Green Bay Packers Forum

Welcome to your Green Bay Packers Online Community!

Since 2006, PackersHome has been providing a unique experience for fans.
Your participation is greatly anticipated!
Login or Register.
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Zero2Cool  
#1 Posted : Monday, March 10, 2014 11:01:58 AM(UTC)
Got anything left in the tank for the Packers? He'll be 30 years old in November and I read a report that cutting him saved $10.57 million in cap space.

nerdmann  
#2 Posted : Monday, March 10, 2014 1:52:00 PM(UTC)
I'd work him out.
User is suspended until 4/29/2043 11:56:55 PM(UTC) texaspackerbacker  
#3 Posted : Monday, March 10, 2014 3:19:26 PM(UTC)
At age 30, he certainly should have something in the tank, and he is a pure 3-4 OLB. The thing is, he probably will be pretty expensive. More like he's gonna work us out instead of us working him out.
steveishere  
#4 Posted : Monday, March 10, 2014 4:46:59 PM(UTC)
texaspackerbacker said: Go to Quoted Post
At age 30, he certainly should have something in the tank, and he is a pure 3-4 OLB. The thing is, he probably will be pretty expensive. More like he's gonna work us out instead of us working him out.


He's the same size as Perry and played DE in college.
nerdmann  
#5 Posted : Monday, March 10, 2014 5:16:25 PM(UTC)
steveishere said: Go to Quoted Post
He's the same size as Perry and played DE in college.


Yes, but he's made the transition. lol
Yerko  
#6 Posted : Tuesday, March 11, 2014 9:51:28 AM(UTC)
He shouldn't be very expensive to where he'd break the Packers bank. He's turning 30 and hasn't had a full season for the past three years. Some of that has to count against him in earning a new contract. I think he'd benefit the Packers defense as he is a good player and he also has a mean streak in him.

Maybe he slips past day one of free agency and the Packers are able to pull together an offer.

Additional, I think Mike Neal is a goner so this move would be even more beneficial.
nerdmann  
#7 Posted : Tuesday, March 11, 2014 10:27:31 AM(UTC)
Yerko said: Go to Quoted Post
He shouldn't be very expensive to where he'd break the Packers bank. He's turning 30 and hasn't had a full season for the past three years. Some of that has to count against him in earning a new contract. I think he'd benefit the Packers defense as he is a good player and he also has a mean streak in him.

Maybe he slips past day one of free agency and the Packers are able to pull together an offer.

Additional, I think Mike Neal is a goner so this move would be even more beneficial.


I'd take Woodley over Neal any day, long as he's got something left.

Either one is an injury waiting to happen, but Woodley's actually shown he can play the position.
DoddPower  
#8 Posted : Tuesday, March 11, 2014 11:34:51 AM(UTC)
I love to see Woodley sign with the Packers. I have always referenced Nick Perry as a "poor man's LaMarr Woodley." I think he's what the Packers were hoping Woodley would be, except Perry is probably even a little more athletic. Either way, I'm a big fan of the guy. I don't expect it to happen, but a combination of Mathews, Woodley, Perry, and others would be a good start to improving the defense.
QCHuskerFan  
#9 Posted : Tuesday, March 11, 2014 11:44:30 AM(UTC)
By all means. Let's sign someone 4 years older than Neal, just as injury prone and twice as expensive!

Think of these 2 free agents like potential spouses. Both have physical issues. 1 is older and has much more expensive tastes. That same one was 'hotter' when he/she was younger, but has some major miles on that body now.

Which one you picking? If either?

Zero2Cool  
#10 Posted : Tuesday, March 11, 2014 11:46:13 AM(UTC)
DoddPower said: Go to Quoted Post
I love to see Woodley sign with the Packers. I have always referenced Nick Perry as a "poor man's LaMarr Woodley." I think he's what the Packers were hoping Woodley would be, except Perry is probably even a little more athletic. Either way, I'm a big fan of the guy. I don't expect it to happen, but a combination of Mathews, Woodley, Perry, and others would be a good start to improving the defense.


from April 2012
DoddPower said: Go to Quoted Post
I'm sticking by my "poor man's LaMarr Woodley" statement.

thanks Post received 1 applause.
DoddPower  
#11 Posted : Tuesday, March 11, 2014 12:19:34 PM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan said: Go to Quoted Post
By all means. Let's sign someone 4 years older than Neal, just as injury prone and twice as expensive!

Think of these 2 free agents like potential spouses. Both have physical issues. 1 is older and has much more expensive tastes. That same one was 'hotter' when he/she was younger, but has some major miles on that body now.

Which one you picking? If either?



In my opinion, the difference in effectiveness between Woodley and Neal is substantial. I don't care what age they are. 29-30 doesn't mean his career is finished. Neal is an OK backup at best, imo. In fact, I still think his best role is rushing from the DT position on passing downs, at least in the 3-4 defense. Woodley is a talented true 3-4 OLB. I'm fine if a team pays money for an effective player at a position of need. I would expect him to produce, too, especially with Mathews is healthy (which he isn't enough). Most players are somewhat injury prone. Using that logic, Clay Mathews isn't worth his contract because he hasn't been very available the past few seasons. Nick Perry is even less available. Besides, I don't think Woodley is going to get a mega contract, although who knows.

I'd rather spend more money for better players than have extra cap space and more average players. Neal isn't a solution for the Packers defense in any other capacity other than a role player. Woodley would almost certainly earn a starting role quickly, and even if he didn't he would be a better backup than Neal. Also, as has been mentioned several times, he brings a level of passion to the field that is sorely missing on the Packers defense. That's valuable in and of itself.

thanks Post received 1 applause.
QCHuskerFan  
#12 Posted : Tuesday, March 11, 2014 1:04:51 PM(UTC)
DoddPower said: Go to Quoted Post
In my opinion, the difference in effectiveness between Woodley and Neal is substantial. I don't care what age they are. 29-30 doesn't mean his career is finished. Neal is an OK backup at best, imo. In fact, I still think his best role is rushing from the DT position on passing downs, at least in the 3-4 defense. Woodley is a talented true 3-4 OLB. I'm fine if a team pays money for an effective player at a position of need. I would expect him to produce, too, especially with Mathews is healthy (which he isn't enough). Most players are somewhat injury prone. Using that logic, Clay Mathews isn't worth his contract because he hasn't been very available the past few seasons. Nick Perry is even less available. Besides, I don't think Woodley is going to get a mega contract, although who knows.

I'd rather spend more money for better players than have extra cap space and more average players. Neal isn't a solution for the Packers defense in any other capacity other than a role player. Woodley would almost certainly earn a starting role quickly, and even if he didn't he would be a better backup than Neal. Also, as has been mentioned several times, he brings a level of passion to the field that is sorely missing on the Packers defense. That's valuable in and of itself.



Woodley would earn a starting role? Beating out Clay Matthews or Nick Perry? Really.

Woodley has played 10, 13, and 12 games in the last 3 years. Last year, he had 5 sacks and 1 FF. Nick Perry had 4 sacks and 3 FF. So basically, they produced the same amount of impact plays and we are all disappointed in Perry. So signing an older, crippled version is an improvement?

We spend all fall complaining about injuries. So why, when Free Agency hits, do we instantly want to sign every broken down, has-been that is available?

Look at Woodley's history. If you see anything that doesn't suggest he is in major decline, let me know. Otherwise he's like your grandma in a bikini. Something I don't want to see.
DoddPower  
#13 Posted : Tuesday, March 11, 2014 1:56:07 PM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan said: Go to Quoted Post
Woodley would earn a starting role? Beating out Clay Matthews or Nick Perry? Really.

Woodley has played 10, 13, and 12 games in the last 3 years. Last year, he had 5 sacks and 1 FF. Nick Perry had 4 sacks and 3 FF. So basically, they produced the same amount of impact plays and we are all disappointed in Perry. So signing an older, crippled version is an improvement?

We spend all fall complaining about injuries. So why, when Free Agency hits, do we instantly want to sign every broken down, has-been that is available?

Look at Woodley's history. If you see anything that doesn't suggest he is in major decline, let me know. Otherwise he's like your grandma in a bikini. Something I don't want to see.


I'm judging Woodley's body of work, and in that body of work, he has proven he is a big time player. No, I wouldn't expect him to beat out Clay Mathews. That's silly. I would expect him to compete with Nick Perry. Between the three of them, perhaps the Packers could get one season's worth of full time contribution from a talented OLB. Perry hasn't proven he can be available at all, so what exactly are the Packers options beyond him? What about when Mathews and Perry are out, which seems inevitable? I would feel much more comfortable having Woodley in that rotation. I'm a huge Perry fan, but I think Woodley is even better. I really don't agree with Woodley being "crippled." That's just nonsensical hyperbole. He's 29 almost 30, I think. He should have at least 3 productive seasons left, knows the scheme, and is a passionate veteran, which Dom Capers seems to love. By your same logic, Clay Mathews is "crippled", too. The Packers had better cut him, since it seems to be a safe bet that he will miss half the season at least, and makes a ton of money.

I'm not stuck on Woodley. But the Packers need some help, be it from the OLB position, or from the defensive line. I don't think the Packers pass rushers are good enough, or at least dependable enough, for the Packers defense to be anything better than average. I don't think average is enough for the Packers to make any noise in the off season. I can understand why a general manager would pass on Woodley, but I would have a hard time understanding how a team like the Packers couldn't do something in free agency to help address their weaknesses (yes, I know about the Shields signing). I don't think rookies alone are going to be enough to make much difference this season, and depending on the continued development of a few players is as big of a risk as signing a moderately priced free agent.

EDIT: Even better, how about the even more expensive Demarcus Ware? Lets Box! Lets Box!
QCHuskerFan  
#14 Posted : Tuesday, March 11, 2014 2:45:50 PM(UTC)
DoddPower said: Go to Quoted Post
I'm judging Woodley's body of work, and in that body of work, he has proven he is a big time player. No, I wouldn't expect him to beat out Clay Mathews. That's silly. I would expect him to compete with Nick Perry. Between the three of them, perhaps the Packers could get one season's worth of full time contribution from a talented OLB. Perry hasn't proven he can be available at all, so what exactly are the Packers options beyond him? What about when Mathews and Perry are out, which seems inevitable? I would feel much more comfortable having Woodley in that rotation. I'm a huge Perry fan, but I think Woodley is even better. I really don't agree with Woodley being "crippled." That's just nonsensical hyperbole. He's 29 almost 30, I think. He should have at least 3 productive seasons left, knows the scheme, and is a passionate veteran, which Dom Capers seems to love. By your same logic, Clay Mathews is "crippled", too. The Packers had better cut him, since it seems to be a safe bet that he will miss half the season at least, and makes a ton of money.

I'm not stuck on Woodley. But the Packers need some help, be it from the OLB position, or from the defensive line. I don't think the Packers pass rushers are good enough, or at least dependable enough, for the Packers defense to be anything better than average. I don't think average is enough for the Packers to make any noise in the off season. I can understand why a general manager would pass on Woodley, but I would have a hard time understanding how a team like the Packers couldn't do something in free agency to help address their weaknesses (yes, I know about the Shields signing). I don't think rookies alone are going to be enough to make much difference this season, and depending on the continued development of a few players is as big of a risk as signing a moderately priced free agent.

EDIT: Even better, how about the even more expensive Demarcus Ware? Lets Box! Lets Box!


Actually, I am wondering if Clay is winding down. But Woodley has played even a couple more years than Clay. He's played 7. The first year was nothing special. Then he had 3 great years. Then he had 3 injury filled years. If you're in Vegas, you don't bet big money assuming he will get healthy and perform at previous high levels.

Body of work is useless. If signing FA's is based on body of work, why isn't Jerry Kramer playing somewhere? You sign FA's based on what you anticipate them being able to do for you this year and next. Not what they did 3 years ago. (Except for Dan Snyder and Jerry Jones, anyway)

29 is old. At least in the NFL. At a quick glance, the Packers only have 6 players that are over 30. 3 of them are Free Agents and maybe not to return; Kuhn, Pickett and Jolly.

I am not against Free Agents. We need some. But I am not in favor of anyone that is high priced or in decline. Give me a 2013 Seahawks Bennett signing. Not a Tier 1 or former Superstar.
DoddPower  
#15 Posted : Tuesday, March 11, 2014 4:14:21 PM(UTC)
QCHuskerFan said: Go to Quoted Post
Actually, I am wondering if Clay is winding down. But Woodley has played even a couple more years than Clay. He's played 7. The first year was nothing special. Then he had 3 great years. Then he had 3 injury filled years. If you're in Vegas, you don't bet big money assuming he will get healthy and perform at previous high levels.

Body of work is useless. If signing FA's is based on body of work, why isn't Jerry Kramer playing somewhere? You sign FA's based on what you anticipate them being able to do for you this year and next. Not what they did 3 years ago. (Except for Dan Snyder and Jerry Jones, anyway)

29 is old. At least in the NFL. At a quick glance, the Packers only have 6 players that are over 30. 3 of them are Free Agents and maybe not to return; Kuhn, Pickett and Jolly.

I am not against Free Agents. We need some. But I am not in favor of anyone that is high priced or in decline. Give me a 2013 Seahawks Bennett signing. Not a Tier 1 or former Superstar.


We obviously just have differing opinions. I think Woodley would still bring as much, or more, to the table than Perry for at least 2-3 seasons . . . and I really like Nick Perry. Woodley knows the scheme well, has had great success in it, plays with passion, and appears to be a decent guy. As a Packer fan, I would love to have that insurance policy once CM3 and Nick Perry are inevitably injured for half the season or more again. I guess we will always have some 7th round draft picks and undrafted free agents to step in though. At least they'll be young!

As I said in my previous post, I'd love a 2013 Bennett type signing, too (although a better scheme fit than actually Bennett). The bottom line is, the Packers need to address a weakness or two in one way or another. I think Woodley would be a start, and I think any moderate contract he would get would be less of a risk than counting on rookies or other young players to fill huge voids. A "declining" Woodley is still better than Mulumba, Palmer, Neal, and likely most rookies the Packers may have soon. But I would gladly accept some other alternative. If the Packers use the same strategy as they usually do, they'll still be a good team, but I can't imagine them winning more than a wildcard or divisional game in the playoffs, once again. Off the top of my head, I'd rather have a guy like Woodley than Raji, Brad Jones, James Jones, and possibly even guys like Pickett and Jolly at this point in their careers.

I'd rather Demarcus Ware, though, even though he's older, and more expensive. I definitely know that's not happening, though.
Rss Feed 
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Notification

Icon
Error


Fan Shout
The_Green_Ninja (18-Feb) : out of curiosity... did any ever by the Starr Favre and Rodgers photo... and has a good scanner?
uffda udfa (17-Feb) : NFL Network showing GB at Dallas. Packers programming all day.
uffda udfa (17-Feb) : Julius Peppers appears done with Packers per Demovsky.
Cheesey (16-Feb) : If the spot was so bad, he wouldnt still be going there.
uffda udfa (15-Feb) : Best of luck at your new fishing hole, Buck.
buckeyepackfan (15-Feb) : "they always do" "good luck with that" I said to him as I walked away and headed to my other favorite hole!
buckeyepackfan (15-Feb) : "Nah" he said , I'm much snarter than these fish, sooner or later they will start biting! They akways
buckeyepackfan (15-Feb) : "Maybe you should try another spot" I said to him each day.
buckeyepackfan (15-Feb) : Each day I asked him gow they were biting. "Not very well" was his reply each day
buckeyepackfan (15-Feb) : For the third day in a row, I went to my favorite fishing spot. The same guy was there everyday
uffda udfa (14-Feb) : Interesting. Why would he leave the team that has the greatest need at CB?
Zero2Cool (14-Feb) : Former Packers corner Bené Benwikere signs with Bengals, per report
Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2016 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 11 @ 12:00 PM
at Jaguars
Sunday, Sep 18 @ 7:30 PM
at Vikings
Sunday, Sep 25 @ 12:00 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Oct 2 @ 12:00 AM
BYE
Sunday, Oct 9 @ 7:30 PM
GIANTS
Sunday, Oct 16 @ 3:25 PM
COWBOYS
Thursday, Oct 20 @ 7:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Oct 30 @ 3:25 PM
at Falcons
Sunday, Nov 6 @ 3:25 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Nov 13 @ 12:00 PM
at Titans
Sunday, Nov 20 @ 7:30 PM
at Redskins
Monday, Nov 28 @ 7:30 PM
at Eagles
Sunday, Dec 4 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Dec 11 @ 3:25 PM
SEAHAWKS
Sunday, Dec 18 @ 12:00 PM
at Bears
Saturday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Jan 1 @ 7:30 PM
at Lions

Think About It
Think About It

Recent Topics
4m / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / DoddPower

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

4h / Community Welcome! / uffda udfa

15h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Cheesey

15h / Around The NFL / uffda udfa

18-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa

18-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Barfarn

17-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / sschind

17-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / warhawk

17-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / yooperfan

17-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / TedThompsonsShades

16-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / uffda udfa


Packers Headlines