2016-2017 Green Bay Packers Thread

[superfly]

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.

 

They were good against the run because everyone just destroyed our CBs lol. I recall Demarco Murray lighting us a new one, and Zeke, other than that i'm not sure we really faced much else as far as run games go. Pretty sure Howard got us once too.

[CheezWizHed]

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.

 

LL.net would've caught that one, but it slipped by at BF.net. Here they catch Jeffrey H%#&*^@ds, Jeff S*&%$n and E*** Gagme

[MrTPlush]

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.

 

They were good against the run because everyone just destroyed our CBs lol. I recall Demarco Murray lighting us a new one, and Zeke, other than that i'm not sure we really faced much else as far as run games go. Pretty sure Howard got us once too.

 

No they were respectable against the run because they were respectable against the run. I'm not sure how getting lit up by an elite running back proves much. Most teams are going to do poorly when a team with a good back and incredible line faces them(Zeke). I'm not sure they were really really good, but they were probably a bit better than middle of the pack. If they can get the passing defense close to middle of the pack it's not hard for them to win a super bowl with their offense.

[MrTPlush]

I see Christine Michael is coming back. I hope and imagine they will get a third back to put back there.

[patrickgpe]

I really like the signing of Ricky Jean Francois, seems like a great clubhouse guy that can help out on the line that came in for a reasonable price. I complain alot about Ted's Free Agency plan, so when he does something good I will praise him too.

[patrickgpe]

I see Christine Michael is coming back. I hope and imagine they will get a third back to put back there.

the draft is so loaded with RB's I would be shocked if they didn't take one in round 2 or 3 that they had a higher grade on.

[tmwiese55]

From what I could find online. In 14 they were 8 mil under, then 10 mil under in 15 and 16. Currently 23 mil under. That's one starting player on D they could afford each year. Obviously have some more people to sign this year but considering no big name players are left i don't see how they spend all 23.

 

Moreover, they didn't use that space to re-configure Rodgers contract and dump him a bunch of extra pay in those years in order for him to take less later on in kind of a gentlemen's agreement.

[FVBrewerFan]

I see Christine Michael is coming back. I hope and imagine they will get a third back to put back there.

the draft is so loaded with RB's I would be shocked if they didn't take one in round 2 or 3 that they had a higher grade on.

 

I would be shocked if they did. They never take a RB high, with the exception of Lacy. That goes all the way back to Wolf. Not saying I agree with that or not, just saying I doubt they go RB early. There will still be camp casualties too, I think they go the quantity over quality route. (Almost like RB is a position on defense ; )

[patrickgpe]

i know that its not Ted Thompson's MO and they have many needs to address but they have a converted WR and a career backup in as RB and thats it. either they sign another FA or they use a high draft pick.

[FVBrewerFan]

i know that its not Ted Thompson's MO and they have many needs to address but they have a converted WR and a career backup in as RB and thats it. either they sign another FA or they use a high draft pick.

 

They'll sign a FA (camp cut), sign a rookie FA, maybe a pick late in the draft. Michael won't even make the team for sure, so this is a work in progress. I'm ok with that, as I'm more bullish on Montgomery and Rip than most. RB is the easiest position to find at least avg talent, so I'm not that worried. They will find a couple capable backs, and who knows maybe even strike lightning and find a really good one.

[patrickgpe]

.

 

They'll sign a FA (camp cut), sign a rookie FA, maybe a pick late in the draft. Michael won't even make the team for sure, so this is a work in progress. I'm ok with that, as I'm more bullish on Montgomery and Rip than most. RB is the easiest position to find at least avg talent, so I'm not that worried. They will find a couple capable backs, and who knows maybe even strike lightning and find a really good one.

i like Montgomery, my issue is that if he goes down they have noone, if its just a bunch of low round draft picks and camp cuts left. same garbage as this past season.

[LouisEly]

From what I could find online. In 14 they were 8 mil under, then 10 mil under in 15 and 16.

Sort of. Because the cap carries over, if they had used the $8M in 14 (assuming a multi-year deal) they would have only been $2M over in 15 and 16, so it is only one player.

[Thurston Fluff]

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.

 

The "we've got to go for it because our star QB isn't getting any younger," line has been around since the 90s. I don't think tailoring free agency around one person's age is a good way to build a team capable of winning every season. if we go for it while Rodgers is here and have to pay for it when he is done doesn't that take away the ability for the next guy to establish himself? Part of what helped Rodgers was having a young talented group of players surrounding him. They didn't have to go through a couple years of over the hill has beens making way too much money and contributing nothing because they can't afford to cut them while he was trying to gain some confidence. Why should the next guy's career suffer just so Rodgers can have more chances than the new guy will be afforded? I just never believed the QB is owed anything more than any other player when it comes to how you build your team.

As far the defensive backs keep in mind they dealt with a lot of injuries. To see how that can hurt a player's performance look no further than Davante Adams playing through a significant injury vs when he isn't. Ditto for Montgomery. Would adams have broken out if we found some average veteran to take snaps away from him due to his rough sophomore season? I think we need more bodies at corner but I think the talent level isn't nearly as bad as it appears.

I'm not really against all free agents. If there is one who would fill an hole that has no real option fine. If there was a few unanticipated losses at a position fine. The D-line is a prime example of that. They lost Raji unexpectedly then Pennel and Guion's issues left a larger than anticipated hole to be filled. No problem adding a lineman or two in those instances. I just don't beleive in older guys being added for losses that should have been anticipated. All that shows is managerial shortsightedness.

[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.

 

The "we've got to go for it because our star QB isn't getting any younger," line has been around since the 90s. I don't think tailoring free agency around one person's age is a good way to build a team capable of winning every season. if we go for it while Rodgers is here and have to pay for it when he is done doesn't that take away the ability for the next guy to establish himself? Part of what helped Rodgers was having a young talented group of players surrounding him. They didn't have to go through a couple years of over the hill has beens making way too much money and contributing nothing because they can't afford to cut them while he was trying to gain some confidence. Why should the next guy's career suffer just so Rodgers can have more chances than the new guy will be afforded? I just never believed the QB is owed anything more than any other player when it comes to how you build your team.

As far the defensive backs keep in mind they dealt with a lot of injuries. To see how that can hurt a player's performance look no further than Davante Adams playing through a significant injury vs when he isn't. Ditto for Montgomery. Would adams have broken out if we found some average veteran to take snaps away from him due to his rough sophomore season? I think we need more bodies at corner but I think the talent level isn't nearly as bad as it appears.

I'm not really against all free agents. If there is one who would fill an hole that has no real option fine. If there was a few unanticipated losses at a position fine. The D-line is a prime example of that. They lost Raji unexpectedly then Pennel and Guion's issues left a larger than anticipated hole to be filled. No problem adding a lineman or two in those instances. I just don't beleive in older guys being added for losses that should have been anticipated. All that shows is managerial shortsightedness.

 

It's not out of owing Rodgers or screwing the next guy. It's that we know we have the best QB right now so our chances at a title are best right now, definitely willing to sacrifice the future to go for it that situation. Similar to trading for help in MLB when you have a title caliber team. In NFL though the by far biggest key to that is QB, and for the next 4-5 years we have that.

[FVBrewerFan]

The "we've got to go for it because our star QB isn't getting any younger," line has been around since the 90s.

 

It's been around that long, because that's been true for that long. Even Wolf said after he retired his biggest regret was not giving Favre more weapons later in his career. Now with Rodgers it's the same thing, only not giving him a defense to win it all.

 

It's a huge mistake to think it's an either/or. It's not a matter of spending NO money on FA or putting yourself in salary cap jail for years. There is a middle ground. I would love it if they drafted well on defense over the years and had no need for FA. But they didn't, and we are where we are. Unfortunately, this was not a year with a bunch of good CBs on the market.

[patrickgpe]

http://dailysnark.com/adrian-peterson-closing-1-year-3m-deal-saints/

 

if the price tag was 1 year 3 million, i would have been happy if he signed for the packers. i'm sure he would have taken that from the packers over the saints to get to play the vikings twice

[tmwiese55]

Yea at that price what do you have to lose?

[MrTPlush]

The fact no big time contender would sign him for that might tell you all you need to know.

[jerichoholicninja]

Peterson only does one thing well and that's run the ball. And last year he wasn't even good at that. Maybe he's got some more in the tank but he looked totally done last year.

[MrTPlush]

Peterson only does one thing well and that's run the ball. And last year he wasn't even good at that. Maybe he's got some more in the tank but he looked totally done last year.

 

Doesn't help when you are old and have missed 2 of the last 3 seasons due to knee injury.

[DHonks]

would be a nice deal, especially since NFL deals aren't guaranteed

[FVBrewerFan]

would be a nice deal, especially since NFL deals aren't guaranteed

 

Depends how much of the $3MM is signing bonus. Signing bonuses are guaranteed.

[tmwiese55]

Peterson only does one thing well and that's run the ball. And last year he wasn't even good at that. Maybe he's got some more in the tank but he looked totally done last year.

 

Doesn't help when you are old and have missed 2 of the last 3 seasons due to knee injury.

 

And an atrocious offensive line, close to the worst in the league bad.

[MrTPlush]

Peterson only does one thing well and that's run the ball. And last year he wasn't even good at that. Maybe he's got some more in the tank but he looked totally done last year.

 

Doesn't help when you are old and have missed 2 of the last 3 seasons due to knee injury.

 

And an atrocious offensive line, close to the worst in the league bad.

 

Totally agree, but he didn't look all that great anyway.

[superfly]

Peterson only does one thing well and that's run the ball. And last year he wasn't even good at that. Maybe he's got some more in the tank but he looked totally done last year.

 

He didn't get much of a chance to be fair, I live over here and watch a fair amount of them and I think you underestimate severely how bad the Vikings OL is/was. They made Seattle's OL look like road graders at times and it's a minor miracle Bradford is still alive.