Will he be a Packer on game 1

It's the answers that aren't that simple.

It really comes down to whether there's a negotiated CBA or if they play under 2010 rules when it comes to UFA/RFA.

Regardless of CBA, IMO I think both Jenkins and Jackson are gone. In drafting Green coupled with Grant and Starks, I just don't see him being back and they'll be a Redskins/Cowpukes type team that will overpay for him.

Jones I'd like to see back and if he's a RFA and we have no cap, then it's possible he's back. If he gets to be a UFA, see above. A team will also overpay for this guy and while Im not a Jones hater, I wonder what his effort will be like with a new contract and a 40K diamond ring on his finger. I just don't see what his motivation will be-maybe Im wrong.

Crosby's ok. Could we do better? Yes. But taking into account the climate he kicks in I think we could do much worse as well.

Barnett I'd like to keep but I don't think he'll take the pay cut needed and shut his piehole to be a quality back up.

I'd also like to keep Colledge!!! but here again, if there is a CBA another team will pay him big dollars. More then TT is willing to shell out.

Flynn's back. Who are the Packers going to have back up Rodgers? Harrell?

Chillar, Flynn, Grant and Crosby are back.

Barnett makes a lot more than Chillar, so that's why he's gone.

Colledge, Jones, Jackson and Jenkins are welcome to come back, but I think someone else will pay them more than TT will.

Bigby and Poppinga just aren't that good (factoring in the injuries)

If Barnett is willing to make an accommodation on the cash side ( and he said he is open to talks) then I would rather dump Chillar and keep Nick around at a reduced price

I may be mistaken, but I think Barnett is better in coverage than Chillar

The only surprise is the number of people above who think Jones might come back (maybe that is if he was an RFA) With the drafting of Cobb, I can't see that happening. I suppose some might be thinking that they cut Driver and use his money for Jones which is possible and I know discussed elsewhere. Personally I am not sold on Jones as a standout number 2, besides the drops and the fumbles, I think you have to account that he was matched up against the other teams nickel back most of the time. (Same for Nelson as good as he was he was out there mostly in dime situations)

Why can't we keep Jones and cut Swain? BTW Jones will not be getting a big payday.

I forgot to add Hall.

I think Hall is a former Packer

What I think will happen...

Yes:
Nick Barnett
Brandon Chillar
Matt Flynn
Brandon Jackson
James Jones
Mason Crosby



No:
Brady Poppinga
Atari Bigby
Ryan Grant
Daryn COLLEDGE
Cullin Jenkins

Question was, who do I think will be a Packer vs. who do I want. I'll answer both here for those with inquiring minds.
Nick Barnett
Hawk and Bishop are better than Barnett and anyone else. Goodbye.

Brandon Chillar
Good coverage. Better player and works well in the system. Hope he's healing well. He's back and I want him.

Matt Flynn
Win with Flynn!

Brandon Jackson
Maligned but a good 3rd down back. Numbers game and I think Green and Starks can cover for him. Goodbye. Packers will likely let him walk.

James Jones
I expect the Packers to let him walk. I would prefer to cut Swain until Cobb is proven not to be Joey Jamison.

Mason Crosby
Needs to step up, but I want him back for one more year.

Brady Poppinga and Atari Bigby
Both gone. Packers did well by them. Neither really lived up to their contract. They will both likely find homes, but not in GB. They leave with no one feeling guilty.

Ryan Grant
Can't get enough proven backs. Veteran leadership for rookies. Team wants him, I want him.

Daryn COLLEDGE
No one hates him, but with stable of OL available, I don't think anyone thinks there will be much of a drop off. He's had his chance to show what he can do. Not a disaster, but won't be missed by anyone.

Cullin Jenkins
Team doesn't think they can afford him. I want him back for one more year.

quote:

Originally posted by Fedya:
Flynn's back. Who are the Packers going to have back up Rodgers? Harrell?

McNabb

quote:

Originally posted by Benzene:
Why can't we keep Jones and cut Swain? BTW Jones will not be getting a big payday.

From Green Bay? Agree.

But as long as the Synderbrenners and Al Davis' still exist, entirely possible they will grossly overpay a player like him.

Javon Walker still floors me....

quote:

Originally posted by Hauser:

quote:

Originally posted by Fedya:
Flynn's back. Who are the Packers going to have back up Rodgers? Harrell?

McNabb

Randall Cobb

I think the Packers want to keep Barnett, and I think he'll be back, but he and Bishop will battle it out for starter.
Chillar will be back, as well. He's under contract for another year or 3, and it's reasonable, AFAIK.
Poppi will be gone. There's too many other guys that have surpassed his skills, and they are younger (read: cheaper).
I voted that Bigby will be back, but he's very marginal. Depending on the health of guys like Collins and Burnett, and his own condition and attitude, he could be expendable, but may be needed for another year of depth.
I voted for Flynn to return also, and I wish whatever clamor there is to trade him would go away. He's too valuable in his specific back-up role given ARod's concussion history.
I voted for Grant to return. Assuming he's healed 100%, his experience gives him the edge over all other RB's.
I voted that BJax will not return. I think the number of players we keep at FB and TE make him expendable more than other guys having more talent, but it's the same result either way.
I voted that Jones will be back (with a 1 year contract). If any of the current WR's are going to get cut, it'll be someone like Swain before it would be JJ. I also think with all the turmoil surrounding the lockout/CBA plus the associated FA eligibility rules, and the possibility of a shortened season this year and an expanded one the following, there won't be any major FA contract signings until the 2012 year (thus JJ playing for the one year).
I voted Colledge will not return. Finally. Lang or ClaudiaSchiffer will beat him out this year to start, and our 2nd year guys will be better (cheaper) depth.
I voted Crosby will return. I still think he is the best kicker for us factoring in home stadium and typical fall/winter weather conditions. And he still has a cannon for a leg; he might miss left or right, but never short.
Lastly, I voted that Jenx will be back. Again, my hypothesis regarding FA contracts, as well as the health of our other D-linemen factor in. I think we're stacked for interior guys, but I don't see anybody else on the roster that can provide enough production while our 2nd/3rd-year guys and the other OLB position develop without having a significant affect on the defense.

Barnett: no

Chillar: yes

Poppinga: no

Bigby: no

Flynn: yes

Grant: It depends on his contract/leg. Leaning "yes"

BJax: 2010 rules: 50/50. New CBA: Leaning "no"

Jones: 2010 rules: Leaning "yes". New CBA: "no"

Colledge: 2010 rules: Leaning "yes". New CBA: "no"

Crosby: yes

Jenkins: no

Hall: no

Kuhn: yes

Especially if training camp starts late the run on FAs may be less than many expect. Fit with the system will become much more important, especially since the big signings are made by teams that want to win THIS YEAR. Even a vet needs to learn the playbook and needs to adjust to teammates on the field.

This last year was uncapped and, oddly, there were few teams that bet the house on FAs. There were many more teams that used the year to scrimp and save. That trend may continue this year. The owners may not be bluffing when they say a lot of teams are broke. On the other hand, with a new CBA there will be a glut of FAs on the market--which may mean that this is the year that TT goes out and signs some bargains for the long term. If TT does that, expect all but Flynn and Crosby to be replaced.

I really don't expect Jones to have a big payday. There will be teams out there who can offer him a #2 spot in the lineup, and that may be enough for him. But anybody who pays him big money is going to regret it.

Colledge may well be back again this year. Every year he looks like he is going to be replaced, and every year he has been the starting left guard. There's a trend there . . .

quote:

Originally posted by Hungry5:
What I think will happen...

No:
Ryan Grant

Really? Why?

quote:

Originally posted by Green and Gold:

quote:

Originally posted by Hauser:

quote:

Originally posted by Fedya:
Flynn's back. Who are the Packers going to have back up Rodgers? Harrell?

McNabb

Randall Cobb

quote:

Originally posted by Coach:
Barnett: no

Chillar: yes

For the sake of discussion, let's pretend they cost the same in salary/compensation for 2011

Which would you prefer to keep in that scenario and why ?

(I think Bishop is the starter per MM's comments and TT's contract)

quote:

Originally posted by Boris:

quote:

Originally posted by Hungry5:
What I think will happen...

No:
Ryan Grant

Really? Why?

Just a hunch... either his leg will still be an issue or he'll have been beat out by Starks. I don't see the decision (on numbers) as Grant or Jackson but more so Grant or Starks. The decision on Jackson will be from the FA movement. I can see Green as the 2nd option after Starks.

That all said, if Jackson leaves they'll likely keep RG.

@ Satori.

I'll be happy to address that, and we don't have to pretend.

My answer is predicated on what I think "will happen", not necessarily what I would "prefer to happen" from a distance.

I think Barnett has clearly had the better overall career up to this point.

That said, I'm basing my take on the following:

Despite his statements to the contrary, I just don't see Barnett being a happy camper with a reduced salary and the reduced role from scrimmage that goes with it. I quite simply don't believe him. I easily could be dead wrong about that, but it's my opinion. Even if he's being 100% sincere, that easily could change over the course of a season.

I also think Chillar is every bit the coverage LB that Barnett is (if not better), and also a slightly better fit as a (backup) ILB in our defense. Even though they're listed at very similar heights/weights I believe Chillar has a slightly larger natural frame. They're both undersized for the position, but to my eyes Barnett appears to be slightly more so than Chillar.

My only real concern with Chillar is his shoulder. I think he's every bit as physically tough as Barnett is. He tried to play through the injury last year, but it just wasn't possible. He also has played special teams for us, and I don't recall Barnett being asked to do that (or envision him enjoying being asked to do that this year for the less amount of money he would need to accept in order to stay).

Chillar's also a year younger, and from the outside (and the Super Bowl highlights) seems like more of a team guy (the latter is purely my speculation).

And in reality of course, we can't pretend that the money doesn't play a role in the decision. We all know it does.

Now, if we were still a 4-3 team I might have a different opinion, but of course we're not.

Thanks for the comments

I think MM has grown weary of Barnett's actions, and not only the SB photo fiasco, but also the Club 56 and twitter crap

What I was trying to figure out is which one of them offers better production as the back up and/or nickel coverage LB

Maybe they both come to camp, but Barnett has some trade value for a 4-3 team like the lions, bears, vikes or giants and he will have to re-do his deal wherever he goes

quote:

Originally posted by Satori:
I think MM has grown weary of Barnett's actions, and not only the SB photo fiasco, but also the Club 56 and twitter crap

Inside stories from Leroy Butler on WSSP when that shi* went down was that MM was reallllly pissed off at Barnett but also Finley. Felt that the team already had plenty of distractions and didn't need such a ridiculous "scandel".

I think with Finley he understood it slightly more because of Finleys age. But Barnett definitely should have known better

Best. Poll. Evah.

good pole. i was thinking about some of these players and if they make the week 1 roster while i was roller blading yesterday.

Time will tell

And IT IS TIME for a new pole

New pole? Did someone say a new pole?

What was wrong with the old pole?

I think we need a new version of this...

Is that a new Miss Pole-asky? Or a new Mrs. Pole-aski?

I just voted! I got most of em right, but I missed on Flynn.