to meet the deadline.
Cap Situation
Damn those silly little things called facts.
Is anyone else experiencing an extreme case of deja vu?
quote:Originally posted by Hungry5:
lukey - I gotta say, you are consistent.
lukey "Packers could've kept Wahle"
lukey "would've kept Wahle"
lukey "had they kept Wahle and Walker"
lukey "add Wahle and Walker to the list since he could've kept those players"
what about Klemm
comments.quote:Originally posted by lukey:
Uhh, let's see something from him in an actual game before we declare who's right and who's wrong.
LOL, what do you want? A Warren sapp type performance? Understand our defense. In the middle you need a space clogger, someone to eat up blocks so the DEs and the LBs can run free. Pickett was an absolute horse when it came to that.
The previous year, with the Rams, Pickett was second in tackles among DL, only to to Kampman. Today they line up side by side. Cool, huh?
quote:Originally posted by STEAMBOAT: on 8-28-2007quote:Team needs
The team needs are as follows............
We have the players in camp that will make the 53 man roster that can get the job done (win the NFC North [Central])......
1) the offense needs to play ball control
- limit turnovers ( O would be nice, but unrealistic)
- no points to opposing teams while we're on "offense"
- Favre needs less than 15 int's
- move the chains, gain field position
- score td's when inside the 10 yard line
- score points when inside the 35 yard line
2) special teams
- help "D" and "O" with field position
- no turnovers
- no returns for td's while punting and KO's
3) defense
- we'll be just fine as long as the "O" doesn't put them in bad field positions and the "O" moves the chains once and awhile to spell the "D".
- make the opponents suffer long drives - no big plays 20+ yards...
I feel real good about this season.... "D" looks great and that's the foundation for a good season.... The "O" just needs to taks care of the ball, score when opportunity knocks, and mix it up...
IMO - the "O" with Favre has always looked good (better than normal) when they go quik or no huddle during the middle of the game... I wish they would do this about every 3rd or 4th series in every game...
Just thought I would pat my own back today!!!!!!
Yeah, nice generalizations.
All of pros on this forum had these points discussed, memorized and were "givens" on 8-28-07 ... get over yourself and get back to Mayberry.
All of pros on this forum had these points discussed, memorized and were "givens" on 8-28-07 ... get over yourself and get back to Mayberry.
just for the record, I said if the Packers scored more points per game than thier opponent, they would have a chance at a winning season.
I'm changing my needs list:
- Guard - As I've said before, Colledge needs to be at LT. I don't like him at LG anymore. 3 months ago I did, but 3 months ago I thought we'd be 5-4 at this point so obviously things change.
- Runningback - Grant is doing well and Wynn looked good when healthy but I think we need another RB. I'm not writing Jackson off, but right now he looks like the 3rd down back at best IMO.
- Corner - Bush is up and down and after him we have nothing. This draft isn't incredibly deep with solid corners so this may need to be addressed even earlier.
- Tight End - Lee looks very solid but behind him it's thin. Bubba was doing good until his injury but really those two are all we have.
- Linebacker - Depth
- QB - Depth
- Guard - As I've said before, Colledge needs to be at LT. I don't like him at LG anymore. 3 months ago I did, but 3 months ago I thought we'd be 5-4 at this point so obviously things change.
- Runningback - Grant is doing well and Wynn looked good when healthy but I think we need another RB. I'm not writing Jackson off, but right now he looks like the 3rd down back at best IMO.
- Corner - Bush is up and down and after him we have nothing. This draft isn't incredibly deep with solid corners so this may need to be addressed even earlier.
- Tight End - Lee looks very solid but behind him it's thin. Bubba was doing good until his injury but really those two are all we have.
- Linebacker - Depth
- QB - Depth
quote:Originally posted by trump:
Yeah, nice generalizations.
All of pros on this forum had these points discussed, memorized and were "givens" on 8-28-07 ... get over yourself and get back to Mayberry.
I beg to differ.... and if you would read just a little, the "pros" were telling us what we were missing, what we needed for next year, heck there was mention of the back-up QB.... What "pros" they are.... Get a clue.... I nailed it and I didn't say we were lacking anything (like many others) to win the North... The Pack is doing exactly what I thought they would.....
All I know is that I have been proven wrong on almost everything I predicted or said regarding the talent the entire off season. Blatantly wrong
Bravo, kworst. A lot of posters here will never admit they were wrong.
quote:Originally posted by cuqui:
Bravo, kworst. A lot of posters here will never admit they were wrong.
Temporary insanity.
I will say that the Packers need to draft some CB's come next year or/and pick one up in FA. Bush scares me still and the jury's out on Blackmon. Travon Williams did not look too good covering in the preseason.
quote:Originally posted by kworst:
All I know is that I have been proven wrong on almost everything I predicted or said regarding the talent the entire off season. Blatantly wrong
Did hell just freeze over or what? Pigs must be flying somewhere!!!
quote:Originally posted by kworst:
All I know is that I have been proven wrong on almost everything I predicted or said regarding the talent the entire off season. Blatantly wrong
It's all good. There are more than one or two ways to build a team and apparently TT's method is working quite well.
quote:Originally posted by oldnavy:
Pigs must be flying somewhere!!!
In the Pink Floyd thread in the x4 Lounge.
Nice list, GraveDigger, and I agree. I don't think BPA is a good philosophy next draft unless it's limited to those positions. A safety would be nice, too, as I'm not sure Collins can be anything more than average.
GD, I'm pretty much in total agreement... but I'll go so far as to "streamline and prioritize" the list...
Need #1: SOLID GUARD - Spitz, Moll or Barbre may be it. It takes time to develop, just look at Coston.
Need #2: SOLID NICKEL CORNER/FUTURE STARTER - Someone as an heir-apparent to Al Harris; Blackmon is no longer atop my list only because of his injury proneness.
Need #3: SOLID FS - I'm not in love with Collins. He can't turn and look for the ball and when he does he can't get a hand on it.
Need #1 or 2 or 3 or 4: STUD RB - Let's see how Grant pans out the second half and we'll all know how badly we need one...
As far as TEs go, we just resigned Lee and he's had a great year. I have a feeling management is happy with the tandem of him and Franks. Our stellar WR corps makes any TE that much better anyway. It's not a pressing need, IMO.
BPA, of course, is the way to go - I just hope we nab some of these positions.
Does anyone know who's an UFA at G, CB and FS this offseason?
Need #1: SOLID GUARD - Spitz, Moll or Barbre may be it. It takes time to develop, just look at Coston.
Need #2: SOLID NICKEL CORNER/FUTURE STARTER - Someone as an heir-apparent to Al Harris; Blackmon is no longer atop my list only because of his injury proneness.
Need #3: SOLID FS - I'm not in love with Collins. He can't turn and look for the ball and when he does he can't get a hand on it.
Need #1 or 2 or 3 or 4: STUD RB - Let's see how Grant pans out the second half and we'll all know how badly we need one...
As far as TEs go, we just resigned Lee and he's had a great year. I have a feeling management is happy with the tandem of him and Franks. Our stellar WR corps makes any TE that much better anyway. It's not a pressing need, IMO.
BPA, of course, is the way to go - I just hope we nab some of these positions.
Does anyone know who's an UFA at G, CB and FS this offseason?