Barfarn
7 years ago
Here’s the test: knowing the injuries we’ve had, I don’t think Ted signs Hayward if he can go back in time machine. Hayward won't make any difference in our ability to advance in playoffs and his signing would have created substantial future harm.

The key to winning is the 1st thing Ted thinks of on every contract considered or every roster move: the winners are teams with the most 1st contract studs, period!

Like Beast, I also had some trepidation about our CB depth; but to say we were “clearly thin” has been proven wrong. The staff knew what Beast and I didn’t, that it was not about potential, they knew the young CBs were ready. I’m shocked by Gunter’s leap, Joe Whitt was not. I was slightly surprised by how well Goodson has played [many other fans stunned and shocked], Whitt was not. We all had some doubt, but the staff knew Randall and Rollins were already established [only injuries have slowed them]. FACT is in hindsight we now know, what the staff knew, no other team had CBs # 4, 5 and 6 as good as Gunter, Hyde and Goodson.

Sure we’d be better at CB with Hayward as #4 outside CB and as a tie for #3 slot CB [#1 Randall w/ Gunter on edge, #2 Rollins, #3 tie Hyde (better at blitz, runs support and covering TEs; Hayward only better at covering slot WRs); but we’d also have been better at QB if we signed Andrew Luck and Tony Romo. The issue is not is a position better; but is the team better by a signing.

Signing Hayward created 3 problems: (1) the loss of $15.3M [not $5M] to spend on other players [EG this subsidized 1/3 of Bak’s extension-Now think about how much we’d be paying for Bak now; we probably saved another $15M by signing Bak when we did]; and (2) Hayward’s presence blocks the development of the youngsters; and WORST OF ALL (3) a good UDFA DB is CUT to help another team.

GB has had unparalleled success finding UDFA DBs. And trust me Ted’s staff was all over Hawkins, Dorelant and Brice, plus probably of few others. Ted knew in March that signing Hayward would have directly to the loss of one good UDFA [Lke Hawkins, Dorleant or Brice].
nerdmann
7 years ago
We don't need Hayward, we've got Dorleant!
“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.”
beast
7 years ago

You don't go spend a 1st and 2nd round pick on CB's who are your 2nd and 3rd and then drop $5 million on another CB when you have more youth in the wings. Boggles my mind how some think that's fiscally wise in any sense.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 


It boggles my mind, that your arguing against signing talented players for reasonable prices... because that doesn't make any sense.

Packers have had a lot of high draft picks on defense not work out... and the Packers did exactly what you're arguing against at OLB (assuming Peppers deal was reasonable, which I'm sure some would argue against. But the Packers had Perry and Neal at OLB and went and got Peppers. Same thing here... add value and depth to the team.
UserPostedImage
Barfarn
7 years ago

It boggles my mind, that your arguing against signing talented players for reasonable prices... because that doesn't make any sense.

Packers have had a lot of high draft picks on defense not work out... and the Packers did exactly what you're arguing against at OLB (assuming Peppers deal was reasonable, which I'm sure some would argue against. But the Packers had Perry and Neal at OLB and went and got Peppers. Same thing here... add value and depth to the team.

Originally Posted by: beast 



Peppers was signed a starter. Ted rarely signs vets to back-up and if so only in short term min type deals.

Notwithstanding the spot Hayward would have occupied on the our fan depth charts with 2 CB and 2 safeties; Steve points out we play alot of DBs and Hayward may have been a starter in a few packages [unless injuries occurred] like 3 WR sets on passing downs and most 4 WR sets. But, generally he'd be a back-up and Ted wont pay 15.3M for a back-up unless the situation is dire.
Zero2Cool
7 years ago

It boggles my mind, that your arguing against signing talented players for reasonable prices... because that doesn't make any sense.

Originally Posted by: beast 



When I said the money not spent on Casey Hayward should have been used to shore up a position of weakness, what I am saying is we shouldn't sign talent players. Precisely. [whead] [whead]


UserPostedImage
beast
7 years ago

When I said the money not spent on Casey Hayward should have been used to shore up a position of weakness,

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

We agree... the money that Hayward got, should of been spent shoring up a position of weakness... such as the CB position... because it's depth was weak. That's where we disagree... you say it was a strength... I respectfully disagree.

They should of shored up the weak CB area by signing Hayward.

Peppers was signed a starter. Ted rarely signs vets to back-up and if so only in short term min type deals.

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 



And you're making the case for signing Hayward... as Hayward started 11 games and was signed cheap for a talented CB just like the other vets to back-up deals that Ted Thompson signs. Hayward perfectly fits into the mold you're describing... which just points to the fact they should of signed him with a deal that low.
UserPostedImage
steveishere
7 years ago

Peppers was signed a starter. Ted rarely signs vets to back-up and if so only in short term min type deals.

Notwithstanding the spot Hayward would have occupied on the our fan depth charts with 2 CB and 2 safeties; Steve points out we play alot of DBs and Hayward may have been a starter in a few packages [unless injuries occurred] like 3 WR sets on passing downs and most 4 WR sets. But, generally he'd be a back-up and Ted wont pay 15.3M for a back-up unless the situation is dire.

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 



Peppers was "signed" as a starter but he was kept this season as a situational pass rusher. That's all they talked about him this offseason was limiting his reps and playing him on pass downs. Hayward on this team was the best slot corner by far. That is a starting position on this defense point blank, not situational and no maybe about it.
Barfarn
7 years ago
Hayward's play the last 3 years in GB, isn't anywhere near as good as Rollins or Randall play in the slot this year. Plus he is an absolute liability in run support or tackling someone in the secondary; he avoids contact like i'd avoid eboli. Heck, given how great Gunter's been outside; GB may have envisioned having Randall and Rollins in slot on 4 WR sets.

If Hayward was so good; then why did he only get 5.1M per/6M Guaranteed?

Brent Grimes and his wife Miko got 7.5M per. Alan Ball signed with Bears last year for 3m per and he just sucks. House got 6.5M per/10M Guarenteed 2 years ago and he wasn't ever a starter.

Fact 1: Good CBs make big bucks.
Fact 2: 32 GMs didnt think Casey was a legitimate starting CB, because all 32 would have paid more than 5M for a starting CB including Ted and SD.
steveishere
7 years ago
He got 5m (I guess it's back to 5m now when it suits you after you've been insisting it was 15) because he's a slot CB, teams pay more for boundary guys. There are a couple positions where you can pay top dollar and have relatively little hit to your cap like slot CB and RT. Similarly good S and ILB can come fairly cheap as well. Casey played over 900 snaps for us (86%), if that doesn't fit your definition of a starter then the word starter is meaningless.
Barfarn
7 years ago

He got 5m (I guess it's back to 5m now when it suits you after you've been insisting it was 15) because he's a slot CB, teams pay more for boundary guys. There are a couple positions where you can pay top dollar and have relatively little hit to your cap like slot CB and RT. Similarly good S and ILB can come fairly cheap as well. Casey played over 900 snaps for us (86%), if that doesn't fit your definition of a starter then the word starter is meaningless.

Originally Posted by: steveishere 



A guy that starts one year is not always the starter next. In 2015, GB had this thing called influx of cheap youthful CB talent; this means going forward no past starting CBs' job is safe, especially one called a "slot CB" [Read below on the hysteric nature of the fan term "slot CB"]. Kuhn wasn't resigned because the staff saw what Rip does in practice and in meetings; Kuhn doesn't get to keep his job in 2016 because of what he did in 2015. Neither does "slot CB" Hayward.

Hayward got as many snaps as he did in 2015 ONLY because youngters were learning the playbook. In 2016, the dynamic is different; suddenly Hayward's numerous mental lapses and refusal to make contact makes him lesser than 3 youngsters, who last year didn't have as good of a command of the playbook as Hayward, but in 2016 do.

In the black-white/sound- bite world reading comprehension, accuracy is not important. Here's some help with the TRUTH of the matter, less all the hysteric semantics:

"5M" and "5.1M per 6M Guaranteed [emphasis added]" is not the same. To discuss cap implications and misrepresent Hayward's contract as 5M, when its 3yr/15.3M, at best lacks proper care, at worst its an attempt to deceive because there is some ulterior agenda. Packer fans more than any others get into an irrational hyper-rage when their team loses and GMs and Coaches bear the brunt of their rage, because idols need to be protected.

Illuminating the hysteric use of the euphemistic fan term "Slot CB" with use of some simile:

In baseball "long relief pitchers" are only this because they are NOT GOOD ENOUGH to start, set-up or close. Lets take Travis Wood. In 2014 he led the team is starts. In May of 2015, Wada [and later Haren] became the 5th starters relegating Wood to Long-R. They didn't call Wood the starter even though he started 2 more games or ended up with more starts than Wada. And in 2016, no one gave him any mind at all that he was a starter.

Likewise, a "slot CB" is by definition a guy who is not good enough to play CB. When 3 CBs are needed the worst of the 3 plays the slot. If a team has 4 good "boundary CBs" to use your terminology then the "slot CB" will never see the field, be is a back-up. EG Sherman is a "boundary CB," if Seattle got 2 better one's, he takes the bench. If a 3rd CB is needed, Sherman is NOT remaining on the bench in favor of a "slot CB."

The hysteric flipptity-flop use of time:

Consider the statement: "Bart Starr would be a starter in 2016 because took 90+% of snaps in 1967; if that is not your definition of starter the term is meaningless." In the sound-bite world things have to be static; because there is no time to recognize the application of dynamics in a situation. But Rosters, starters, football is DYNAMIC, not STATIC, it is in a constant state of flux.

Now Grasshopper use this knowledge for good.
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (2m) : Former #Packers TE Josiah Deguara is signing a 1-year deal with the Jaguars, per source.
Zero2Cool (1h) : They do not do it for "content sake".
dfosterf (11h) : For the record, I enjoy Beast and Mucky drafts
Zero2Cool (18h) : Haha
Mucky Tundra (19h) : No time for talking! Back to work beast!
beast (19h) : You saw only 4,201 of my mocks? 🥺 I think that means you missed more than half of them 😢
dfosterf (23h) : Does anyone know what Lambeau field improvements got put on hold? My guess would be for the 2025 draft
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : It's like listen, you made 4,201 mocks, no shit.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Cuz during the draft "I had them mocked there!" as if it's amazing.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : They're fun to do once in awhile. It's people who think they are "content" that annoy me.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Against tbd
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Answer to your question is yes, it's a Thursday, will be the Chiefs aga
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Luckily for all concerned, I don't post them. I did one, but that was like 25 mocks ago
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : NFL 2024 gonna start Sept 5th isn't it???
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Ugh... kids these days!
dfosterf (27-Mar) : I'm gonna go do some more mock draft hell instead 🤪
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Did we do one of those prediction threads yet for 2024 season?
dfosterf (27-Mar) : In my city, they are playing the nimby game, in order to keep some railroad tracks vs. 2 professional sports teams and a concert venue.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : And/Or a city council, of which I haven't seen a good one in a very long time
dfosterf (27-Mar) : That sounds like a Mayor, not a city.
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers halt scheduled 80mil upgrade of stadium until lease agreement talks are restarted
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : City of Green Bay puts Packers' Lambeau Field lease talks on hold
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers 1 of 3 teams to vote no on new kickoff rule.
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Packers sign another Kicker
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Lengthy explanation at PFF if you click the link
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Kickoff rules officially changed.ngthy explan
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : lol
Cheesey (26-Mar) : 2009? No thanks! One open heart surgery is enough!
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Good for you!
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Yes. That's the one.
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Is that "Lady Dugan" per chance?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Crystal?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Please refresh my memory
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Alan posts. Crystal back in my life. It's 2009 all over again! Lol
Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : BAH GAWD! THAT'S CHEESEYS MUSIC!
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Gutekunst said early stages of Jordan Love contract being discussed.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Shouldn't be penalized cuz official screwed up
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Yeah, challenge until you are incorrect twice.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Fining them is the goal, per the people who made the rule anyway.
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still waiting on the kickoff rule changes. Did hear yesterday that the touchback proposal will now be the 30 yard line, not the 35
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Probably speed of game issues with your proposal
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Hopefully the refs don't get in the habit of throwing flags on this
beast (25-Mar) : I think when it comes to Challenges should get two strikes, so unlimited challenges as long as they keep winning them, but 2 wrong then done
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still subject to the fines etc
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Yes, I should have been more specific. Also, they are now saying it would be a 15 yard penalty. That makes more sense .
beast (25-Mar) : Simply fined in the week to follow
beast (25-Mar) : I agree with one NFL official, it'll probably be like some of the helmets hits, not really called by the refs on the field but simply fined
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Hip drop is not. Super confusing. Referees job is harder
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Swivel hip drop is banned
dfosterf (25-Mar) : The hip drop enforcement will be in the form of fines, etc. Not flags
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
11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

11h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

23h / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

24-Mar / Around The NFL / dhazer

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

22-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

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