Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

First Crack at a 2013 Mock

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mccammon07


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 900
Location: Washington State
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:55 am    Post subject: First Crack at a 2013 Mock Reply with quote

Resigned
Sam Sheilds
Evan Dietrich-Smith
Tom Crabtree

Restructured
Charles Woodson
John Kuhn
Jermichael Finley

Retired
Donald Driver
Jeff Saturday

Signed
Steven Jackson, RB, STL

We tag and trade Greg Jennings to the Miami Dolphins for their second round pick

Round One
*Trade* The Green Bay Packers trade this year’s first round pick(26) and next year’s second and fourth round picks to the New York Jets for cornerback Darrell Revis

We get the best corner in the game and are able to work out a contract with him because of the restructured contracts of Finley, Woodson, and Kuhn.

Round Two (Miami)
Quinton Patton
Wide Receiver
Louisiana Tech


Patton will be our next small school stud at wide receiver.

Round Two
Jesse Williams
Nose Tackle
Alabama

We need some more beef up front on the line. Williams will allow us to be more creative and flexible on defense.

Round Three
Christine Michael
Running Back
Texas A&M

Michael seems to be a popular choice here for the Packers and he fits our scheme to a T. He will compete for playing time with Jackson and Harris

*Trade* Packers trade CB Tramon Williams and their fourth round pick to the Oakland Raiders for their fourth round pick

Round Four (Oakland)
Kyle Long
Offensive Tackle
Oregon

We trade up to draft Long who is going to compete for a starting spot right away.

Round Four (comp)
Travis Long
Outside Linebacker
Washington State

Living in the great northwest I have seen Long play for years. He is extremely underratted and does nothing great, but everything good. A very high motor, reminds me of Aaron Kampman

Round Five
Dalton Freeman
Center
Clemson

Freeman would go much higher if he was bigger. He is undersized, but so was Scott Wells. He will compete for a starting spot right away.

Round Six
Trey Wilson
Cornerback
Vanderbilt

Wilson was Casey Haywards teamate at Vandy and although he is not quite as developed as Hayward was coming out, Wilson has too much potential to pass on at this spot.

Round Seven
Matt Scott
Quarterback
Arizona

I think it is a long shot that Scott will last this long, but it seems that TT likes to draft QB's late and Scott has the tools to be our next reliable backup.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
spilltray


Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 10508
Location: Green Bay, WI
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2013 2:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Definitely not a fan.

Last player I want to "restructure" is Finley. He's too inconsistent to get a good gauge on his value. I don't see him as the type to take a large pay cut for security. He'll play this deal out and see where the chips fall.

Absolutely hate the Revis trade. I hate trading future picks. I hate taking the gigantic contract for a CB coming off an ACL injury.

I don't care for signing Stephen Jackson on top of all that.

Not a fan of an injury prone RB in round 3. Michael hasn't been able to stay healthy as a part time RB in college, why would you expect that to change in the NFL?

The rest of it's fine, but Jackson, Revis, and extending Finley is a recipe for cap disaster and I just can't get behind it at all.
_________________
Wilfred wrote:
Memory is like the Packers when they are behind by two touchdowns in the 4th quarter... It comes back.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
mccammon07


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 900
Location: Washington State
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2013 2:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

spilltray wrote:
Definitely not a fan.

Last player I want to "restructure" is Finley. He's too inconsistent to get a good gauge on his value. I don't see him as the type to take a large pay cut for security. He'll play this deal out and see where the chips fall.

Absolutely hate the Revis trade. I hate trading future picks. I hate taking the gigantic contract for a CB coming off an ACL injury.

I don't care for signing Stephen Jackson on top of all that.

Not a fan of an injury prone RB in round 3. Michael hasn't been able to stay healthy as a part time RB in college, why would you expect that to change in the NFL?

The rest of it's fine, but Jackson, Revis, and extending Finley is a recipe for cap disaster and I just can't get behind it at all.


I understand on Revis, but I think we could get Jackson cheap, just as cheap as we got Benson last year. As for Finley I said restructure, not extend. I think we need to ask him to take a pay cut in his final year of his deal and if he refuses we should let him go. It gives him one year to prove that he is the player we all though he was going to be three years ago.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
spilltray


Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 10508
Location: Green Bay, WI
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2013 2:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mccammon07 wrote:
spilltray wrote:
Definitely not a fan.

Last player I want to "restructure" is Finley. He's too inconsistent to get a good gauge on his value. I don't see him as the type to take a large pay cut for security. He'll play this deal out and see where the chips fall.

Absolutely hate the Revis trade. I hate trading future picks. I hate taking the gigantic contract for a CB coming off an ACL injury.

I don't care for signing Stephen Jackson on top of all that.

Not a fan of an injury prone RB in round 3. Michael hasn't been able to stay healthy as a part time RB in college, why would you expect that to change in the NFL?

The rest of it's fine, but Jackson, Revis, and extending Finley is a recipe for cap disaster and I just can't get behind it at all.


I understand on Revis, but I think we could get Jackson cheap, just as cheap as we got Benson last year. As for Finley I said restructure, not extend. I think we need to ask him to take a pay cut in his final year of his deal and if he refuses we should let him go. It gives him one year to prove that he is the player we all though he was going to be three years ago.


Benson signed for a vet minimum contract because he had absolutely no offers on the table. I don't think you are going to get Jackson nearly that cheap.

Finley is in the last year of a 2 year deal when he was under the looming threat of a possible franchise tag. I would wager he'd rather be cut and free to negotiate the best deal he can on the open market than restructure the one year remaining. He's already on that "prove it" deal and to me has proven to be not worth it. I just can't see him saying "what the heck I'll take a major pay cut to stick around one more year". In his mind, he's already shown how great he is.
_________________
Wilfred wrote:
Memory is like the Packers when they are behind by two touchdowns in the 4th quarter... It comes back.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
cpnesdude41


Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Posts: 1574
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2013 2:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tramon and a 4th for a 4th? someone smack me
_________________
clown
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Kuhn


Joined: 07 Dec 2011
Posts: 369
Location: UWM
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2013 2:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Good try.

Like the SJax signing and the GJ tag and trade. Think those are both possible.

The Darrell Revis trade is a stretch. Personally, I'd rather not even deal with that headache. He is going to want a huge contract and isn't really a team player.

Onto the mock:
Flip Williams and Patton and I think that is a much more realistic 2nd round. Michael is a good pickup.

You completely lose me in the 4th.. what is going on there?
This forum needs to cut Tmon some slack. Sure, he is a liability when Adrian Peterson is running the football and has clearly taken a step back since Woodson's position move, but the fact remains that he is an EXCELLENT cover corner a couple years removed from preforming at a Pro-Bowl level. I'm not against trading him per se, but I sure hope his return would be more than a move of 20 something picks in the 4th. That's putting his trade worth at like 50 points right? Boo.

I'm ok with the rest. Think Kyle Long goes higher. I really jumped off the Freeman bandwagon after I read up on some of the Shrine Game practices, he played poorly.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wgbeethree


Joined: 15 Dec 2009
Posts: 3076
Location: Denver, CO via Racine, Wisconsin
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2013 11:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Tramon trade makes some sense in this scenario. If we resigned Shields and traded for Revis we would HAVE to dump his salary. Knowing that teams wouldn't exactly be lining up to throw picks at us. If we are going to basically give away a player in a salary dump a team in the AFC with Packer connections makes the most sense.
_________________

TytybearsFan21 wrote:
Justo knows nothing about sportz

justo wrote:
I would be a terrible coach/anything.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ChaRisMa


Joined: 08 Mar 2007
Posts: 7259
Location: @_G_Tom
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2013 12:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I loved every single bit of this. Amazing--Except Revis. There's just no need to do that. I'd much rather add a talented defensive lineman with pick 26 than send it for Revis.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
NCPackFan


Joined: 12 Jan 2013
Posts: 2244
Location: Kinston, NC
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

cpnesdude41 wrote:
Tramon and a 4th for a 4th? someone smack me


Yeah, we'd be significantly trading up but trading Slowpoke to the Raiders in the 4th to move up doesn't make sense. If it were in the 3rd round however...

I, like many others, really don't like this mock too much. Jesse Williams will NOT be in there in the 2nd round and there's really no reason to take a QB. I don't see why everyone's so high on Matt Scott. I really don't and I've seen him play. The two picks that DID stick out to me, on the positive, were Dalton Freeman and Travis Long. Both would be of solid value where they're picked and Long could step in and help out in the run game immediately.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
byzr


Joined: 31 Jan 2005
Posts: 3135
Location: Kentucky
PostPosted: Thu Jan 31, 2013 1:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

i wouldn't mind everything EXCEPT THE REVIS TRADE!! who are you going to let walk in order to sign him and keep him? Clay, Raji, Rodgers, heck even Cobb will be in the 3rd year of his rookie contract. those 4 guys are going require big contracts and a team can really only handle a 2 maybe 3 of those big contracts while maintaining good depth(see the Lions). i'd rather we go out and trade for Champ Bailey or another veteran corner, if you think we need one, personally i'm comfortable with our cornerbacks.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
mccammon07


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 900
Location: Washington State
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2013 12:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I honestly think that we could afford Revis. He still has one year left on his contract and we would be getting rid of Tramons contract in this situation, and I figure Woodson has one year left in him and his contract wil be gone too. We have money folks. I think Aaron Rodgers is the type of player that would take less money if it meant us getting better as a team. I think Picketts days are numbered and we could dump his salary after the year. We will have money to spend.

I know they are just rumors, but hearing that the packers might be interested in Revis leads me to believe that if TT is indeed interested in Revis than he must figure that we have enough money to extend our upcoming free agents.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NCPackFan


Joined: 12 Jan 2013
Posts: 2244
Location: Kinston, NC
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2013 3:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

byzr wrote:
i'd rather we go out and trade for Champ Bailey or another veteran corner, if you think we need one, personally i'm comfortable with our cornerbacks.


I certainly wouldn't trade for Champ but that's beside the point. We need to play it safe until Rodgers, CMIII, and Raji are all extended. Once that occurs THEN we can maybe look at some more liberal options.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gizmo2012


Joined: 11 Mar 2007
Posts: 2806
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2013 9:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is Green Bay that desperate for a CB = no. Does TT really want to take on the self overrated Darrell Revis = no. Every year Revis says he is going to hold out for more money so why would any team want to deal with that. Besides, Revis wants 13 or 14 million per year and last time I checked the Packers don't have close to that kind of money lying around.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ArmyMedic


Joined: 06 Jan 2013
Posts: 2
PostPosted: Sun Feb 03, 2013 4:39 pm    Post subject: Hmmmmmmmm Reply with quote

I would rethink that mock and give it another try. Not fond of the choices.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group