2016-2017 Green Bay Packers Thread

[MrTPlush]

They don't need to draft a RB. Montgomery is better than people think, Rip can handle some carries, and they can use Michaels or some other FA RB they come across. Then there's always guys who are cut. RB is the only position I'm fine throwing some bodies at it and let it sort out.

 

CB on the other hand, I sure hope they don't think House and a bottom of the 1st or 2nd round CB will solve the problem. I'm fine with House, he can battle for a backup position with Randall, Rollins, Gunter, etc. But by my count, they still need two starting CBs. I don't see how they do that without trading up in the 1st, and/or trading for another CB somehow.

 

Not saying Montgomery isn't good, but they need a reliable back-up and Ripkowski is definitely no where near being that. Michaels is also not that guy. Michaels can flash something every now and again, but he isn't consistent. That isn;t what you want in a back-up RB. They need another RB though and I think they do it in the draft. It doesn't have to be one of the first two rounds. They can get a decent back in the middle rounds.

[Thurston Fluff]

They don't need to draft a RB. Montgomery is better than people think, Rip can handle some carries, and they can use Michaels or some other FA RB they come across. Then there's always guys who are cut. RB is the only position I'm fine throwing some bodies at it and let it sort out.

 

CB on the other hand, I sure hope they don't think House and a bottom of the 1st or 2nd round CB will solve the problem. I'm fine with House, he can battle for a backup position with Randall, Rollins, Gunter, etc. But by my count, they still need two starting CBs. I don't see how they do that without trading up in the 1st, and/or trading for another CB somehow.

 

I think people are writing off Ranal and Rollins to soon. They both dealt with injuries and looked much better as rookies so there is talent there.

[FVBrewerFan]

Not so much I'm writing off Randall/Rollins, it's just that I wouldn't count on them. I would want two CBs I feel better about than those guys, and if one or both can improve dramatically, great, now you have some great depth. But if they continue to struggle and/or get banged up again, now you're in the same position as last season.

 

Shields wasn't even what I would call a shut down corner, but at the very least they need two guys at least that good. Goodson is actually a guy who could still contribute, but again I wouldn't count on that.

[homer]

Datone Jones signs with Minny.

[pacopete4]

Any chance TT kicks the tires in someone like Revis? He was cleared of all charges today.

[FVBrewerFan]

Any chance TT kicks the tires in someone like Revis? He was cleared of all charges today.

 

Yes. Whether they publicly say so or not, I'm sure there is interest in at least seeing what it would cost for a one year deal. Beyond the off the field issues, his performance on the field slipped. But playing for a better team often brings out the best in vets, plus a Revis that's lost a step is still better than anyone they have now.

[Thurston Fluff]

Any chance TT kicks the tires in someone like Revis? He was cleared of all charges today.

 

No. He pretty much sucked last year and has not been nearly as good as his reputation for a couple years. All name no game free agents is pretty much exactly the type of FA Ted doesn't go after.

[FVBrewerFan]

Exactlyrics what was said about Charles Woodson. Nobody wanted him, except Tampa who wanted him to play Safety. We know how that turned out. Revis was a shutdown corner not long ago. Can he be again? Probably not. But if he's motivated and gets his head right, he can still be very good. And that's worth at least talking to him.

[superfly]

Revis is done. Targeted him on a weekly basis for daily fantasy last year lol...the only other possibility is he did an epic mail-it-in job which i would do too if i had to play for that joke of an organization.

[Point Beer Is Best]

Revis cannot play corner anymore, probably not even in the slot. He has lost his speed. He may be an effective safety, but that position is probably in the best shape on the defense right now with HHCD & Burnett with some prospects in Evans & Brice. And you know Revis is going to think he's worth at least $6M, which isn't going to happen.

[Thurston Fluff]

Exactlyrics what was said about Charles Woodson. Nobody wanted him, except Tampa who wanted him to play Safety. We know how that turned out. Revis was a shutdown corner not long ago. Can he be again? Probably not. But if he's motivated and gets his head right, he can still be very good. And that's worth at least talking to him.

 

Wood son was 29 and coming off an injury which held his value down. He also wasn't cut IIRC his contract ran out. It wasn't like the team had to eat money to get rid of him. Revis is 32 and sucked enough without being injured that the team decided to eat some money to get rid of him. The two are not comparable at all. Hardy Nickerson or Jeff Saturday would probably be better comparisons.

[FVBrewerFan]

Whenever we compare players it is never an exact comparison. Coming off injury, only the Packers were willing to give Woodson a chance to play CB. In that way they're similar. Revis was clearly mailing it in as a Jet. Not saying that's right, or that's the type of guy you would want- but it MAY explain his performance.

 

My point is, what does it hurt to talk to him and work him out? Plus, the NFL has private investigators, the Packers do too. They can get a good idea where his head is at, and work him out so see if he's in better shape, a little speed is back etc.

 

If any one of those things is a red flag, obviously you don't sign him. But if he can be 80% of the shutdown corner Revis, it's worth checking out.

[Thurston Fluff]

Whenever we compare players it is never an exact comparison. Coming off injury, only the Packers were willing to give Woodson a chance to play CB. In that way they're similar. Revis was clearly mailing it in as a Jet. Not saying that's right, or that's the type of guy you would want- but it MAY explain his performance.

 

My point is, what does it hurt to talk to him and work him out? Plus, the NFL has private investigators, the Packers do too. They can get a good idea where his head is at, and work him out so see if he's in better shape, a little speed is back etc.

 

If any one of those things is a red flag, obviously you don't sign him. But if he can be 80% of the shutdown corner Revis, it's worth checking out.

 

Revis at one time was the best corner in the game. Even at his peak though 80% of his talent would have been closer to average than top tier. So what would probably be about league average as the most one could expect of him you sacrifice the chance of finding a player who may turn into more than that for years to come.

Take Sam Shields for example. He came in as an undrafted rookie and turned into the slot corner in a Superbowl winning team that season. He then became a starter who was better than 80% of Revis at peak value. Hell he was close to that as a rookie. Add in this is an exceptionally strong draft for both safeties and corners it makes no sense at all the use a spot on an aging veteran who will only ever be, at most, average with a significant risk of being well below average.

To maintain a long term winning team you need to constantly give young players a chance to learn and grow. The best way not to do that is by always giving those roster spots away to people who are clearly on the downswing and will never be more than they are now.

[superfly]

Hardy Nickerson

 

How dare you utter that name in here. It's not saying Joe Johnson but still....

[Thurston Fluff]

Hardy Nickerson

 

How dare you utter that name in here. It's not saying Joe Johnson but still....

 

I humbly apologize. I thought the cuss filter would have changed it enough to be acceptable.

[pacopete4]

We could make middle linebacker stronger by going after Zach Brown. Dude had 150 tackles last year and is only 27.

[Thurston Fluff]

Is middle linebacker all that weak now? WE have three player vying for two spots as it is. Two are entering their third season which is usually when players enter their prime. Both of them solidified a position that was God awful the prior season. The other was a pleasant surprise as a rookie. He had a rep of being a good in coverage and didn't disappoint while also being much better against the run than most people anticipated. He has plenty of room to grow if he's allowed to, as do the other two. What Brown would bring is nothing more than we should expect out of what we have now. What he would also bring is less playing time for our current guys to possibly be much better than he is. Better to use that spot on a rookie who might help us in the future when one or more of our current MLB's move on.

[tmwiese55]

So I'm not huge in following NFL FA and draft, somewhat out of bitterness about how much ESPN jams it down our throats, but am I correct in thinking that we've done nothing to fix the secondary beyond bring House back and I assume all high end guys are signed by now? So we're banking on whoever we draft and Rollins/Randall improving in spite of their awfulness last year?

[FVBrewerFan]

Correct. Always possible a good vet could be cut in camp for cap reasons, or acquire one via trade. Neither is very likely though.

 

As far as mlb goes, they have guys. Just like most positions, nobody special.

[LouisEly]

The Packers need depth at ILB. By the end of last season Burnett was playing ILB on some packages. I wouldn't say that Ryan, Martinez, or Thomas are anything more than league average. Brown is a guy I'd go after. So is Jonathan Hankins (and let Guion and his suspension walk).

[Thurston Fluff]

The draft has a boatload of high level corners and safeties. I would not be too worried about that. The corners were young and/or banged up. A little health and some well earned experience will go a long ways toward shoring it up. Add in a potential high ceiling guy with the ability to play at least the slot corner right away and I'm not all that worried about corner.

As far as MLB goes the reason Burnett played it some down the stretch was because of injury. We need some depth but I just am not a fan of using FA for depth. I am not against using it to replace a subpar starter like we did with Peppers or Woodson but if they aren't demonstrably better at a position that needs to be demonstrably better at why bother?

[brwrsfan]

The Packers need depth at ILB. By the end of last season Burnett was playing ILB on some packages. I wouldn't say that Ryan, Martinez, or Thomas are anything more than league average. Brown is a guy I'd go after. So is Jonathan Hankins (and let Guion and his suspension walk).

 

Thomas is the best of that group, but none of them are anything special. Ryan and Martinez would be better served as backups IMO as neither has the speed that I think is necessary nor do either of them cover overly well. Nothing wrong with them, but just all around average players to me.

[Thurston Fluff]

The Packers need depth at ILB. By the end of last season Burnett was playing ILB on some packages. I wouldn't say that Ryan, Martinez, or Thomas are anything more than league average. Brown is a guy I'd go after. So is Jonathan Hankins (and let Guion and his suspension walk).

 

Thomas is the best of that group, but none of them are anything special. Ryan and Martinez would be better served as backups IMO as neither has the speed that I think is necessary nor do either of them cover overly well. Nothing wrong with them, but just all around average players to me.

 

That is way premature IMHO. Look at the jump both Ryan and Thomas made after one season. That position went from one of the worst in the league to league average with three guys who had a combined two years experience between them. To think that amounts to nothing more than being a backup seems to completely miss the fact that all are on the rise. i also think you are wrong on Martinez ability to cover. He did fairly well at it and better than expected against the run. Though the expectation against the run was admittedly low to start with. Those three can play but to take away their chance to play essentially guarantees they will not ever be more than backups. Which would be fine if you were replacing them with an all pro. None of the ILB's left are anything close to that. I'm not sure any of them are actually better than what we have.

[tmwiese55]

Yea generally speaking I'm fine building through the draft but Rodgers isn't getting any younger, at some point we have to go for it. No need to be sitting 10+ mil under the cap again. The defensive backs were so beyond awful last year that I would have preferred stabilizing it with 1 proven guy at least. instead we're banking on rebounds from two guys who were awful along with rookies. So my guess is not long into the season we'll be relying on winning shootouts again and complaining how the D is wasting another year of Rodgers prime.

[FVBrewerFan]

Probably. But that's going to happen almost no matter what they do. Just not enough money and luck to patch all the holes they have in one off-season.

 

Here's one way they can be better. They were pretty darn good against the run last year, hopefully that continues. To combat the passing game, they are not going to have the horses to compete in the backfield. Can they be better this year? Sure. But no matter what, that is just not going to be a strong unit. The best way they can combat that is improving the pass rush, and I think that is realistic. They need to get more creative with blitzes, and more importantly work a lot more on execution. You can always tell who's coming, and from where.