mi_keys
8 years ago

That's what I get for not being precise about the point I'm trying to make.

What was that point? It starts with a point I have tried to make repeatedly since last season ended, namely my belief that there were several positions where improvement was needed and that expecting all of that improvement to come from players currently on the roster is a recipe for failure. Before free agency started, I believed, and I still do, that there wasn't enough talent on the end-of-season Packer roster to cover the improvement needed at at starting LT, at starting RG, at starting RT, at backup TE, at starting DT, at rotation DE, at starting ILB#1, at starting ILB#2, at starting OLB #2, at backup LB, and at backup CB.

And after pre-draft veteran free agency, that list expanded to include starting CB #2.

Now, clearly no one here seems to agree with my list. That's fine. But whether this or that part of the list, or even two thirds of the list for that matter, belongs on it, is not the point. The point is that I do not think highly of the Packers' deep-into-playoff chances in 2015 if all 22 starters (or, if you prefer to substitute RaiderPride's "players with significant playing time" substitute for "starter,") are drawn from players who were on the roster at the end of last season.

I believed that in last January, and I will go on believing it until I am shown otherwise.

Which brings me to the post with which I started this thread: Believing as I do, and having a organization that for whatever reasons people want to give, did nothing to find outside veterans to provide serious competition for that end-of-2015 roster, that competition must come from either draft or UDFA.

I don't believe its good practice to expect rookie draft picks to become starters. I do believe that given (i) the number of positions at which some serious competition for starting/significant game reps is needed and (ii) the *lack* of players at on the end-of-2015 roster who can reasonably be expected to provide competition at *all* of those positions and (iii) the *lack* to date of any 2016 veteran free agent acquisitions that might provide that competition at *any* of those positions, then the only places we can expect that serious competition to come from are either rookies or UDFAs.

And, as I said, I don't see it except, maybe, at one ILB position, with Ryan. And to be honest, as high as I am on Ryan, I don't see him as a substantial upgrade as a rookie either.

Most everyone else seems to think that all the improvement needed to go late into the playoffs can come from the current roster (maybe with one/both of the S/CB hybrids getting significant reps in nickel/dime packages).

I just don't see it. Long run, Randall and Rollins may be all pros. In 2016, I see them as competing for reps with whoever loses the battle between Hayward and Hyde, Bush, and Richardson. Montgomery? He's going to be a number three WR. Ryan, ok, that's serious competition for one ILB position.

Meanwhile, we have no competition added for starting/significant time for either side of the line. Okay, I understand people are never going to see my argument on Lang and Bulaga's being not good enough. But do people seriously think a "developing" Bahktiari is what we should be satisfied with at LT. Do people seriously think that a serviceable Guion (who still may well be suspended for part of the season) and a B J Raji whose only consistency is his inconsistency, and maybe Pennell or whoever's "unproven potential" on last year's roster you like is enough competition for the NT position in a 3-4 defense?? How many years are we going to hope for Neal and Perry and D. Jones and Boyd et al to provide the oomph at DE they haven't yet provided? And we have no competition added for OLB (since I guess Perry or whoever will continue to improve enough?), the other ILB.

Yes, there is going to be competition for Tramon's position. But at this point that competition is Hyde and Hayward. Period.

I am not bothered just because the Packers haven't drafted players to compete for starting jobs. I am bothered because everyone seems to think that the Packers don't have to bring in ANY outside competition for ANY starting jobs.

And I, emphatically, disagree.

Hell, I'd disagree even if the Packers had won the Super Bowl last year and had 10 players in the Pro Bowl.

Originally Posted by: Wade 



I think many here wouldn't mind an increase of some form in free agents coming in, though I think how much more activity people want would vary considerably. I myself wouldn't mind the occasional deal like the one with Peppers once every couple years as there was potential high end payoff and if it didn't work out we could move on without too much of a hit.

Out of curiosity, which free agents this year would you have wanted the Packers to pursue and what would you have been happy paying them? In particular, who at tackle do you think could've provided any real competition at good value? Most pundits had Bulaga as the top tackle in free agency and looking at the scraps that Jacksonville shelled out for I'd agree. If given the choice, would you have traded for someone and if so who? I think that would be an interesting discussion (and apologies if you've already provided elsewhere on the forum).
Born and bred a cheesehead
nerdmann
8 years ago

I think many here wouldn't mind an increase of some form in free agents coming in, though I think how much more activity people want would vary considerably. I myself wouldn't mind the occasional deal like the one with Peppers once every couple years as there was potential high end payoff and if it didn't work out we could move on without too much of a hit.

Out of curiosity, which free agents this year would you have wanted the Packers to pursue and what would you have been happy paying them? In particular, who at tackle do you think could've provided any real competition at good value? Most pundits had Bulaga as the top tackle in free agency and looking at the scraps that Jacksonville shelled out for I'd agree. If given the choice, would you have traded for someone and if so who? I think that would be an interesting discussion (and apologies if you've already provided elsewhere on the forum).

Originally Posted by: mi_keys 



Haloti Ngata, but was probably out of our price range.
“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
greengold
8 years ago

several positions where improvement was needed and that expecting all of that improvement to come from players currently on the roster is a recipe for failure. Before free agency started, I believed, and I still do, that there wasn't enough talent on the end-of-season Packer roster to cover the improvement needed at at starting LT, at starting RG, at starting RT, at backup TE, at starting DT, at rotation DE, at starting ILB#1, at starting ILB#2, at starting OLB #2, at backup LB, and at backup CB.

And after pre-draft veteran free agency, that list expanded to include starting CB #2.

Originally Posted by: Wade 



Holy cow that is quite a list. I'm not sure where to start.

So 3/5 of the OL needs an upgrade? I don't know if a team can afford to do that in free agency. Not to mention we signed the top rated free agent tackle in free agency and he is one of the guys you say needs replaced. To me, our run game and pass protection were solid. I don't see the cost/benefit to spend crazy money to upgrade 3 of the positions.

Backup TE? Which one are we replacing, Quarless or Rodgers? To me they were both solid backups last year. If you are talking about replacing #1 (again which one?) I could see that. But I would also like to see if either one can emerge this year as a starter. If that makes any sense.

DL, I agree there were some veteran guys on the market we probably could have brought in as an upgrade without breaking the bank.

ILB, to me not a premium position worth a big FA contract. I was glad to see the big contracts of Hawk and Jones off the books. I like the 4th round draft pick .... I might make an exception to the big contract if Mychal Kendricks really was available via trade. But you would have to trade a player from a position we are really deep at (WR?) or a draft pick. I don't see Ted doing that.

OLB#2 you mean Peppers? I dunno, the guy was still a freak last year at 35. We shall see if that continues this year.

Backup CB? Backup LB? I dunno those sound like rookie contract positions to me. I mean under the salary cap. Where do you want to spend your $140M?



texaspackerbacker
8 years ago
Wade, there's no poster I have more all around respect for than you. However, I don't think it was a matter of you not being understood correctly. I think you are swimming against the tide, and frankly, the tide has it right and you don't - IMNHO.

Your long laundry list of needs has some items that ring true to some extent. Last off-season, I was very disappointed/disgusted with the fact that Bakhtiari was the best we could do at LT, and of course, there is the NT situation. And ILB and Corner after losing Williams and House, etc. The overriding point, though, is that we came within an eyelash of going to the Super Bowl - against a team we beat pretty handily during the season. Sure, that's in extremely large part, due to having the greatest QB in the history of the world, and if he got hurt, we'd instantly become aware that the leadership has failed to maximize talent around him. Just the same, as I have said, if we got no help from the draft at all, we would have a high quality team that a damn good chance to win it all - a lot of the other contenders seem to have been degraded a little bit.

On top of all that, we DID have a draft that has a strong chance to contribute - beat out the starters going in? maybe not, but because what we have is generally damn good, not for any lack of draft quality.
Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member Topic Starter
8 years ago

Haloti Ngata, but was probably out of our price range.

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 



God damn it. Why do people always ask this question?

Ted has been here ten years. He has hit three big free agents. In a goddamn decade. It isn't just about whether I would have gone after this or that free agent in one year. It is that if you only sign three of them per decade, you have to draft better AND develop faster than the average.

(Oh, and Haloti Ngata wasn't out of our price range. The Packers had plenty of cap room to bring him in if they were serious about it. The reason why Ted never goes after the Ngatas is that he doesn't like the kind of risk that paying that price brings with it.

That's his approach. He ain't changing and I ain't going to be bothered by it all that much. BUT WHAT I AM GOING TO DO is hold him to a "higher than average" standard for success at "draft-and-develop" than I will for someone who puts "draft-and-develop" together with major free agent signings more than 3 times per decade.


And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member Topic Starter
8 years ago

Wade, there's no poster I have more all around respect for than you. However, I don't think it was a matter of you not being understood correctly. I think you are swimming against the tide, and frankly, the tide has it right and you don't - IMNHO.

Your long laundry list of needs has some items that ring true to some extent. Last off-season, I was very disappointed/disgusted with the fact that Bakhtiari was the best we could do at LT, and of course, there is the NT situation. And ILB and Corner after losing Williams and House, etc. The overriding point, though, is that we came within an eyelash of going to the Super Bowl - against a team we beat pretty handily during the season. Sure, that's in extremely large part, due to having the greatest QB in the history of the world, and if he got hurt, we'd instantly become aware that the leadership has failed to maximize talent around him. Just the same, as I have said, if we got no help from the draft at all, we would have a high quality team that a damn good chance to win it all - a lot of the other contenders seem to have been degraded a little bit.

On top of all that, we DID have a draft that has a strong chance to contribute - beat out the starters going in? maybe not, but because what we have is generally damn good, not for any lack of draft quality.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 



So you are satisfied with Bahktiari having no serious competition at LT? Don't bitch to me then when some defensive thug blows past him and we're looking at Scott Tolzien to take us deep into the playoffs, and I promise to stop bitching as soon as Scott Tolzein turns out to be this year's Earl Morrall.

I spend most of my life going against the tide. Why should Packer stuff be any different?

(Besides, the tide of public opinion, unlike the lunar tides, is usually wrong anyway. The "tide" elected you-know-who twice in a row, after all. 🙂 )


And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
QCHuskerFan
8 years ago

God damn it. Why do people always ask this question?

Ted has been here ten years. He has hit three big free agents. In a goddamn decade. It isn't just about whether I would have gone after this or that free agent in one year. It is that if you only sign three of them per decade, you have to draft better AND develop faster than the average.

(Oh, and Haloti Ngata wasn't out of our price range. The Packers had plenty of cap room to bring him in if they were serious about it. The reason why Ted never goes after the Ngatas is that he doesn't like the kind of risk that paying that price brings with it.

That's his approach. He ain't changing and I ain't going to be bothered by it all that much. BUT WHAT I AM GOING TO DO is hold him to a "higher than average" standard for success at "draft-and-develop" than I will for someone who puts "draft-and-develop" together with major free agent signings more than 3 times per decade.

Originally Posted by: Wade 



So it's more important that Ted Thompson sign FA than win? Because that's all that his teams have done. If he was signing more FA's but failing to make the playoffs, you would consider him a success?

Sorry. Guess I'm a sheep. But I am a sheep that appreciates results, not activity.
greengold
8 years ago

So you are satisfied with Bahktiari having no serious competition at LT? Don't bitch to me then when some defensive thug blows past him and we're looking at Scott Tolzien to take us deep into the playoffs, and I promise to stop bitching as soon as Scott Tolzein turns out to be this year's Earl Morrall.

I spend most of my life going against the tide. Why should Packer stuff be any different?

(Besides, the tide of public opinion, unlike the lunar tides, is usually wrong anyway. The "tide" elected you-know-who twice in a row, after all. 🙂 )

Originally Posted by: Wade 



I would like the name of the player Ted Thompson should have brought in to be serious competition to Bakhtiari at LT??

I think the "tide" of public opinion is "TT should be more active in free agency since that is what the rest of the NFL does."
Yerko
8 years ago
My dark horse to grab a starting position at the outside spot is Quentin Rollins. I am so high on this pick. Yeap, he played one year of college football. Who cares. Watch some of the guys film (not just the highlights). He is fast, strong and has good instinctive play. He also does something well that we have been clamoring for for the past couple of seasons since losing Woodson...he can tackle...really well.

If he doesn't get shifted to the outside, then I still think he sees very significant time in the nickel. He truly only has one person to beat for the outside job, Hayward.


I believe Jake Ryan will also start, although, Ted did say they didn't draft him to start (doesn't mean he can't). Again, another very instinctive player and he will be a good addition to the run defense. Hoping the knee continues to hold up.

Those are the only two I think can grab a starting position. With the depth the Packers do have at most positions, I don't believe they necessarily had to draft for day 1 starters. I would expect that from a team like the Jaguars and Browns, where more than half of their draft picks are thrown to the wolves. I also have faith in the positional coaches like Whitt to help these new players get acquainted to the professional game.
UserPostedImage
Barfarn
8 years ago



It starts with a point I have tried to make repeatedly since last season ended, namely my belief that there were several positions where improvement was needed and that expecting all of that improvement to come from players currently on the roster is a recipe for failure. Before free agency started, I believed, and I still do, that there wasn't enough talent on the end-of-season Packer roster to cover the improvement needed at at starting LT, at starting RG, at starting RT, at backup TE, at starting DT, at rotation DE, at starting ILB#1, at starting ILB#2, at starting OLB #2, at backup LB, and at backup CB.

And after pre-draft veteran free agency, that list expanded to include starting CB #2.

Originally Posted by: Wade 



I hear what your saying and the only disagree w/ is that 2015 Hayward is an upgrade and maybe a huge one over 2015 Tramon. Hayward's slot snaps will be covered by Hyde.

And remember: if Tretter didn't get hurt, we wouldn't know we had a stud on roster in Linsley; but Ted Thompson would.

What you've just described is the cap era! EVERY TEAM HAS WEAKNESSES! If you're concerned about GB's OL, you'd blow your brains out if you were a Hawks fan. Our lousy DL dominate their OL; Our OL dominated their DL. They lose Carpenter and their best in Unger [W/ squat in reserve-Tretter and Taylor would start inside and I think Barclay would beat out Britt]. On DL, MeBane might be back and during 2015 Bennett, Mcdaniel, Mebane will be 30, and Avril 29. Now you see why Schneider' went gambling w/ Clark. Across the board our OL and DL players are younger; so one would predict greater relative growth and less injury. Relatively speaking Seattle is infinitely in worse shape that us in terms of 2014-2015 improvement.

When I was a kid I read that a bear could out run a horse for 60 yards [and this is true] so I was afraid to go camping for fear a bear would wander into camp and I'd be eaten. But, then i realized i dont have to outrun the Bear, i just gotta outrun whomever I'm with. Ted Thompson dont have to outrun the Bear, he just has to outrun Seattle and this has been accomplished.
Ted Thompson waited until the 5th round to get Linsley; because he knew what he had in Tretter. He could have resigned Hawk, Jones, Lattimore to the deals they got; he could have drafted an ILB early, but didn't. It's because the guys on the roster are better than Hawk and co. and Anthony and Co. IMHO, Barrington will be pushed for his job by the glut of young ILB talent on the roster.
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (7h) : Chase Young to sign $13M contract with Saints
Zero2Cool (7h) : Yosh to Panthers what noooo. Wait he didn't do crap
wpr (18-Mar) : I say that he is technically HER BIL as he married her sister. I checked it out, he's considered my BIL as well. Sad.
Mucky Tundra (18-Mar) : wpr, I assume its your BIL via marriage to your wife? If so, I can figure out where the smarts in the family went ;)
wpr (18-Mar) : Mucky my B-I-L is Bare Stupid. I could write a book.
Mucky Tundra (18-Mar) : As a teenager in Rockford IL I would get heckled by adults in public for wearing GB gear
Mucky Tundra (18-Mar) : if you think the online ones are bad, try *living amongst* them
Mucky Tundra (18-Mar) : Never doubt wprs loyalty. Poor guy is surrounded by Bears fans in Northern IL
wpr (17-Mar) : pass Martha. Thanks for the invite though.
Martha Careful (17-Mar) : blog * as the same ugly Illinois colors were adopted by the Baer
Martha Careful (17-Mar) : WPR, perhaps you should be joining the Bears fans blog has the same ugly Illinois colors were adopted by the Bears
Mucky Tundra (17-Mar) : Ah a fellow U of Illinois hater. I can respect that though I imagine it's for different reasons
Zero2Cool (17-Mar) : BTW. I didn't catch the game. I just hate Illinois.
Mucky Tundra (17-Mar) : They're your Big Ten Chumps and you will like it!
Zero2Cool (17-Mar) : No, not for the record. Referee's handled that BS. Orange team was trash ass
Mucky Tundra (17-Mar) : *Your* Big Ten Chumps for the record
Zero2Cool (17-Mar) : No, not Big Ten Champs. IL is big ten CHUMPS
wpr (17-Mar) : Big Ten Champs
wpr (17-Mar) : !!!
wpr (17-Mar) : INI
wpr (17-Mar) : ILL
Martha Careful (17-Mar) : Wisconsin with an outstanding on in the men’s Big Ten basketball tournament. Let’s hope it continues in the NCAAs
Zero2Cool (17-Mar) : Almost like taking QB in 2020 even if you don't need one is good move.
Mucky Tundra (16-Mar) : 2021 QB Draft class looking like a real clunker
Mucky Tundra (16-Mar) : A conditional 6th rounder? I remember Bears fans arguing they'd get a day 2 pick at worst lol
dfosterf (16-Mar) : So I got the no extension part right and the have to wait on the CW physical wrong
Zero2Cool (16-Mar) : Bears are trading Justin Fields for a 2025 6th-round pick that goes to a 4th-round pick based on playtime, per sources.
Zero2Cool (16-Mar) : Former Packer Jarrett Bush opens Wisconsin’s first blow dry bar in Green Bay
dfosterf (16-Mar) : If the Bears are not doing a deal with Washington, they also cannot trade Fields until Williams physical with them. All hail Caleb Williams!
dfosterf (16-Mar) : The talent is undeniable, but the (advertised) haul is obscene.
dfosterf (16-Mar) : If the Bears are cutting a deal with the Commanders, in either scenario, cannot happen until williams passes a Commanders physical
dfosterf (16-Mar) : My guess is no to the Fields extension, but yes to the trade back with the Commanders.
dhazer (15-Mar) : I think the Bears do a Love extension and they will trade out of the 1st pick and take the haul
Martha Careful (15-Mar) : that might make sense
Zero2Cool (15-Mar) : Justin Fields to Steelers?
Zero2Cool (15-Mar) : Kenny Pickett. Eagles. Done.
Zero2Cool (15-Mar) : They can claim best two WR tandem.
Mucky Tundra (15-Mar) : Aaron Donald retiring
dhazer (15-Mar) : Campbell signing with 49ers
dhazer (15-Mar) : I love how the Bear Fans are now claiming they have the best skill players in the NFC North lol
Zero2Cool (15-Mar) : Vikings made a move to get a 2nd first round pick
Mucky Tundra (15-Mar) : That's a not a bad deal for the Bears
Zero2Cool (15-Mar) : Bears have traded for WR Keenan Allen sending Chargers a fourth rounder.
Martha Careful (15-Mar) : *signs
Martha Careful (14-Mar) : MLB Devon White science with the Eagles
Mucky Tundra (14-Mar) : But that was before FA started
Mucky Tundra (14-Mar) : Dhaze, I thought Kurls would be their #1 target when I read that he was an Amos comp (jack of all trades guy)
dhazer (14-Mar) : I would like to see the Packers target 2 more FA still available Kamren Curl Safety and Chase Young edge
Martha Careful (14-Mar) : wow...didn't see that coming
Zero2Cool (14-Mar) : AJ Dillon re-signing with Packers.
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2023 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
Bears
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
LIONS
Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
Raiders
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
RAMS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
CHARGERS
Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
CHIEFS
Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
Giants
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
Panthers
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
Cowboys
Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
49ers
Recent Topics
3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

13h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

18-Mar / Around The NFL / Mucky Tundra

16-Mar / Random Babble / Martha Careful

16-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

15-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / dhazer

15-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

14-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

14-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

14-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

13-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

13-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

13-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

13-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.