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

2013 Free Agency General Discussion
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 76, 77, 78 ... 87, 88, 89  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Green Bay Packers
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ThinkICare


Joined: 07 Jan 2010
Posts: 3688
PostPosted: Sun Mar 17, 2013 4:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MNPackfan32 wrote:
Why pile a big contract on to a strong position?


Because in his prime he's arguably a top 5 CB. Good in coverage and a great run defender.
_________________
Ice King wrote:
How 'bout me? Put me on the grid, scale of 1 to 10. 1 is "totally gross," 10 is like, "Hey, Ice King. You look crazy seeyick"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DavidatMIZZOU


Joined: 09 Apr 2009
Posts: 9996
Location: The ZOU
PostPosted: Sun Mar 17, 2013 4:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Vikefan79 wrote:
Have you guys shown any interest in Antoine Winfield?


We need S not CB. Woodson could cover as a S, but the combination of age catching up to him and being a CB really did show. I don't think Winfield would be any better in the Woodson role. I honestly think that Winfield would be a perfect fit in Chicago for the next couple of seasons coming in as a 3rd CB.

Also want to add, I think the Packers are loaded at CB. Tramon, Shields and Heyward are as good as any other 3 deep in the league. Add in Jarrett Bush and Davon House fighting to even see the field in dime formations, we're pretty good. Tramon, Bush and soon Shields are paid pretty well. In my opinion, paying the price for a veteran the quality of Winfield doesn't make sense. I think we will draft a CB on the third day and sign one or two more as UDFAs. I believe Bush's contract expires after this season and Tramon needs to match production and pay a little better. But the actual need for this season is pretty low.
_________________
GO PACK GO!

mistakebytehlak wrote:

My god it must be so terrible to have three teams that consistently make the playoffs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
BobSacamano


Joined: 21 Aug 2006
Posts: 13330
PostPosted: Sun Mar 17, 2013 4:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
"All this thing is a big, giant puzzle, and the pieces all have to fit. At some point, things get out of whack a little bit and all the pieces donít fit anymore. But theyíre, like I said, our policy in drafting and developing is a conservative but solid way of building your team. The end result of that is that, historically speaking, youíre going to get to the end of contract lives where people have outplayed their rookie deals and if youíve done a good enough job of drafting and developing, youíre going to have more of those at that stage than you can keep. But thatís, relatively speaking, a good problem to have."


Ted earlier today. Agree?
_________________


KingTarvaris7 wrote:
last year's vikings were far better than the packers team that just won
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
persiandud


Joined: 08 Oct 2011
Posts: 1067
Location: Davis, CA
PostPosted: Sun Mar 17, 2013 5:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BobSacamano wrote:
Quote:
"All this thing is a big, giant puzzle, and the pieces all have to fit. At some point, things get out of whack a little bit and all the pieces donít fit anymore. But theyíre, like I said, our policy in drafting and developing is a conservative but solid way of building your team. The end result of that is that, historically speaking, youíre going to get to the end of contract lives where people have outplayed their rookie deals and if youíve done a good enough job of drafting and developing, youíre going to have more of those at that stage than you can keep. But thatís, relatively speaking, a good problem to have."


Ted earlier today. Agree?


Absolutely. Draft and develop is the way to go.

Rinse, repeat.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TheGreatZepp


Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Posts: 2844
Location: Brookfield, WI
PostPosted: Sun Mar 17, 2013 5:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

persiandud wrote:
BobSacamano wrote:
Quote:
"All this thing is a big, giant puzzle, and the pieces all have to fit. At some point, things get out of whack a little bit and all the pieces donít fit anymore. But theyíre, like I said, our policy in drafting and developing is a conservative but solid way of building your team. The end result of that is that, historically speaking, youíre going to get to the end of contract lives where people have outplayed their rookie deals and if youíve done a good enough job of drafting and developing, youíre going to have more of those at that stage than you can keep. But thatís, relatively speaking, a good problem to have."


Ted earlier today. Agree?


Absolutely. Draft and develop is the way to go.

Rinse, repeat.
Turnover kills the sentimental attachment but financially wise as long as like Ted says, you have more then you can keep.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MNPackfan32


Joined: 22 Sep 2010
Posts: 8175
PostPosted: Sun Mar 17, 2013 5:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ThinkICare wrote:
MNPackfan32 wrote:
Why pile a big contract on to a strong position?


Because in his prime he's arguably a top 5 CB. Good in coverage and a great run defender.
Hayward graded out as the #1 CB and Shields was top 10 in metrics too. This is why I have 0 interest in Revis. He would be an upgrade but he is also older and way more expensive. The position is too solid to go searching for a big name to pay for.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ThinkICare


Joined: 07 Jan 2010
Posts: 3688
PostPosted: Sun Mar 17, 2013 6:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MNPackfan32 wrote:
ThinkICare wrote:
MNPackfan32 wrote:
Why pile a big contract on to a strong position?


Because in his prime he's arguably a top 5 CB. Good in coverage and a great run defender.
Hayward graded out as the #1 CB and Shields was top 10 in metrics too. This is why I have 0 interest in Revis. He would be an upgrade but he is also older and way more expensive. The position is too solid to go searching for a big name to pay for.


I'm just talking about prime years here, so I don't know what age range that would be for him.
_________________
Ice King wrote:
How 'bout me? Put me on the grid, scale of 1 to 10. 1 is "totally gross," 10 is like, "Hey, Ice King. You look crazy seeyick"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dcerb44


Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 3048
Location: Schofield, Wisconsin
PostPosted: Sun Mar 17, 2013 6:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

persiandud wrote:
BobSacamano wrote:
Quote:
"All this thing is a big, giant puzzle, and the pieces all have to fit. At some point, things get out of whack a little bit and all the pieces donít fit anymore. But theyíre, like I said, our policy in drafting and developing is a conservative but solid way of building your team. The end result of that is that, historically speaking, youíre going to get to the end of contract lives where people have outplayed their rookie deals and if youíve done a good enough job of drafting and developing, youíre going to have more of those at that stage than you can keep. But thatís, relatively speaking, a good problem to have."


Ted earlier today. Agree?


Absolutely. Draft and develop is the way to go.

Rinse, repeat.


Exactly, Ted is right. There's always going to be cheaper younger assets to fill those rolls. The hard part is knowing when to move on and cut your losses. So far I think he's done an excellent job in both of those areas.
_________________


pf9 wrote:
This should definitely be McCarthy's swan song. If we're lucky Bret Bielema will come back to this state and coach the Pack next year.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address MSN Messenger
DavidatMIZZOU


Joined: 09 Apr 2009
Posts: 9996
Location: The ZOU
PostPosted: Sun Mar 17, 2013 9:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BobSacamano wrote:
Quote:
"All this thing is a big, giant puzzle, and the pieces all have to fit. At some point, things get out of whack a little bit and all the pieces donít fit anymore. But theyíre, like I said, our policy in drafting and developing is a conservative but solid way of building your team. The end result of that is that, historically speaking, youíre going to get to the end of contract lives where people have outplayed their rookie deals and if youíve done a good enough job of drafting and developing, youíre going to have more of those at that stage than you can keep. But thatís, relatively speaking, a good problem to have."


Ted earlier today. Agree?


Yes. Very much. But there is a part of all of us that wants to win in March just as bad as we want to win in April, January and February. Ted mostly concedes the March crown and how ever rational you are it's still not fun seeing they traded Kolb for 2 seconds, or they signed Jennings, or they traded for Harvin.
_________________
GO PACK GO!

mistakebytehlak wrote:

My god it must be so terrible to have three teams that consistently make the playoffs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DavidatMIZZOU


Joined: 09 Apr 2009
Posts: 9996
Location: The ZOU
PostPosted: Sun Mar 17, 2013 9:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dcerb44 wrote:
persiandud wrote:
BobSacamano wrote:
Quote:
"All this thing is a big, giant puzzle, and the pieces all have to fit. At some point, things get out of whack a little bit and all the pieces donít fit anymore. But theyíre, like I said, our policy in drafting and developing is a conservative but solid way of building your team. The end result of that is that, historically speaking, youíre going to get to the end of contract lives where people have outplayed their rookie deals and if youíve done a good enough job of drafting and developing, youíre going to have more of those at that stage than you can keep. But thatís, relatively speaking, a good problem to have."


Ted earlier today. Agree?


Absolutely. Draft and develop is the way to go.

Rinse, repeat.


Exactly, Ted is right. There's always going to be cheaper younger assets to fill those rolls. The hard part is knowing when to move on and cut your losses. So far I think he's done an excellent job in both of those areas.


That and he has come out ahead letting people walk, so far. Opinions would probably be different had he made the wrong decisions about which players to keep and which to let go.
_________________
GO PACK GO!

mistakebytehlak wrote:

My god it must be so terrible to have three teams that consistently make the playoffs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MNPackfan32


Joined: 22 Sep 2010
Posts: 8175
PostPosted: Sun Mar 17, 2013 10:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ThinkICare wrote:
MNPackfan32 wrote:
ThinkICare wrote:
MNPackfan32 wrote:
Why pile a big contract on to a strong position?


Because in his prime he's arguably a top 5 CB. Good in coverage and a great run defender.
Hayward graded out as the #1 CB and Shields was top 10 in metrics too. This is why I have 0 interest in Revis. He would be an upgrade but he is also older and way more expensive. The position is too solid to go searching for a big name to pay for.


I'm just talking about prime years here, so I don't know what age range that would be for him.
Well I guess I won't speculate on prime years, because he isn't in his prime and I am not sure I would put big money towards him with Harris here, but that's water under the bridge. I want no part of him now.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Blink


Joined: 05 Aug 2011
Posts: 722
Location: Denver, CO
PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

BobSacamano wrote:
Quote:
"All this thing is a big, giant puzzle, and the pieces all have to fit. At some point, things get out of whack a little bit and all the pieces donít fit anymore. But theyíre, like I said, our policy in drafting and developing is a conservative but solid way of building your team. The end result of that is that, historically speaking, youíre going to get to the end of contract lives where people have outplayed their rookie deals and if youíve done a good enough job of drafting and developing, youíre going to have more of those at that stage than you can keep. But thatís, relatively speaking, a good problem to have."


Ted earlier today. Agree?


In theory, yes.

The issue is that no one drafts perfectly, so what do you do when the draft just isn't working for certain positions? Keep banging your head against the wall in name of procedure, or do you do what needs to be done?

The issue isn't that he's quiet in free agency, the issue is that we repeatedly ignore a large talent pool while going into the season with positions of staggering weakness.

Ted hasn't shown the ability to draft a starting RB, this is a failure. That failure is compounded when we don't use available resources to compensate. No one is asking for Reggie Bush, we're asking for better than mid season street free agent pick ups.

In the end you can choose to occasionally over pay a guy at a position of tremendous need for a few years, or you can stand pat and do nothing while the same positions are weaknesses year after year. I think in the end staying too safe in free agency is just as risky as taking a chance on a player.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
driftwood


Joined: 20 Aug 2008
Posts: 6588
Location: Milwaukee
PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

so a co-worker who I talk football with mentioned he ran into Nick Barnett at the Milwaukee museum this weekend

not saying there is a connection... just saying

but seriously, if a co-worker was able to break news on TT kicking tires with a former packer looking for work... lollerskates
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TheGreatZepp


Joined: 27 Jan 2010
Posts: 2844
Location: Brookfield, WI
PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 11:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

driftwood wrote:
so a co-worker who I talk football with mentioned he ran into Nick Barnett at the Milwaukee museum this weekend

not saying there is a connection... just saying

but seriously, if a co-worker was able to break news on TT kicking tires with a former packer looking for work... lollerskates
We already had another poster see him playing Craps at Oneida in Green Bay.

CalhounLambeau wrote:
Just wanted to throw this out. I'm at the Oneida Casino in Green Bay right now, posting this from my hotel room. Nick Barnett is playing tables right now on the casino floor. I stood next to him while he threw dice for about an hour (I didn't bother him). Got me thinking about where he will sign, we obviously don't have room for him, where do you think he goes? Kind of cool to see him.


My guess is he's in town visiting friends.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jsitton71#


Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Posts: 1101
Location: kenosha
PostPosted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 12:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Blink wrote:
BobSacamano wrote:
Quote:
"All this thing is a big, giant puzzle, and the pieces all have to fit. At some point, things get out of whack a little bit and all the pieces donít fit anymore. But theyíre, like I said, our policy in drafting and developing is a conservative but solid way of building your team. The end result of that is that, historically speaking, youíre going to get to the end of contract lives where people have outplayed their rookie deals and if youíve done a good enough job of drafting and developing, youíre going to have more of those at that stage than you can keep. But thatís, relatively speaking, a good problem to have."


Ted earlier today. Agree?


In theory, yes.

The issue is that no one drafts perfectly, so what do you do when the draft just isn't working for certain positions? Keep banging your head against the wall in name of procedure, or do you do what needs to be done?

The issue isn't that he's quiet in free agency, the issue is that we repeatedly ignore a large talent pool while going into the season with positions of staggering weakness.

Ted hasn't shown the ability to draft a starting RB, this is a failure. That failure is compounded when we don't use available resources to compensate. No one is asking for Reggie Bush, we're asking for better than mid season street free agent pick ups.

In the end you can choose to occasionally over pay a guy at a position of tremendous need for a few years, or you can stand pat and do nothing while the same positions are weaknesses year after year. I think in the end staying too safe in free agency is just as risky as taking a chance on a player.
Ted said his approach to free agency is a way to fix his draft mistakes. I agree he hasn't drafted a starting RB since his tenure. Jackson and Green who he drafted high are both busts. The OL is still unstable and backup Qb situation is a joke. Im not saying break the bank but this thrift market approach to free agency is frustrating. I believe you use free agency to fill holes while you draft and develop the younger guy who can slide in when the contract is up. But year after year we bring in the Miurs and Merlings who we just end up cutting.
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 - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 76, 77, 78 ... 87, 88, 89  Next
Page 77 of 89

 
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